The Reformed Orthodox were entirely correct to discern a fundamental threat and challenge in the spread of Cartesianism, especially as regards the relation of philosophy and theology.
But it’s hard to read about their responses without sadness. “Whatever reason brings out of its stinking heaps must be subordinate to the word of God and be measured by it as its touchstone but not opposed to it,” says Arnoldus. Quite true, all of it. But how long can people be told that their every thought arises from “stinking heaps” before they tire of it? And where is the profound humanism of Augustine, who was able to hold together a profound awe at the possibilities of the human mind with unprecedented recognition of its corruption?
Klaus Scholder says that the responses to Cartesianism arose from fear, including a fear of those “bold enough to raise questions where orthodoxy did not seem to allow any.” Pejoratively phrased, of course; but not unjustified. But where does this fear come from? Fear of questions ? How did theologians become fearful of questions?
And, again, where is Augustine, who wrote entire books in the interrogative?
Peter Leithart
Peter J. Leithart is President of Theopolis Institute. He is the author of numerous books on theology, literature, and culture, including Theopolitan, Defending Constantine, and Baptized Body.
More from History
Continue reading related articles

Realness of Things Past
Greg Anderson began thinking about the thesis of his Realness of Things Past while working on a book on the “state” in classical Greece. He discovered there was no such thing as an Athenian “state,” and that conclusion led him to question the way historians do history. Instead of running…

The Power of the Margins
David Martin (1929-2019) was a secularization skeptic. He acknowledged that modern societies typically undergo a process of "differentiation," in which various sectors of social and political life free themselves from the oversight of religious authority. He acknowledged that in many modern societies religious institutions and values are "marginalized." But he…

Zwinglian Symbolism
Nathan Mitchell (writing in the Oxford History of Christian Worship , 324) denies that Zwingli taught a "mere symbolist" according to which the Supper "simply served to remind believers of the great benefits bestowed on them through Christ's passion and death." Zwingli wasn't a symbolist "in any modern sense." Mitchell…
In Medias Res
Your weekly digest for all things Theopolis.