The Relevance of the Distinction between Theologia and Oeconomia for the Condemnations of 1241/ 4. Continuities and Intermissions

The condemnations in the West throughout the 13th century have recently drawn the attention of exegetes. Despite this seemingly favourable situation, some censorship episodes have yet to be given due attention. For example, the literature dedicated to the condemnation of 1241/ 4 does not include more than 20 studies in the last two decades, some treating the topic marginally. I am particularly interested in the hermeneutical perspective provided by M.-D. Chenu who argues in his famous 1947 study (”Le dernier avatar de la théologie orientale en Occident au XIII-ème siècle”) that Eastern authors such as Maximus the Confessor and John Damascene – at that point partially translated into Latin – adopted somewhat confusingly an obscure interpretation of ”economy” (i.e., the divine life known in its relations with the created being). On the other hand, the term “theology” did not enjoy a particularly great reception at the crossroads between the 12^th and the 13^th centuries. In this study, I aim to assess to what extent the patristical distinction between θεоλоγία and οἰκονομία was ”confusing” and ”obscure” in the authors of the first Christian centuries and whether this distinction had any relevance against the backdrop of the condemnations of 1241/ 4.

Full Text