Aquinas mp3s

Status
Not open for further replies.
Speaking of Aquinas, what are some Roman Catholic commentaries? I would like to know What the Roman Church teaches about Romans 9.
 
Speaking of Aquinas, what are some Roman Catholic commentaries? I would like to know What the Roman Church teaches about Romans 9.

Try the "Sacra Biblia" series of commentaries (I think that's the right name). They have one on Romans. Don't remember the commentator's name. The series comes from a moderately critical Roman Catholic position, according to D. A. Carson's New Testament Commentary Survey.
 
Speaking of Aquinas, what are some Roman Catholic commentaries? I would like to know What the Roman Church teaches about Romans 9.
Probably one of the most extensive commentaries on Romans by a Roman Catholic would be Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., Romans, A New Translation with introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible Series (New York: Doubleday, 1993). Fitzmyer is not a liberal per se, in spite of the claims of some Roman apologists, he would be more in the center in his perspective. His commentary is scholarly, and very thought-provoking in some places. This following quote is rather interesting to me, because although he tries to recast the meaning of how Paul understood justification, nonetheless, he grants the standard meaning of that word group...
Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J.: “Justification” is drawn from Paul’s Jewish background, expressing a relationship between human beings and God, a judicial relationship, either ethical or forensic (i.e. related to human conduct and law courts: Deut 25:1; cf. Gen 18:25-26). Dikaios, “righteous, upright,” usually denoted a person who stood acquitted or vindicated before a judge’s tribunal (Exod 23:7; 1 Kgs 8:32; Job 31:35-37), and thus a right relationship with other human beings. See Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J., Romans, A New Translation with introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible Series (New York: Doubleday, 1993), p. 116.

In his commentary on Romans, Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J. comments that Luther was not the first to invoke sola fide in his translation of Romans. Others used the term in a broader context as well. Below is an extended quote of what Fitzmyer states on pp. 360-361 of Romans, A New Translation with introduction and Commentary, The Anchor Bible Series (New York: Doubleday, 1993).

At 3:28 Luther introduced the adv. “only” into his translation of Romans (1522), “alleyn durch den Glauben” (WAusg 7.38); cf. Aus der Bibel 1546, “alleine durch den Glauben” (WAusg, DB 7.39); also 7.3-27 (Pref. to the Epistle). See further his Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen, of 8 Sept. 1530 (WAusg 30.2 [1909], 627-49; “On Translating: An Open Letter” [LuthW 35.175-202]). Although “alleyn/alleine” finds no corresponding adverb in the Greek text, two of the points that Luther made in his defense of the added adverb were that it was demanded by the context and that sola was used in the theological tradition before him.

Robert Bellarmine listed eight earlier authors who used sola (Disputatio de controversiis: De justificatione 1.25 [Naples: G. Giuliano, 1856], 4.501-3):

Origen, Commentarius in Ep. ad Romanos, cap. 3 (PG 14.952).

Hilary, Commentarius in Matthaeum 8:6 (PL 9.961).

Basil, Hom. de humilitate 20.3 (PG 31.529C).

Ambrosiaster, In Ep. ad Romanos 3.24 (CSEL 81.1.119): “sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei,” through faith alone they have been justified by a gift of God; 4.5 (CSEL 81.1.130).

John Chrysostom, Hom. in Ep. ad Titum 3.3 (PG 62.679 [not in Greek text]).

Cyril of Alexandria, In Joannis Evangelium 10.15.7 (PG 74.368 [but alludes to Jas 2:19]).

Bernard, In Canticum serm. 22.8 (PL 183.881): “solam justificatur per fidem,” is justified by faith alone.

Theophylact, Expositio in ep. ad Galatas 3.12-13 (PG 124.988).

To these eight Lyonnet added two others (Quaestiones, 114-18):

Theodoret, Affectionum curatio 7 (PG 93.100; ed. J. Raeder [Teubner], 189.20-24). [DTK’s note - If I may be so bold as to correct Fitzmyer’s reference here to Theodoret. The reference in Migne is not PG 93.100, but should be PG 83.1001 - Obviously this may be a typo on the part of Fitzmyer, but at any rate I checked the reference myself and found it elsewhere to be PG 83.1001].

Thomas Aquinas, Expositio in Ep. I ad Timotheum cap. 1, lect. 3 (Parma ed., 13.588): “Non est ergo in eis [moralibus et caeremonialibus legis] spes iustificationis, sed in sola fide, Rom. 3:28: Arbitramur justificari hominem per fidem, sine operibus legis” (Therefore the hope of justification is not found in them [the moral and ceremonial requirements of the law], but in faith alone, Rom 3:28: We consider a human being to be justified by faith, without the works of the law). Cf. In ep. ad Romanos 4.1 (Parma ed., 13.42a): “reputabitur fides eius, scilicet sola sine operibus exterioribus, ad iustitiam”; In ep. ad Galatas 2.4 (Parma ed., 13.397b): “solum ex fide Christi” [Opera 20.437, b41]).

See further:

Theodore of Mopsuestia, In ep. ad Galatas (ed. H. B. Swete), 1.31.15.

Marius Victorinus, In ep. Pauli ad Galatas (ed. A. Locher), ad 2.15-16: “Ipsa enim fides sola iustificationem dat-et sanctificationem” (For faith itself alone gives justification and sanctification); In ep. Pauli Ephesios (ed. A. Locher), ad 2.15: “Sed sola fides in Christum nobis salus est” (But only faith in Christ is salvation for us).

Augustine, De fide et operibus, 22.40 (CSEL 41.84-85): “licet recte dici possit ad solam fidem pertinere dei mandata, si non mortua, sed viva illa intellegatur fides, quae per dilectionem operatur” (Although it can be said that God’s commandments pertain to faith alone, if it is not dead [faith], but rather understood as that live faith, which works through love”).

DTK
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top