Historical Precedent as a Theological Argument

Abstract

When discussing various theological issues, a number of precedents from church history is often used by each side — precedents relating to an authoritative person or place that have a certain attribute of holiness. When comparing various historical precedents, a contradictory picture often arises, which needs to be coordinated and clarified. Approaches to solving this issue were developed in Western medieval scholasticism, but they are inapplicable in modern theological discourse for a number of reasons. Many modern theologians, pointing to the increasing importance of historical and contextual research, do not offer a way to resolve the conflicting historical conclusions that arise in this case and that are directly related to both theology and church-practical life, which pushes modern authors to dogmatic relativism and even adogmatism. In this article, based on existing theological methodological studies, a specific way to solve this problem is proposed. In particular, a number of principles of the analysis of church-historical precedents are suggested which allow determining their significance for the validation of theological statements: the doctrinal principle, the historical one, and the principle of church reception. Using three concrete examples, the article demonstrates the way of applying these principles and presents relevant theological conclusions that allow retaining the high importance of historical research but do not lead to the confrontation of history and truth.