My paper raises the question whether there are any tenable hylomorphic theories of post-mortem survival and resurrection compatible with Catholic Churchdoctrine. After considering what it would mean for such a theory to be compatible with Church doctrine, I raise three objections to which a hylomorphic theory would need to successfully respond in order to be considered tenable. In the final section of the paper, I argue affirmatively, that there are tenable hylomorphic theories. I then consider two contemporary theories and offer reasons to prefer an alternative, non-reassemblist theory to others that are currently equally or more popular
Keywords Catholic Tradition  Conference Proceedings  History of Philosophy  Philosophy and Religion
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s) 0065-7638
DOI 10.5840/acpaproc2010847
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,219
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Contemporary Hylomorphism.Andrew M. Bailey & Shane Wilkins - 2018 - Oxford Bibliographies 3:1-12.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
51 ( #208,562 of 2,448,396 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #450,223 of 2,448,396 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes