"a man cannot be thoroughly humbled until he comes to know that his salvation is utterly beyond his own powers, counsel, endeavors, will, and works, and absolutely depending on the will, counsel, pleasure, and work of another, that is, of God only." So speaks Luther in his greatest book, On the Bondage of the Will. In this book, Luther replies to the arguments of Erasmus of Rotterdam, who had pointed to all the commands in Scripture, and believed that (...) they implied that man could obey them. Luther replied that such an argument emptied the Gospel of its power. Luther throwing plenty of entertaining bombshells and insults along the way, but he also gets right to the heart on issues such as grace, human sinfulness, predestination, and man's need for absolute grace and forgiveness. (shrink)

Molyneux's Question (MQ) concerns whether a newly sighted man would recognize/distinguish a sphere and a cube by vision, assuming he could previously do this by touch. We argue that (MQ) splits into questions about (a) shared representations of space in different perceptual systems, and about (b) shared ways of constructing higher dimensional spatiotemporal features from information about lower dimensional ones, most of the technical difficulty centring on (b). So understood, MQ resists any monolithic answer: everything depends on the constraints faced (...) by particular perceptual systems in extracting features of higher dimensionality from those of lower. Each individual question of this type is empirical and must be investigated separately. We present several variations on MQ based on different levels of dimensional integration—some of these are familiar, some novel adaptations of problems known elsewhere, and some completely novel. Organizing these cases in this way is useful because it unifies a set of disparate questions about intermodal transfer that have held philosophical and psychological interest, suggests a new range of questions of the same type, sheds light on similarities and differences between members of the family, and allows us to formulate a much-augmented set of principles and questions concerning the intermodal transfer of spatiotemporal organization. (shrink)

This volume is a wonderful introduction to Foucault and a testimony to the deep humanity of the man himself.

Denis Dutton died a day or two after Christmas in 2010. I had the good fortune to meet him in February 2010, when I participated in an Author-Meets-Critics session on The Art Instinct at the American Philosophical Association, Central Division. (The Critical Notice that follows is a development of my comments there.) Dennis was a passionate, intelligent, influential, and well connected man, who had a vigorous philosophical mind, fully on display in The Art Instinct. Outside of academic philosophy, he was (...) famous as founder of the Arts and Letters Daily, the pre-eminent content-aggregating blog for intellectuals. It is in that capacity that he was obituarised in many of the world’s leading English-language .. (shrink)

It is commonplace to observe that the history of thought reveals certain recurring patterns whose mode of expression changes according to context. It is equally apparent that to chart the salient characteristics of an influential way of thinking – to give concrete, clearly defined shape to the usually tangled fundamental impulses informing a cast of mind – is a complex, difficult task which calls for attention from the historian, the psychologist, the philosopher and, in the case of religious figures and (...) movements, the theologian alike. With regard to the manner of thinking embodied in the theological doctrines of Martin Luther such a task is fraught with more than the usual number of pitfalls. In the first place, following recent Luther scholarship, we must be wary of assuming that the great Reformer held fast to a single set of theological opinions throughout his long career. We shall not, therefore, attempt to reach conclusions applicable to Luther's thought as a whole, but rather shall focus exclusively on a number of key early expositions of the Theologia Crucis . Here, between about 1514 and 1520, we find, according to our argument, enough thematic unity to warrant the search for underlying principles. A second, less easily disposed of difficulty is the lack of a working consensus as to how and with what aims in mind one should even begin an historical analysis of Luther's texts. For example, to the believer who regards Luther's basic tenets as in a straightforward sense divinely inspired, the attempt to extract from his writings the ingredients of a certain thoroughly human way of thinking will seem doomed to inadequacy from the start. Likewise, for different reasons, many of today's. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:BOOK REVIEWS 145 Luther on Thomas Aquinas: The Angelic Doctor in the Thought of the Reformer. By DENIS R. JANZ. Veroffentlichungen des Instituts fiir Europiiische Geschichte Mainz, Abt. Religionsgeschichte, Bd. 140. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1989. Pp. ii + 124. DM 38 {cloth). As Denis Janz, specialist in the late medieval context of Luther's thought (Luther and Late Medieval Thomism, 1983), points out in the "Prospectus," (...) a study of Luther's understanding of Thomas has an inherent appeal, for, " rightly or wrongly, Thomas and Luther are inevitably regarded as the standard-bearers of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism" {p. 1). The recent completion of the necessary critical indices has made the task possible, and the result is a fine and necessary contribution to the work of all scholars interested in the thought of these two pivotal Christian thinkers. The method of Janz is straightforward: assemble the references to Thomas in Luther's works, organize them into appropriate categories, exegete their meanings, and discern important tendencies or perspectives common to these texts. Then "the accuracy of Luther's understanding and the cogency of his critique " can be evaluated from the perspective of twentieth cenrtury historical knowledge {p. 2). Janz recognizes that there are significant hermeneutical difficulties inherent in such a study and that any evaluation " may well imply a notion of history as progress, perhaps even a confidence in the intellectual superiority of modernity over the past " (p. 3). The result bears out the soundness of his approach. Chapter I examines "Luther on the Person of Thomas." Luther, sharing in and contributing to his time's distinctive theological polemic, had no shortage of epithets for Thomas, from " Sophist " to " beggarly paunch " {p. 4). The remarkable thing is the surprising number of complimentary things he has to say. At different times of his career Luther referred to Thomas as " this holy man " or " a man of ' great genius '... woefully misunderstood " {p. 5). A most interesting example is the different uses he makes of a story of Thomas's struggle with despair when near death, when Thomas faced his Anfechtung by holding the Bible and saying "I believe what is in this book" (p. 8). Sometimes Luther cites it as an example of the weakness of implicit faith; but other times he makes no critical comment on Thomas, and the story implies the victory of faith over despair. These different uses show the ambiguity of Luther's attitude toward Thomas as a person, and what in balance seems to be " grudging respect " for an " example of how great persons can at the same time be seriously mistaken " (p. 10). 146 BOOK REVIEWS Chapter U, which comprises the bulk of the hook, carefully examines the substantive issues on which Luther mentions and responds to Thomas: experience, the use of Aristotle, Scripture, penance and indulgences, the Lord's Supper, monasticism, justification, law, baptism, angels, papal authority, purgatory, and the veneration of images. On some of these issues Janz sees only a minor critique of Thomas by Luther and sometimes little real difference between their positions. Both Luther and Thomas give primacy to the literal sense of Scripture, and "both teach that the Church and theology stand under the authority of Scripture" (p. 30). On this question Luther's critique has more to do with the Thomists than Thomas. In regard to penance and indulgences Luther criticizes Thomas's view, though here again there is distortion of Thomas by the Thomists, which Luther correctly suspects (pp. 44-45). Though Luther disagrees with Thomas's understanding of the Lord's Supper, he feels Thomas was entitled to his opinion; what he cannot bear is how Thomas has been raised " to the level of an infallible teacher," with his opinions transformed "into articles of faith" (p. 48). Justification, the heart of Luther's thought, is "a relatively insignificant issue " in his critique of Thomas, as Luther eventually comes to understand better the key place Thomas gave grace (pp. 60, 61). Luther sees Christ as the " abrogation " of the law and criticizes Thomas for not seeing it this way; however, this is a linguistic misunderstanding of Thomas, probably based on Gabriel Bicl's teaching, so that Thomas and Luther are... (shrink)

Martin Luther lectured moral philosophy in Wittenberg. He was therefore a well-trained philosopher in the tradition of Willem Ockham. Throughout his academic career, he respected the important contribution of philosophy to life. Without philosophy, the world cannot function properly! He, however, rejected the idea that Aristotelian philosophy should be the guiding principle of theology. A philosophy that concentrates on what man could and should do, cannot be the cradle of the New Testament notion of justification without works. The God (...) of the New Testament could therefore not be discovered by philosophical reflexion, but should rather be discovered by the preaching of the gospel. Theology, for Luther, is 'science of conflict' - it is in conflict with human logic and science. Theology offers a truth that is not scientifically intelligible. This truth is a matter for faith and not reason. By saying this, the importance of human reasoning is not denied. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Martin Luther King, Jr., and the Legacy of Boston PersonalismJ. Edward Hackett1. IntroductionWhen the question of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s philosophical legacy arises in the academy, so far, the question remains open-ended (though, as I will shortly argue, the question has already been answered by King himself). Beyond his presence in public American consciousness, King left behind speeches, sermons, correspondence, and writings that inspire (...) both philosophical and theological reflection. However, King is also interpreted on the merits of the biases and philosophical traditions that we scholars navigate. Such biases and philosophical traditions mediate our experience of encountering King, and this mediation can impact our understanding of what exactly King’s philosophical legacy is.1Accordingly, we should seek to reconstruct King’s thoughts in the philosophical vocabulary King employed rather than displacing King from his own agency and the contexts that shaped him.2 In doing so, we prevent mistakes and misunderstandings that plague the public knowledge of King’s legacy. And yet, serious misunderstanding occurs every January with light fluff pieces in major newspapers and websites from authors who do not read King’s corpus. What’s more, some scholars are guilty of this lack of reading King widely. Consider Martha Nussbaum and her glaring error and omission in her recent contribution to a recent book that purports to look at King as a philosopher: “Although a religious man, [King] did not advance in his political writings a comprehensive and religious doctrine, as Gandhi did” (Nussbaum 123). In an otherwise interesting article about political emotions, Nussbaum completely neglects any historical consideration or development where King describes himself as a personalist.3 Like others, Nussbaum disregards King’s own self-description. This disregard is tantamount to a silent [End Page 45] and implicit racism that results in scholarly efforts that deprive King of his own intellectual agency when interpreting his work. This tendency prevails in both philosophy and theology departments, and this neglect has also been the larger challenge of African American philosophy gaining more acceptance as a field of philosophical inquiry (McClendon and Ferguson 38). My efforts in this article are to put an end to continual misreadings of King. First and foremost, King is a personalist.While this essay defends the personalist interpretation of King, let me lay out briefly those pieces of evidence. The interpretation of King as a personalist rests on four evidential sources: (1) King’s own words, (2) family background, (3) influence of personalist ideas on his writings, and (4) the tradition of King’s reception by other Boston personalists. First, King describes himself in his own words as a personalist. This is perhaps the biggest piece of evidence for why we should read King as a personalist. Second, King was influenced by personalism before studying Brightman’s philosophy with Gregory Davis at Crozers Theological Seminary.4 Before Morehouse College and Crozers Theological Seminary, according to Rufus Burrow, homespun personalism emerges out of King’s upbringing within the Black Church. For this reason, scholars should not doubt that King synthesizes personalist influences with how he was raised (Burrow, God and Human Dignity 17–31). Moreover, given that King chose to go to Boston University to study with Brightman and to be where Boston personalism was known to be strong, all of these facts indicate that King was a personalist (Burrow, God and Human Dignity 24).Homespun personalism gave King a vocabulary to bring together and synthesize many intellectual forces in his life, and this synthesis is recognized by other personalists. Walter Muelder is one such personalist. Muelder was Dean of Boston University’s School of Theology from 1945–1972 when King attended. Muelder and King exchanged correspondence, and Muelder delivered many lectures, some published and others unpublished, on the personalism of King. The most famous of these lectures is one Muelder gave to Morehouse College in 1983, in which Brightman’s moral law system is read into King’s own words. Taking this historical background and also that, to this day, some teachers at Morehouse College, like Lawrence Carter, make their students learn the personalist moral law system from Muelder and Bright-man, the personalist interpretation... (shrink)

Wissenschaftler verschiedener Fachrichtungen (Theologen, Historiker, Padagogen, Literaturwissenschaftler und Musikwissenschaftler) haben sich 2017 mit der Frage befasst, wie weit Johann Gottfried Herder (1744-1803) durch eine Interpretation seiner Position in Weimar als Superintendent besser verstanden werden konnte, arbeitend unter dem Bilde Luthers, sich diesem lebenslang verpflichtet fuhlend auch als Aufklarer. Kann man den "Theologen unter den Klassikern" aus dem Geflecht der Beziehungen zu Goethe, Schiller und Wieland losen, aus seinen Beziehungen zum Hof, zur Stadt, zur Schule in Weimar? Andererseits lebte er autonom (...) aus der Idee, das Erbe der Reformation fur eine neue Zeit umformen zu mussen. Aus diesen Fragestellungen fallt neues Licht auf die deutsche Geistesgeschichte, auf die Herder gerade als Protestant massgeblich eingewirkt hat. Mit Beitragen von:Martin Bollacher, Claas Cordemann, Corinna Dahlgrun, Stefanie Freyer, Stefan Gerber, Hans-Werner Hahn, Henry Hope, Martin Kessler, Roland M. Lehmann, Johannes von Lupke, Michael Maurer, Hans-Jurgen Schrader, Christopher Spehr, Michael Winkler. (shrink)

Enracinée dans la prière, fondée sur la Bible seule, centrée sur le Christ, et insistant sur la lutte contre le Malin, sur l'engagement éthique et sur la proximité du Royaume de Dieu, la théologie de Martin Luther, soutenue par le courage et l'humour d'un écrivain hors du commun, rencontre maintes préoccupations théologiques actuelles ; mais elle interpelle aussi des théologies souvent embarrassées par le sola scriptura et le solus Christus, promptes à faire de l'homme une victime et limitant l'eschatologie (...) à l'avènement du Christ dans l'intériorité du croyant. De la théologie contemporaine, elle peut apprendre que toute exégèse est située, que l'assertion n'est pas le seul registre du discours théologique, que le dialogue religieux ne se réduit pas à l'anathème et que l'action de Dieu dans l'histoire n'est pas univoque. Martin Luther's theology is rooted in prayer, founded only on the Bible, and centred on Christ ; it lays stress on the struggle against the Devil, on moral commitment, and on the proximity of God's Kingdom ; it is kept up by the courage and humour of an extraordinary writer. As such, it meets with many modern theological preoccupations, but it also challenges theologies that are often embarrassed by the sola scriptura and the solus Christus, theologies that are ready to victimize man and limit eschatology to the coming of Christ into the believer's inner self. From contemporaneous theology it can learn that each exegesis has its context, that doing theology does not only consist of uttering statements, that the religious dialogue does not confine itself to the anathema, and that God's acts in history are not univocal. (shrink)

ZUSAMMENFASSUNGIm Rekurs auf Luthers Verständnis der communicatio idiomatum, also der gegenseitigen Mitteilung und Partizipation von Göttlichem und Menschlichem in der Person Jesu Christi, versucht der Text eine Annäherung zu leisten an eine kommunikative theologische Anthropologie innerhalb einer relationalen und kommunikativen Ontologie. Mit einem solchen Konzept erscheint es als möglich, innerhalb der Debatte um Leib und Seele beziehungsweise Gehirn und Geist, die in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten aufgrund der Forschungsergebnisse der Neurowissenschaften von neuem in die öffentliche Aufmerksamkeit gerückt ist, zu einer Klärung (...) zu gelangen und sowohl einen Leib-Seele-Dualismus als auch eine naturalistische Reduzierung mentaler Prozesse auf rein physische Vorgänge zu vermeiden. Luthers Modell der communicatio idiomatum dient in diesem Zusammenhang als Strukturmodell für die Kommunikation von Mensch und Gott im Glauben und für die leib-seelische Existenz des Menschen selbst.SUMMARYThe article tries – in referring to Martin Luther's understanding of communicatio idiomatum, thus the communication of divine and human nature in the person of Jesus Christ – to outline a communicative anthropology and ontology, in order to help to clarify the body-mind-problem and to overcome both the body-mind-dualism and a naturalistic approach currently favoured by several neuroscientist concepts. In comparing Luther's view of the communication of immaterial and material processes within the person of Jesus Christ and his concept of communication that takes place between Christ and the believer, the essay concludes that Luther seems to conceive a constitutively relationally structured view of man. In taking this approach seriously, there could be a way for Christian theology to appropriately deal with the challenges caused by the contemporary neuroscientist debate. Following Luther's concept of communication within the person of Jesus Christ, of Christ and man and within man himself, this communicative concept could turn out to be helpful in outlining a relational and communicational theological anthropology. (shrink)

The article explicates the significance of M. Weber’s works for understanding of calling as an important world view idea of the European culture. The author observes Weber’s analysis of forming of the notion of calling in the times of ancient Egypt state and Judaic captivity as well as in the Old Testament and its interpretations by M. Luther. Particularly significant for the understanding of social processes during the Reformation in Europe and then in America became Weber’s analysis of the (...) transformation of the religious meaning of calling as “task” and “mission” of a man in the world into the motivation for a practical professional activity. The study shows the ways of implementation of Weber’s theory of social action and political leadership within the concept of calling. The internal collision of the experience of calling is explicated by the examples of charismatic leadership, responsibility of a politician and ethos of a scientist. Combination of affective motivation, value and target oriented rationality in the calling forms the problem for a decision, although this complexity is a driving force of the realization of calling by a person. The philosophical and theological substratum of the Weber’s concept of calling is his looking for the integration of temporal and eternal dimensions in human existence. Calling as an idea of postreformational European culture serves for finding and realization of the meaning of personal life as well as for legitimation of social action. Especially this idea grounds the possibility and necessity of conciliation of the ethics of conviction and the ethics of responsibility in individual as well as in social existence and morality. (shrink)

Resumen Kierkegaard, en su Diario, ha dado un juicio filosófico favorable sobre los actos con los que Lutero ha iniciado la Reforma, pues con estos ha afirmado la autoridad de competencia del individuo que es un prius respecto al Estado y a la Iglesia. Por otro lado, Kierkegaard ha señalado que estos actos han sido viciados por razones filosóficas que han llevado no sólo a la formación de la Iglesia de Estado, sino a la del Estado-Iglesia. Primeramente, se trata de (...) razones de carácter político-filosóficas: una concepción del Poder confusa, una desvalorización del individuo a favor de la comunidad y del Estado, una perspectiva equivocada de la felicidad-salvación del hombre. Además, Kierkegaard ha señalado razones estrictamente filosóficas que han llevado al Estado-Iglesia: una equivocada concepción del ser y una errónea visión de lo que es la razón y el conocimiento. Estas razones, positivas y negativas, señalan cuestiones aún no resueltas en nuestros tiempos.Kierkegaard in his Diary has ¿ven a favorable philosophical judgment on the facts with which Luther has initiated the Reforma, for with these has affirmed the compeUnce authoritj of the individual who is a prius with respect to the State and the Church. On the other hand, Kierkegaard has pointed out that these acts have been vitiated by philosop bical reasons that have led not onlj to the formation of the Church of State, but to that of the Church-State. Firstlj, these are politicalphilosophical reasons: a confused conception of power, a devaluation of the individual in favor of the community and the state, a mistaken perspective of man's happiness and salvation. In addition, Kierkegaard has pointed out strictlj philosoph-ical reasons that have led the Church State: a mistaken conception of being and an erroneous visión of what is reason and knowledge. These reasons, positive and negative, point to issues not jet resolved in our times. (shrink)

Resumen Kierkegaard, en su Diario, ha dado un juicio filosófico favorable sobre los actos con los que Lutero ha iniciado la Reforma, pues con estos ha afirmado la autoridad de competencia del individuo que es un prius respecto al Estado y a la Iglesia. Por otro lado, Kierkegaard ha señalado que estos actos han sido viciados por razones filosóficas que han llevado no sólo a la formación de la Iglesia de Estado, sino a la del Estado-Iglesia. Primeramente, se trata de (...) razones de carácter político-filosóficas: una concepción del Poder confusa, una desvalorización del individuo a favor de la comunidad y del Estado, una perspectiva equivocada de la felicidad-salvación del hombre. Además, Kierkegaard ha señalado razones estrictamente filosóficas que han llevado al Estado-Iglesia: una equivocada concepción del ser y una errónea visión de lo que es la razón y el conocimiento. Estas razones, positivas y negativas, señalan cuestiones aún no resueltas en nuestros tiempos.Kierkegaard in his Diary has ¿ven a favorable philosophical judgment on the facts with which Luther has initiated the Reforma, for with these has affirmed the compeUnce authoritj of the individual who is a prius with respect to the State and the Church. On the other hand, Kierkegaard has pointed out that these acts have been vitiated by philosop bical reasons that have led not onlj to the formation of the Church of State, but to that of the Church-State. Firstlj, these are politicalphilosophical reasons: a confused conception of power, a devaluation of the individual in favor of the community and the state, a mistaken perspective of man's happiness and salvation. In addition, Kierkegaard has pointed out strictlj philosoph-ical reasons that have led the Church State: a mistaken conception of being and an erroneous visión of what is reason and knowledge. These reasons, positive and negative, point to issues not jet resolved in our times. (shrink)

Disputations were a fixture of Martin Luther’s academic career. Luther participated regularly in disputations. It was an important communicative vehicle through which he developed and expressed his theology. The well-known 95 theses are a case in point. Luther’s career as a disputator was impressive. Several of his most influential disputations were explicitly intended for consideration by his academic and ecclesiastical colleagues, but the majority of his disputations took place as a curricular exercise at the University of Wittenberg. (...) The purpose of these disputations was pedagogical and polemical. Luther deployed the same tools for his defence of proper doctrine that were at the centre of the Protestant reformation in the face of objections. The disputatio de homine is a systematic summary of Luther’s anthropology. It incorporates the doctrine of justification as the theological definition of man. It treats the subject within the context of the relationship between theology and philosophy, and reflects upon the new language of theology. The disputatio de homine provides an essential resource for the study of Luther’s anthropology and the doctrine of justification. (shrink)

_The purpose_ of this study is the reflection on ways of philosophical legitimation for the "Self-made-man" idea in the worldview of the Renaissance and Reformation. _Theoretical basis._ Historical, comparative, and hermeneutic methods became the basis for this. The study is based on the works of Nicholas of Cusa, G. Pico della Mirandola, N. Machiavelli, M. Montaigne, E. Roterodamus, M. Luther, J. Calvin together with modern researchers of this period. _Originality._ The analysis allows us to come to the conclusion that (...) casts doubt on the still widespread belief according to which the emergence of the "Self-made-man" idea is localized by the process of forming the American cultural code and the ideological heritage of Benjamin Franklin. It is highlighted that the formation of this idea is the result of a long process that originated in the ancient world and gains a special impetus in the Renaissance and Reformation. Precisely in the cultural context of the latter, the ancient intention to recognize the individual’s right to self-determination and self-government, which in the depths of Christian theology acquires only a potentially universal character, becomes not only acceptable but also, in the context of Protestantism worldview, the only admissible, in fact, individual’s obligatory life guidelines. _Conclusions._ Humanistic and reformation thoughts quite naturally led to further ideological legitimation of the person’s idea of who is creating oneself. This legitimation was during the complex interaction of numerous factors of culture in the Late Middle Ages, as well as ideas and intentions inherited from Antiquity. Key among them was the gradual formation of a new social order, in essence, indifferent to paternalistic rudiments, together with the ethics of Protestantism corresponding to it. The latter does not only legalize but, de facto, sacralizes the individual’s reorientation from hopes for the synergy of God’s grace and own free will in personal salvation, toward the self-reliance and personal efforts, awareness of personal responsibility for the own fate as key principles of the "Self-made-man" concept. (shrink)

Même s’ils ne sont pas volumineux, les commentaires de l’Ecriture tiennent une place essentielle dans la pratique théologique de S. Thomas. Après avoir rappelé ses clés de lecture et d’interprétation du texte biblique selon les coutumes et traditions de son temps, G. Berceville en vient, à propos du texte crucial de Rm 7,14-25 au « je » du discours de Paul tel que le perçoit S. Thomas. Tout en tenant compte de ce qu’en avaient dit les « Autorités », S. (...) Thomas n’en marquait pas moins ses « préférences » : ce texte, sur le bien difficile à faire et le mal qui se présente au « je », s’applique aussi bien au juste qu’au pécheur. En contrepoint, la lecture de Luther, en réaction contre le naturalisme de la Renaissance, se trouve au terme d’une transformation radicale de la raison et de la philosophie. Cette « lecture » dit à la fois l’étrangeté aujourd’hui de l’exégèse de Thomas et la sensibilité Luther à la dimension historique de l’homme, ce qui structure son « anthropologie théologique ». La question est posée : est-il possible aujourd’hui de se mettre à l’école de Thomas le contemplatif sans rien perdre de l’attention inquiète que notre modernité porte à l’histoire où Dieu vient et fait grâce ?Although they are not voluminous, St. Thomas’s commentaries on Scripture are essential to his practical theology. After recalling the keys to reading and interpreting Biblical texts according to the customs and traditions of his time, G. Berceville arrives at St. Thomas’ interpretation of the “I” in the discourse of St. Paul in the crucial text of Rm 7, 14-25. While taking into account what the “Authorities had said,” St. Thomas nevertheless pointed out his “preferences.” This text, concerning the good which is difficult to do and the evil that presents itself to the “I”, can be applied to the just man as well as to the sinner. In contrast, Luther’s reading – a reaction against the naturalism of the Renaissance – came at the end of a radical transformation of reason and philosophy. This “reading” reveals both the strangeness of Thomas’ exegesis today, and Luther’s sensitivity to the historical dimension of man, which structures his “theological anthropology.” It also raises the question: Is it possible today to follow the school of Thomas the contemplative without losing the uneasy attention our modernity brings to history which God enters and saves? (shrink)

Gutenbergs tryckteknik ledde till en medierevolution som förändrades Europa. I 1500-talets början spreds litteratur, grafik och vetenskap, men också nyhetsblad om katastrofer, pamfletter om invaderande turkar och religiösa stridsskrifter. Medan mycket ännu vägde blommade renässanshumanismen genom Erasmus av Rotterdam. Han stod bakom en femtedel av Europas böcker, och skulle ge framtiden ett viktigt arv. Nina Burton skriver om Erasmus och hans tid så att man känner sig vara med när han träffar konstnärerna och de intellektuella? Albrecht Dürer, Holbein d.y., Paracelsus, (...) Thomas More och Luther? lika väl som påvar, kejsare, pedagoger och rebeller. Genom honom möter man en hel epok. Vilken var Erasmus hemlighet? I sina brev klottrade han självporträtt med dubbla ansikten, och hans förmåga att se två sidor födde ett samtal bortom all fanatism? en dröm om ett gränslöst Europa, där kultur och vetenskap knöt nya samband. Men då religiösa strider började skaka världen fick han mäktiga fiender. Erasmus visade vilken roll litteraturen kan spela i en dramatisk tid som har många likheter med vår egen. (shrink)

Until recently, Feuerbach seemed to be a minor footnote in the history of nineteenth century secular and theological development. He was known best because of the interest in those who attacked him. But with the recent concern with the varieties of "radical" theology and the fascination with the intellectual climate of the early Marx, many thinkers have been taking a fresh look at Feuerbach himself. Much of what is "new" in theology as well as atheism is to be found in (...) Feuerbach. Not only does Feuerbach reaffirm the thesis of his The Essence of Christianity—that the "truth" of theology is anthropology whereby "God" turns out to be a name for ideals rooted in man's nature, he now declares that what really motivates the Christian in his belief in God is self-love. There is a helpful introduction by Cherno locating this work in Feuerbach's development and sketching the main stages of its argument.—R. J. B. (shrink)

The question of grace and free will, based on the Augustinian thought, was and still remains the subject of debate among cotemporary theologians and philosophers, due to the importance of this issue in human affairs. This article aims to clarify the relationship between the thought of St. Augustine and the thought of Luther on the issue of grace and free will. We try to show how Luther, anchored in St. Augustine discussion, proposes a relationship between grace and free (...) will in man, when he says that man can not decide on anything that comes to him, just simply to be like a donkey guided by whom mounts him. Thus, Luther reveals a rather pessimistic position about man, what can’t be said so pointedly in relation to St. Augustine. (shrink)

Martin Luther has given little explicit influence on philosophy, and in 1950 Jaroslav Pelikan called for further work into investigating a ‘Lutheran philosophy.’ The beginning of this work lies in Luther’s Heidelberg Disputations, in which he attacks the method of scholasticism and counters with the method of truly Christian theology, a theologia crucis. Such counter, this article argues, entails a shift in Christian philosophizing, a shift that sharply distinguishes between God and man and yet, through this distinction, as (...) Luther asserts, allows one to “call the thing what it actually is”—and thus leads to a truly Christian philosophy. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:1 & 2 Thessalonians by Douglas FarrowAnna Silvas1 & 2 Thessalonians by Douglas Farrow (Grand Rapids, MI: Brazos, 2020), xx + 336 pp.1 and 2 Thessalonians are probably the very first written testimonies of early Christianity. When Paul wrote 1 Thessalonians in AD 50, Our Lord Jesus Christ had "accomplished his exodus in Jerusalem" (see Luke 9:31) not twenty years before. Here we find the paradosis of the (...) Mystery of Christ among the Gentiles, the first articulations of Trinitarian faith (see 1 Thess 1:2-5), expressions of longing for the coming Parousia of Christ, warnings of a strange lawlessness already at work ripening towards a great apostasy and the coming of the "man of lawlessness."Douglas Farrow has pondered 1 and 2 Thessalonians for many years, attested by his numerous expositions and essays over three decades. He brings to his task a ready command of Greek, Hebrew, and Latin, and a vast reading of historical commentary and controversy, an intense personal and ecclesial faith, and a sense of historical, prophetic, and pastoral urgency.Throughout the book are excurses on themes opened up by the words and phrases of St Paul's text: Satan (82-86); the sexual body and virtue in sex, divorce, and remarriage (95-114); the remedial pains of purgatory (beginning in this life); the reality of final retribution, the finality of hell; the untenability of so-called "universalism" (131-41,178-84,192-96); the imminency and the delay of the Parousia (199-204); the apostasy / man of lawlessness / Antichrist; the temple in which the Antichrist seats himself (205-42); the mystery of lawlessness at work, especially in undermining the Church (245-61).In studying Paul's eschatological themes, Farrow necessarily ponders other scriptural texts leading in the same direction: Dani 7-12; Jesus's Olivet Discourse in its most extensive form at Matt 24:1-25:46 (though it really begins at 23:23); 2 Pet 2:1-5, 3:3-15; much of the Rev 6:1 through 19:21; [End Page 398] Deut 32:1-43 (Farrow says the Song of Moses encapsulates the whole of human history); Psalms 97 (LXX 96); 110 (LXX 109); Wis 4-5, 10-19; Sirach 50; Joel; Zech 8-14; Mai 3-4; 2 Mace 5-9; Isa 66:5,14-16; and so on. Farrow holds that Paul worked from knowledge of Jesus's apocalyptic teachings in aversion closest to Matthew's (138,142,184, 189, 205).Farrow takes companions in his exegesis: Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Cyril of Jerusalem, John Chrysostom, Augustine, Haimo, Anselm, Aquinas, and others. He knows Luther's hermeneutics and Calvinist disputes about supra- and infra-sessionism and double predestinationism. He consults more recent prophets, quoting at length from Newman's amazingly prescient 1838 discourses on the last times, Solovyovin 1899, and Fulton Sheen in 1948 and 1958. Another exegete is an artist: Luca Signorelli, whose Disputation of the Antichrist in Orvieto Cathedral Farrow refers to several times.Farrow shows his affinity with Irenaeus. That means cleaving to the visible and invisible truths of the Incarnation of God the Word, respecting concrete and embodied realities, keeping in view the transcendent goal ("The glory of God is a living man—and the life of man is in the vision of God"), instinctively flinching at gnosticizing tendencies—sophisticated re-interpretations of Scripture that elide the rule of faith and dissolve truth. It means a ruling sense of the Kingdom of God as an intervention from heaven rather than generating from man or from the earth. It means a spirit of obedience to the commandments, to the paradosis that descends to us from above in Christ, effected by the Spirit in the ecclesia, the company of brethren destined to "gather to Christ" at his coming (1 Thess 2:1), who practice that final gathering to Christ by participating in the Eucharist on the "Eighth Day," the Lord's Day.Farrow deplores the patchy reading of 1 and 2 Thessalonians in the lectionaries: "While 1 Thessalonians fares a little better, barely half of 2 Thessalonians is read in the Churches" (11). Missing is the eschatologically pivotal 2 Thess 2:3-15, where Paul, distinguishing... (shrink)

First published in 1988 as volume 63 of his Collected Works, Ontology—The Hermeneutics of Facticity is the text of Heidegger's lecture course at the University of Freiburg during the summer of 1923. In these lectures, Heidegger reviews and makes critical appropriations of the hermeneutic tradition from Plato, Aristotle, and Augustine to Schleiermacher and Dilthey in order to reformulate the question of being on the basis of facticity and the everyday world. Specific themes deal with the history of ontology, the development (...) of phenomenology and its relation to Hegelian dialectic, traditional theological and philosophical concepts of man, the present situation of philosophy, and the influences of Aristotle, Luther, Kierkegaard, and Husserl on Heidegger's thinking. Students of Heidegger will find initial breakthroughs in his unique elaboration of the meaning of human experience and the "question of being," which received mature expression in Being and Time. (shrink)

Kant is widely acknowledged as the greatest philosopher of modern times. He undertook his famous critical turn to save human freedom and morality from the challenge of determinism and materialism. Intertwined with his metaphysical interests, however, he also had theological commitments, which have received insufficient attention. He believed that man is a fallen creature and in need of ‘redemption’. He intended to provide a fortress protecting religious faith from the failure of rationalist metaphysics, from the atheistic strands of the Enlightenment, (...) from the new mathematical science of nature, and from the dilemmas of Christian theology itself. Kant was an epistemologist, a philosopher of mind, a metaphysician of experience, an ethicist and a philosopher of religion. But all this was sustained by his religious faith. This book aims to recover the focal point and inner contradictions of his thought, the ‘secret thorn’ of his metaphysics. It first locates Kant in the tradition of reflection on the human weakness from Luther to Hume, and then engages in a critical, but charitable, manner with Kant’s entire pre-critical work, including his posthumous fragments. Special attention is given to The Only Possible Ground, one of the most difficult, interesting and underestimated of Kant’s works. The book takes its cue from an older approach to Kant, but also engages with recent Anglophone and continental scholarship, and deploys modern analytical tools to make sense of Kant. What emerges is an innovative and thought-provoking interpretation of Kant’s metaphysics, set against the background of forgotten religious aspects of European philosophy. (shrink)

This essay asserts freedom as the essence of the prophetic Black Christian tradition that propelled the 1968 Memphis Sanitation Strikes, and largely guided the moral compass of the late-twentieth-century Civil Rights Movement. Sexism, however, is a moral paradox that emerges at the interstices of the prophetic Black Church’s institutional espousal of freedom and its consistently conflicting practices of gender discrimination that bind Black women to politics of silence and invisibility. An exploration of the iconic “I AM a Man” placards worn (...) by strikers during Martin Luther King Jr.’s final campaign in Memphis alongside a contemporary icon of the Black Lives Matter movement illumines how black women continue to be challenged by intracommunal invisibility, even as they are consistently the progenitors, mobilizers, sustainers, and intellectual architects of Black movements for social change. (shrink)

This paper is referring to Fichte’s ambivalent notion of nature. For Fichte, nature is something that needs to be formed. This formability is an evidence of the imperfection, even depravity of an unformed and therefore unfree nature. Fichte seems to allude indirectly on Martin Luther and the Reformation tradition. Accordingly, nature – which is in itself evil or will become evil – is a state from which men had to step out. The affinity to Rousseau’s picture of nature is (...) obvious. Finally, the article asks for the position of Fichte’s notion of nature in the philosophy of German Idealism. At a turning point Schelling tries to explain that nature is something that can be understood as a self-integrating concept.In dem Beitrag wird der Versuch unternommen, den vieldeutigen Naturbegriff Fichtes zu bestimmen. Es soll gezeigt werden, dass Fichte Natur vorrangig als etwas versteht, das »gebildet« werden muss. Diese Bildbarkeit zeugt, so die These, dabei von der Vorstellung einer depravierten, d. h. ungebildeten und damit auch unfreien Natur, wobei Fichte hier mutatis mutandis auf Luther und die reformatorische Tradition zurückzugreifen scheint. Dieser Traditionslinie folgend ist Natur etwas, das als an sich böse oder als böse geworden eingeschätzt wird, d. h. sie wird als ein Zustand bewertet, aus dem man zur Einlösung des Freiheitanspruches notwendigerweise heraustreten müsse. Hierbei wird u. a. auch die Nähe Fichtes zu Rousseaus Naturverständnis deutlich. Schließlich fragt der Beitrag nach dem generellen Ort von Fichtes Naturbegriff innerhalb der philosophischen Entwicklung des Deutschen Idealismus, die mit Schelling eine Kehrtwende erlebt, infolgedessen die Einkehr in eine eigentlich mit Hegel endgültig hinter sich gelassene Natur wieder möglich wird. (shrink)

ZUSAMMENFASSUNGLuthers Äußerungen zu dem in seiner Majestät verborgenen Gott geben der Theologie bis heute Rätsel auf. Will man Luthers Aussagen nicht ihrer Schärfe berauben, um die Einheit im Gottesbegriff zu retten, so scheint die Konsequenz eines dualistischen Gottesbildes und eines Widerspruchs in Gott unvermeidlich. In Auseinandersetzung mit Luthers Ausführungen in De servo arbitrio und mit Eberhard Jüngels Interpretation dieser Ausführungen sucht der vorliegende Text einen Zugang zur Verborgenheit Gottes mit Hilfe des phänomenologischen Begriffs der Entzogenheit als eines Moments, das jede (...) Bezogenheit begleitet. Gottes schlechthinnige Verborgenheit wird dann verstehbar als eine Dimension im Gottesbegriff, die diesem notwendig zugehört und auf Gottes Offenbarung in Christus stets zu beziehen, von dieser aber zu unterscheiden ist.SUMMARYLuther's utterances on God's absolute hiddenness in his controversy with Erasmus of Rotterdam pose considerable difficulties for systematic theology. They inevitably seem to suggest a dualistic notion of God, if their radicality is to be maintained. In discussing some of the most famous passages from De servo arbitrio as well as Eberhard Jüngel's interpretation of these passages, I suggest to understand the notion of God's hiddenness in accordance with the phenomenological concept of withdrawal : Even God's full and complete revelation in Jesus Christ is accompanied by a dimension of inaccessibility that can only be approached from God as revealed in Jesus Christ but needs to be distinguished from it. (shrink)

Die Physikotheologie leitet Gottes Schöpferkraft, Weisheit und liebende Vorsorge aus Schönheit, Funktionalität und Ordnung seiner Schöpfung ab. Diese Theologierichtung - Vorläufer des Intelligent Design Movement? - wird, von Natürlicher Theologie und Naturrecht ausgehend, von Cicero über Calvin, Luther, Kant, Barth und Gogarten besprochen. Ist diese Theologierichtung ein Zugang zu Gott neben der Offenbarung? Der Berner Anatom und Botaniker Albrecht von Haller (1708-1777), ein physikotheologisch denkender Gelehrter, hat als Calvinist das Christentum gegen Voltaire und materialistischen Atheismus kämpferisch verteidigt. Hallers Interpretation (...) der Bibel als von Gott eingegebenes Menschenwort - nicht als Verbalinspiration - ist gerade in der Kreationismus-Diskussion lesenswert. Man würde heute Haller als Anhänger des Intelligent Design einordnen: dass es eine evolutionäre Entwicklung zum Überleben der Schöpfung gibt, ist Gottes Plan zu danken. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:"Yes, We're Buddhists Too!"Jan WillisOn occasion, people have said to me, "Oh, I didn't know that there were African American Buddhists!" Mostly my reaction is demure, but I sometimes want to respond with the question, "Why shouldn't there be?" After all, African Americans are human beings who think and breathe and experience suffering just as other human beings do. More than 2,500 years ago, at the very end of (...) his life, the Buddha declared, "In all these years, I have taught only two things: suffering and its cessation." What a marvelous statement! And, given the end of the declaration, pretty good news.Who, having heard and reflected upon such teachings, would not wish to undertake and practice them? As the Dalai Lama often says today, "All beings wish to have happiness and to avoid suffering. In this regard, we are all exactly alike, exactly the same." It should come as no surprise, then, that at this historic time in Buddhist history— when almost all the world's traditions of Buddhism are found together in one geographic space, the United States—that African Americans too would find Buddhist teachings attractive.Many African Americans of my generation who later inclined toward Buddhism had already heard similar teachings in the words of Martin Luther King Jr. Striving to move this country closer to being a more just society, King and others had built the nonviolent Civil Rights Movement around the principles of love, forgiveness, and interdependence. Hearing these same principles and practices extolled in Buddhist teachings was like coming home.When we learned the details of the Buddha's life, he became even more of an inspiration. Here was a man who actually, in practice, rejected the systemic oppression of his country's people by denouncing the caste, or varna, system of the Aryans (originally founded on color discrimination) and allowing all castes and women to enter his community of practitioners. Both actions were extremely radical—even revolutionary— for his time. Because of the Buddha's teachings and because of his own life example, many African American children of the Civil Rights Movement have been finding their way to Buddhism.Yet, as has so often been the case, we have been doing this without much fanfare or even recognition, once again being made almost invisible. Why is this the case? And, why is it important? We should, it seems to me, explore these issues.According to a number of recent essays and reports, Buddhism is now one of the [End Page 39] fastest-growing religions in the United States. In terms of adherents, it is said to rank either third or fourth behind Christianity, Judaism, and the "nonreligious," and has grown at a rate of 170 percent since 2000. The Pew Forum U.S. Religious Landscape Survey1 published in 2008 said that people in the United States who say they are Buddhist account for about 0.7 percent of the total population (which translates into around two million followers), but a study by Wuthnow and Cadge suggests that at least 12 percent of the U.S. population—some 25 to 30 million people—have "been impacted or influenced in their spirituality by Buddhism or Buddhist ideas."2 Clearly, Buddhist ideas have affected many Americans, and some of them are African Americans.In many ways, the history of Buddhism in America is a distorted and racialized one, with one group of people being extolled while other groups are disparaged or ignored. When we trace the roots of Buddhism's introduction to the United States only to the 1893 World Parliament of Religions, we ignore the fact that there were Chinese and Japanese Buddhists in this country decades before that event. The first groups of Buddhists were actually the Chinese who came to the West Coast as menial laborers in the mines and on the railroads. In 1860, the California census showed that one in ten California residents was Chinese. Around this time Japanese also came to Hawai'i and other West Coast states, bringing with them their respective forms of Buddhism. While these different forms caught the attention of some Euro-Americans, the Chinese and Japanese Buddhists... (shrink)

The theme of this dissertation is to trace a development of defining freedom in the western tradition. It projects to have Luther and Kierkegaard as the central figures to delineate an understanding of freedom, called the Platonic-Augustinean-Lutheran-Kierkegaadian concept of freedom. The author penetrates into these two fundamental elements in this tradition: man by nature pursues good and good must be attributed to God's grace . Logically, these two elements by appearance are not compatible. However, historically, in Augustine's thought, they (...) entered into and then are able to coexist in one system. Their incompatibility and coexistence created a dynamic underlying the development of defining freedom. Influenced by Augustine, Luther followed this dynamic and found that he must deny human freedom . He then resorted to God's grace in promise and claimed that faith endorses righteousness and that a Christian is possessed of freedom in grace. Propelled by this same dynamic, Kierkegaard challenged the modern concept of freedom as self-determination in rationality and provided a profound analysis of human existence in the light of redemption. Kierkegaard's analysis reveals an existential paradox in which man freely chooses unfreedom. Logically, his existential analysis starts with the concept of eternal possibility and infers that freedom is to hold fast to possibility through possibility's giving out itself . The dynamic constituted of the Platonic principle and the concept of redemption allows Kierkegaard to define a powerful concept of freedom and to deconstruct the modern concept of freedom. ;There are two tasks in this dissertation. The first one is to offer a historical and philosophical demonstration of the dynamic, in which the Platonic principle and the concept of redemption proceed from the confrontation, through the combination and the separation, and at last to the unification. The other task is to defend a position that freedom understood in terms of possibility requires possibility's giving out itself In this defense, the essay treats the concept of redemption as a philosophical meditation, rather than a theological reflection. (shrink)

Karl Barth is recognized throughout the world as the twentieth century's leading Protestant theologian. His thought has determined much of the shape of today's Christian thinking, yet it is thoroughly misunderstood. He is a systematic theologian who writes with great complexity and in a scholastic vein. This fine and lucid study isolates Barth's most specific themes and focuses on the relevance of his radically trinitarian doctrine of God to the post-religious situation. The book opens with a discussion of the death (...) of historical religion and Barth's early attempts to deal with the decline of belief in a transcendent God contrasted with contemporary views of the situation. It goes on to treat Barth's further studies, especially his attack on the theology of religion, and there is a discussion in depth of Barth's doctrine of the Trinity as a definition of God. It concludes with an analysis of the different interpretations that can be have been made of Barth's theology. "This scholarly work . . . is a thoroughgoing approach to Barth's leading contribution to twentieth-century dialectical theology. Barth's insights are shown to be far beyond their time. Especially relevant is his application of God's transcendence to man's practical responsibilities. Readers may well ponder whether Barth's Commentary on Romans may not clearly merit more than its present place on well-respected shelves of past history." -Library Journal Robert W. Jenson is a leading American Lutheran theologian. He has taught at many institutions, including Luther College in Decorah, Iowa, the Lutheran Seminary in Gettysburg, and Saint Olaf College in Northfield, Minnesota. With Carl Braaten, he founded the Center for Catholic and Evangelical Theology in Northfield, Minnesota. He was a Senior Scholar for Research at the Center for Theological Inquiry in Princeton, New Jersey, where he now resides. Among his many books are his two-volume Systematic Theology, Lutheranism: The Theological Movement and Its Confessional Writings (with Eric Gritsch), and A Map of Twentieth-Century Theology (editor with Carl Braaten). (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:386 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY species of pragmatism, it could be said that there is indeed some justification for discovering analogies between the Heideggerian theory of truth and pragmatism. What is deplored by Vers6nyi is the loss of the concrete significance of tIeidegger's early theory of truth (as Vers~nyi characterizes it) and its replacement by a conception of truth which is paradoxical and ultimately fruitless for an understanding of the (...) world in which man finds himself. If Being is the groundless Ground, the Wholly Other, and if Being is truth, then truth is inaccesible to man. Truth, in Heidegger's later works, is beyond the finitude of self-reflective thought and can only be approached by means of a via negativa. This, however, is described as the "abandonment of reason." This critical analysis of Heidegger's thought is an interesting and challenging work which attempts a much needed appraisal of Heidegger's philosophical "voyage" from Being and Time to Gelassenheit. Some will be angered by the author's incisiveness; some will applaud his hostility to the dissolution of reason in mysticism; none can be indifferent to this valuable contribution to the study of Heidegger. GEORGEJ. STACK Long Island University A Short History o] Ethics. By Alasdair MacIntyre. (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1966. Pp. viii + 280 $4.95.) Professor MacIntyre's Short History o] Ethics turned out, to my surprise and pleasure, to be a quite different book from what I had expected. I had assumed from its title that it would consist of an exposition, analysis, and perhaps criticism of the theories of the standard great figures from the history of Western moral philosophy, stitched together by a thin thread of historical narrative. It does contain this standard material and the quality of exposition and analysis is very high. But there is much more to the book than that. For in it MacIntyre devotes a great deal of space to political and social philosophy, with discussions of figures like Machiavelli, Locke, Montesquieu, Rousseau, and Marx. Another subject that gets a good deal of attention is religion, including such writers as Luther, Calvin, and Kierkegaard. Even further afield, Professor MacIntyre surveys the beliefs and activities of certain social reformers---for example, the Diggers and Levellers in 17th century England--and the developments and changes in the moral attitudes and relationships of people in certain societies--for example, in ancient Greece. The result is a book that is very rich and varied in content, fascinating to read, and informative. Anyone, student or teacher, who is interested in technical ethics would be well advised to study it. Maclntyre has reasons for giving his book the wide scope it has. For he believes that ethics is a broad subject, concerned with the whole range of man's activities as a practical being. He rejects the notion currently popular that ethics should be a second-order undertaking, morally neutral in itself and limiting its activities to the logical analysis of first-order moral utterances (p. 3). The ethicist cannot, he believes, divorce himself from the social setting in which he lives, taking up a neutral position above the fray, because the very concepts he uses in his thinking and writing are "embodied in and are partially constitutive of forms of social life" (p. 1). The moral philosopher, in other words, is and must be articulating a set of beliefs and ideals that arise out of the general social and historical setting of which he is a part. To understand and appreciate his theories, therefore, we must be conversant with the social organization, political structure, and religious faith of his society. For it is only within this broad context that the concepts that any given ethicist employs become intelligible. MacIntyre's view seems to have one very controversial implication, on which I should like to comment. If the concepts employed by the ethicist are embodied in a given form of social life, then no ethical theory can transcend its historical setting, hence the question, Is a given ethical theory true or false? cannot legitimately be asked. The result is historical BOOK REVIEWS 387 relativism. MacIntyre recognizes this implication and has a good deal to... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:THE HOLINESS OF THE CHURCH IN LUMEN GENTIUM HE NOTION OF the Church as a smner, not often spoken of in Catholic theology of other times, has become quite common in recent years.1 Among the questions of a pastoral and theological nature that have given rise to it, the following may be noted: a) The ecumenical question. Many would wish the Church as such to accuse herself of sin, (...) as a means towards reconciliation. b) The idea borrowed from traditional Protestant theology of a certain compatibility between sin and holiness,2 the simul sanctus et pecca.tor of Luther. c) The notion of evil as a mere deficiency properly belonging to a given stage of development of the Cosmos; such is t:he understanding of Teilhard de Chardin.3 1 The mark of holiness has been applied to the Church more than any of the other three, from the very beginning of Christian times; Baptismal creeds are a clear witness to this. 2 Cf. n. 66 on Kiing. 3 "What is the inevitable complement of anything which results from such a process (an evolutive one) but having to pay the price of some losses? Lack of harmony and physical decomposition in the Pre-Vivant, suffering in the Vivant, sin in the dominion of Freedom..." (Comment je crois) ; "We must say that God, in spite of his power, cannot unite any creature to himself without necessarily entering into battle with Evil, because Evil appears inevitably with the first atom of being which creation 'releases' into existence. Creation and sinlessness are terms as much at loggerheads with divine Power and Wisdom as creature with unicity" (Notes sur les modes de l'ac-tion divine dans l'Universe-yr. 1920). Undoubtedly, sin in its effects is a lack of what man (and creation dependent on him) should have, but the point that Teilhard misses is that the 'deficiency' due to sin (unlike other imperfections found in creation) is due to the responsible action of human beings, and has no inevitability about it. 673 674 PAUL o'cALLAGHAN d) An increased awareness of the social dimension of sm. Undoubtedly sin has numerous (though divisive) social efects.4 But it would be incorrect to affirm that sin is an entirely social phenomenon.5 An application of such a notion to the Church would be an easy next stage. e) A certain undoing of the constrast between the ' Kingdom of God' and the 'world ',6 to the detriment, let it be said, both of the eternity and definitiveness of the former, and the progressive sanctification of the latter. The Church then, not belonging so intimately to the All-Holy, may be more easily looked upon as a sinner. f) Another factor has been the positive humanizing em4 In the Apostolic Exhortation Reeonciliatio et Paenitentia (English translation ; London: CTS, 1984) where Pope John Paul II ga.thers together the findings of the 1983 Synod of Bishops, many acceptable ways of understanding ' social sin' are explained: as mystically ' dragging down ' the whole world; in the sense that it goes in the detriment of our neighbour; in the relationships between various human communities (n.16: p. 51-54). 5 For example, the following words of G. Gutierrez: "No se trata, en la perspectiva liberadora, de! pecado como realidad individual, privada e intimista, afirmada justo lo necesario para necesitar una redenci6n 'espiritual ', que no cuestiona el orclen en que vivimos. Se trata del pecado como un hecho social, hist6rico... El pecatlo se da en estructures opresoras en la explotaci6n del hombre por el hombre, en la dominaci6n y esclavitud de los pueblos, razas y clases sociales. El pecado surge, entonces, como la alienaci6n fundamental, como la rniz de una situaci6n de injusticia y explotaci6n" Teofogia de la liberaci6n (Salamana: Sigueme, 1972), p. 236-237. And in a more recent work of his: " pecar es optar por la opresi6n y contra la liberaci6n " La fuerza hist6rioa de los pobres, (Lima, 1979) p. 19. As J. M. IbaiiezLanglois points out, this statement would be fine if it were to say 'to opt for oppression and against liberation is sinful', that is one more among many possible sins: Teologia de la liberacion... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Buddhist-Christian Studies 22 (2002) 163-179 [Access article in PDF] Emptiness and Dogma Joseph S. O'Leary Sophia University The controversial Vatican document Dominus Iesus reasserts that non-Christian religions are objectively in a defective situation as regards salvation.Etymologically, salvation (soteria salus) means health. Here I should like to reflect on apparent symptoms of ill health in Christian theology and ask if Buddhist wisdom can help us formulate a diagnosis and bring (...) the issues into perspective in a healing way. I shall take as my guiding thread an idea familiar to readers of this journal, namely, that Christian theology has suffered from a delusive clinging to substance and identity, and that the Buddhist teachings of dependent co-arising, emptiness, and non-self may provide an antidote.Biblical and Christian traditions are rich in resources for a critique of substantialist conceptions of God and self. The God of the Bible is constantly shattering the fixated, idolatrous images his worshippers form of him, and the Johannine language of God as Spirit, light, love, locates God in a dynamic realm of communal contemplation from which it would be difficult to distill a well-defined divine substance suited to metaphysical analysis. As for self, Paul, and later Luther, present the Christian self as an existential and relational event, not a substantial self-contained soul.What of Christian theology as shaped from Greek metaphysics? Is it irredeemably substantialist, prey to naive reification and objectification? The definition of God as ipsum esse subsistens("being itself subsisting") sufficiently eludes objectification to include the Plotinian sense of God as "beyond being." The idea adopted from Aristotle that "the soul [as knower] is in a manner all things" suggests that metaphysical theology also developed a nonobjectifying conception of human being. The Christological debates of the early Christian centuries rely of necessity on substance language, yet in placing that terminology at the service of a revealed mystery beyond the grasp of language or thought, they introduce a ferment of paradox into the play of concepts and make of it a dance of traces, following the contours of a reality that cannot be brought under substantialist rubrics.Some might see the brilliant relational fireworks of Thomist trinitarian speculation as deconstructing logocentric images of divinity. However, the Trinity in itself is probably best seen as an abstract remainder concept, postulated as a dim background of the revealed phenomenon of Father, Jesus Christ, and Spirit, so that to spin stories of theories about it is futile, a form of misplaced concreteness. Robert Magliola finds [End Page 163] Nagarjunian resonances in the trinitarian logic of the Council of Florence, notably in the decree it addressed to the Copts in 1442 (Magliola, 85-89). The Copts were given an extra dose of the logic that had caused profound unease among the Greek delegates three years earlier (see Gill, 227-232; 325). How much of this later logic did the Latins read back into the patristic texts they cited? Though unbeatable in the fifteenth century, how convincing is it today? Theology has to face the hermeneutical task, and an ongoing one, of assessing the status and function of this trinitarian logic and referring it back to the biblical basis.The desubstantializing tendencies just noted can be drawn on in a contemporary "overcoming of metaphysics" in theology. But the mainstream of the tradition invested massively in substance and identity. It was by strong affirmations of substantial identity that Christianity made its way in the world. Dogma determined the identities of Father, Son, and Spirit as consubstantial hypostases of the one God, the identity of Jesus Christ as true God and true man united in one hypostasis, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the unity, sufficiency, infallibility of the Church and its Scriptures, the continuity of the episcopal and papal ministries as transmitted from the apostles. The substantiality of what was proclaimed was matched by the total conviction of the faith that proclaimed it. Theologians might tinker with speculative elaborations, but the core of faith and dogma was untouchable, never subjected to doubt or questioning.It is a kind of metadogma that all... (shrink)

The present essay contends that progressive readings of Smith ignore the influence of theological concepts and religious ideas on his work, notably three distinct strands: first, seventeenth- and eighteenth-century natural theology; second, Jansenist Augustinianism; third, Stoic arguments of theodicy. Taken together, these theological elements help explain why Smith’s moral philosophy and political economy intensifies the secular early modern and Enlightenment idea that the Fall brought about ‘radical evil’ and a ‘fatherless world’ in need of permanent divine intervention. As such, Smith (...) views the market as divine regulation of human sinfulness and an instrument to serve God’s providential plan. Indeed, the ‘invisible hand of the market’ represents a nominalist realm where human cooperation intersects with divine providence, blending private self-interest with the public commonweal. I will also argue that Smith’s conception of a morally neutral market is ultimately incompatible with creedal Christianity, in particular orthodox catholic Christian ideas of the common good in which all can share and the practice of charity for those most in need who have been abandoned by state bureaucracy and the marketplace. The main reason is that Smith, not unlike Calvin, tends to divorce human contract from divine gift by dividing the theo-logic of gratuitous reciprocal giving from the economic logic of contract – a dualism that bears an uncanny resemblance with Suárez’s Baroque scholasticism of which Smith’s friend David Hume was rightly critical. In particular, the Reformation and Counter-Reformation theology of Calvin, Luther and Suárez sunders ‘pure nature’ from the supernatural and develops a ‘two ends’ account of human nature, according to which human beings have a natural end separate from their supernatural finality. So instead of participating in the divine oikonomia of asymmetrical gift-exchange, human society and the economy operate autonomously and are ordered towards a purely natural end. Smith conceptualises the market mechanism as both a fundamental precondition for interpersonal relationality and at the same time separate from the sociality it engenders. Smith’s anthropology hovers half-way between Machiavelli and Mandeville’s homo œconomicus in search for maximal profit, on the one hand, and the diametrically opposed conception of man as a gift-exchanging animal striving for mutual social recognition, on the other hand. By viewing market exchange as separate from the private virtues of benevolence, justice and prudence, he introduces a split between the exercise of moral virtues and the operation of commercial society. Such a divide is wholly foreign to the project of an overarching civil compact in the writings of Smith’s contemporary Antonio Genovesi and other members of the Italian schools of civic humanism and civil economy. In consequence, Smith’s œuvre marks a decisive shift from civil to political economy. (shrink)

Kierkegaard's "absolute paradox" was born in his critique of Hegel's absolute reconciliation between faith and knowledge and bears the scars of his desperate struggle between atheism and the belief in the God of Abraham. In Kierkegaard's critique of Hegel's reconciliation it became evident that there are two basic possibilities in interpreting religious experience: gnosticism and pisticism. Paul, Augustine, Luther, Kant, Kierkegaard and Karl Barth represent the pistic interpretation of religion. They are "pistics" who protest against man's gnostic hubris and (...) try to expose his illusion about a cognitive way of archetypal knowledge. The paradox of faith implies a sola fide which can never be turned into a general and universal method. But theology is stronger than faith! It turns even the paradox of faith into a method relating the way of paradox to the classical ways of theology, the method of negation and analogy. The paradox of faith is thereby taken out of its context, its energy diffused and its motif turned into a general argument for apologetic theology. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Buddhist-Christian Studies 21.1 (2001) 69-72 [Access article in PDF] Christian Experiences with Buddhist Spirituality: A Response Robert Thurman Columbia University Recently I read an account on the CNN website of a statement made at the Kumbh Mela at Allahabad in India, where about eighty million devotees of Hinduism were joined in their worship of the grace of the Goddess River Ganga by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, informal head (...) of Tibetan Buddhists and formal head of the Tibetan government in exile. His Holiness also joined the leaders of Hinduism, various Shankaracharyas and others, in a formal statement in which they requested with the followers of other world religions not to persist in the practice of aggressive conversion of the followers of other religions. The statement addressed a special plea to Christians and Muslims, who may currently be the most intense in their worldwide missionary activities.The writer of the CNN article was clearly cynical about this, mentioning, as if to undercut the force of their appeal to other religions, that the Hindu leaders themselves wanted to declare India a Hindu nation. He noted that the Dalai Lama "giggled" when he sprinkled himself with Ganga water out of respect for Hindu beliefs, but declined to immerse himself in the river, saying it was too cold.His Holiness has often challenged leaders of world religions, including Buddhists, Hindus, and secular humanists (which he considers a world religion/ideology, whether Marxist or liberal democratic), by saying that now is past the time when anyone should be attempting to convert others to a different belief system or institutional affiliation. If persisted in, it will lead to worse violence in the future than it already has in the past. His position seems eminently reasonable, looking realistically at the world situation, the powerful technologies of communication and possible scale of violence. Yet people filled with enthusiasm for their saving faith tend to feel deprived if they cannot have a mission to save others with it.I do not think His Holiness means that you cannot share your enthusiasm, or make the jewels of faith, wisdom, and compassion of your tradition accessible to others, or even dialogue with others comparing your tradition with theirs. He travels the world teaching Buddhism, mostly to Buddhists, but freely to anyone who is interested. But then he does tell those who are not Buddhists notto convert to Buddhism. Rather, he cautions, they should take whatever they learn and use anything that seems good to them to enhance their original tradition, thereby remaining integrated with [End Page 69] their families, communities, and local customs, perhaps even enriching their own traditions. Those who are Buddhists from birth he urges to study other traditions, learn from them, and critically extricate themselves from feelings of superiority or estrangement. And some who may already have chosen to become Buddhist he strongly cautions not to criticize their birth traditions or look down on their followers.What I love about the essays in this collection is that they all seem to be learning from Buddhism and appreciate its traditions, yet they interpret it in Christian terms, apply it to their own Christian understanding, and practice an enriched Christianity, perhaps what Bardwell Smith so aptly calls in his essay "becoming a Christian." I feel privileged to respond to the deep personal quest for truth I sense within each essay. I am not going to review each essay point by point, though I will touch on each of the five as I follow a kind of pilgrimage through them. Though all five essays are personal and confessional, those by Ingram and Muck are perhaps more theoretical in tone, Adeney and Frohlich more contemplative in focus, and Smith combines both in a special combination I will save for last.Paul Ingram writes as a man who floats contentedly in a sea of God's grace, the vision of which seems to have been opened for him by Martin Luther. While he floats, he reflects deeply and knowledgeably about both Pure Land and Zen Buddhisms, acknowledging how his appreciation of the Christian... (shrink)

In his 1959–1960 seminar on the ethics of psychoanalysis the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan states that one can only fully understand the intellectual (philosophical, ethical) problems Freud addresses when one recognizes the filiation or cultural paternity that exists between him and a new direction of thought represented by Luther. In this article Lacan’s interest in Luther’s theological voluntarism, his conception of God, his articulation of what Lacan identifies as the modern crisis in ethics and his view on the (...) law in relation to desire is presented and analysed. It is argued that Lacan is primarily interested in Luther as a religious author radically expressing the problem of the foundation of moral law and addressing the question how and where a person finds moral orientation after the break with the medieval Aristotelian-scholastic universal order and given man’s sinful desires. (shrink)