This blog explores both historical and current events guided by the thought of the leading thinkers, past and present, of this school or movement of theology. Refer to the Classic Posts, Great and Contemporary Thinkers, various links of all kinds, in addition to the Archives themselves. David is the founder and manager of this website, but many friends contribute to it on a regular basis.
I linked to the comment(s) because it is how I view things at the most basic level, the rational or philosophical or even natural (if we can speak that way). I think my comments on Deep Furrows complement what I later had to say (at Ignatius Insight Scoop) about Guissani and Pope Benedict's perspectives on "being Christian." I do not think Aquinas and Pieper speak the same way but I think there is a bridge that can unite them or, better yet, a perspective that can incorporate them with Giussani and Pope Benedict's ways of expression. That is what I have been trying to do since I met the Movement: understand a place for both Aquinas (and some--not all--of his interpreters) and Giussani in expressing elements or experiences of the Christian life.
If the two sets of comments do not have a place together, I accept that. Perhaps I have to do a better job of explaining them and then connecting them together in some manner. Next vacation, perhaps. Ha!
As well, I linked to the comments on Deep Furrows because I felt quite moved that night and the next day with the discussion that went on. I enjoyed it, learned from it, and had hoped others could as well. I did not realize we ended up in disagreement. I do think that the expressions of Giussani and Aquinas (and Pieper too) need some clarification before they are judged to be incompatible. I think they are compatible and just use language differently. That was one of the biggest "ah-ha" moments for me in trying to understand how all three could be speaking about the Christian life but sound so different at times. I learned to consider their intentions and audiences as well as their philosophical/metaphysical foundations, which opened up a lot in how I understood their use of key terms and what they signified. If we are in disagreement, then I will have to revisit the series of comments and consider how. With distinctions made at key points, I think we are closer to agreeing than not, but for that I am open to your judgment on the matter.
O yes, we're very close. Perhaps as close as folks can get in debating things in comment boxes...
I really learned a lot to see Aquinas discussing faith as certain insofar as it's a dependence on the testimony of the Holy Spirit; and dubious insofar as it's a claim to have grasped the ineffable God (God, after all, being greater than what can be conceived).
What sparked the original post was an experience of certainty - while some philosophers have a horror of certainty...
4 comments:
And for some thoughts on "faith," go here and then scroll up and down the page for more of the discussion.
Heh. I'm amused to see W. linking his comment on my post.
I guess we agree to disagree about the certainty of faith... :)
I linked to the comment(s) because it is how I view things at the most basic level, the rational or philosophical or even natural (if we can speak that way). I think my comments on Deep Furrows complement what I later had to say (at Ignatius Insight Scoop) about Guissani and Pope Benedict's perspectives on "being Christian." I do not think Aquinas and Pieper speak the same way but I think there is a bridge that can unite them or, better yet, a perspective that can incorporate them with Giussani and Pope Benedict's ways of expression. That is what I have been trying to do since I met the Movement: understand a place for both Aquinas (and some--not all--of his interpreters) and Giussani in expressing elements or experiences of the Christian life.
If the two sets of comments do not have a place together, I accept that. Perhaps I have to do a better job of explaining them and then connecting them together in some manner. Next vacation, perhaps. Ha!
As well, I linked to the comments on Deep Furrows because I felt quite moved that night and the next day with the discussion that went on. I enjoyed it, learned from it, and had hoped others could as well. I did not realize we ended up in disagreement. I do think that the expressions of Giussani and Aquinas (and Pieper too) need some clarification before they are judged to be incompatible. I think they are compatible and just use language differently. That was one of the biggest "ah-ha" moments for me in trying to understand how all three could be speaking about the Christian life but sound so different at times. I learned to consider their intentions and audiences as well as their philosophical/metaphysical foundations, which opened up a lot in how I understood their use of key terms and what they signified. If we are in disagreement, then I will have to revisit the series of comments and consider how. With distinctions made at key points, I think we are closer to agreeing than not, but for that I am open to your judgment on the matter.
In Christ,
O yes, we're very close. Perhaps as close as folks can get in debating things in comment boxes...
I really learned a lot to see Aquinas discussing faith as certain insofar as it's a dependence on the testimony of the Holy Spirit; and dubious insofar as it's a claim to have grasped the ineffable God (God, after all, being greater than what can be conceived).
What sparked the original post was an experience of certainty - while some philosophers have a horror of certainty...
Post a Comment