"The Fathers did not find the seeds of the Word in the great religions, but in philosophy, i.e. in the application of critical reason to the [(le processus de la raison critique face aux)] religions."
Joseph Ratzinger, Chemins vers Jésus, trans. Linnig (Parole et Silence, 2004), 73-74, as quoted by Serge-Thomas Bonino, "'Toute vérité, quel que soit celui qui la dit, vient de l'Esprit-Saint': autour d'une citation de l'Ambrosiaster dans le corpus thomasien," Revue thomiste 106, no. 1/2 (2006): 102n6. But Bonino qualifies this considerably for Aquinas, who "discovered [these seeds] first in philosophy" (102), but "did not limit the illuminative action of God exercised among the pagans to the rational speculation of the philosophers alone" (104). For St. Thomas there was always "the possibility that [even] the religious institutions of the Gentiles--in particular their prophecy and their scriptures--functioned as vectors directing them to some of the supernatural truths that come from the Holy Spirit and lead to Christ (though not without passing [ultimately] through Jerusalem!)" (126, italics mine). That "non sans passer d'ailleurs par Jérusalem!" is important. Because this is no abandonment of the orthodox denial of an extra ecclesiam. "Clearly, this revelation made to the Gentiles does not institute a way of salvation that would be complementary (still less parallel) to the economy of biblical revelation that culminates in Jesus Christ. It is strictly ordained to Jesus Christ, [the one] Mediator and Redeemer, whose mystery it announces and in an embryonic fashion explicates, in such a way as to prepare the minds and hearts of pagans to accept him" (114). Hence, "it belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ to purify these traditions, to recapitulate these captive and partial truths in order that they might be reintegrated into their 'natural place': the Church's confession of faith. It is only in this whole, to which they are ordained, that they find their full signification" (128).
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Sunday, February 1, 2009
"But in the end the Word is given, and one touches it with one's hand"
"the atmosphere of negative theology, so respectful of the mystery [(l'ambiance mystérique de la théologie négative)], . . . is, as it were, condensed and concentrated in the constant moment, in the incorruptible moment of the theology of eminence, Verbum abbreviatum. This procedure does not render pointless the old debate over the apophaticism of Saint Thomas. . . . But in the end the Word is given, and one touches it with one's hand."
Philippe Vallin, "Henri de Lubac et Saint Thomas d'Aquin: ouverture et structure en théologie," Revue des sciences religieuses 77, no. 2 (2003): 248.
Verbum abbreviatum ("the Man-God, Verbum abbreviatum" (248)) was, apparently, a medieval expression dear to de Lubac (248n96, which cites Histoire et esprit, pp. 345-346). Cf. the verbum [ab]breviatum of Is 10:22-23 and Rom 9:28, as quoted by, for example, Aquinas (Index Thomisticus, Corpus Thomisticum).
Abbreviatum derives from ML se abbreviare, to abase or humble or lower oneself, to stoop down, to condescend, and was used in the context of the theology of the Incarnation (Blaise, Lexicon Latinitatis Medii Aevi (Brepols, 1975), 2). So Verbum abbreviatum would be something like "the Word self-abased", "the Word [who] humbled himself", etc. I'm working not from the texts directly but from Blaise, but Niermeyer gives other senses, too, ones that we today would associate with a term like abbreviare: to summarize, write with abbreviations, shorten, or contract (Niermeyer & Kieft, Mediae Latinitatis lexicon minus, 2nd ed., ed. Burgers (Brill, 2002), 4-5). So the Verbum abbreviatum was probably also "the Word contracted", "the Word sized down", "the Word contained" by the womb of Mary, the crib, etc. (Or so I'm just guessing.)
Philippe Vallin, "Henri de Lubac et Saint Thomas d'Aquin: ouverture et structure en théologie," Revue des sciences religieuses 77, no. 2 (2003): 248.
Verbum abbreviatum ("the Man-God, Verbum abbreviatum" (248)) was, apparently, a medieval expression dear to de Lubac (248n96, which cites Histoire et esprit, pp. 345-346). Cf. the verbum [ab]breviatum of Is 10:22-23 and Rom 9:28, as quoted by, for example, Aquinas (Index Thomisticus, Corpus Thomisticum).
Abbreviatum derives from ML se abbreviare, to abase or humble or lower oneself, to stoop down, to condescend, and was used in the context of the theology of the Incarnation (Blaise, Lexicon Latinitatis Medii Aevi (Brepols, 1975), 2). So Verbum abbreviatum would be something like "the Word self-abased", "the Word [who] humbled himself", etc. I'm working not from the texts directly but from Blaise, but Niermeyer gives other senses, too, ones that we today would associate with a term like abbreviare: to summarize, write with abbreviations, shorten, or contract (Niermeyer & Kieft, Mediae Latinitatis lexicon minus, 2nd ed., ed. Burgers (Brill, 2002), 4-5). So the Verbum abbreviatum was probably also "the Word contracted", "the Word sized down", "the Word contained" by the womb of Mary, the crib, etc. (Or so I'm just guessing.)
Ratzinger on the nature of the New Testament
The New Testament writings "neither oppose nor juxtapose a new Scripture to the old; but to the one Scripture, i.e. to the Old Testament, they oppose the event that is Jesus Christ, inasmuch as he is the Spirit who explicates Scripture. . . . [Paul] opposes the Old Covenant and the New as gramma and pneuma, letter and spirit, and he calls the Lord by the name of [the] Spirit who causes [one] to comprehend the letter, or, rather, who is the sense of it, its living content (2 Cor 3:6-18)."
Joseph Ratzinger, as quoted by Henri de Lubac, as quoted by Tracey Rowland, in "Henri de Lubac et Saint Thomas d'Aquin: ouverture et structure en théologie," Revue des sciences religieuses 77, no. 2 (2003): 246. All of this contra Joachim of Fiore, who treated the New Testament as a second gramma merely, and was therefore obliged to hold out for something else wholly "spiritual".
Joseph Ratzinger, as quoted by Henri de Lubac, as quoted by Tracey Rowland, in "Henri de Lubac et Saint Thomas d'Aquin: ouverture et structure en théologie," Revue des sciences religieuses 77, no. 2 (2003): 246. All of this contra Joachim of Fiore, who treated the New Testament as a second gramma merely, and was therefore obliged to hold out for something else wholly "spiritual".
Ratzinger on "bourgeois Pelagianism" on the stats
"Contrary to the attitude that whatever appears to be wrong with the contemporary Church must be somehow the work of the Holy Spirit, even if it is not obvious how or why, Ratzinger has written that the criterion that Jeremiah laid down remains valid: 'the proclamation of empirical success is to be judged by empirical criteria and cannot rely on theology.'"
Tracey Rowland, "Variations on the theme of Christian hope in the work of Joseph Ratzinger-Benedict XVI," Communio: international Catholic review 35:2 (Summer 2008): 209-210. Cited here is The Yes of Jesus Christ, pp. 41-51. The lines immediately preceding were, "Often bourgeois Pelagians react strongly against all criticisms of secularizing post-conciliar practices and the concerns of those who worry that there might be problems with the reception of the conciliar call for renewal and with popular interpretations of conciliar documents. When presented with statistical data about plummeting Mass attendance rates, the even smaller numbers going to Confession, and the rather large numbers cohabitating before marriage, contracepting and so on, the bourgeois Pelagians are likely to reply that the younger post-conciliar generations simply have different ways of expressing their spirituality. Against these kinds of reactions Ratzinger has spoken of the 'arrogance of apostasy which is a parody of faith and hope.' He has also drawn analogies between the attitudes of contemporary bourgeois Pelagians and those who imprisoned the prophet Jeremiah for his pessimism. He observes that in the time of Jeremiah 'the official optimism of the military, the nobility, the priesthood, and the establishment prophets demanded the conviction that God would protect his city and his temple. However, they were all wrong. They ignored all the evidence to the contrary and 'downgraded God to become the guarantee of human success and the justification for their irrationalism.' Contrary to the attitude that whatever appears to be wrong with the contemporary Church must be somehow the work of the Holy Spirit, even if it is not obvious how or why, Ratzinger has written that the criterion that Jeremiah laid down remains valid: 'the proclamation of empirical success is to be judged by empirical criteria and cannot rely on theology.'"
Tracey Rowland, "Variations on the theme of Christian hope in the work of Joseph Ratzinger-Benedict XVI," Communio: international Catholic review 35:2 (Summer 2008): 209-210. Cited here is The Yes of Jesus Christ, pp. 41-51. The lines immediately preceding were, "Often bourgeois Pelagians react strongly against all criticisms of secularizing post-conciliar practices and the concerns of those who worry that there might be problems with the reception of the conciliar call for renewal and with popular interpretations of conciliar documents. When presented with statistical data about plummeting Mass attendance rates, the even smaller numbers going to Confession, and the rather large numbers cohabitating before marriage, contracepting and so on, the bourgeois Pelagians are likely to reply that the younger post-conciliar generations simply have different ways of expressing their spirituality. Against these kinds of reactions Ratzinger has spoken of the 'arrogance of apostasy which is a parody of faith and hope.' He has also drawn analogies between the attitudes of contemporary bourgeois Pelagians and those who imprisoned the prophet Jeremiah for his pessimism. He observes that in the time of Jeremiah 'the official optimism of the military, the nobility, the priesthood, and the establishment prophets demanded the conviction that God would protect his city and his temple. However, they were all wrong. They ignored all the evidence to the contrary and 'downgraded God to become the guarantee of human success and the justification for their irrationalism.' Contrary to the attitude that whatever appears to be wrong with the contemporary Church must be somehow the work of the Holy Spirit, even if it is not obvious how or why, Ratzinger has written that the criterion that Jeremiah laid down remains valid: 'the proclamation of empirical success is to be judged by empirical criteria and cannot rely on theology.'"
Aquinas on the sin of Lucifer
"Without doubt the angel sinned by seeking to be as God. But this can be understood in two ways: first, by equality; secondly, by likeness. He could not seek to be as God in the first way, because by natural knowledge he knew that this was impossible, and there was no habit preceding his first sinful act, nor any passion fettering his knowing power, so as to lead him to choose what was impossible. . . . And even supposing it were possible, it would be against the natural desire, because there exists in everything the natural desire of preserving its own being, which would not be preserved were it to be changed into another nature. . . . But he desired to be like God in this respect,--by desiring, as his last end of happiness [(ut finem ultimum beatitudinis)] that which he could attain by the power of his own nature [(virtute suae naturae)], turning his desire away from supernatural happiness [(a beatitudine supernaturali)], which is attained by God's grace [(ex gratia Dei)]. Or, if desiring as his last end that likeness to God which is bestowed by grace, he sought to have it by the power of his own nature, and not from divine assistance according to God's ordering [(per virtutem suae naturae, non ex divino auxilio secundum Dei dispositionem)]."
Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae I.63.3.Resp., trans. FEDP. A rejection of what I take to be the popular claim, that Lucifer sought to be like God simpliciter. (Although Aquinas is really responding in the nuanced positive to the objections here, the question being "Whether the Devil desired to be as God".) I was put onto this by Ph. Vallin, "Henri de Lubac et Saint Thomas d'Aquin: ouverture et structure en théologie," Revue des sciences religieuses 77, no. 2 (2003): 221-222, who goes on to stress a point I am myself (perhaps overly) fond of making, that "the obstacle . . . of the transcendent heteronomy of salvation" is "an illusion, . . . as if the Being of God were a member of [and therefore a threat to the autonomy of the other members of (faisait nombre avec) the class] of autonomous being[s]" (222, where Suarez and Wolf, not Aquinas, are the culprits). "Saint Thomas finds already in Aristotle a correction of the principle that the idea of nature implies that of complete autonomy and loaths heteronomy". No, human nature is a "structure open" to the "opening structure" of divine revelation (225, 226). "the anthropology of the open structure" discovers its (undeniably cruciform) fulfillment in the "revelation of the trinitarian economy to which it is subordinated: 'before Abraham was, I AM'" (226: Abraham, "open structure"; YHWH, "opening structure"). For more on the sign of contradiction that this "opening structure" presents, go here: http://liberlocorumcommunium.blogspot.com/2008/12/corrective-on-aquinas-worth-heeding.html.
Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae I.63.3.Resp., trans. FEDP. A rejection of what I take to be the popular claim, that Lucifer sought to be like God simpliciter. (Although Aquinas is really responding in the nuanced positive to the objections here, the question being "Whether the Devil desired to be as God".) I was put onto this by Ph. Vallin, "Henri de Lubac et Saint Thomas d'Aquin: ouverture et structure en théologie," Revue des sciences religieuses 77, no. 2 (2003): 221-222, who goes on to stress a point I am myself (perhaps overly) fond of making, that "the obstacle . . . of the transcendent heteronomy of salvation" is "an illusion, . . . as if the Being of God were a member of [and therefore a threat to the autonomy of the other members of (faisait nombre avec) the class] of autonomous being[s]" (222, where Suarez and Wolf, not Aquinas, are the culprits). "Saint Thomas finds already in Aristotle a correction of the principle that the idea of nature implies that of complete autonomy and loaths heteronomy". No, human nature is a "structure open" to the "opening structure" of divine revelation (225, 226). "the anthropology of the open structure" discovers its (undeniably cruciform) fulfillment in the "revelation of the trinitarian economy to which it is subordinated: 'before Abraham was, I AM'" (226: Abraham, "open structure"; YHWH, "opening structure"). For more on the sign of contradiction that this "opening structure" presents, go here: http://liberlocorumcommunium.blogspot.com/2008/12/corrective-on-aquinas-worth-heeding.html.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
