« From Impermanence to Emptiness: Madhyamaka and Momentariness | Main | Condoleezza as Eichmann; Rev Robert Sinico as Goebbels »

April 17, 2009

Comments

evagrius

Perhaps the remarks by Laurie Brinks O.P. could have been better stated but they do point to the need for a new "theological language".

See the remarks by Raimundo Panikkar;

http://www.odemagazine.com/doc/print/12/if_you_don_t_believe_in_yourself_you_can_t_believe_in_god

http://www.share-international.org/archives/religion/rl_cfnew-innocence.htm

Spirit of Vatican II

"Let us not reduce and limit Christ to Jesus" -- I think this plea of Panikkar makes sense theologically. Working it out with due reverence for tradition is a delicate task. The open discussion of such theological horizons is impeded by the "nervous nellie" antics of the CDF, and when their personnel (mostly men, or perhaps exclusively men, of a somewhat misogynistic disposition too, I'd imagine) get working on women who are theologically vulnerable, a grisly witch-hunt seems likely to ensue.

evagrius

I think that's why the situation is so dangerous.

It's one thing to "tangle" with someone as theologically and philosophically astute as Panikkar and another when "tangling" with those not so astute though well intentioned and quite intelligent.

It's another attempt to stifle, not dissent, but exploration or, as the nuns state, sojourning.

Christopher

Fr. O'Leary,

Could you read through my latest post on "The Wisdom Jesus" by Cynthia Bourgeault. She's making the rounds both in Episcopal and Roman Catholic circles. I find it very disturbing.

Christopher

I think, for example, her use of Pannikar is warrant for a "nervous nellie":

1.“Abba, Father” expresses his intense sense of “filiation” (i.e., “sonship”). But
inclusively, rather than exclusively. Panikkar effectively demolishes Jesus’s
ONLY, exclusive status (the rest of us are merely “children by adoption”) as an
example of Roman, legalistic cultural embeddedness and encourages to us to
experience our solidarity with him in our common experience of being children.
He also lodges another potshot at the incapacity of our Western monotheistic
metaphysic to comprehend Jesus’ meaning here: “Within a monotheistic context
we cannot be God’s real children.” (p. 98).
2.“The Father and I are One.”

evagrius

Perhaps the "problem" is that we are in a "post-Western" situation rather than a "post-Christian" situation.

Spirit of Vatican II

Annoyingly, one blogger sees me as a New Ager who totally agrees with Sr Laurie Brinks, ignoring the fact that I italicize the phrases I disagree with or at least find misleading. See http://s10.zetaboards.com/Catholic_CyberForum/topic/7216488/2/

To "go beyond Jesus" has a valid meaning -- to find the divine Logos in all of creation and the great religions as well as in the Gospels -- but of course such a going beyond is a rediscovery of Jesus in the widest perspective of his identity as the Logos entering human history.

Rat-biter

"It is well represented today by the confused and immature columnist Damian Thompson..."

## He's not responsible for the comments people make on his articles, and he is thought-provoking,or certainly can be; though I prefer a less defensive style of Catholicism.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Pages

Blog powered by Typepad