tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post3889023175017825159..comments2024-03-25T13:40:30.747-04:00Comments on Faith and Theology: Fergus Kerr: Twentieth-Century Catholic TheologiansBen Myershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-68165561985981916362008-04-16T00:48:00.000-04:002008-04-16T00:48:00.000-04:00Hi Anon — I'm sorry if my opinions are "rash and u...Hi Anon — I'm sorry if my opinions are "rash and uninformed". I try to stay informed as much as possible, but no one's perfect! And of course this is only a blog, not a research seminar — if it's any consolation, I do <A HREF="http://faith-theology.blogspot.com/2006/08/benjamin-myers-publications.html" REL="nofollow">proper research</A> as well...<BR/><BR/>In any case, I appreciate your comment.Ben Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-66675580388921595792008-04-15T20:53:00.000-04:002008-04-15T20:53:00.000-04:00Ben,I've been reading your blog for a while, and i...Ben,<BR/><BR/>I've been reading your blog for a while, and it now seems to me that you regularly make rash and theologically un-informed judgments about theologians of whom you have little knowledge. How can you manage to comment on the quality of Lonergan, Rahner, Jungel, Bultmann, and Barth with out ever holding a PhD or acknowleding their real and divisive differencers is itself a mystery! I love the blog, but it seems to hold more opinion than expertise.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-28530030122756409822008-01-17T18:39:00.000-05:002008-01-17T18:39:00.000-05:00I read the book and found it to be interesting but...I read the book and found it to be interesting but a little smug. There was a strong liberal bias which threatened the integrity of the text. When the later Ratz is mentioned distancing himself from certain currents in post-concilliar theology he is simply mocked by the author. It goes without saying that there was no attempt to engage the Suaurzean interlocutors or see what they were at.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-82482795658960722862007-05-08T09:40:00.000-04:002007-05-08T09:40:00.000-04:00Maybe the newly released book (hundreds of pages) ...Maybe the newly released book (hundreds of pages) on the Trinity by Lonergan is relevant to theology.<BR/><BR/>http://www.amazon.com/Triune-God-Systematics-Collected-Lonergan/dp/0802094333/ref=ed_oe_p/103-8850056-2403035?ie=UTF8&qid=1178631485&sr=8-22<BR/><BR/>RandyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-79135736895971929362007-04-17T14:08:00.000-04:002007-04-17T14:08:00.000-04:00it would seem that there is a latent inharmonicity...it would seem that there is a latent inharmonicity in the Catholic Church that is there because of the Fall and at times it comes out in bold relief. but knowing this does not really heal the problem! there is no total comfort until heaven where we will witness the miracle of unified truth...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-36415725477545332032007-04-14T00:59:00.000-04:002007-04-14T00:59:00.000-04:00Hi Derek -- yes, it offers an excellent introducti...Hi Derek -- yes, it offers an excellent introduction to these thinkers. The chapter on Rahner is particularly good; the one on Balthasar isn't as broad as it could have been, but it still gives you a good picture of some of Balthasar's main concerns.Ben Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-50085373341062691662007-04-14T00:51:00.000-04:002007-04-14T00:51:00.000-04:00I have been curious about this book ben-thanks for...I have been curious about this book ben-thanks for the review. <BR/><BR/>Do you think that it would be a good place to start when studying Rahner & Bal? They have intrigued me, and their names are frequently mentioned in conversation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-13140842965855461492007-04-02T12:56:00.000-04:002007-04-02T12:56:00.000-04:00You bring to mind Fr. Lonergan’s notion of dramati...You bring to mind Fr. Lonergan’s notion of dramatic bias and his advertence to the rather obvious but seldom appreciated truth that judging what one does not understand is not an example of human knowing, but of human arrogance. <BR/><BR/>You first say you wish Lonergan had been “passed over in silence” and immediately add “but enough said of that,” as if to suggest that you could certainly say more to support the judgment that would explain the wish but that some delicacy of reticence prevents you. In other words, you get your dig in without having to back it up, and even try to give the impression that you are being considerate in not doing so. <BR/><BR/>You next say simply that it is hard for you to think Lonergan should be included with “formative” theological thinkers, again without offering anything to support the denigration, and then, to end on a “positive note,” you agree that what you consider to be Lonergan’s “central epistemological insight” is indeed profound, but is, after all, something we already know since Kant! Your suggestion here seems to be that Lonergan’s achievement amounts to no more that repeating an overheard slogan. <BR/><BR/>While it is quite true that “knowing is not like taking a look” - although it is also true that taking a look is one of the first steps in getting to know - it is absurd to suggest that Lonergan’s cognitional theory can be so tritely distilled to this “central epistemological insight” in order to be more easily dismissed as old hat.<BR/>One must actually read Lonergan if one is to understand him, and one must first understand him if one is to judge him with any degree of reasonableness and honesty. One of the beauties of Lonergan’s work is that he provides access to a critically objective means of evaluating reasonableness, especially when this has to do with discerning the distinction between formative and de-formative theologies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-36927583374624421372007-03-31T16:53:00.000-04:002007-03-31T16:53:00.000-04:00Yes, WTM, there's a good chapter on Congar. And th...Yes, WTM, there's a good chapter on Congar. <BR/><BR/>And thanks, Patrick -- I hope my comment doesn't offend any of my Canadian friends! I don't have any real problems with Lonergan, but I do wonder whether his philosophical work has much direct relevance for <I>theology</I>. In any case, it's hard (for me) to imagine that Lonergan really deserves a place alongside formative theological thinkers like Congar, de Lubac, Rahner, Schillebeeckx, Balthasar, et al.<BR/><BR/>On a positive note, I actually think Lonergan's central epistemological insight is very profound: i.e., that knowledge is not like "taking a look" at an object. But of course this has already been pretty clear since Kant!Ben Myershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03800127501735910966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-42942874829861571602007-03-31T09:25:00.000-04:002007-03-31T09:25:00.000-04:00Ben,Thanks for this great overview! One question:...Ben,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for this great overview! One question: Did Yves Congar make it into the volume?W. Travis McMakenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12347103855436761304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-89726127255665762462007-03-31T02:23:00.000-04:002007-03-31T02:23:00.000-04:00Your throwaway comment on Lonergan intrigued me. W...Your throwaway comment on Lonergan intrigued me. When I was in a Jesuit school in Canada, his name was always spoken with reverence and "Insight" considered to be a major work. I never did meet anyone who had actually read it, however... Ben , do you not consider his work important, or is it just too idiosyncratic to be made part of the general conversation?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-85655435099246738782007-03-30T19:54:00.000-04:002007-03-30T19:54:00.000-04:00This should prove extremely helpful as a reference...This should prove extremely helpful as a reference.Michael Westmoreland-White, Ph.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/06343135380354344847noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14261952.post-72080241698942638732007-03-30T18:05:00.000-04:002007-03-30T18:05:00.000-04:00Thanks, Ben. Kerr is indeed excellent (from the s...Thanks, Ben. Kerr is indeed excellent (from the same stable as Herbert McCabe, of course). His <I>Theology after Wittgenstein</I> is seminal. And his <I>After Aquinas: Versions of Thomism</I> is on the book pile beneath my desk. Looks like the pile will now grow by one!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com