by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
|
Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life by Charles J. Chaput |
by Donald De Marco
|
by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger
|
by Scott Hahn
|
The contrast between the inductive (empirical) and deductive (Aristotelian) conceptions of science has caused them to be considered mutually exclusive. Actually, they are species of a single genus, but, because their common feature cannot be grasped without an awareness of the scientific medium, the structure of intellectual consciousness must first be brought into view (Article 2). The theory of intellectual consciousness broadens and deepens both conceptions of science.
The word 'history' has been fraught with troublesome ambiguities. The search for a univocal concept of history leads to a discovery of the medium of historical science. Once this medium has been identified (Article 3), it can be analyzed (Article 4), compared with the medium of inductive and deductive science (Article 5), and divided into categories (Article 6). It becomes clear how historical science uses the knowledge of individual things to arrive at its conclusions, and how final causality functions in historical reasoning. Classical (inductive and deductive) science and historical science turn out to be species of one comprehensive scientific genus. To reach this concept it is necessary to trace human knowledge down to its psychological roots. The consequent modification of the Aristotelian theory of knowledge is more a development than an alteration.
This development carries over to the notion of faith and theological science. In the light of intellectual consciousness, the factor of infused contemplation is seen to be included in the act of faith and to have a controlling function in valid theological reasoning. An examination of the object of faith from the viewpoint of historical science delineates the field of historical theology (Article 7).
The lengthy presentation of W.H. Walsh's theory of history is a tribute to his work as a whole. My critique is intended merely to indicate how certain elements of the theory can be improved by using other principles.
The ample space given to the writings of Rudolf Bultmann is a recognition of his success in formulating problems for historical theology. Since I totally disagree with Bultmann's method of surrendering to difficulties that can be resolved, I also totally disagree with his conclusions. This accounts for the space given to my reply.
I am grateful to Prof. Brunero Gherardini for his wise and erudite advice, to Prof. Claudio Zedda for his critical reading of the manuscript, to John Cardinal Wright, and to all who by their prayer and activity have sustained me during the years of research into the subject. I am particularly grateful to Mary, Mother of Jesus, Mother of the Word Incarnate, Mother of the church, and our Mother, for having so many times and in so many ways led me to her Son. And, in humble adoration, I am most grateful of all to the Person of Jesus for being, in the unity of the Most Holy Trinity, the divine Reality that this science is about.
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
There are no customer reviews yet. Create your own review
| |||
Video reviews
|
|
|
This product's forum
(0 discussions)
Ask questions, Share opinions, Gain insight
Active discussions in related forums
|
Related forums
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|   |   |   |   | |||||||
|
|
You have no recently viewed items or searches.
After viewing product detail pages or search results, look here to find an easy way to navigate back to pages you are interested in. Look to the right column to find helpful suggestions for your shopping session. |
|
| ||
| ||
| ||
| ||