Old and New in Theology

Old and New in Theology
Sku: 53100D0E060
Archival Number: A531
Author: Lonergan, B.
Language(s): English
Decade: 1960
Open 53100D0E060.pdf

Description:
4 handwritten schematic pp. headed 'Old and New in Theology'

Transcription:

53100D0E060

Transcription by R. Doran, added Nov 12 2011

Old and New in Theology

1 Mediaeval

α internal elaboration of doctrina sacra: lectio, quaestio, disputatio

sententiae, regulae

comm in libros sentent

qq disputatae: collectiones, series

summae

comm in summam

initial development similar in Canon Law

divergence: CL – Roman lawyers Justinian

Th – Aristotle Topics Metaphys. Post Anal: no serious synthesis

β division of wisdom & prudence theologia mystica Gerson 1363-1429

Congar 423 f.

per se subject

static account of virtue theologia moralis – separate – last quarter xvi – Congar 424

γ positive theology

1 name from 1509 – current by end of xvi century Congar 426-30

2 theology of Jerome Augustine Gregory [return to sources]

3 humanist influence – literary studies – expository style

evidence of scholastic technical terms, rigorous argument

4 polemical: defense of later dogmas (Trent) and scholastic conclusions[?]

5 positing principles before drawing conclusions: argument from Ss PP

Councils

= relation of dogmas to Xtian sources, development to origin Congar

429

Cano “ponere principia” Congar 426 – cf. Gregory of Valencia 427

cf ? de la foi Congar 429

δ apologetic, fundamental: sources & dogmas as related to human reason

separate hardly (?) before middle of xvii

Congar 430

[page 2]

2 Modern Butterfield – Origins of Modern Sc. Catholic ghetto Mediaeval

P. Hazard – The European Mind Renaissance CReform

Y. Congar – from about 1680

α “Dogmatic” Theology Congar 482

springs from positive theology

divides theology into: “common to all” to be accepted

free questions “in ? libertas”: omitted [or]

presented as opinion of a school

exposition (in accord with Cano) thesis, status quaest., preuves positives d’autorité, preuves de la raison théologique, solution of diff & corollaries, esp. corollaries for life & piety

β “ancilla” tendencies to system, encyclopedia, methodologies 433 f

drawing on (1780-1880) Descartes, Leibniz & Wolf, Kant or Fichte, Schelling, Hegel & Schleiermacher, Malebranche, Locke, Condillac, Rousseau, Lammenais

“Aeterni Patris” and related docs 437 f.

Scheeben 442 f

γ xix century, new human science, biblical criticism, history of dogma, comparative religion // “scientific” study of man/religion/?

δ xx century: ? de l’enseignement 1890-1910 Congar 439 f. Xiberta

modernism Lamentabili, Pascendi, Iusiurandum

Deus sc Dom

Divino afflante Spiritu Periodical literature

Humani generis Monographs

Vatican ii Dictionaries

ε Problems Congar 444 “Positive” “Science”

[page 3]

3 The Contemporary Transformation

α The New Context – Break out from Wolffian ghetto

Phil Psych Ethics

add extrinsically

?-? qq in Nat Sc (? Medicine)

Depth psych., phenomenology

Social science

History of cultures, literatures, ideas

Science & history of religion

β The New Methods Research interpretation history

concretely apprehended, ? art (??), grounded in convention

w/o anachronism archaism infidelity extrinsicism [= thinking things thought]

cf modernism

(1) to normative documents cf old positive “dogmatic” theology

scr PP CC TT esp Aq.

obedience of old “dogmatic” – origin --> development not principles to conclusions

- barrier of ?/specialized/probable

between dogmatist & sources

(2) not for immediate dogmatic or apologetic purpose – get things right at each stage

(3) ? a theology in oratione obliqua – theol of Is Mark Paul John

(4) de facto, heading towards reconstruction, thematization of whole Xtian culture [Fr. Wulf, Philologie]

complete explanation of all phenomena

γ Involvement in the New Anthropology

(1) as tool of interpretation/history – evolution of a pretechnical meaning, implicit belief, cf. systematic concepts /doctrines

not one definition, system but perspectivism, pluralism growth in range of applications, in depth of grasp

(2) emergence of new doctrinal theol – understan hist of doct <-> understand the doctrine

(3) emergence of new systematic/speculative/explanatory theol.,

Historie --> Geschichte [Existenz in history]

account --> encounter vs theory or practice]

Heilsgeschichte α interpretation of Scr

kerygma β a new type of syst theol

Hebr GK --> Med <-> Mod.cs.

[page 4]

The Problem Contemporary – Congar – “Science” – “Place of Positive” within theology

α For seven centuries theology has been conceived as analogously a science

What “science” was it analogous to? in what sense was it analgous?

First q. only possible answer is Aris Post Anal.

Second q. many answers / need not bother about

β Only part of organon – logos as thematic

Ideal construction based on nature of syllogistic demonstration

conclusions are from principles

demonstration neither by infinite regress nor circular

there must be basic premises

they must be necessary, eternal, universal, per se, essential, true, certain

they are either proper to particular ?

[or] answers to many or all ?

they arise from sense via rally-in-rout

γ New Notion

what arises from sense via rally in rout

is empirical intelligibility, developing, descending to ? concrete, includes statistical

not structured or on ? analogy of subject & predicate, moving towards truth, probable

what science moves towards is not abstract part of reality but complete explanation of all phenomena

in nat. sc., in hum. sc., in the contemporary tendency of theology

δ Problem

A Not two notions of science, of man, phil approach

B Are there no common principles? is there just a universal flux? relativism

if there are, do they too arise from sense?

if not, what is their genesis?

are they necessary, eternal, universal, abstract?

understand developing comprehensive concrete ?

ε Existence of problem:

in nat sc – mechanist determinism – relativity, QT, obscurity

in hum sc – interpretation, what are the categories of human mind?

are mythic, Hebraic, Gk, modern mind essentially different?

What is interpretation?

in history – is there any structure that extends over history of doctrines, ideas, modes of ?

What is history?

in phil – rationalists Thomists idealists relativists

empiricists Scotists Kantians existentialists

positivists

in theol – Aug Ar xiv & xv De auxiliis “Dogmatic”

what is relation between special fields? what is a special field? does biblical scholar[ship] have to be a matter of development of dogma?

does doctrinal theology have to be a biblical scholar?