DOCSLIB.ORG

Sergey N. Bulgakov and Lev I. Shestov)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sergey N. Bulgakov and Lev I. Shestov) chapter 13 The Tragedy of Philosophy and the Philosophy of Tragedy (Sergey N. Bulgakov and Lev I. Shestov) Vladimir N. Porus Abstract The tragedy of Bulgakov is the tragedy of philosophy. The tragedy of Shestov is the phi- losophy of tragedy. Tragedy is a key word; it is therein that the thoughts of both philoso- phers overlap. From the standpoint of Bulgakov, the tragedy of being is not to be solved in the “philosophy of tragedy,” for this philosophy itself is not tragic; it does not live in tragedy, but only reasons on it. Bulgakov’s idea of uniting theology and philosophy should have seemed intolerably false to Shestov as, in his opinion, it could only lead to deviation from faith, to its blending into philosophy and not to the latter’s rising to the knowledge of God. “The tragedy of philosophy,” according to Bulgakov, is, first of all, recognition of the insolvability of the main tasks philosophical reason is setting for itself: looking into the causes of evil in the world, the possibility of freedom, the sense of history, and the unity of things in the great Whole. The form taken by this tragedy is antinomianism. Keywords tragedy of philosophy – philosophy of tragedy – reason – faith – antinomianism – being – philosophy of history Humanity has entered the third millennium without belief that it somehow will manage to escape global disasters. The cruel experience of the past years does not strengthen this belief but rather calls it into question. However, the irony of our time is that the global threats (environmental, economic, military, etc.) have become so usual that being reminded of them engenders boredom. We have become accustomed to their existence and drive a thought of their inevitability away from us. Otherwise, we would find living to be too difficult, if at all possible. People realize the tragic nature of being at the crucial moments of their lives. The existentialists of the 20th century used to call such moments “limit situa- tions.” At such moment Being reveals its true nature to individuals and throws © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���6 | doi �0.��63/978900430784�_0�5 <UN> The Tragedy of Philosophy and the Philosophy of Tragedy 193 off “the veil of Maya.” The same might be happening to peoples, nations, and cultures. Philosophy (along with art) has always been the self-consciousness of humanity. In the “limit situations” it is imbued with tragedy. This feature appears to be of two kinds: philosophy is awareness of tragedy and, at the same time, participation in it. A rationalist just pretends to be able “not to weep, not to laugh, not to turn one’s back but to understand.” Take a good look at the eyes of Benedict (Baruch) Spinoza. Nevertheless, Spinoza and “The Unhappiest One” of Søren Kierkegaard often have a “right-of-way” lying between them as well as mutual distrust growing into hostility. The Russian philosophy of the first half of the recently expired century was not only a “sensorium commune” of world tragedy but realized the greatest ordeal therein. What is a way to keep dignity in a situation with no favorable outcome? Is it to remain human in the inhuman world captured by the mad- ding whirlwind of history? Is it to keep deep inside an ability to see the light in the pitch darkness? These questions sound today as relevant as at the time when Sergey N. Bulgakov and Lev I. Shestov were putting them to each other. Their dispute in absentio still remains an important spiritual lesson for us. … “For various reasons I find it difficult to write about the world view of Shestov,” Bulgakov used to confess. At the time when the main works of Shestov were already widely known, Bulgakov, who knew the author well and treated him with respect and sympathy, did not pay interest to these “writings.” However, the theological quest of Bulgakov, as well as of other Russian religious thinkers of that time, was to all appearance of the same low interest to Shestov. (Shestov doubted their trueness; he did not trust the religious exercises of “intelligen- tsia,” in particular when they were claiming transformation of faith and “refor- mation.” As he thought, coming to believe is torturous and hard work which is really impossible for those who, like Nicolas Berdyaev, Dmitry Merezhkovsky, or Bulgakov, do not do it by simple and joyful opening of their souls but through sophistication and rational construction to the results of which the inward spiritual workings and experiences “are adjusted” in one way or another.1 Nevertheless, to nearly a greater extent this characterization pertains to Shestov himself in whose religious quest anguish and intellectualization are far too evident. Mutual distrust in matters of faith is a communication feature 1 Lev Shestov, Works, v. 5 (Saint-Petersburg: Schipovnik, 1911, 97–98). [Шестов, Лев. Сочинения в 6 томах. Т. 5. Санкт-Петербург: Шиповник, 1911, c. 97–98.] (in Russian). <UN>.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Friedrich Nietzche on the Way of Recurrence to Oneself
    Friedrich Nietzche on the Way of Recurrence to Oneself Natalya Shelkovaia 1 Instead of a Preface1 In a very difficult period of my life, short thoughts and aphorisms about the nature of a person and the world began to come to my mind. At first, I wrote them down on sheets of paper, then I got a big notebook, which eventually grew into a big book. While composing this “Diary of Thoughts” at some point the name “The Way of Recurrence to Oneself” occurred to me. Later, when I read works by the mystics, I noticed that “recurrence to oneself” was the goal of a mystical spiritual action. And more recently, carefully reading Friedrich Nietzsche’s works and working on them, I noticed again that for Nietzsche “re- currence to oneself” has been the aim of spiritual practice: “Lonely one, you go the way to yourself!”2 Only “recurring” to oneself can one be considered, accord- ing to Nietzsche, a super-human, a new person. Although, based on the idea of eternal recurrence, rooted in antiquity and reanimated by Nietzsche, the new person is only a regenerated, primordial one. And what is interesting: those works about Nietzsche, which seemed the most appealing and close to me in spirit, were, rather, not studies of his work, not “works about Nietzsche,” but “co-thinking, co-feeling with Nietzsche.” This implies similarity between their authors’ “vital world” (Lebenswelt) and that of Nietzsche. I saw this in Lev Shestov’s article, “The Good in the Teaching of Count Tolstoy and Friedrich Nietzsche,”3 in Andrei Bely’s article “Friedrich Nietzsche,”4 in the article by Vladimir N.
    [Show full text]
  • Seven Atheisms
    SEVEN ATHEISMS Andrew Walker SEVEN ATHEISMS Exploring the varieties of atheism in John Gray’s book Seven Types of Atheism Andrew Walker Emeritus Professor of Theology, Culture and Education, King’s College London Christian Evidence Society christianevidence.org Text copyright © Andrew Walker 2019 Published by the Christian Evidence Society, London, 2019 christianevidence.com All rights reserved Editing and design: Simon Jenkins Cover photograph by PhotoDu.de / CreativeDomainPhotography.com. Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0) license Contents Introduction 5 The seven atheisms 19th century atheism 6 Secular humanism 8 Science as religion 12 Modern politicial religion 15 God-haters 18 Atheism without progress 22 The atheism of silence 25 Conclusion 27 Index 30 Introduction John Gray’s Seven Types of Atheism (Allen Lane, 2018) is an important book for both religious and non-religious readers. John Gray, who describes himself as an atheist, is nevertheless critical of most versions of atheism. His attitude to atheism is the same as his attitude to certain types of religion. This attitude is predicated upon Gray’s conviction that human beings are intrinsically dissatisfied and unpredictable creatures who can never get along with each other for any length of time. His view is based on a reading of human nature that sails close to the wind of the Christian concept of original sin, and is out of step with most modern forms of atheism. In particular, Gray is allergic to any forms of cultural progress in human behaviour especially if they are couched in positivistic or evolutionary terms. 5 ATHEISM 1 19th century atheism Gray sets out his stall in his first chapter, ‘The New Atheism: A Nineteenth- century Orthodoxy’.
    [Show full text]
  • BETWEEN PHILOSOPHIES: the EMERGENCE of a NEW INTELLECTUAL PARADIGM in RUSSIA by Alyssa J. Deblasio Bachelor of Arts, Villanova
    BETWEEN PHILOSOPHIES: THE EMERGENCE OF A NEW INTELLECTUAL PARADIGM IN RUSSIA by Alyssa J. DeBlasio Bachelor of Arts, Villanova University, 2003 Master of Arts, University of Pittsburgh, 2006 Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Pittsburgh 2010 UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH School of Arts and Sciences This dissertation was presented by Alyssa J. DeBlasio It was defended on May 14, 2010 and approved by Tatiana Artemyeva, Professor, Herzen State Pedagogical University (St. Petersburg, Russia), Department of Theory and History of Culture Vladimir Padunov, Associate Professor, University of Pittsburgh, Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures James P. Scanlan, Emeritus Professor, The Ohio State University, Department of Philosophy Dissertation Advisor: Nancy Condee, Associate Professor, Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures ii Copyright © by Alyssa J. DeBlasio 2010 iii BETWEEN PHILOSOPHIES: THE EMERGENCE OF A NEW INTELLECTUAL PARADIGM IN RUSSIA Alyssa J. DeBlasio, PhD University of Pittsburgh, 2010 This dissertation takes as its primary task the evaluation of a conflict of paradigms in Russian philosophical thought in the past decade. If until the early nineties Russian philosophers were often guilty of uncritically attributing to their domestic philosophy a set of characteristics that fell along the lines of a religious/secular binary (e.g. literary vs. analytic; continuous vs. ruptured), in recent years the same scholarship is moving away from the nineteenth-century model of philosophy as a “path” or “special mission,” as it has been called by Konstantin Aksakov, Aleksei Khomiakov, Ivan Kireevskii, and later, Nikolai Berdiaev, among others.
    [Show full text]
  • Literature of Absence and the Experience of Evil (Container by Marek Bieńczyk, Is Not by Mariusz Szczygieł, and Things I Didn’T Throw out by Marcin Wicha)
    56 (1/2020), pp. 101–117 The Polish Journal DOI: 10.19205/56.20.6 of Aesthetics Maciej Michalski* Literature of Absence and the Experience of Evil (Container by Marek Bieńczyk, Is Not by Mariusz Szczygieł, and Things I Didn’t Throw Out by Marcin Wicha) Abstract The article discusses the way in which literature can address evil, understood as the expe- rience of absence and loss. The problem concerns artistic writing in general, as was stressed by Maurice Blanchot; but it also appears particularly in a collection of texts about absence, such as Container by Marek Bieńczyk, Is Not by Mariusz Szczygieł, and Things I Didn’t Throw Out by Marcin Wicha. At the same time, they are an attempt to fill the void through literary restitution of that which is lost. Keywords Literature, Evil, Loss, Absence, Marek Bieńczyk, Mariusz Szczygieł, Marcin Wicha The relationship of literature and evil (and perhaps even their strong con- nection—as will be discussed later) raises a number of questions and doubts. It may seem that by juxtaposing these two areas and notions, we arrive at a somewhat inadequate, vividly asymmetrical juxtaposition in which evil—an ethically important category—is juxtaposed with an area of sssss * University of Gdańsk Department of Theory of Literature and Art Criticism Institute of Polish Studies Email: [email protected] 102 Maciej Michalski __________________________________________________________________________________________________ artistic, perhaps merely ludic and reckless, activity. For this very reason, we approach this issue asymmetrically—not in terms of literature and evil, but rather of literature towards evil. One can regard evil, after Gabriel Marcel, not as a problem, and therefore something to be solved, but as a mystery (Mukoid 1993, 113), or assume after Lev Shestov that one cannot ask the question about the source of evil, as “there are questions whose significance lies precisely in the fact that they do not admit of answers because answers kill them” (Shestov 1928- 1937/1966, 230).
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix! Fyodor Dostoevsky and Vladimir Solovyov*
    Appendix! Fyodor Dostoevsky and Vladimir Solovyov* (In memory of Dr Nicolas M. Zernov, 1898-1980) The volume and scope of critical and commentarial literature devoted to Dostoevsky's thought in the century since his death is clear evidence of the richness and complexity encountered in his works. In the figure of Vladimir Solovyov - both in his person and his writings - we also encounter a high degree of complexity. Tracing the patterns of his thought, we find certain tensions and a number of striking incongruities. Here was - a man who was, at heart, a monarchist, but aroused the anger and suspicions of the Tsar and Holy Synod through his advocacy of theocratic government; a man who embraced so much that was characteristic of the Slavophiles, and yet was a staunch supporter of their arch-enemy, Peter the Great; a man so seemingly keen to reaffirm the worth of contemplative spirituality, but who personally resisted the decision to join a monastery, a step that he at one time regarded as 'flight' from the world. Those who knew Solovyov at first hand stressed what they regarded either as his sanctity or his eccentricity (his chudachestvo ). Accounts of the excitement generated by his university lectures on philosophy certainly show that he commanded a surprising degree of authority and respect. On the other hand, Solovyov had to contend with numerous uncharitable gibes and with accusations to the effect that he had set himself up as a 'prophet'. Perhaps his best response to adverse criticism of this kind was to deflate his *A Paper delivered at the VI Symposium of the International Dostoevsky Society, 9-16 August 1986, University of Nottingham.
    [Show full text]
  • Russian Contribution to the International Kant Studies from the Late 19Th Century Until the Present Day: an Analysis of Publications in “Kant-Studien”1
    CON-TEXTOS KANTIANOS. International Journal of Philosophy N.o 4, Noviembre 2016, pp. 35-55 ISSN: 2386-7655 Doi: 10.5281/zenodo.163988 Russian Contribution to the International Kant Studies from the Late 19th Century until the Present Day: An Analysis of Publications in “Kant-Studien”1 ALEXEY SALIKOV∗ Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University of Kaliningrad, Russia; Free University of Berlin, Germany Abstract This article gives a general characteristic of the publications of the Russian philosophers in the oldest Kantian Journal “Kant-Studien”. The study embraces the entire period of the existence of this magazine, from the very beginning down to our days. In general, after compiling all materials related to Russia published in “Kant-Studien”, I became aware of get a picture of a significant presence of Russian philosophers in this periodical. This gives me a good reason to conclude that even if the impact of the Russian philosophical thought on the international Kant studies was not decisive, then, at least, it was tangible. This influence was due to the phenomenon which was later called the “Silver Age of Russian philosophy”, as well as the phenomenon of Russian emigration, arising as a result of wars and revolutions in Russia and the exodus of the Russian philosophers of the West, where one of their main initial shelters was Germany. Keywords Kant, Russian Kant Scholarship, Russian philosophical thought, Russian emigration, Kant-Studien. The history of the reception of Kant's philosophy in Russia is more than two centuries old and is well researched today. The role of the German university thought in the formation and development of the Russian understanding of Kant's philosophical system is also well 1 This article was written with support from the Russian Foundation for the Humanities (RGNF), Project No.
    [Show full text]
  • Conclusion: Post-Jansenist Meditations
    Conclusion: Post-Jansenist Meditations The tragedy of the majority of men is by no means that they are weak but that they are too strong – genuinely to be aware of God. Søren Kierkegaard, Papers, §4453 Grace Above All Else Under the joint tutelage of Paul of Tarsus and Augustine of Hippo, whose infuence can be felt throughout, the works of Pascal and Kierkegaard return constantly to an issue which preoccupied both authors throughout their lives: how should man go about seeking salvation? Through his deeds and subordination to the revealed Law, or in the refuge of divine grace, a necessary prerequisite for all good actions and thoughts? For both authors, grace is the primary requirement. Without grace we are incapable of understanding our own nature, or comprehending our tasks and duties, or escaping the clutches of despair. In Kierkegaard’s Papers we fnd this position expressed in striking terms: “grace frst and foremost, and always before us.”1 The implication is that grace always acts in advance, as if to shorten the distance between the ordinary Christian and the Christian ideal. Kierkegaard and Pascal thus make a fundamental distinction between grace and the law, a thoroughly Augustinian dichotomy: “The law imposed what it did not give. Grace gives what it imposes,2 writes Pascal. The existential fulflment of the Law by Christ coincides with the advent of a new grace which supersedes the Law. The imitation of Christ by Christians is not a matter of respecting the law, it is a consequence of grace, since grace always transcends the law.
    [Show full text]
  • The Contradictory Unity of Faith and Reason in Christian Theoretical Thought
    HTS Teologiese Studies/Theological Studies ISSN: (Online) 2072-8050, (Print) 0259-9422 Page 1 of 9 Original Research The contradictory unity of faith and reason in Christian theoretical thought Author: This article aims to demonstrate the unity of faith and reason as irrational and rational elements 1 Sergey N. Astapov of the theoretical religious discourse on instances of Christian theoretical thought. This unity Affiliation: was represented as a dialectical contradiction, the violation of which led to the destruction of 1Institute of Philosophy and religious discourse. The contradictory unity of faith and reason was researched in European Social and Political Studies, medieval philosophy and Russian religious philosophy in the first half of the 20th century and Southern Federal University, in the theoretical systems that were considered ways of explaining the relationship between Rostov-on-Don, Russian Federation faith and reason in Christian thought. This article reveals two historical types of the dynamic unity of faith and reason as well as violations of this unity: when medieval authors attempted Corresponding author: to find the most effective relationship between faith and reason for Christian theology; and Sergey Astapov, when Russian philosophers attempted to transmit theological knowledge by means of [email protected] philosophy in the secular age. The results of the dynamic unity violations in both traditions are Dates: investigated as the conceptions that had been denied by these traditions. The main conclusion Received: 24 Sept. 2018 of the article is that Christian theoretical thought maintained the contradictions between faith Accepted: 22 Mar. 2019 and reason as a search for its development. Published: 23 July 2019 Keywords: Faith; European medieval philosophy; Reason; Religious discourse; Russian How to cite this article: Astapov, S.N., 2019, ‘The religious philosophy; Theology.
    [Show full text]
  • SBL 19791115 SUPP.Pdf
    AUSTRALIAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE STUDY OF RELIGION c|o Scholars Press Book Service P.O. Box 5207 THE UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA PRESS Missoula, MT 59806 P.O. Box 2877 25% discount on books ordered at meeting. University, AL 35486 PAUL W. BRENNAN $3.00P (2.25) 20% discount on books ordered at meeting. Let Sleeping Snakes Lie: Central Enga Traditional Religious Belief and Ritual NAHUM N. GLATZER $19.50C (15.60) Essays in Jewish Thought T. G. H. STREHLOW $3.00P (2.00) Central Australian Religion: Personal Monototemism in a ARTHUR GREEN $27.50C (22.00) Polytotemic Community Tormented Master: A Life of Rabbi Nahman of Bratslav VICTOR C. HAYES, editor $4.95P (3.50) Australian Essays in World Religions ANDREWS UNIVERSITY PRESS Andrews University Campus Berrien Springs, MI 49104 DALE E. TWOMLEY $7.50C Parochiaid and the Courts ROBERTi. CRUISE and PETER BLITCHINGTON $2.95P Understanding Your Temperament ANIMA PUBLICATIONS 1053 Wilson Avenue Chambersburg, PA 17201 10% discount on books ordered at meeting. Anima: An Experiential Journal $8.50P (7.65) annually BARDWELL L. SMITH, editor $7.95P (7.16) Religion and Legitimation of Power in Sri Lanka BARDWELL L. SMITH, editor $7.95P (7.16) Religion and Legitimation of Power in Thailand, Laos, and Burma ROBERT McDERMOTT, editor $5.95P (5.36) Six Pillars: An Introduction to the Major Works of Sri Aurobindo HARRY M. BUCK and GLENN E. YOCUM, editors $5.95P (5.36) Structural Approaches to South India Studies SAMUEL SANDMEL $3.95P (3.56) A Little Book on Religion (for people who are not religious) THOMAS BERRY $2.00P (1.80) The New Story—Teilhard Study No.
    [Show full text]
  • Oliver Smith Studies in Russian and Slavic Literatures, Cultures and History
    Oliver Smith Studies in Russian and Slavic Literatures, Cultures and History Series Editor: Lazar Fleishman (Stanford Universtity) Oliver Smith Boston 2011 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Smith, Oliver, Ph. D. Vladimir Soloviev and the spiritualization of matter / Oliver Smith. p. cm. -- (Studies in Russian and Slavic literatures, cultures, and history) Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and index. ISBN 978-1-936235-17-9 (hardback) 1. Solovyov, Vladimir Sergeyevich, 1853-1900. 2. Matter. 3. Spirit. I. Title. B4268.M35S65 2010 197--dc22 2010047543 Copyright © 2011 Academic Studies Press All rights reserved ISBN 978-1-936235-17-9 Book design by Ivan Grave On the cover: Th e Portrait of Vladimir Soliviev, by Ivan Kramskoy (a fragment). 1885 Published by Academic Studies Press in 2011 28 Montfern Avenue Brighton, MA 02135, USA [email protected] www.academicstudiespress.com Effective December 12th, 2017, this book will be subject to a CC-BY-NC license. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. Other than as provided by these licenses, no part of this book may be reproduced, transmitted, or displayed by any electronic or mechanical means without permission from the publisher or as permitted by law. The open access publication of this volume is made possible by: This open access publication is part of a project supported by The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Humanities Open Book initiative, which includes the open access release of several Academic Studies Press volumes. To view more titles available as free ebooks and to learn more about this project, please visit borderlinesfoundation.org/open.
    [Show full text]
  • Henry Corbin and Russian Religious Thought Hadi Fakhoury Institute Of
    Henry Corbin and Russian Religious Thought Hadi Fakhoury Institute of Islamic Studies McGill University, Montreal August 2013 A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master’s of Arts © Hadi Fakhoury, 2013 iii Abstract Henry Corbin and Russian Religious Thought Hadi Fakhoury, M.A. Institute of Islamic Studies, McGill University, 2013 This study addresses the influence of Russian religious thought on the French philosopher and Islamicist Henry Corbin (1903-1978). In the 1930s, Corbin came into contact with religious thinkers of the Russian emigration in Paris, particularly Nikolai Berdyaev (1874-1948), who had an important role in his critical reception of contemporary German philosophy and theology. In 1939, Corbin moved to Istanbul where, parallel to his work on the first critical edition of the writings of the Iranian philosopher Shahab al-Din al-Suhrawardi (1155-1191), he deepened his knowledge of Byzantine theology and translated some of the writings of the Russian theologian Fr. Sergius Bulgakov (1871-1944). Corbin’s post-war writings thus contain important references to Russian thinkers such as Berdyaev, Bulgakov, Aleksey Khomiakov (1804-1860), Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881), Konstantin Leontiev (1831-1891), and Vasily Rozanov (1856-1919). These thinkers had a unique role in Corbin’s ecumenical project. He was indeed convinced that Russian Orthodoxy has an important role in mediating between East and West, Christianity and Islam. Until now, there has been no attempt to study the Russian connection in Corbin’s thought. The present work explores this influence as reflected in the themes of East and West, Sophiology, Divine humanity, eschatology, angelology, and Orthodox iconography.
    [Show full text]
  • Jewish Philosophical and Psychological Approaches to The
    Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations A peer-reviewed e-journal of the Council of Centers on Jewish-Christian Relations Published by the Center for Christian-Jewish Learning at Boston College Modern Jewish Philosophical Approaches to the Apostle Paul: Spinoza, Shestov, and Taubes Daniel R. Langton University of Manchester Volume 2, Issue 2 (2007): 114-139 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol2/iss2/ Langton, “Modern Jewish Philosophical Approaches to Paul” 114 http://escholarship.bc.edu/scjr/vol2/iss2/ Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations Volume 2, Issue 2 (2007): 114-139 Introduction valuable for understanding the modern history of Jewish- non-Jewish inter-relations.2 Furthermore, such a restrictive Jewish attitudes towards the Apostle to the Gentiles have program automatically excludes those Jewish thinkers who been the subject of a number of studies in recent years. might have alternative reasons for reading Paul’s writings These have tended to focus on New Testament or Pauline and who believe that he has relevance for other kinds of studies, on theologians and religious leaders.1 This is scholarly discourse. For those engaged in philosophical because those conducting the surveys have been interested endeavors, for example, the attraction to Paul appears to be primarily in interfaith dialogue and the theological issues, not his implicit critique of society in the construction of the least the question of what to make of Paul’s apparent church, composed of both Jews and Gentiles. In the hostility towards the Law. For those interested in Jewish- philosophical writings of Baruch Spinoza, Lev Shestov and Christian relations in a wider cultural context, however, this Jacob Taubes, the claim is made that the Church has theological bias is unfortunate.
    [Show full text]