DOCSLIB.ORG

John Henry Newman and Georges Florovsky: an Orthodox-Catholic Dialogue on the Development of Doctrine Daniel Lattier

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
John Henry Newman and Georges Florovsky: an Orthodox-Catholic Dialogue on the Development of Doctrine Daniel Lattier Duquesne University Duquesne Scholarship Collection Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fall 2012 John Henry Newman and Georges Florovsky: An Orthodox-Catholic Dialogue on the Development of Doctrine Daniel Lattier Follow this and additional works at: https://dsc.duq.edu/etd Recommended Citation Lattier, D. (2012). John Henry Newman and Georges Florovsky: An Orthodox-Catholic Dialogue on the Development of Doctrine (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). Retrieved from https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/800 This Immediate Access is brought to you for free and open access by Duquesne Scholarship Collection. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Duquesne Scholarship Collection. For more information, please contact [email protected]. JOHN HENRY NEWMAN AND GEORGES FLOROVSKY: AN ORTHODOX-CATHOLIC DIALOGUE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE A Dissertation Submitted to the McAnulty Graduate School of Liberal Arts Duquesne University In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Daniel J. Lattier December 2012 Copyright by Daniel J. Lattier 2012 JOHN HENRY NEWMAN AND GEORGES FLOROVSKY: AN ORTHODOX-CATHOLIC DIALOGUE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE By Daniel J. Lattier Approved November 12, 2012 ________________________________ ________________________________ Dr. Radu Bordeianu Dr. George Worgul Associate Professor of Theology Professor of Theology (Committee Chair) (Committee Member) ________________________________ Dr. Bogdan Bucur Assistant Professor of Theology (Committee Member) ________________________________ ________________________________ Dr. James Swindal Dr. Maureen O‘Brien Dean, McAnulty Graduate School of Chair, Department of Theology Liberal Arts Professor of Theology Professor of Philosophy iii ABSTRACT JOHN HENRY NEWMAN AND GEORGES FLOROVSKY: AN ORTHODOX-CATHOLIC DIALOGUE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOCTRINE By Daniel J. Lattier December 2012 Dissertation supervised by Dr. Radu Bordeianu This dissertation examines the idea of doctrinal development in the writings of John Henry Newman and Georges Florovsky, who are both representative thinkers in their respective Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions. Newman‘s theory of doctrinal development proposes that divine revelation has been given once and for all, but that the Church is still growing in its understanding of this revelation. This growth sometimes results in new doctrinal definitions, which require confirmation of their truth by an infallible authority. The essence of Newman‘s theory has been received as compatible with Roman Catholic theology, and constitutes a hermeneutical lens through which Roman Catholics view the categories of revelation, Tradition, and authority. On the contrary, many leading Orthodox theologians of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries have expressed serious reservations about the idea of doctrinal development, iv leading one to wonder if there are some unexamined hermeneutical disagreements between Roman Catholics and Orthodox on these categories. In order to respond to these Orthodox reservations, I constructed the dissertation as a dialogue between Newman and Florovsky on doctrinal development. More specifically, I arranged the dissertation as a dialogue between Newman and Florovsky on their understandings of revelation, Tradition, and authority—categories implied in the idea of doctrinal development. The first goal of the dissertation is to show that Newman‘s theory of doctrinal development is in fact compatible with Orthodox understandings of revelation and Tradition. The understanding of authority in Newman‘s theory does not currently share this compatibility, but dialogue does offer the opportunity for mutual enrichment of Newman‘s and Florovsky‘s thought on this category. A second goal is to expose Newman‘s theory to Orthodox categories of thought in the hopes of further developing Newman‘s theory itself. One of the principal developments that results from this exposure is the clarification that Newman‘s theory is a function of the incarnational character of his theology. Showing that the affirmation of doctrinal development follows from an incarnational, or Christocentric, theology represents the third and final goal of this dissertation. v DEDICATION To Kelly, John, Finn, James, and Alethea. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Above all, thanks are due to Christ, who provided me with the strength to endure the ascetical trials that attend dissertation writing. I could not have completed this dissertation, much less pursued graduate work, without the unwavering faith and constant encouragement of my lovely wife, Kelly. She and my children sacrificed much over the past six years so that my studies could reach fruition in this work. Thank you, honey, for continuing to run the race with me. I truly do not deserve you. I would like to give special thanks to John and Kathy Corrigan—my father and mother-in-law—whose support also made my graduate work possible. They have also made great sacrifices so that I could complete my studies. Their support sprang not only from their love of me, their daughter, and their grandchildren, but also from their love of the Church, and their belief that my work might somehow contribute to the growth of the Body of Christ. I would also like to thank my father, Doug, and my mother Mary and her husband Manfred, for their help during these years of my graduate school sojourn. I am grateful for the mentorship and gentle guidance of my dissertation director, Fr. Radu Bordeianu. He first introduced me to the writings of Georges Florovsky, and it was in his class that the idea for this dissertation first emerged. Fr. Radu was always prompt in responding to me during the dissertation process, and his comments and edits helped to improve my abilities as a writer. I look forward to further collaboration with him in future years. vii I would also like to thank the other members of my dissertation committee—Dr. George Worgul and Dr. Bogdan Bucur—for reading my dissertation on rather short notice, and for their kind comments during the defense. In addition, I am truly appreciative of the entire theology faculty of Duquesne University, who provided me with a thorough theological education, and an initiation into the academic life. And finally, I would like to thank my good friend, Matthew Baker, for his magnanimity in pointing me toward invaluable resources on Florovsky, and in carefully reading and editing the drafts of my chapters. He was really the fourth member of my dissertation committee. He is one of the greatest scholars I know, and his writings and our conversations remain a consistent source of edification to me. viii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Abstract .......................................................................................................................... iv Dedication ...................................................................................................................... vi Acknowledgement ......................................................................................................... vii List of Abbreviations ....................................................................................................... x Introduction ................................................................................................................... xii Chapter One: Newman and Florovsky on the Mode and Character of Revelation............. 1 1.1: Newman on the Mode and Character of Revelation ....................................... 2 1.2: Florovsky on the Mode and Character of Revelation ................................... 42 1.3: Dialogue ..................................................................................................... 80 Chapter Two: Newman and Florovsky on Tradition and Doctrinal Development ......... 102 2.1: Newman on Tradition ............................................................................... 103 2.2: Florovsky on Tradition .............................................................................. 144 2.3: Dialogue ................................................................................................... 184 Chapter Three: Newman and Florovsky on the Role of Authority in Doctrinal Development ....................................................................................... 215 3.1: Newman on Doctrinal Development and Authority ................................... 219 3.2: Florovsky on Doctrinal Development and Authority ................................. 254 3.3: Dialogue ................................................................................................... 282 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 302 Selected Bibliography ................................................................................................. 311 ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS WORKS OF NEWMAN I would like to thank the National Institute of Newman Studies for providing online editions of many of Newman‘s writings that I have used in this dissertation on newmanreader.org. Apo. Apologia pro Vita Sua. Edited by Ian Ker. London: Penguin, 1994. Ari. The Arians of the Fourth Century. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1908. Ath. 1,2 Select Treatises of St. Athanasius. London: Longmans, Green & Co., 1903. Cons. ―On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine.‖ Rambler (July 1859): 198-230. D.A. Discussions and Arguments on Various Subjects. London: Longmans, Green & Co.,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Harmonising God's Sovereignty and Man's Free Will
    Introduction Historical Overview Arminianism & Calvinism Molinism Criticisms Conclusion An Introduction to Molinism Harmonising God’s Sovereignty and Man’s Free Will Wessel Venter http://www.siyach.org/ 2016-06-07 Introduction Historical Overview Arminianism & Calvinism Molinism Criticisms Conclusion Introduction Introduction Historical Overview Arminianism & Calvinism Molinism Criticisms Conclusion Mysteries of the Christian Faith 1. How can God be One, but Three Persons? 2. How can Jesus simultaneously be fully man and fully God? 3. How can God be sovereign over our lives, yet people still have free will? Introduction Historical Overview Arminianism & Calvinism Molinism Criticisms Conclusion Mysteries of the Christian Faith 1. How can God be One, but Three Persons? 2. How can Jesus simultaneously be fully man and fully God? 3. How can God be sovereign over our lives, yet people still have free will? Introduction Historical Overview Arminianism & Calvinism Molinism Criticisms Conclusion Table of Contents 4 Molinism 1 Introduction Definition of Molinism Preliminary Definitions Counterfactuals 2 Historical Overview Middle Knowledge Pelagian Controversy 5 Objections and Criticisms Thomas Aquinas Miscellaneous The Reformation Thinly Veiled Open Theism The Counter-Reformation The Truth/Existence of Further History CCFs Secular Debate Divine Voodoo Worlds 3 Arminianism and Calvinism Grounding Problem Arminianism Not Biblical Calvinism 6 Applications and Conclusion Arminianism vs Calvinism Applications Introduction Historical Overview Arminianism & Calvinism Molinism Criticisms Conclusion Definitions Preliminary DefinitionsI Definition (Soteriology[9]) “The study of salvation.” In Christianity this includes topics such as regeneration, election, predestination, repentance, sanctification, justification, glorification, etc. Definition (Possible World) A world that could have been, if history had progressed differently. E.g., if there was not a traffic jam, I would not have been late for work on Monday.
    [Show full text]
  • John Henry Newman and the Significance of Theistic Proof
    University of Rhode Island DigitalCommons@URI Open Access Master's Theses 1983 John Henry Newman and the Significance of Theistic Proof Mary Susan Glasson University of Rhode Island Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/theses Recommended Citation Glasson, Mary Susan, "John Henry Newman and the Significance of Theistic Proof" (1983). Open Access Master's Theses. Paper 1530. https://digitalcommons.uri.edu/theses/1530 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@URI. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@URI. For more information, please contact [email protected]. - JOHNHENRY NEWMAN ANDTHE SIGNIFICANCE OF THEISTICPROOF BY MARYSUSAN GLASSON A THESISSUBMITTED IN PARTIALFULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTSFOR THE DEGREEOF MASTEROF ARTS IN PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITYOF RHODEISLAND 1983 ABSTRACT The central problem of this paper is to decide the significance of formal argument for God's existence, in light of John Henry Newman's distinction between notional and real assent. If God in fact exists, then only real assent to the proposition asserting his existence is adequate. Notional assent is inadequate because it is assent to a notion or abstraction, and not to a present reality. But on Newman's view it is notional assent which normally follows on a formal inference, therefore the significance of traditional formal arguments is thrown into question. Newman has claimed that our attitude toward a proposition may be one of three; we may doubt it, infer it, or assent to it, and to assent to it is to hold it unconditionally.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconciling Universal Salvation and Freedom of Choice in Origen of Alexandria
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Dissertations (1934 -) Projects Reconciling Universal Salvation and Freedom of Choice in Origen of Alexandria Lee W. Sytsma Marquette University Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu Part of the Christianity Commons, and the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Sytsma, Lee W., "Reconciling Universal Salvation and Freedom of Choice in Origen of Alexandria" (2018). Dissertations (1934 -). 769. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/769 RECONCILING UNIVERSAL SALVATION AND FREEDOM OF CHOICE IN ORIGEN OF ALEXANDRIA by Lee W. Sytsma, B.A., M.T.S. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2018 ABSTRACT RECONCILING UNIVERSAL SALVATION AND FREEDOM OF CHOICE IN ORIGEN OF ALEXANDRIA Lee W. Sytsma, B.A., M.T.S. Marquette University, 2018 Origen has traditionally been famous for his universalism, but many scholars now express doubt that Origen believed in a universal and permanent apocatastasis. This is because many scholars are convinced that Origen’s teaching on moral autonomy (or freedom of choice) is logically incompatible with the notion that God foreordains every soul’s future destiny. Those few scholars who do argue that Origen believed in both moral autonomy and universal salvation either do not know how to reconcile these two views in Origen’s theology, or their proposed “solutions” are not convincing. In this dissertation I make two preliminary arguments which allow the question of logical compatibility to come into focus.
    [Show full text]
  • A Possible Filiation Between A. Khomiakov and Lev Karsavin Françoise Lesourd
    A possible filiation between A. Khomiakov and Lev Karsavin Françoise Lesourd To cite this version: Françoise Lesourd. A possible filiation between A. Khomiakov and Lev Karsavin. Alexei Khomiakov : We are sobornost’ integral life in slavophile thought as an answer to modern fragmentation. The church, empire and the modern state, In press. hal-01792373 HAL Id: hal-01792373 https://hal-univ-lyon3.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01792373 Submitted on 15 May 2018 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. 1 A Possible Filiation Between Alexei Khomiakov and Lev Karsavin Françoise Lesourd Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3 Khomiakov exerted a certain influence on Lev Karsavin, one of the leading Russian philosophers of religion of the twentieth century. Lev Karsavin was born in Saint Petersburg in 1882. His family belonged not to the intelligentsia, but to the artistic milieu: his father was principal dancer at the Mariinsky Theatre, the Saint Petersburg opera house, and his sister Tamara Karsavina became a famous ballerina and went on to dance with Nijinsky 1 . Karsavin himself studied at the Faculty of History and Philology under the distinguished professor Ivan Mikhailovitch Grevs, and was to become one of the most outstanding historians of the Saint Petersburg school, and a specialist on medieval Western spirituality.
    [Show full text]
  • Stability and Development in Canon Law and the Case of "Definitive" Teaching
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2001 Stability and Development in Canon Law and the Case of "Definitive" Teaching Ladislas M. Örsy Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] Vol. 76 Notre Dame Law Review, Page 865 (2001). Reprinted with permission. © Notre Dame Law Review, University of Notre Dame. This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/569 76 Notre Dame L. Rev. 865-879 (2001) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Religion Law Commons STABILITY AND DEVELOPMENT IN CANON LAW AND THE CASE OF "DEFINITIVE" TEACHING Ladislas Orsy, SJ!:~ The beginning of knowledge is wonder, wonder provoked by a puzzle whose pieces do not seem to fit together. We do have such an on-going puzzle in canon law; it is the prima facie conflict between the demand of stability and the imperative of development. Stability is an essential quality of any good legal system because a community's lav{s are an expression of its identity, and there is no identity without permanency. Many times we hear in the United States that we are a country held together by our laws. Although the statement cannot be the full truth, it is obvious that if our laws ever lost their stability, the nation's identity would be imperiled. In a relig­ ious community where the source of its identity is in the common memory of a divine revelation, the demand for stability is even stronger.
    [Show full text]
  • Doctrinal Controversies of the Carolingian Renaissance: Gottschalk of Orbais’ Teachings on Predestination*
    ROCZNIKI FILOZOFICZNE Tom LXV, numer 3 – 2017 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18290/rf.2017.65.3-3 ANDRZEJ P. STEFAŃCZYK * DOCTRINAL CONTROVERSIES OF THE CAROLINGIAN RENAISSANCE: GOTTSCHALK OF ORBAIS’ TEACHINGS ON PREDESTINATION* This paper is intended to outline the main areas of controversy in the dispute over predestination in the 9th century, which shook up or electrified the whole world of contemporary Western Christianity and was the most se- rious doctrinal crisis since Christian antiquity. In the first part I will sketch out the consequences of the writings of St. Augustine and the revival of sci- entific life and theological and philosophical reflection, which resulted in the emergence of new solutions and aporias in Christian doctrine—the dispute over the Eucharist and the controversy about trina deitas. In the second part, which constitutes the main body of the article, I will focus on the presenta- tion of four sources of controversies in the dispute over predestination, whose inventor and proponent was Gottschalk of Orbais, namely: (i) the concept of God, (ii) the meaning of grace, nature and free will, (iii) the rela- tion of foreknowledge to predestination, and (iv) the doctrine of redemption, i.e., in particular, the relation of justice to mercy. The article is mainly an attempt at an interpretation of the texts of the epoch, mainly by Gottschalk of Orbais1 and his adversary, Hincmar of Reims.2 I will point out the dif- Dr ANDRZEJ P. STEFAŃCZYK — Katedra Historii Filozofii Starożytnej i Średniowiecznej, Wy- dział Filozofii Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego Jana Pawła II; adres do korespondencji: Al.
    [Show full text]
  • Saint John Henry Newman, Development of Doctrine, and Sensus Fidelium: His Enduring Legacy in Roman Catholic Theological Discourse
    Journal of Moral Theology, Vol. 10, No. 2 (2021): 60–89 Saint John Henry Newman, Development of Doctrine, and Sensus Fidelium: His Enduring Legacy in Roman Catholic Theological Discourse Kenneth Parker The whole Church, laity and hierarchy together, bears responsi- bility for and mediates in history the revelation which is contained in the holy Scriptures and in the living apostolic Tradition … [A]ll believers [play a vital role] in the articulation and development of the faith …. “Sensus fidei in the life of the Church,” 3.1, 67 International Theological Commission of the Catholic Church Rome, July 2014 N 2014, THE INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL Commission pub- lished “Sensus fidei in the life of the Church,” which highlighted two critically important theological concepts: development and I sensus fidelium. Drawing inspiration directly from the works of John Henry Newman, this document not only affirmed the insights found in his Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine (1845), which church authorities embraced during the first decade of New- man’s life as a Catholic, but also his provocative Rambler article, “On Consulting the Faithful in Matters of Doctrine” (1859), which resulted in episcopal accusations of heresy and Newman’s delation to Rome. The tension between Newman’s theory of development and his appeal for the hierarchy to consider the experience of the “faithful” ultimately centers on the “seat” of authority, and whose voices matter. As a his- torical theologian, I recognize in the 175 year reception of Newman’s theory of development, the controversial character of this historio- graphical assumption—or “metanarrative”—which privileges the hi- erarchy’s authority to teach, but paradoxically acknowledges the ca- pacity of the “faithful” to receive—and at times reject—propositions presented to them as authoritative truth claims.1 1 Maurice Blondel, in his History and Dogma (1904), emphasized that historians always act on metaphysical assumptions when applying facts to the historical St.
    [Show full text]
  • The Magisterium of the Faculty of Theology of Paris in the Seventeenth Century
    Theological Studies 53 (1992) THE MAGISTERIUM OF THE FACULTY OF THEOLOGY OF PARIS IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY JACQUES M. GRES-GAYER Catholic University of America S THEOLOGIANS know well, the term "magisterium" denotes the ex­ A ercise of teaching authority in the Catholic Church.1 The transfer of this teaching authority from those who had acquired knowledge to those who received power2 was a long, gradual, and complicated pro­ cess, the history of which has only partially been written. Some sig­ nificant elements of this history have been overlooked, impairing a full appreciation of one of the most significant semantic shifts in Catholic ecclesiology. One might well ascribe this mutation to the impetus of the Triden­ tine renewal and the "second Roman centralization" it fostered.3 It would be simplistic, however, to assume that this desire by the hier­ archy to control better the exposition of doctrine4 was never chal­ lenged. There were serious resistances that reveal the complexity of the issue, as the case of the Faculty of Theology of Paris during the seventeenth century abundantly shows. 1 F. A. Sullivan, Magisterium (New York: Paulist, 1983) 181-83. 2 Y. Congar, 'Tour une histoire sémantique du terme Magisterium/ Revue des Sci­ ences philosophiques et théologiques 60 (1976) 85-98; "Bref historique des formes du 'Magistère' et de ses relations avec les docteurs," RSPhTh 60 (1976) 99-112 (also in Droit ancien et structures ecclésiales [London: Variorum Reprints, 1982]; English trans, in Readings in Moral Theology 3: The Magisterium and Morality [New York: Paulist, 1982] 314-31). In Magisterium and Theologians: Historical Perspectives (Chicago Stud­ ies 17 [1978]), see the remarks of Y.
    [Show full text]
  • Faith and Knowledge in the Thought of Georges Florovsky
    Teresa Obolevitch The Pontifical University of John Paul II, Copernicus Center for Interdisciplinary Studies (Krakow, Poland) Faith and Knowledge in the Thought of Georges Florovsky Georges Vasil’evich Florovsky was one of the most prominent theo- logians and philosophers of the 20th century . He is known not only in Russia, but also abroad (in Western Europe and USA), primarily as an author of the neopatristic synthesis – a project of renewing of thought of the Church Fathers in the 20th century and its adaptation to mod- ern philosophico-theological issues. In this article we will discuss the question of the relationship between knowledge and faith, philoso- phy (and science) and theology that was the integral part of the afore- mentioned synthesis . Science and religion Florovsky had been interested in philosophy and theology as well as in science since his youth . During his studies at the Historico-philo- logical Faculty of Novorossiysk University in Odessa he strove, on the one hand, to achieve the mystical unity with God, and, on the other, he undertook rational and empirical research . Amongst his professors was the positivist Nikolai Lange, and it was under his in- fluence that Florovsky criticized the speculative metaphysics deve- loped by Russian philosophers of the so-called Silver Age, such as Vladimir Solovyov, Paul Florensky, Sergey Bulgakov and others un- til the end of his days, having the opinion that philosophy “begins 198 Teresa Obolevitch with experience and explains experience.”1 His student work entitled On the Mechanism of Reflex Salivary Secretion was appreciated by professor Ivan Pavlov who recommended publishing it in English in 1917 .2 For his other work (A Critical Analysis of the Modern Con- cepts of Inferences, 1916), written under the influence of the Mar- burg School of Neo-Kantianism (H .
    [Show full text]
  • Revelation, Philosophy and Theology*
    Archpriest Georges Florovsky (1893-1979) Revelation, Philosophy and Theology* Chapter II of Collected Works of Georges Florovsky, Vol. III: Creation and Redemption (Nordland Publishing Company: Belmont, Mass., 1976), pp. 21-40. Quotations from the Greek have here been transliterated. I. Revelation There are two aspects of religious knowledge: Revelation and Experience. Revelation is the voice of God speaking to man. And man hears this voice, listens to it, accepts the Word of God and understands it. It is precisely for this purpose that God speaks; that man should hear him. By Revelation in the proper sense, we understand precisely this word of God as it is heard. Holy Scripture is the written record of the Revelation which has been heard. And however one may interpret the inspired character of Scripture, it must be acknowledged that Scripture preserves for us and presents to us the voice of God in the language of man. It presents to us the word of God Just as it resounded in the receptive soul of man. Revelation is theophany. God descends to man and reveals himself to man. And man sees and beholds God. And he describes what he sees and hears; he testifies to what has been revealed to him. The greatest mystery and miracle of the Bible consists of the fact that it is the Word of God in the language of man. Quite properly the early Christian exegetes saw in the Old Testamental Scriptures an anticipa- 22 tion and prototype of the coming Incarnation of God. Already in the Old Testament the Divine Word becomes human.
    [Show full text]
  • University College Dublin, Dublin- Ireland Facts
    University College Dublin, Dublin- Ireland Facts • Language of instruction: English • Number of students currently enrolled: 33,000 • Semester 1: Early September – Late December • Semester 2: Mid-January - Late May • Important information: http://www.ucd.ie/international/exchange- programmes/incoming-exchanges/erasmus-exchange-information/ About the University Founded in 1854 by Cardinal John Henry Newman, University College Dublin (UCD) is Ireland’s largest and most richly diversified university. Today UCD is a vibrant, modern university of over 33,000 students situated on a spacious and leafy campus some 5km to the south of Dublin city centre. Located on the east coast of Ireland, Dublin began as a Viking settlement founded over one thousand years ago. In the 21st century, with a population of over one million people, Dublin is the thriving capital of the Republic of Ireland and is the centre of the political, diplomatic, administrative and commercial life of the country. Famous for its literary tradition, Ireland's capital has been home to writers from Jonathan Swift to William Butler Yeats and James Joyce. Dublin allows you to explore both the historical and the modern, from castles and churches to cafés and clubs. Website: http://www.ucd.ie/ What to expect Application process If you are allocated for an exchange at the University College Dublin, you will be officially nominated by the Go Abroad Office and will then be provided with your detailed application instructions. You can ONLY apply if officially nominated. Type of Application: You will receive an email with application instructions. The application form is online. Notes of Guidance for Exchange students University College Dublin Academics Course/ credit load One full year of study should equate to 60 ECTS.
    [Show full text]
  • Foundations for John Zizioulas' Approach To
    FOUNDATIONS FOR JOHN ZIZIOULAS’ APPROACH TO ECCLESIAL COMMUNION John Zizioulas’ work is appealing; he is a sourcier of fresh views on the Church as a communion1. The evaluation of his contributions is prob- lematic. Zizioulas has not presented a synthesis of his contributions2. The topics treated were usually prepared for conferences or theological com- missions. This prompted their publication rather than a clear personal ini- tiative by Zizioulas’ to engage the reader in the development of his ecclesiology and clarify for the reader the consistent theological founda- tions which guide the way he addresses questions. There is a risk of en- gaging the work of Zizioulas without attention to the foundations which shape a particular contribution. This article proposes three foundations which direct the construction of the ecclesiology of John Zizioulas: an ontological, eschatological and epistemological foundation. The ontological foundation is rooted in the difference between creator and creation resulting in the ontological im- portance of salvation. The foundation relative to the eschatological truth in history determines the way salvation is realized in historical and ecclesial events without implicating by this historicity a historical causal- ity. The epistemological foundation establishes the role of ecclesial life for the theological discourse, recognizes the limits of the theological dis- 1. A. DE HALLEUX, Personnalisme ou essentialisme trinitaire chez les pères cappado- ciens?, in RTL 17 (1986) 129-155 and 265-292; reprinted in A. DE HALLEUX, Patrologie et œcuménisme (BETL, 93), Leuven, Leuven University Press, 1990, pp. 215-268; G. BAILLARGEON, Perspectives orthodoxes sur l’Église communion. L’œuvre de Jean Zizioulas, Montréal, Éditions Paulines & Médiaspaul, 1989, 414 p.; J.
    [Show full text]