DOCSLIB.ORG

Durham E-Theses

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Durham E-Theses Durham E-Theses Suering, Tragedy, Vulnerability: A Triangulated Examination of the DivineHuman Relationship in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Rowan Williams, and Sarah Coakley CHA, BORAM How to cite: CHA, BORAM (2019) Suering, Tragedy, Vulnerability: A Triangulated Examination of the DivineHuman Relationship in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Rowan Williams, and Sarah Coakley, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/13372/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Abstract Suffering, Tragedy, Vulnerability A Triangulated Examination of the Divine–Human Relationship in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Rowan Williams, and Sarah Coakley Boram Cha The present thesis puts the trinitarianism, christology, and anthropology of Hans Urs von Balthasar’s kenotic theology, Rowan Williams’s tragic theology, and Sarah Coakley’s ascetic theology into critical and triangulated conversation: in order to argue that suffering and death is ontologized at the same level as love and life in God in the kenotic trinitarianism of Balthasar; that the tragic is given an ontological value in the tragic imagination of Williams; and that vulnerability is essentialized in the ascetic spirituality of Coakley. I will argue that, on the whole, their arguments tend to put a positive light on the darkness of suffering as that which proves to be christologically meaningful, and portray the divine–human relationship competitively in a shared proclivity for emphasizing Jesus’s cry of dereliction on the cross (“My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”). A concern that moves the tripartite chapters forwards is to examine how these three respected thinkers are inclined more or less to conceive the divine–human encounter and the God–world relation competitively, and to show how that unfortunate conception serves to sacralize suffering, tragedy, and vulnerability in their accounts of divine–human relationship. In this context, I will consent to Coakley’s critique that the classical understanding of non-competitive divine–human relation is undermined in Balthasar’s kenotic theo-dramatics; and I will argue that although a non- competitive account is formally affirmed and espoused by Williams as well as Coakley, it is effectively operative neither in Williams’s tragic imagination nor in Coakley’s kneeling practice. What a non-competitive account of divine–human relations means is gradually fleshed out, with recurrent references to Kathryn Tanner, over the course of the thesis. It is given fuller expression in the final chapter’s examination of the coincidence of divine–human goodness implied in the doctrine of creation ex nihilo, albeit without intending to delve into specialist knowledge. Suffering, Tragedy, Vulnerability A Triangulated Examination of the Divine–Human Relationship in Hans Urs von Balthasar, Rowan Williams, and Sarah Coakley Boram Cha Thesis submitted to the University of Durham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Research conducted in the Department of Theology and Religion 2019 Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter 1. Kenosis and Suffering in the Kenotic Theology of Hans Urs von Balthasar 6 Introduction: The Event of Love in God as Balthasar’s Middle Way 6 The Threefold Movement of the Theo-Dramatic Kenosis of God 10 Trinitarian Kenosis: The Procession of the Son 11 Redemptive Kenosis: The Mission of the Son 13 Creative Kenosis: The Creation of the World 17 The God–World Relation in Theo-Drama 18 Divine Immutability and Scripture 18 The Contrast between Divine Transcendence and Immanence 21 Kenosis, Otherness, and Competition: Balthasar, Williams, and Coakley 23 The Suffering and Death of Christ in the Trinity 30 Suffering and Death Latent and Implicit in God 30 Christ Suffering “Passibly” in the Divine Nature 36 Visualizing Eternal Suffering and Death of God: “The Lamb Slain” 40 “The Lamb Slain” as a Pivotal Johannine Image 40 The Twofold “Johannine” Image 41 The Revelation of John: Slain “before the Foundation of the World” 42 The Gospel of John: Kenotic Paradox of Mission Christology 43 The Temporal Wound of Christ and the Eternal Wound in the Trinity 51 Sin and Evil in Relation to God: Balthasar, Williams, and Coakley 55 Locating Sin and Evil in God: The “Real” Relation of the World to God 55 Explaining Sin and Evil: A Theodicean Approach 59 Finding Divine Meaning in Every Suffering 62 Chapter 2. Tragedy and Dereliction in the Tragic Theology of Rowan Williams 67 Introduction: Williams and the Tragic 67 Johannine Tragic Irony and the Petrine Pattern of Growth 72 Tragic Irony in the Gospel of John 72 Tragic Irony as Misrecognition and Rejection 75 The Petrine Pattern of Growth from Failure to Renewal 77 Complicity and Mourning in Time: Donald MacKinnon and Gillian Rose 82 Not Wiping Away but Weeping Endlessly 89 Johannine Comic Irony and the Un-Petrine Pattern of Growth 91 Comic Irony as Recognition and Reception 91 The Un-Petrine Pattern of Growth: Mary Magdalene and the Beloved Disciple 93 Ontologizing the Tragic 97 The Cry of Dereliction and Self-Dispossession 103 The Paradox of Dereliction and Intimacy in the Gospel of John 105 Unfaded Love and Unbroken Unity in the Gospel of John 109 The Cry of Dereliction in the Divine Identity 113 The Freudian Projection of Self-Interest onto God 116 The Triune Metaphysics of Self-Dispossession and the Human Ethics of Self-Dispossession 118 The Eternal Deflections of Divine Desire as Divine Self-Dispossession 126 Chapter 3. Vulnerability and Competition in the Ascetic Theology of Sarah Coakley 129 Introduction: Situating Coakley’s Idea of Vulnerability 130 In Comparison with Judith Butler 130 In the Context of Balthasar and Feminism 133 The Paradox of Human Vulnerability and Divine Omnipotence/Empowerment 137 The Prioritization and Fertilization of Human Vulnerability to God 137 The Priority and Efficacy of the Divine Gift in Philippians 2: John Barclay on Pauline Divine Gift 141 The Competition between Divine Coerciveness and Human Vulnerability 145 The Non-Competitive Relation of Divine and Created Goodness: A Preliminary Reflection 151 Created Dependence on God as Ascetic Vulnerability to God 153 The Departure from Creation ex nihilo towards the Cry of Dereliction 154 Ascetic Cruciformity to the Suffering of Christ in Romans 8 157 Created Dependence on God: From the View of Creation ex nihilo 162 Creation ex nihilo and Scripture 163 The Non-Competition and Goodness of Divine Gift and the Gratitude of Human Reception 164 Dependence as Vulnerability or Union: Interpretations of John of the Cross 169 Dependence as Vulnerability in Darkness: Coakley and Williams 169 Dependence as Union with the Creator: David Burrell 174 Conclusion 182 Bibliography 185 Statement of copyright The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be published in any format, including electronic and the Internet, without the author’s prior written consent. All information derived from this thesis must be acknowledged appropriately. Acknowledgement “Placing his hand on mine, smiling at me in such a way that I was reassured, he led me in, into those mysteries.” I am indebted to many for their support and assistance in writing the present doctoral thesis. First of all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my Doktormutter, Professor Karen Kilby, Bede Chair in Catholic Theology, for her academic guidance, pastoral counselling, and practical advice, without which I could not perhaps get through seemingly impenetrable crises and traps. She has shepherded me into the world of the academic community and taken me new heights in such a way that I was reassured. She not only showed a great interest in my dissertation on Hans Urs von Balthasar but has also encouraged me to broaden it into a triangulated conversation with Rowan Williams and Sarah Coakley and inspired me to deepen it with a particular perspective of suffering. And she also led me to apply for Durham Catholic Studies Scholarship in the second and third years of my doctoral research, during which I thankfully relieved from a huge burden by the Catherine McAuley and Mary Ward Scholarships from Durham Centre for Catholic Studies. I am also thankful to Mark McIntosh and Simon Oliver, the former and the present Van Mildert Professors of Divinity. They have fostered me with profound depths of theological contemplation and liturgical exegesis from pulpits of Durham Cathedral and brightened every winter season with a generous endowment of Barry Scholarship in Divinity. Particular thanks are due to the retired and present Anglican Bishops of Seoul, respectively, Paul Kim who encouraged me to embark on a doctoral study abroad, and Peter Lee who has heartened me to complete it. And the Diocesan Education Fund that they have supplied me with has enabled me to gain access to a variety of resource necessary for my research. I am much obliged to Revd Dr Jeremiah Guen Seok Yang who has upheld me throughout from the time of Anglican ordinand in Seoul and until the moment I have completed doctoral research in Durham. He has not only nurtured me with profound theological insights and knowledge but also shown me an example of practising virtue with courtesy.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion
    College Theology Society The Human in a Dehumanizing World: Re-Examining Theological Anthropology and Its Implications Sixty-Seventh Annual Convention in conjunction with The National Association of Baptist Professors of Religion Thursday, June 3 – Saturday, June 5, 2021 **ALL TIMES CENTRAL** Thursday Evening Opening 6:00-6:45pm (CDT) Online Auditorium Welcome, Business Meeting, Award Presentations Mary Doak University of San Diego (CA) President, College Theology Society Thursday Plenary 7:00-8:30pm (CDT) Online Auditorium ID: Convention Co-Chair and Session Moderator Jessica Coblentz, Saint Mary’s College (IN) Love for the Annihilated: A Black Theological Reading of Angela’s Memorial Memorial Andrew L. Prevot Boston College Andrew L. Prevot is an associate professor in the Department of Theology at Boston College. His research interests include: prayer, spirituality, and mystical theology; political, liberation, and black theology; phenomenology and continental philosophy of religion; and Catholic systematic and fundamental theology. He is the author of Thinking Prayer: Theology and Spirituality Amid the Crises of Modernity (Notre Dame Press, 2015), and a number of article and book chapters in the fields of liberation theology, political theology, and philosophical theology. Dr Prevot’s address belongs to a burgeoning field of scholarship that addresses current social issues by drawing on Christian mystical sources. In particular, it argues that Angela of Foligno's struggle with an inner sense of personal nothingness resembles the psychological burdens of many suffering under anti-blackness and other dehumanizing regimes. It further contends that God's loving response to Angela points to the sort of love that is needed to address such injustices.
    [Show full text]
  • Trinity, Subordination, and Heresy: a Reply to Mark Edwards
    2020 TheoLogica An International Journal for Philosophy of Religion and Philosophical Theology S. I. CONCILIAR TRINITARIANISM DOI: https://doi.org/10.14428/thl.v4i2.52323 Trinity, Subordination, and Heresy: A Reply to Mark Edwards R. T. MULLINS University of Edinburgh [email protected] Abstract: In this article, I offer some analytic reflections on Mark Edward's paper, "Is Subordinationism a Heresy?" I shall discuss the desiderata for a conciliar Trinitarian theology, the divine essence, and the different notions of subordination that Edwards identifies. Then I shall consider two arguments that certain accepted, conciliar notions of subordination lead to heretical notions of subordination. Thus raising the worry that conciliar Trinitarian theology might involve some internal incoherence between the homoousios doctrine and the subordination of the Son and Holy Spirit to the Father. Keywords: Trinity, subordination, eternal generation, analytic theology Mark Edwards has provided us with an excellent overview of the different notions of Trinitarian subordination throughout parts of church history. Some readers will be surprised to find that certain notions of subordination are affirmed in conciliar Trinitarian thought, whilst others are not. I for one greatly appreciate the clarity that Edwards brings to this issue in his essay. His essay is not intended to be historically exhaustive, but rather offers snapshots into different time periods. Edwards starts his survey with the biblical material before moving on to the debates leading up to the Council of Nicaea, and the continuation of those debates in the aftermath of the Council. After this, Edwards takes a glance at the Protestant Reformation, and then offers an interesting discussion of the Trinitarian thought of John Milton, Ralph Cudworth, and George Bull.
    [Show full text]
  • Sergei Bulgakov and the Search for the Ecumenical Future
    The Hour is Coming, and is Now Come: Sergei Bulgakov and the Search for the Ecumenical Future by Scott Allan Sharman A Thesis submitted to the Faculty the University of St. Michael’s College and the Theological Department of the Toronto School of Theology In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Theology awarded by the University of St. Michael’s College © Copyright by Scott Sharman 2014 The Hour is Coming, and is Now Come: Sergei Bulgakov and the Search for the Ecumenical Future Scott Sharman Doctor of Philosophy in Theology University of St. Michael’s College 2014 ABSTRACT This dissertation draws upon the lived and written ecclesiology of Sergei Nikolaevich Bulgakov (1871-1944) in order to make theological and methodological contributions to the current debates surrounding the future of the Christian ecumenical movement. Part I lays the groundwork for the subsequent chapters. It begins with a brief introduction to Bulgakov’s personal history and context, as well as an identification of the most relevant primary and secondary sources on the topics of Church and ecumenism. This is followed by a short survey of the origins and significant highlights of the ecumenical movement in the twentieth century, and an identification of certain challenges which have emerged in the latter part of the century. Part II represents the heart of the study. It sets out to engage in an in-depth examination of the key features of Bulgakov’s ecumenical thought and career. Initial attention is given to both the personal and intellectual influences which shaped Bulgakov’s vision of Christian unity.
    [Show full text]
  • The Theology of the Book of Amos John Barton Frontmatter More Information
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85577-8 - The Theology of the Book of Amos John Barton Frontmatter More information The Theology of the Book of Amos In modern times, Amos has come to be considered one of the most important prophets, mainly for his uncompromising message about social justice. This book provides a detailed exploration of this theme and other important elements of the theology underlying the book of Amos. It also includes chapters on the text itself, providing a critical assessment of how the book came to be, the original message of Amos and his circle, which parts of the book may have been added by later scribes, and the finished form of the book. The author also considers the book’s recep- tion in ancient and modern times by interpreters as varied as rabbis, the Church Fathers, the Reformers, and liberation theologians. Throughout, the focus is on how to read the book of Amos holistically to understand the organic development of the prophet’s message through the many stages of the book’s development and interpretation. John Barton is Oriel and Laing Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture, University of Oxford. He is the author of numerous mono- graphs, including Amos’s Oracles against the Nations (1980), The Spirit and the Letter: Studies in the Biblical Canon (1997), and The Nature of Biblical Criticism (2007). © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85577-8 - The Theology of the Book of Amos John Barton Frontmatter More information © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-85577-8 - The Theology of the Book of Amos John Barton Frontmatter More information Old Testament Theology General Editors Brent A.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 the Trinity in the Theology of Jürgen Moltmann
    Our Cries in His Cry: Suffering and The Crucified God By Mick Stringer A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Theology The University of Notre Dame Australia, Fremantle, Western Australia 2002 Contents Abstract................................................................................................................ iii Declaration of Authorship ................................................................................... iv Acknowledgements.............................................................................................. v Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1 1 Moltmann in Context: Biographical and Methodological Issues................... 9 Biographical Issues ..................................................................................... 10 Contextual Issues ........................................................................................ 13 Theological Method .................................................................................... 15 2 The Trinity and The Crucified God................................................................ 23 The Tradition............................................................................................... 25 Divine Suffering.......................................................................................... 29 The Rise of a ‘New Orthodoxy’.................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • On Reading the Bible As Scripture, Encountering the Church
    Perichoresis Volume 18.5 (2020): 67–86 DOI: 10.2478/perc-2020-0029 ON READING THE BIBLE AS SCRIPTURE, ENCOUNTERING THE CHURCH * STEVEN NEMES Fuller Theological Seminary ABSTRACT. As an exercise in the ‘theology of disclosure’, the present essay proposes a kind of phenomenological analysis of the act of reading the Bible as Scripture with the goal of bringing to light the theoretical commitments which it implicitly demands. This sort of analysis can prove helpful for the continuing disputes among Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox insofar as it is relevant for one of the principal points of controversy between them: namely, the rela- tionship between Scripture, Tradition, and Church as theological authorities. It proceeds by analyzing both the objective and subjective ‘poles’ of the act, and it illuminates the presence of the Church and her Tradition on both sides. The Church—i.e., the community of God’s peo- ple—is both that which is immediately encountered in the text, as well as the factor which ena- bles scriptural reading in the first place. The article terminates with an application of the in- sights of the preceding discussion to the controversy about icons. KEYWORDS: phenomenology of Scripture, Tradition, Bible, ecclesiology, icons Preliminary Remarks on the Phenomenology of Scripture The quincentenary of the Protestant Reformation invites careful reflection on persistent divisions which characterize Christian existence in the modern world. Though typically the disputes between Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox are often addressed hermeneutically, through the careful inter- pretation of particular critical passages, there is a prior question to be an- swered, one which promises fruit for the resolution of the seemingly inter- minable exegetical debates.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conversation with Jonathan Edwards and William Alston
    Towards a Model of Indwelling: A Conversation with Jonathan Edwards and William Alston Ray S. Yeo Carolina Graduate School of Divinity Abstract: In this paper I attempt to provide a model for understanding the theological, psychological and metaphysical dimensions of the Spirit’s indwelling in sanctifying grace by synthesizing Jonathan Edwards’ theological psychology with William Alston’ model of indwelling. However, despite its promise, the Edwards-Alston synthesis faces substantial difficulties associated with a literal and direct union between divinity and humanity. Nevertheless, the difficulties could be avoided if we take the mediatory role of Christ’s humanity more seriously and conceive of indwelling grace as an infusion of Christ’s human unitive drive through the Holy Spirit’s abiding presence within his people. 1. Introduction Central to the thought of Jonathan Edwards is his theologically sophisticated psychology of grace or what is sometimes called his “religious psychology of the heart” (Walton 2002, 5).1 Discussion of this important subject can be found not only in his famous Treatise Concerning Religious Affections but also throughout his vast corpus of writings including his sermons and miscellanies entries. Edwards’ understanding of the psychological functioning of grace may not be entirely original; much of what he says can be found in some form in his Puritan and Protestant forbearers.2 However, his treatment of the subject is unsurpassed in the Puritan literature in terms of the level of precision, thoroughness and systematic sophistication.3 Hence, it remains one of the deepest and most fecund theological psychologies of grace in the Protestant tradition and the heart of his account comes 1 Harold Simonson (2004, 5) claims that the notion of the sense of the heart “summarizes Edwards’s whole system of thought”.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting Back to Idolatry Critique: Kingdom, Kin-Dom, and the Triune
    86 87 Getting Back to Idolatry Critique: Kingdom, Critical theory’s concept of ideology is helpful, but when it flattens the idolatry critique by identifying idolatry as ideology, and thus making them synonymous, Kin-dom, and the Triune Gift Economy ideology ultimately replaces idolatry.4 I suspect that ideology here passes for dif- fering positions within sheer immanence, and therefore unable to produce a “rival David Horstkoetter universality” to global capitalism.5 Therefore I worry that the political future will be a facade of sheer immanence dictating action read as competing ideologies— philosophical positions without roots—under the universal market.6 Ideology is thus made subject to the market’s antibodies, resulting in the market commodi- Liberation theology has largely ceased to develop critiques of idolatry, espe- fying ideology. The charge of idolatry, however, is rooted in transcendence (and cially in the United States. I will argue that the critique is still viable in Christian immanence), which is at the very least a rival universality to global capitalism; the theology and promising for the future of liberation theology, by way of reformu- critique of idolatry assumes divine transcendence and that the incarnational, con- lating Ada María Isasi-Díaz’s framework of kin-dom within the triune economy. structive project of divine salvation is the map for concrete, historical work, both Ultimately this will mean reconsidering our understanding of and commitment to constructive and critical. This is why, when ideology is the primary, hermeneutical divinity and each other—in a word, faith.1 category, I find it rather thin, unconvincing, and unable to go as far as theology.7 The idea to move liberation theology from theology to other disciplines Also, although sociological work is necessary, I am not sure that it is primary for drives discussion in liberation theology circles, especially in the US, as we talk realizing divine work in history.
    [Show full text]
  • Hegel, Sade, and Gnostic Infinities
    Radical Orthodoxy: Theology, Philosophy, Politics, Vol. 1, Number 3 (September 2013): 383-425. ISSN 2050-392X HEGEL, SADE, AND GNOSTIC INFINITIES Cyril O’Regan lavoj Žižek not only made the impossible possible when he articulated an inner relation between Kant and de Sade, but showed that the impossible was necessary.1 The impossibility is necessary because of the temporal contiguity of thinkers who articulate two very different S versions of the Enlightenment, who variously support autonomy, and who feel called upon to take a stance with respect to Christian discourse and practice. As the demand for articulation is pressed within a horizon of questioning, proximally defined by the Lacanian problematic of self-presentation and horizonally by Adorno and Horkheimmer’s dialectic of the Enlightenment, Žižek would be the first to agree that his investigation is probative. One could press much more the issue of whether the logic of Kant’s view on radical evil is in fact that of the demonic, while much more could be said about the Enlightenment’s inversion in the ‘mad’ discourse of Sade and the relation- difference between both discourses and the Christian discourses that are objects of critique. However important it would be to complete this task, it seems even more necessary to engage the question of the relation between Hegel and Sade. More necessary, since not only is such a relation left unexplored while hinted at 1 See Žižek’s essay ‘On Radical Evil and Other Matters,’ in Tarrying with the Negative: Kant, Hegel, and the Critique of Ideology (Durham: Duke University Press, 1993), pp.
    [Show full text]
  • Christian Theology Edited by Ian A
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-41496-9 - The Cambridge Dictionary of Christian Theology Edited by Ian A. McFarland, David A. S. Fergusson, Karen Kilby, Iain R. Torrance Frontmatter More information the cambridge dictionary of Christian Theology With over 550 entries ranging from ‘Abba’ to ‘Zwingli’ composed by leading contemporary theologians from around the world, The Cambridge Dictionary of Christian Theology represents a fresh, ecumenical approach to theological refer- ence. Written with an emphasis on clarity and concision, all entries are designed to help the reader understand and assess the specifically theological significance of the most important concepts. Clearly structured, the volume is organized around a small number of ‘core entries’ which focus on key topics to provide a general overview of major subject areas, while making use of related shorter entries to impart a more detailed knowledge of technical terms. The work as a whole provides an introduction to the defining topics in Christian thought and is an essential reference point for students and scholars. ian a. mcfarland is Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Emory University. His publications include Difference and Identity: A Theological Anthro- pology (2001) and The Divine Image: Envisioning the Invisible God (2005). davida.s.fergussonis Professor of Divinity and Principal of New College at the University of Edinburgh. His recent publications include Church, State and Civil Society (Cambridge, 2004) and Faith and Its Critics (2009). karen kilby is Head of the Department of Theology and Religious Studies at the University of Nottingham and President of the Catholic Theological Associ- ation of Great Britain. She is the author of A Brief Introduction to Karl Rahner (2007) and Karl Rahner: Theology and Philosophy (2004).
    [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]
  • 1A2ae.10.2.Responsio 2
    THE TRINITARIAN GIFT UNFOLDED: SACRIFICE, RESURRECTION, COMMUNION JOHN MARK AINSLEY GRIFFITHS, BSC., MSC., MA Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2015 Abstract Contentious unresolved philosophical and anthropological questions beset contemporary gift theories. What is the gift? Does it expect, or even preclude, some counter-gift? Should the gift ever be anticipated, celebrated or remembered? Can giver, gift and recipient appear concurrently? Must the gift involve some tangible ‘thing’, or is the best gift objectless? Is actual gift-giving so tainted that the pure gift vaporises into nothing more than a remote ontology, causing unbridgeable separation between the gift-as-practised and the gift-as-it-ought-to- be? In short, is the gift even possible? Such issues pervade scholarly treatments across a wide intellectual landscape, often generating fertile inter-disciplinary crossovers whilst remaining philosophically aporetic. Arguing largely against philosophers Jacques Derrida and Jean-Luc Marion and partially against the empirical gift observations of anthropologist Marcel Mauss, I contend in this thesis that only a theological – specifically trinitarian – reading liberates the gift from the stubborn impasses which non-theological approaches impose. That much has been argued eloquently by theologians already, most eminently John Milbank, yet largely with a philosophical slant. I develop the field by demonstrating that the Scriptures, in dialogue with the wider Christian dogmatic tradition, enrich discussions of the gift, showing how creation, which emerges ex nihilo in Christ, finds its completion in him as creatures observe and receive his own perfect, communicable gift alignment. In the ‘gift-object’ of human flesh, believers rejoicingly discern Christ receiving-in-order-to-give and giving-in- order-to-receive, the very reciprocal giftedness that Adamic humanity spurned.
    [Show full text]