This thesis tests the hypothesis that between 1905 and 1940 Russian religious philosophy changed, and that this can be gauged by looking at how the meanings of four ideas (all-unity, sobornost', Sophia and Godmanhood) changed in that time. By looking at religious philosophy through these ideas we can better understand the intellectual climate of the period. The proposal that Russian religious philosophy should be considered a coherent school of thought and the hypothesis that it would be useful to look at its four central ideas are raised and challenged. The theory that a 'discourse' of religious philosophy united texts in this period is examined, and it is concluded that discourse theory can act as an aid in analysis of religious philosophy. Religious philosophy before the Revolution, the history of the Revolution and its influence on philosophy are examined and its productivity is explored. Post-revolutionary Russian religious thought focusing on the experience of exile is also examined, concluding that the political and social upheaval that Russians were subjected to in the first half of the twentieth century added to and complicated the meaning of the Revolution. Themes of isolation and exclusion become more prevalent in emigration, and religious philosophy also becomes more theological. The findings of this research are (1) that changes within religious philosophy took place and can be detected through the careful study of the ideas that make up this philosophy; (2) that these changes can only partially be attributed to external circumstances because internal constraints also affected the capacity of these ideas to change; (3) that these changes were part of a decline in production, popularity or relevance of religious philosophy; and (4) that it is possible to explain why certain areas of their use remained relevant while others became obsolete.

Observing the movement in recent Christian theology, I examine the change in depth metaphors and theological works, as they move from tendencies of solidity and proposition-forming, to more fluid imaginations in their substance and style. I conduct an indirect comparison between John A.T. Robinson and Catherine Keller, engaging Buber, Tillich and Virginia Mollenkott, specifically focusing on themes of depth and working through a filter of social and ecological justice.Throughout the essay I acknowledge the importance of the continuing re-articulation of theology, the necessity of exploring the roots of Christianity, and I affirm the need for new language for the task of articulating an appropriate image of divinity and humanity. I contend that while Keller is well able to continue Robinson's theological project for the next generation, his work is still valuable in contributing Christology and New Testament studies, both of these being somewhat absent from Keller's work.

Recent scholarship in biblical interpretation has remained suspicious of the "allegorical" approach to scripture, presumed as common to Medieval Christianity, and Bernard of Clairvaux is often acknowledged as paradigmatic of contemplative exegesis. Bernard's Sermons on the Song of Songs is often alleged to be an ultimate example of the dangers of monastic "allegorizing," in that such an approach lacks any consistency of method and maintains an ideological stance that is suspicious of and ultimately rejects the nature of bodily existence. This thesis counters these claims by utilizing the work of contemporary medievalists, instead of contemporary biblical exegetes, as a lens in a close reading of Bernard's Sermones Super Cantica, as well as his textual interaction with Peter Abelard and Peter the Venerable. This thesis suggests that Bernard is consistent in his method of performative reading and holds bodily existence as vital to the monastic and broader Christian way of life.

The aim of the thesis is to introduce the American process philosopher Charles Hartshorne and his philosophical theism and to relate his approach and his thoughts to the debate about the relationship of theology and philosophy. After introducing the basics of the career and work of Alfred North Whitehead, the better known representative of process thought, and then the career and achievements of Hartshorne himself, I proceed to make a survey of the main aspects of his neoclassical philosophical concept of the God-world relation. Special attention is paid to one of Hartshorne's specifics - his defense and interpretation of the ontological argument for the existence of God. I then deal with Hartshorne's attempts to engage some classical theistic concepts, namely that of Thomas Aquinas, and of the luminaries of Protestant theology, Paul Tillich and Karl Barth, into a kind of dialogue. Then I introduce briefly "process theology" and some significant examples of applying Hartshorne's ideas in theology, Christology, and moral theory. I survey some polemical reactions to process thought and to Hartshorne by German Protestant theologians and I consider the possibility of a certain kinship between Hartshorne's view of the God-world relation and the theology of nonviolence. In the conclusion I survey the outcomes of...

Thesis (M.A.)--Catholic Theological Union at Chicago, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 112-122).

Thesis (M.A.)--Catholic Theological Union at Chicago, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 112-122).

Thesis (M.A.)--Catholic Theological Union at Chicago, 2004. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 112-122).

The aim of this thesis is to define, develop, and defend an interpretation and application of the mystical ontology of Meister Eckhart. Briefly, mystical ontology should be understood as a distinctive theology insofar as it presents God's being, the being of the world, and the individual's being as an essentially unified whole. My research focus for this thesis will then be to situate Eckhart's theology within current debates on mysticism and amidst the post-Kantian philosophical turn toward ontology. The cumulative effort of this thesis will reach its height when I apply my conclusions on the mystical nature of being that can be found in Eckhart's medieval writings and transcriptions in order to address the modern, theological problem of secularity. This effort will be implemented with the objective of creating a space for dialogue between Christian theology and the generally secularized culture that, in part, defines the present age. In so doing, this thesis will demonstrate the philosophical and cultural relevance of this particular understanding of the nature of being when treating modern problems in theology. The guiding question for this thesis will be the following: what insights can Meister Eckhart's thought offer to theologians today in addressing the problem of secularity? My overall thesis will then be: the mystical ontology of Meister Eckhart can be interpreted and applied in a manner that successfully opens a space for constructive dialogue between secular culture and the presence of God in the world. Overall, this thesis should be read as a scholarly project on Eckhartian theology and its applicability toward productively treating the problem of secularity. All of my conclusions will be derived as a result of having been situated and argued for amidst current debates on relevant topics, as well as in relation to other major works that are indispensable for such a project. To be clear, my aim will not be to appropriate Eckhart's work and to assimilate it to a post-Kantian perspective. Rather, I will look to Eckhart for his clear and definitive theological statements. I will then interpret those statements and apply them in a manner that efficaciously engages specific principles of secularity in demarcating a common ground for dialogue.

This thesis for the first time critically and comparatively examines contemporary Christian and philosophical ethics of war. Thus it contributes to an investigation of current possibilities of moral-political action. Exploring various combinations of political ethics and the tenets of faith, it compares three Christian with two secular thinkers. Each chapter first shows how Just War ethics are constructed between ‘realism’ and ‘idealism’. The former prioritizes individual or national self-defence and power; the latter the universal value of each individual. Each analytical section reconstructs the author’s moral understanding of political authority, violent force and political reality. These foci are investigated in terms of how they understand, envision or reject the mediation between politics and Christian morality. As the inner logic of each Just War proposal is thus brought out, continuities and differences between authors can be explained. Part I looks at Christian authors. Jean Bethke Elshtain’s realistic, ‘naturalistic’ Just War ethic of the sovereign state rejects humanist idealism. For Paul Ramsey Christian agape provides a transformative ethic between idealism and realism. Developing this, Oliver O’Donovan’s evangelical approach practically fuses idealism and realism. Dogmatically, this is conditioned by moving from Elshtain’s modern theological dualism to Ramsey’s Christ-transforming the world, though still indebted to philosophical idealism. O’Donovan, however, suggests that after the singular mediation of the Christ event, moral-political categories disclose the divine order. Part II investigates the idealism-realism divide amongst philosophers. Both David Rodin’s idealist demand for a global state and Uwe Steinhoff’s individualist Machiavellianism seek to protect human rights. After Kant, they presuppose an unbridgeable division between politics and ‘religious’ morality. Theology, having become anthropology, replaces the mediation of Christ with immanent mediators: legal, statist or individualist moral agents. But this echoes and intensifies the Christian tradition. Whereas Rodin introduces a renewed, violent papacy, Steinhoff seeks to renew the liberal-democratic status quo through a secular ‘radical reformation’. It is concluded that both modern Christian and philosophical ethics of war can oscillate between impractical triumphant justice and the failure of tragic antagonism. If the singular mediation between Is and Ought in Christ is recognized as a universal paradox, doing justice effectively becomes possible.

Herman Bavinck (1854-1921), perhaps the most remarkable dogmatician and intellectual of the Dutch Reformed (gereformeerde) tradition in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, committed himself to what he called a 'Reformed' and 'catholic' theological task. For the modern dogmatician, this task is neither repristination nor abandonment of one's confessionalist tradition, but, being driven along by the Scriptural witness, to appropriate 'catholic' dogma to the grammars of modern conceptual frameworks. Such a task led Bavinck to a certain eclecticism in style and source for which he earned in twentieth century scholarship the pejorative label of dualism, applied both to his person and his theological content. Regarding his person, this thesis of the two Bavincks follows a biographical narrative of a student and blossoming theologian divided between the orthodox and modern. Regarding his content, interpreters move to and fro between Bavinck the scholastic and Bavinck the post-Kantian, subjectivist dogmatician. This study nuances this picture and participates in James Eglinton's recent call for an overturning of said dualisms applied to Bavinck's person and work by outlining the most significant example of Bavinck toiling to complete his 'catholic' dogmatic task: his appropriation of Friedrich Schleiermacher. In distinction from Bavinck's milieu, he did not demonize Schleiermacher, but, while willing to critique Schleiermacher's material dogmatics, regarded Schleiermacher as 'deeply misunderstood'. The two primary locales of Bavinck's appropriation of Schleiermacher include (i) the question of the epistemic ground of the unity of being and thinking; (ii) the grammar of subjective and objective religion. In both, Bavinck adopts Schleiermacher's concepts of 'feeling', 'absolute dependence', and 'immediate self-consciousness' to complete his own logic. Understanding Bavinck's adoption of Schleiermacher's conceptual framework, particularly that of the introduction from Schleiermacher's Der christliche Glaube, makes visible just how Bavinck determined to work as a modern theologian post-Kant and within the freeing confines of his orthodox, Dutch confessionalist heritage. His appropriation of Schleiermacher is the paradigmatic example of his commitment to be orthodox - yet modern.