<p> Christianity&rsquo;s political voice in US society is often situated within a simplistic binary of social justice versus faithfulness. Gary Dorrien and Stanley Hauerwas, respectively, represent the two sides of the binary in their work. Although the justice-faithfulness narrative is an important point of disagreement, it has also created a categorical impasse that does not reflect the full depth and complexity of either Dorrien&rsquo;s or Hauerwas&rsquo;s work. Their concerns for both justice and faithfulness differ only in part because of their different responses to liberalism and liberal theology. Under all those issues are rival accounts of relational truth that indicate divergent understandings of reality. At the heart of Dorrien&rsquo;s and Hauerwas&rsquo;s theologies and differences are the issues of God&rsquo;s sovereign agency and humanity&rsquo;s subjectivity and agency. Dorrien emphasizes love, divine Spirit, human spirit, and freedom for flourishing. Hauerwas stresses gift, triune creator, human creaturehood, and flourishing in friendship. Those divergent positions issue forth in rival responses to political sovereignty. Dorrien&rsquo;s panentheistic monism is integrated with the modern nation-state&rsquo;s sovereignty. Hauerwas rejects the state&rsquo;s hegemonic sovereignty as an attempt at autonomy that rejects God&rsquo;s gifts and aspires to rival God&rsquo;s sovereignty. </p><p> While Dorrien&rsquo;s and Hauerwas&rsquo;s discussion might then appear at an impasse, it can be opened and developed in reference to Rowan Williams&rsquo;s horizon. Although his political work overlaps with much in Dorrien&rsquo;s and Hauerwas&rsquo;s positions, Williams goes beyond them by calling for the transformation of the modern nation-state&rsquo;s sovereignty and by supplying a vision of it transformed. Williams&rsquo;s advance opens Dorrien&rsquo;s and Hauerwas&rsquo;s disagreement by freeing them from their common assumption, the permanence of state sovereignty. Williams&rsquo;s political horizon is underwritten by his theological horizon, which fuses love and gift within triune mutuality and plenitude. This account offers critical help to issues that Dorrien and Hauerwas find problematic in each other&rsquo;s position. Such development thereby opens the possibility of a fresh and fruitful discussion. Therefore, Williams&rsquo;s work offers important help for Dorrien and Hauerwas to address the heart of their disagreement over divine and political sovereignty, and human subjectivity and agency.</p>

No description available.

<p>This dissertation fills a gap in nonsupersessionist theologies by constructing a Christology that brings together Jesus' particular Jewish existence (his human nature) and his universal transcendence (his divine nature), while maintaining the equality, unity, and full participation of both natures. This Christology proposes that both natures interact in a relationship of multiple-formativity to constitute the one person of the Incarnation through 'contextual universalism' and 'overlapping membership.' </p><p> Using frameworks from the areas of multicultural theory and political theory, this dissertation first identifies the processes by which classical and contextual Christologies negotiate difference in the Incarnation. In doing so, it exposes that Jesus' Jewishness is problematically supplanted as Christologies unite the two natures of Christ through assimilationism, a process undergirded by the presupposition that coexistent differences cause untenable conflict that can be resolved only through a single agent that homogenizes difference. </p><p> Destabilizing this presupposition and counteracting its results, this project then constructs a new conceptual framework for Christology that simultaneously differentiates and unites the two natures without assimilating either nature or dispensing with Jesus' Jewish particularity. Building from Toni Erskine's work in international relations theory and her model of 'embedded cosmopolitanism,' this work proposes 'contextual universalism' for understanding the differentiated unity of the two natures. To accommodate this new understanding, Laurel C. Schneider's theological anthropology and Rita Dhamoon's theory of difference are brought together to define Jesus Christ's human nature as constituted of a unique constellation of multiple, relationally-engaged contexts. Through an integration of Bikhu Parekh's political theory and Mayra Rivera's theology, the divine nature is interpreted as the unassimilable and transcendent Other that protects and connects innumerable differences. This dissertation then adapts Erskine's concept of 'overlapping membership' to propose a Christology wherein the particular, Jewish, human nature and the universal, divine nature of Jesus Christ engage in a relationship of interactivity and multiple-formativity in the one person of the Incarnation. </p>

Thesis ( M.A. ) -- University of Texas at Arlington, 2008.

This thesis concerns the reason-giving aspect of legitimacy. What reasons must be used to justify coercive laws, if citizens are to be respected as morally free and equal, in the face of their many moral, religious, and philosophical disagreements? Many theorists endorse 'political liberalism', according to which laws must be justified to all citizens by reasons that they can accept. This claim has been interpreted in two conflicting ways. The dominant view, which I call 'public reason liberalism', holds that laws must be justified by appeal to a set of values that all citizens can share, despite their many disagreements. In the first part of the thesis, I argue that this view should be rejected in favour of 'justificatory liberalism', which holds that laws must be conclusively justified to each citizen on the basis of all of their reasons. I also respond to the challenge of the 'right reasons view', which rejects the claim that laws need to be justified to citizens by reasons they can accept. Several prominent objections to political liberalism claim that it is incompatible with committed religious belief. In the second part of the thesis I investigate whether this is the case with regard to Christianity, by engaging with Christian theology. I argue that many of the common objections to political liberalism fail, but so do certain arguments that aim to show that Christians ought to endorse public reason liberalism on the basis of their religious beliefs. Nonetheless, Christians can accept political liberalism, and justificatory liberalism in particular. The requirements of justificatory liberalism and individuals' Christian beliefs will sometimes conflict, however. Justificatory liberals should accept that individuals can sometimes justifiably prioritise the latter over the former. My overall argument is that justificatory liberalism offers the best account of the reason-giving aspect of legitimacy, and that this is partly shown by its compatibility with Christian theology.

Thesis advisor: Frederick G. Lawrence / Taking as its mandate the expansive vision suggested by the integral ecology of Laudato Si’, in conjunction with the insights of contemporary ecological and evolutionary theologians, this dissertation proposes a framework for an integral, planetary, and cosmic theology of grace. It draws from and builds upon many of the insights of the leading Catholic contributors to ecological and evolutionary theologies, including especially John Haught, Elizabeth Johnson, Denis Edwards, and Celia Deane-Drummond. Through their various approaches, each emphasizes the created, cosmic effects of both the universal invisible mission of Holy Spirit and the visible mission of Christ’s Incarnation, intended from all eternity and culminating in his passion death and resurrection. Noting the strong resonances with traditional accounts of the economy of grace in human redemption, this dissertation seeks to provide a unitive account of God’s healing and elevation of all of creation through a creative and redemptive economy of grace. This project is also carried out in intentional dialogue with both with traditional understandings of grace, especially as articulated in the speculative and systematic synthesis of St. Thomas Aquinas, and with contemporary scientific understandings of world process. To facilitate this larger conversation, this dissertation also explores Bernard Lonergan’s transposition of grace, nature, and sin from the Medieval theoretical framework into a framework based on interiority, and it relies especially on Lonergan’s explanatory account of the dynamic orientation of nature as “upwardly but indeterminately directed,” as laid out in his generalized emergent probability. However, as Lonergan and his students have only attended to grace in relation to human contexts, the constructive part of this dissertation lays out an understanding of grace as “God’s created relationship of transformative love and care for all creatures that opens them up to ever deeper relationships with God and with each other.” This broad definition makes possible the identification of God’s grace throughout all of creation: humans, other animals, plants, and even “inanimate” matter are caught up in the networks of grace that bring them to greater perfection along three axes: According to their absolute finality, all creation may be observed as existing in a state of ontological praise of its Creator and Redeemer and in a state of eschatological expectation. According to their horizontal finality, each creature is empowered to realize its particular, fleshly excellences in line with its dynamically conceived nature, the account of which nature is described by the vast array of modern sciences. According to their vertical finality, each creature exists in networks of interconnection that undergird the possibility and, sometimes, the reality of surprising and irreducible inbreaking of renewal and emergence. At the same time, this framework also recognizes the elevation of human beings to not only these forms of relative supernaturality, but also to the absolute supernaturality of sanctifying grace and the habit of charity in which we are adopted into the intra-trinitarian life of friendship. By situating this theology of grace in relation to Lonergan’s transposition of nature in the form of his account of generalized emergent probability, the specifically theological character of this account of world process is both distinguished from and related to the other explanatory accounts offered by the whole range of the human, social, and natural sciences. To clarify these relationships and the particular role of theology in dialogue with these other sciences, the final chapters explore the hermeneutical and heuristic value of this theology of grace in relation to the larger conversations around emergence, convergence, and cooperation in evolutionary theory. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2021. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Theology.

This dissertation brings a new philosophical perspective to an important topic in the contemporary theology and science dialogue, specifically the theological reception of multiverse thought in modern cosmology. In light of recent cosmological speculation about the plausibility of a 'multiverse,' a cosmic ensemble in which our own universe is just one of many, theological responses have largely focused on the question of whether such a multiverse might be an alternative to divine design (or might itself be compatible with divine design). However, this approach neglects the fundamental metaphysical issues entailed in the multiverse proposal, including its entanglement of the one and the many (a paradox which has itself been a central concern of theological reflection), as well as its intimations of cosmic multiplicity, diversity, and infinity. In this dissertation I provide the first systematic theological engagement with these metaphysical implications. My approach is to draw on ancient and medieval resources (neglected not only in multiverse discussions but also in the theology and science field more generally) to show that the concept of metaphysical participation provides a particularly fertile ground on which theology can engage constructively with multiverse thought. To that end, I focus specifically on the participatory thought of Plato, Aquinas, and Nicholas of Cusa, each of whom seek to understand how a physical cosmos of complexity and immensity might share in divine existence of unity and simplicity. I bring their insights into interaction with a diverse range of contemporary theological, philosophical, and scientific figures to demonstrate that a participatory account of the relationship between God and creation argues for greater continuity between theology and the multiverse proposal in modern cosmology.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-07-27T13:46:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 PAULO SERGIO SOARES.pdf: 1819144 bytes, checksum: 46c1970907dfda3019e553fac5ee1358 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-02-13 / Theology and Science are distinct areas of knowledge s construction that can dialogue to each other, because both seek to explain the world. Is this dialogue possible, today, especially considering the extraordinary advances in Science and, on the other hand, the stagnation of Theology in its classic schema based on Revelation and Tradition, as well as the loss of its cognitive character? Efforts are being undertaken by representatives from both areas, in various directions, aiming at rapprochement between them. This requires, for both, renounce any confrontation, but also renounce the claim that there isn t any contradiction between Bible and Science, and follow the way of mutual collaboration, through a "critical-constructive interaction", as proposes Hans Küng. Since the Bible is one of the sources of theological knowledge, to the biblical hermeneutics this imposes the task of contributing with its specificity in this process. Texts that defy scientific knowledge, as the "stop of the Sun and the Moon", in Joshua 10,12-14, were in the midst of the crisis that resulted in disagreement and detachment between Theology and Science, since Galileo s case". Such texts are asking today to be revisited, in order to no longer obstruct the dialogue. With the historical-critical exegesis and the criticalconstructive hermeneutics of the referred text of Joshua, associated to some epistemological considerations, the present thesis wishes to contribute to the consolidation of a secure base for the bridge which has been building between the two areas. / Teologia e Ciência são áreas distintas de construção do conhecimento que podem dialogar entre si, pois ambas pretendem explicar o mundo. Será possível esse diálogo, hoje, sobretudo considerando os extraordinários avanços da Ciência e, em contrapartida, a estagnação da Teologia em seu esquema clássico baseado na Revelação e na Tradição, bem como a perda de seu caráter cognitivo? Esforços vêm sendo empreendidos por representantes de ambas as áreas, em diversas direções, visando a reaproximação entre elas. Isso exige, para ambas, renunciar a toda confrontação, como também ao "concordismo", à alegação de que não existe qualquer contradição entre Bíblia e Ciência, e seguir o caminho da mútua colaboração, por meio de uma interação crítico-construtiva , como propõe Hans Küng. Já que a Bíblia é uma das fontes do saber teológico, impõe-se para a hermenêutica bíblica a tarefa de contribuir com sua especificidade nesse processo. Textos que desafiam o conhecimento científico, como o da parada do sol e da lua , em Josué 10,12-14, estiveram no bojo da crise que resultou no desentendimento e afastamento entre a Teologia e a Ciência, a partir do caso Galileu . Tais textos pedem hoje uma revisita, de forma a não mais obstaculizar o diálogo. Com a exegese histórico-crítica e a hermenêutica crítico-construtiva do referido texto de Josué, associadas a algumas considerações epistemológicas, a presente tese deseja contribuir para a consolidação de uma base segura para a ponte que se vem construindo entre as duas áreas.

This study examines the rise, development, and crisis of theological encyclopaedia in nineteenth-century Germany. As introductory textbooks for theological study in the university, works of theological encyclopaedia addressed the pressing questions facing theology as a ‘science’ (Wissenschaft), a rigorous, critical discipline deserving of a seat in the modern university. The project of theological encyclopaedia, I argue, functioned as the place where theological reflection and the requirements of the institutional setting in which that reflection occurred—here the German university—converged. I explore its roots as a pioneering idealist model for organizing knowledge in the German university system in the late eighteenth century. I focus especially on Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834), the father of modern Protestantism and principal intellectual architect of the University of Berlin (1810). Schleiermacher’s programme transformed the scholarly theological enterprise into one defined in terms of science. That transformation laid the groundwork for the later historicization of theology, which I investigate in the two predominant ‘schools’ of German university theology in the middle of the nineteenth century, the Hegelian ‘speculative’ school and ‘mediating theology’ (Vermittlungstheologie). Among the latter, I emphasize the remarkable international influence of the Swiss-German Karl Hagenbach (1801–74), whose theological encyclopaedia was among the most widely read theological books in German-speaking Europe from the 1830s through World War I. Finally, I analyze the project’s downfall in the context of Wilhelmine Germany and the Weimar Republic, beset by radical disciplinary specialization, a crisis of historicism, and the attacks of dialectical theology. Throughout, I contend that theological encyclopaedia represented the institutionalization of the idea of theology as science, which furnishes an explanatory grid for understanding the relationship between theology and the university. The project resulted in a powerful synthesis that fundamentally shaped the reigning theological paradigms in nineteenth-century Germany and beyond.