My working opinion: Properly systematic theology has ceased to exist, having been replaced by the museum tours offered under the guidance of supposedly objective historical narratives, which often have flawed speculative roots. What about historical context? Of course, one must know history and appreciate context. Notwithstanding, knowledge of both roots and fruits of thought demands thought itself. This requirement is ineluctable. Does someone truly elucidate Anselm by finding Augustine in him, when in fact he cannot make sense of either Augustine or Anselm? Thought demands rigor, and rigor rests on contemplation of the real. Further, context is best appreciated with the aid of lived schools of rigorous thought. There must be a return to the properly speculative method. The perennial philosophy, then, as well as the perennial theology, is no museum piece of history, to be relegated to the dead past by the assertive narratives of modernists and postmodernists. Rather, these are living, vibrant and unfinished endeavors that also learn from modernity and postmodernity. I blog at http://theologicalflint.com/
The faithful have had a growing sense that something is not quite right in the life of the Cathol... more The faithful have had a growing sense that something is not quite right in the life of the Catholic Church. Confusion abounds as doctrinal rebellion spreads with impunity. The proponents of this rebellion have foisted their errors upon others by deceptively twisting certain friendly communications strategies of the recent Magisterium. The rebels have even caught unsuspecting believers in the undertow. Hence the confusion: Has the Catholic Faith changed?
I identify various heresies and errors of the new modernism. Nearly all of them have in common a false mercy that divorces compassion from truth. But compassion without truth is only emotional sympathy, not charity. Genuine mercy is based on truth. God pours out His grace so that we sinners may repent of wickedness, embrace Him, and live holy lives.
I treat various heresies currently causing great confusion, offering the Church's teaching as healing remedy.
Newman's Lectures on Justification are remarkable although they have an Achilles Heel. Fr. Jaki i... more Newman's Lectures on Justification are remarkable although they have an Achilles Heel. Fr. Jaki is one of the most astute commentators on Newman. This is a review of Jaki on Newman on justification.
I investigate here both the mature teaching of Aquinas on the order of the passions and also his ... more I investigate here both the mature teaching of Aquinas on the order of the passions and also his development of thought. According to his mature thought, love is the first of the passions, constituting an affective “union” with what one takes to be a good. On the basis of such love, either desire or delight arises, the former if the good is absent (to the lover in self-love, to the beloved in love of another) and the latter if it is present. Thomas struggled to reach this lucid insight early in his career. Initially, he had opined that desire is the first passion and that love is tantamount to delight, arising because of the presence of the loved object. The development is of interest in its own right but may be of relevance to a study of "the problem of love".
The article critically examines the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, one of th... more The article critically examines the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, one of the more important achievements of the Lutheran-Catholic dialogue. The question is: Does the document adequately and fairly represent the substance of each tradition?
Recent Trinitarian theology, though rich and fruitful in many ways, often suffers from a lack of ... more Recent Trinitarian theology, though rich and fruitful in many ways, often suffers from a lack of scientific theological precision. A notable example is the inclination of recent thinkers, such as Kasper and Ratzinger, to describe the Trinitarian faith in such a way as to imply that God cannot be rightly conceived except as Trinitarian. As they imply, if we know that God is a person or an “I,” we must know that he is Trinitarian. Correlatively, little attention has been paid to the divine unity, and much less attention to the content of the preambles of the faith, the truth of which is discernible by natural reason. The implications for inter-religious dialogue remain unconsidered, yet they are disastrous, since, on this line of reasoning, all faith commitments except the Trinitarian faith commitment must be false, and since the rational conclusion to a being that is intelligent, personal, and one must be false. This line of thought rises to the distinction of persons at the expense of the excellence of the divine nature. The current essay seeks to expound the pith of this recent line of thought and to evaluate it critically, suggesting a major reconfiguration of the noble insights that inform the problematic outcome.
How to balance the gratuity and dear relevance of grace is a perennial difficulty. Drawing on phe... more How to balance the gratuity and dear relevance of grace is a perennial difficulty. Drawing on phenomenological analysis, Rahner postulates a Supernatural Existential in part to avoid pitfalls, real or alleged, of the " pure nature " tradition and the " natural desire for the supernatural " tradition. Are there causal grounds for the postulate? Inductive analysis suggests there are not. Indeed, the postulate's viability as an alternative rests on an evasion of the causal question that grounds its power as answer. So, it seems a solution in name only. Notwithstanding, the postulate might be qualifiedly retrieved by causal commitments similar to those of the pure nature tradition Rahner rejected.
The thesis long prevailed that the Second Vatican Council rejected exclusive identity of the Chur... more The thesis long prevailed that the Second Vatican Council rejected exclusive identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church. Recent scholarship challenges that thesis, provoking the question whether exclusive identity is compatible with ecumenism as mutual exchange. This essay argues in the affirmative, employing a corporeal analogy as a postulate. A complex corporeal entity is one by its substantial form yet also has the “form” of order in the dynamic orchestration of its parts. Similarly, the Church is one integral whole by her single substantial form and an orchestrated totality of parts. Identical with the Church of Christ by a single substantial form, the Catholic Church can, in the dynamic order of her lived life, receive gifts from non-Catholic communities.
In this article, I demonstrate that, in continuity with the pre-conciliar magisterial teaching, V... more In this article, I demonstrate that, in continuity with the pre-conciliar magisterial teaching, Vatican II does not mitigate the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church. First, I take stock of the textual history of the constitution on the Church. Second, I present four ways in which one might deny a full identity, focusing on the fourth way, which involves the notion of non-exclusive identity. Third, I adumbrate the forceful arguments of one of the most respectable English speaking defenders of non-exclusive identity, Francis Sullivan. Finally, I respond to Sullivan’s arguments and offer a number of arguments that “converge” in favor of full identity.
This article expounds and examines Martin Luther’s penetrating critique of Catholic thought on ju... more This article expounds and examines Martin Luther’s penetrating critique of Catholic thought on justification. According to Luther, the tradition he inherited (now Catholic teaching) forces man either to presume upon or to despair over himself. The solution to this dilemma is justification sola fide. The article identifies several noteworthy elements of Luther’s thought as central, also, to Catholic thought. Luther’s reception of the chief of these shared convictions – the supremacy of genuine love of God – involves, however, when evaluated from a Catholic perspective, a misconstrual. This misconstrual leads Luther to sola fide, a “solution” to the dilemma that in fact contradicts that chief, shared premise. Nevertheless, sola fide also presupposes the goodness of the human desire for beatitude and for freedom from punishment, since the Gospel cannot ring out as good news unless man’s desire for beatitude, implanted by the creator, is also good. Therefore, the constellation of theses constitutive of sola fide is inherently unstable as an ensemble, yet elements of this instability indicate solid grounds for the continued progress of ecumenical dialogue.
This all sounds positive. It is as positive a reading of Luther's disastrous outlook and theses as I find reasonable. In point of fact, however, his view of the law and hence of the God who gave it is astoundingly dark, excessive and tyrannical. It is with this as backdrop that he finds solution in another false, even blasphemous notion of God: The God of mercy who does not care about the justice of his law. So, from a tyrannical conception of God and law, Luther pivots to a mercy that completely bypasses all that really is good and necessary in law. Further, by this bypassing, Luther makes void the very reason for earthly pilgrimage. Salvation is, for him, by faith alone. Even if it is never alone, because it supposedly issues in good works, it need not issue in good works in order to save. Further, these good works Luther himself stains with the curse because he pronounces all our works, even good ones wrought in faith, to be sullied with sins, and all sins are worthy of damnation he declares.
Let it be utterly clear: It is impossible to reconcile all of Luther's theses with Catholic dogma. So many of them contradict Catholic dogma, and his outlook is from beginning to end contrary to that of the saints. The points of contact identified here are too quickly taken up and employed in service of these misunderstandings as to render them in his works void. The aim of this article is to identify for Lutherans of good will points of contact that will enable a proper embrace of Catholic teaching. The aim is twofold: First: To demonstrate the inherent impossibility of the Lutheran system as a whole. (And it is a system. Variations and complexities and dialectical tensions can indeed be brought to a basic systematic statement.) Second: To show that the Catholic system (and it is indeed a system) is a superior way of accounting for God's law and mercy.
Argues that Pius XI establishes the sine qua non foundation of ecumenism, articulating the requir... more Argues that Pius XI establishes the sine qua non foundation of ecumenism, articulating the requirements of faith. Subsequent Magisterial teachings must be based on this. Insofar as they are thus based, subsequent teachings develop and encourage the virtues of hope and charity. What is needed today is an integration of all three virtues, not simply the thesis of one or the other taken separately.
Most scholars have contended that early Catholic responses to the Reformers showed deep misunders... more Most scholars have contended that early Catholic responses to the Reformers showed deep misunderstandings. In this essay, I examine More's reading of Luther, as can be gleaned through his subtle "Dialogue Concerning Heresies," and contend that More substantially gets Luther right. I make one major qualification that only redounds to a further critique of Luther, while appreciating the loftiness of his vision that nonetheless founds his own misconceptions.
This is my Foreword to the English translation of Nicola Bux's No Trifling Matter: Taking the Sa... more This is my Foreword to the English translation of Nicola Bux's No Trifling Matter: Taking the Sacraments Seriously Again (Angelico Press, 2018).
This book examines the "problem of love" in light of the thought of Thomas Aquinas. The "problem"... more This book examines the "problem of love" in light of the thought of Thomas Aquinas. The "problem" is the relationship between the desire for happiness and the love of another, chiefly, the love of God for His own sake. Great thinkers judge the matters connected with this problem differently. Aristotle and others contend that the desire for happiness grounds ethical activity. Others contend that a pure love of God (or of the "other") is not founded on desire for happiness. The former charge the latter with leaving love groundless, and the latter charge the former with reducing love to egoism. Aquinas's appreciation of the Aristotelian tradition is forefront in his classic treatment of human action, which begins with the desire for happiness. Accordingly, many readers, proponents and critics, read Aquinas as simply "eudaimonistic." There are, however, other principles at work in his thought; these suggest a simple but profound difficulty in his thought, one reflective of the subtlety of real life. Are the two sets of principles contradictory? Juxtaposed? Considering beatific charity as ultimate lens for this problem, Malloy contends that Aquinas's texts and principles are hierarchically harmonious while developmentally complex. They indicate that love of happiness has a foundational role in human action and that love of God for His own sake has priority in the order of finality.
This ordered balance depends upon a conception of the common good in accord with a metaphysics of participation: as having existence and formal perfection from and in likeness to the One Who Is, created persons incline to love God more than and more intensely than themselves. Thus, love of the Divine Other, while indeed the supreme love, especially as deified through charity, does not demand "disinterested" love. God truly is man's good: His true lover longs to be with Him.
The faithful have had a growing sense that something is not quite right in the life of the Cathol... more The faithful have had a growing sense that something is not quite right in the life of the Catholic Church. Confusion abounds as doctrinal rebellion spreads with impunity. The proponents of this rebellion have foisted their errors upon others by deceptively twisting certain friendly communications strategies of the recent Magisterium. The rebels have even caught unsuspecting believers in the undertow. Hence the confusion: Has the Catholic Faith changed?
I identify various heresies and errors of the new modernism. Nearly all of them have in common a false mercy that divorces compassion from truth. But compassion without truth is only emotional sympathy, not charity. Genuine mercy is based on truth. God pours out His grace so that we sinners may repent of wickedness, embrace Him, and live holy lives.
I treat various heresies currently causing great confusion, offering the Church's teaching as healing remedy.
Newman's Lectures on Justification are remarkable although they have an Achilles Heel. Fr. Jaki i... more Newman's Lectures on Justification are remarkable although they have an Achilles Heel. Fr. Jaki is one of the most astute commentators on Newman. This is a review of Jaki on Newman on justification.
I investigate here both the mature teaching of Aquinas on the order of the passions and also his ... more I investigate here both the mature teaching of Aquinas on the order of the passions and also his development of thought. According to his mature thought, love is the first of the passions, constituting an affective “union” with what one takes to be a good. On the basis of such love, either desire or delight arises, the former if the good is absent (to the lover in self-love, to the beloved in love of another) and the latter if it is present. Thomas struggled to reach this lucid insight early in his career. Initially, he had opined that desire is the first passion and that love is tantamount to delight, arising because of the presence of the loved object. The development is of interest in its own right but may be of relevance to a study of "the problem of love".
The article critically examines the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, one of th... more The article critically examines the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification, one of the more important achievements of the Lutheran-Catholic dialogue. The question is: Does the document adequately and fairly represent the substance of each tradition?
Recent Trinitarian theology, though rich and fruitful in many ways, often suffers from a lack of ... more Recent Trinitarian theology, though rich and fruitful in many ways, often suffers from a lack of scientific theological precision. A notable example is the inclination of recent thinkers, such as Kasper and Ratzinger, to describe the Trinitarian faith in such a way as to imply that God cannot be rightly conceived except as Trinitarian. As they imply, if we know that God is a person or an “I,” we must know that he is Trinitarian. Correlatively, little attention has been paid to the divine unity, and much less attention to the content of the preambles of the faith, the truth of which is discernible by natural reason. The implications for inter-religious dialogue remain unconsidered, yet they are disastrous, since, on this line of reasoning, all faith commitments except the Trinitarian faith commitment must be false, and since the rational conclusion to a being that is intelligent, personal, and one must be false. This line of thought rises to the distinction of persons at the expense of the excellence of the divine nature. The current essay seeks to expound the pith of this recent line of thought and to evaluate it critically, suggesting a major reconfiguration of the noble insights that inform the problematic outcome.
How to balance the gratuity and dear relevance of grace is a perennial difficulty. Drawing on phe... more How to balance the gratuity and dear relevance of grace is a perennial difficulty. Drawing on phenomenological analysis, Rahner postulates a Supernatural Existential in part to avoid pitfalls, real or alleged, of the " pure nature " tradition and the " natural desire for the supernatural " tradition. Are there causal grounds for the postulate? Inductive analysis suggests there are not. Indeed, the postulate's viability as an alternative rests on an evasion of the causal question that grounds its power as answer. So, it seems a solution in name only. Notwithstanding, the postulate might be qualifiedly retrieved by causal commitments similar to those of the pure nature tradition Rahner rejected.
The thesis long prevailed that the Second Vatican Council rejected exclusive identity of the Chur... more The thesis long prevailed that the Second Vatican Council rejected exclusive identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church. Recent scholarship challenges that thesis, provoking the question whether exclusive identity is compatible with ecumenism as mutual exchange. This essay argues in the affirmative, employing a corporeal analogy as a postulate. A complex corporeal entity is one by its substantial form yet also has the “form” of order in the dynamic orchestration of its parts. Similarly, the Church is one integral whole by her single substantial form and an orchestrated totality of parts. Identical with the Church of Christ by a single substantial form, the Catholic Church can, in the dynamic order of her lived life, receive gifts from non-Catholic communities.
In this article, I demonstrate that, in continuity with the pre-conciliar magisterial teaching, V... more In this article, I demonstrate that, in continuity with the pre-conciliar magisterial teaching, Vatican II does not mitigate the full identity of the Church of Christ with the Catholic Church. First, I take stock of the textual history of the constitution on the Church. Second, I present four ways in which one might deny a full identity, focusing on the fourth way, which involves the notion of non-exclusive identity. Third, I adumbrate the forceful arguments of one of the most respectable English speaking defenders of non-exclusive identity, Francis Sullivan. Finally, I respond to Sullivan’s arguments and offer a number of arguments that “converge” in favor of full identity.
This article expounds and examines Martin Luther’s penetrating critique of Catholic thought on ju... more This article expounds and examines Martin Luther’s penetrating critique of Catholic thought on justification. According to Luther, the tradition he inherited (now Catholic teaching) forces man either to presume upon or to despair over himself. The solution to this dilemma is justification sola fide. The article identifies several noteworthy elements of Luther’s thought as central, also, to Catholic thought. Luther’s reception of the chief of these shared convictions – the supremacy of genuine love of God – involves, however, when evaluated from a Catholic perspective, a misconstrual. This misconstrual leads Luther to sola fide, a “solution” to the dilemma that in fact contradicts that chief, shared premise. Nevertheless, sola fide also presupposes the goodness of the human desire for beatitude and for freedom from punishment, since the Gospel cannot ring out as good news unless man’s desire for beatitude, implanted by the creator, is also good. Therefore, the constellation of theses constitutive of sola fide is inherently unstable as an ensemble, yet elements of this instability indicate solid grounds for the continued progress of ecumenical dialogue.
This all sounds positive. It is as positive a reading of Luther's disastrous outlook and theses as I find reasonable. In point of fact, however, his view of the law and hence of the God who gave it is astoundingly dark, excessive and tyrannical. It is with this as backdrop that he finds solution in another false, even blasphemous notion of God: The God of mercy who does not care about the justice of his law. So, from a tyrannical conception of God and law, Luther pivots to a mercy that completely bypasses all that really is good and necessary in law. Further, by this bypassing, Luther makes void the very reason for earthly pilgrimage. Salvation is, for him, by faith alone. Even if it is never alone, because it supposedly issues in good works, it need not issue in good works in order to save. Further, these good works Luther himself stains with the curse because he pronounces all our works, even good ones wrought in faith, to be sullied with sins, and all sins are worthy of damnation he declares.
Let it be utterly clear: It is impossible to reconcile all of Luther's theses with Catholic dogma. So many of them contradict Catholic dogma, and his outlook is from beginning to end contrary to that of the saints. The points of contact identified here are too quickly taken up and employed in service of these misunderstandings as to render them in his works void. The aim of this article is to identify for Lutherans of good will points of contact that will enable a proper embrace of Catholic teaching. The aim is twofold: First: To demonstrate the inherent impossibility of the Lutheran system as a whole. (And it is a system. Variations and complexities and dialectical tensions can indeed be brought to a basic systematic statement.) Second: To show that the Catholic system (and it is indeed a system) is a superior way of accounting for God's law and mercy.
Argues that Pius XI establishes the sine qua non foundation of ecumenism, articulating the requir... more Argues that Pius XI establishes the sine qua non foundation of ecumenism, articulating the requirements of faith. Subsequent Magisterial teachings must be based on this. Insofar as they are thus based, subsequent teachings develop and encourage the virtues of hope and charity. What is needed today is an integration of all three virtues, not simply the thesis of one or the other taken separately.
Most scholars have contended that early Catholic responses to the Reformers showed deep misunders... more Most scholars have contended that early Catholic responses to the Reformers showed deep misunderstandings. In this essay, I examine More's reading of Luther, as can be gleaned through his subtle "Dialogue Concerning Heresies," and contend that More substantially gets Luther right. I make one major qualification that only redounds to a further critique of Luther, while appreciating the loftiness of his vision that nonetheless founds his own misconceptions.
This is my Foreword to the English translation of Nicola Bux's No Trifling Matter: Taking the Sa... more This is my Foreword to the English translation of Nicola Bux's No Trifling Matter: Taking the Sacraments Seriously Again (Angelico Press, 2018).
This book examines the "problem of love" in light of the thought of Thomas Aquinas. The "problem"... more This book examines the "problem of love" in light of the thought of Thomas Aquinas. The "problem" is the relationship between the desire for happiness and the love of another, chiefly, the love of God for His own sake. Great thinkers judge the matters connected with this problem differently. Aristotle and others contend that the desire for happiness grounds ethical activity. Others contend that a pure love of God (or of the "other") is not founded on desire for happiness. The former charge the latter with leaving love groundless, and the latter charge the former with reducing love to egoism. Aquinas's appreciation of the Aristotelian tradition is forefront in his classic treatment of human action, which begins with the desire for happiness. Accordingly, many readers, proponents and critics, read Aquinas as simply "eudaimonistic." There are, however, other principles at work in his thought; these suggest a simple but profound difficulty in his thought, one reflective of the subtlety of real life. Are the two sets of principles contradictory? Juxtaposed? Considering beatific charity as ultimate lens for this problem, Malloy contends that Aquinas's texts and principles are hierarchically harmonious while developmentally complex. They indicate that love of happiness has a foundational role in human action and that love of God for His own sake has priority in the order of finality.
This ordered balance depends upon a conception of the common good in accord with a metaphysics of participation: as having existence and formal perfection from and in likeness to the One Who Is, created persons incline to love God more than and more intensely than themselves. Thus, love of the Divine Other, while indeed the supreme love, especially as deified through charity, does not demand "disinterested" love. God truly is man's good: His true lover longs to be with Him.
Uploads
I identify various heresies and errors of the new modernism. Nearly all of them have in common a false mercy that divorces compassion from truth. But compassion without truth is only emotional sympathy, not charity. Genuine mercy is based on truth. God pours out His grace so that we sinners may repent of wickedness, embrace Him, and live holy lives.
I treat various heresies currently causing great confusion, offering the Church's teaching as healing remedy.
This all sounds positive. It is as positive a reading of Luther's disastrous outlook and theses as I find reasonable. In point of fact, however, his view of the law and hence of the God who gave it is astoundingly dark, excessive and tyrannical. It is with this as backdrop that he finds solution in another false, even blasphemous notion of God: The God of mercy who does not care about the justice of his law. So, from a tyrannical conception of God and law, Luther pivots to a mercy that completely bypasses all that really is good and necessary in law. Further, by this bypassing, Luther makes void the very reason for earthly pilgrimage. Salvation is, for him, by faith alone. Even if it is never alone, because it supposedly issues in good works, it need not issue in good works in order to save. Further, these good works Luther himself stains with the curse because he pronounces all our works, even good ones wrought in faith, to be sullied with sins, and all sins are worthy of damnation he declares.
Let it be utterly clear: It is impossible to reconcile all of Luther's theses with Catholic dogma. So many of them contradict Catholic dogma, and his outlook is from beginning to end contrary to that of the saints. The points of contact identified here are too quickly taken up and employed in service of these misunderstandings as to render them in his works void. The aim of this article is to identify for Lutherans of good will points of contact that will enable a proper embrace of Catholic teaching. The aim is twofold: First: To demonstrate the inherent impossibility of the Lutheran system as a whole. (And it is a system. Variations and complexities and dialectical tensions can indeed be brought to a basic systematic statement.) Second: To show that the Catholic system (and it is indeed a system) is a superior way of accounting for God's law and mercy.
This ordered balance depends upon a conception of the common good in accord with a metaphysics of participation: as having existence and formal perfection from and in likeness to the One Who Is, created persons incline to love God more than and more intensely than themselves. Thus, love of the Divine Other, while indeed the supreme love, especially as deified through charity, does not demand "disinterested" love. God truly is man's good: His true lover longs to be with Him.
I identify various heresies and errors of the new modernism. Nearly all of them have in common a false mercy that divorces compassion from truth. But compassion without truth is only emotional sympathy, not charity. Genuine mercy is based on truth. God pours out His grace so that we sinners may repent of wickedness, embrace Him, and live holy lives.
I treat various heresies currently causing great confusion, offering the Church's teaching as healing remedy.
This all sounds positive. It is as positive a reading of Luther's disastrous outlook and theses as I find reasonable. In point of fact, however, his view of the law and hence of the God who gave it is astoundingly dark, excessive and tyrannical. It is with this as backdrop that he finds solution in another false, even blasphemous notion of God: The God of mercy who does not care about the justice of his law. So, from a tyrannical conception of God and law, Luther pivots to a mercy that completely bypasses all that really is good and necessary in law. Further, by this bypassing, Luther makes void the very reason for earthly pilgrimage. Salvation is, for him, by faith alone. Even if it is never alone, because it supposedly issues in good works, it need not issue in good works in order to save. Further, these good works Luther himself stains with the curse because he pronounces all our works, even good ones wrought in faith, to be sullied with sins, and all sins are worthy of damnation he declares.
Let it be utterly clear: It is impossible to reconcile all of Luther's theses with Catholic dogma. So many of them contradict Catholic dogma, and his outlook is from beginning to end contrary to that of the saints. The points of contact identified here are too quickly taken up and employed in service of these misunderstandings as to render them in his works void. The aim of this article is to identify for Lutherans of good will points of contact that will enable a proper embrace of Catholic teaching. The aim is twofold: First: To demonstrate the inherent impossibility of the Lutheran system as a whole. (And it is a system. Variations and complexities and dialectical tensions can indeed be brought to a basic systematic statement.) Second: To show that the Catholic system (and it is indeed a system) is a superior way of accounting for God's law and mercy.
This ordered balance depends upon a conception of the common good in accord with a metaphysics of participation: as having existence and formal perfection from and in likeness to the One Who Is, created persons incline to love God more than and more intensely than themselves. Thus, love of the Divine Other, while indeed the supreme love, especially as deified through charity, does not demand "disinterested" love. God truly is man's good: His true lover longs to be with Him.