Orthodox Bishop Hilarion Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship. That's shipping July 1st, and you should already have it on order, because I'm pretty certain I've had to inform you once before that it's on prepub. Gabe, if you're working on a list for Fortress Press right now, here are some more to make sure are on the list, from my hard copy library:.
I have checked that none of these are currently available on Logos. Rosie Perera:. I would love to have Bethge's biography of Bonhoeffer, I think the fact that he was a friend of Bonhoeffer adds a valuable perspective. The whole series would be good. Admittedly I only own the Trinitarian Controversy volume but have heard decent things about the rest of them. The Gospel is not Gabe Martini:. In that case, and since Fortress is a Lutheran press, will you take any suggestions? They publish some of rabbi Neusner's, and they use horribly bad glue in their paperbacks.
If the books are a couple of years old, they fall to pieces as soon as you open them.
- Christ and Analogy: The Christocentric Metaphysics of Hans Urs von Balthasar (Emerging Scholars)?
- The Green Fairy (Tales from the Special Courier Service Book 2).
- Poems by Marietta Holley.
- Come Walk With Me.
- Christ and Analogy: The Christocentric Metaphysics of Hans Urs von Balthasar by Junius Johnson.
- 2 editions of this work.
In fact, I can't figure out which ones are. Fortress themselves only list the five that are in print, and Amazon And the Fortress title I have by him doesn't show up at all. Perhaps you could get a complete list from Fortress, and we could tell you what we want? Fortunately that won't be a problem with the Logos editions. The file will be sent to your email address.
It may take up to minutes before you receive it. The file will be sent to your Kindle account. It may takes up to minutes before you received it.
Christ and analogy : the Christocentric metaphysics of Hans Urs Von Balthasar
Please note you need to add our NEW email km bookmail. Read more. Post a Review. You can write a book review and share your experiences. Other readers will always be interested in your opinion of the books you've read. It is written by Torstein Theodor Tollefsen and takes as its point of departure the Logos who always and everywhere seeks to realize the mystery of his embodiment.
However, his essay is ultimately directed toward the questions of the salvation of animals for Maximus and the compatibility of his theology with evolution. I am very pleased that Prof. Natalie Carnes has written a response to my book on Maximus in view of her fine work on theological aesthetics in patristic authors, especially Gregory of Nyssa, whose imprint on Maximus rivals that of Gregory Nazianzen.
Lars Thunberg was one of the first scholars to engage this problem, even more straightforwardly than von Balthasar, and I have learned much from their analyses. Carnes has wonderfully sketched the dilemma here as well, and I am grateful that she both understands and sympathizes with how I myself have tried to interpret it. That said, it is the Son as Logos and Wisdom who for Maximus most dramatically reveals the ecstatic playfulness of the Trinity.
Given that Maximus is so often cast as a militant anti-Origenist, it is always important and ironic to keep in mind that his understanding of the dynamics of the Logos-at-play owes much not just to Gregory Nazianzen and Dionysius the Areopagite but also Origen himself. I want at last to thank Prof. Carnes once again for taking the time to give my book a careful and insightful reading and commentary. I have genuinely profited from her analysis. Since we find ourselves so much in sympathy, I want to respond to Dr. But to the question at hand.
Any term abstracts from the phenomena it means to reveal. Descriptions necessarily entail some loss, some slippage from the events, places, and phenomena they also give to us. It may even hide what I love.
Christ and Analogy: The Christocentric Metaphysics of Hans Urs von Balthasar
My concern is this. In the incarnation, we receive a Messiah who is homoousios with the Father, a Messiah who gives us the being, the substance that is divinity. Yet that is not the story I see Blowers telling about Maximus. It is not that the Logos is more present in the Eucharist than in the saint, for example, but that she is differently present in each. The Logos does not just give more or less of herself in her various embodiments; playfully, she gives herself differently.
We might also, as I suggested in my previous essay, attribute such playfulness to the Pneuma, as the one who makes the Logos present in different ways.
- Symposium Introduction?
- Former Faculty.
- Article excerpt.
- Grow the Best Blueberries: Storeys Country Wisdom Bulletin A-89 (Country Wisdom Bulletins, Vol. a-89).
- Download TIME SERIES ANALYSIS with MATLAB. ARIMA and ARIMAX MODELS PDF.
- Koorong | Unsupported Browser?
The Logos does not repeat her becoming flesh; Incarnate, the Logos becomes present in new ways in the world. In theology of imaging, questions of presence and types of presence are historically central. Important to the development of icon theology, for example, is the articulation of icons as bearing hypostatic or prosoponic presence, a type of presence distinct from the presence given by the Eucharist and different still from the presences given by images that are not icons. To my mind, though, the term ultimately is too static, too flat, for the Logos on high playing in all sorts of forms, mingling with her world here and there, following her divine desires.
First, then, an encomium. Blowers has managed not only to limn a fairly comprehensive portrait of Maximus and his thought, but to do so with distinctively Maximian chiaroscuro. The form speaks the Maximian axiom that contemplation of Christ is at once that of God, creation, and humanity. Another merit.
Specialists typically take great interest when a senior scholar like Blowers weighs in on perennial issues. They will not be disappointed. He suggests that Maximus is more Origenist than is usually granted 1—3, 67—68, — Blowers does address the question of apokatastasis in Maximus. Now, an engagement. Very often Blowers indulges the quotes 78, , , , Yet not a few times the quotes vanish 78, 87, 92, , So too do their buffering effect.
This leads Blowers to make some provocative claims.
In this Book
This kenotic identification of Word and World means creation bears the cross as its most basic form, its fundament ; cf. It would seem that Blowers like Maximus wants to tender the radical view that the very act of creation is divine Incarnation—untamed by quotes. Incarnation here means that creatio ex nihilo is at once creatio ex Deo and Deus ex Deo.
This is to conceive the generation of the World in its absolutely natural difference from God and in its fundamentally hypostatic or personal identity with Him. Creation would be divine ecstasy in the precise form of divine Incarnation, a hypostatic relation that exceeds whatever participative or analogical relation obtains between created and uncreated natures exactly because it precedes every natural relation. But Blowers follows von Balthasar in receding from such a prospect, finally discerning in Maximus only the logic of analogia entis so precious to Catholic theology last century.
Perhaps thence comes the adventitious scare quotes.
Emerging Scholars series - kompmisdanira.gq
Take, for instance, how Blowers narrates divine and human ecstasy in Maximus. Maximus himself braves more than this last remark. Deification is not simply the movement from image to likeness of God. It was fully traversed at least once—in Christ. But as Blowers also knows , Maximus claims that the historical Incarnation of Jesus was not some exceptional instance of God traversing that natural chasm in person. Rather it revealed such identity as the vocation of human nature itself :.
Had man united created nature with the uncreated through love. Not an ecstasy from nature, counters Blowers, but only of nature —92, — What could be more dramatic than that creation is not simply a setting of the stage, but is itself the first act of the principal dramatis persona , the profoundest kenotic ecstasy wherein Word identifies Himself with the World and so generates the World—the institution of natural difference by a still more mysterious and ineffable identity between Creator and creation?
Daley San Francisco: Ignatius,  , Ep 12 PG 91, AB. That this emphasis on identity was dear to Maximus is clear from the fact that Leontius of Byzantium, a fellow Neo-chalcedonian from whom Maximus drew liberally, never went so far. I admit that I am giddy when I discover that new dissertations are being written on Maximus in the United States and abroad, proof that there is a new generation of scholars taking up the mantle of interpreting this prolific Christian thinker. Jordan, like Prof. Carnes, too! I think Jordan feels my pain there, and for that I am grateful.
If so that is well and fine, although I might need more exposition than he is able to provide in his short commentary here.
I am intrigued by this statement:. If creation be Incarnation, then the God-World identity must be of a hitherto unthinkable order. The composite hypostasis that is Jesus Christ is the unique union of Uncreated and created natures, and therein the hypostasis of the Son precludes any human hypostasis as Maximus occasionally reiterates in repudiating Nestorianism.
The Logos created a unique but thoroughly genuine human nature in Jesus the New Adam which, in the historical incarnation, was joined to the divine hypostasis of the Logos. And while Jordan is, in a certain sense, justified in saying that the hypostatic union of divine and human natures in Jesus Christ is the basis of the difference of those natures as well as their union citing Amb. The freedom of God to incarnate himself through the hypostasis of the Logos, crossing the diastemic gap between Uncreated and created natures, and the prior division between those natures as the theatre in which he reunites them, are of a piece.
For Jordan, if I understand him correctly, Maximus at last homogenizes the creation-as-incarnation with the historical incarnation as together crossing the diastemic gap between uncreated and created nature. Let me again express my thanks to him for his challenging comments. I look forward to reading his dissertation. Many thanks once more to Dr.
I want mainly to register a plea that my original question should not be just mine, and that we need to revisit the validity of the standard answers. Eric Perl has already argued that point, and rightly so.
Download TIME SERIES ANALYSIS with MATLAB. ARIMA and ARIMAX MODELS PDF
But simultaneity names a relation, not a mode. Christology again sharpens the point. They were not adoptionists. The problem was how those parts were one — the mode of union.