Bibliothèque Don Bosco de Lubumbashi
Auteur Khaled Anatolios
|
Documents disponibles écrits par cet auteur (3)
Affiner la recherche Interroger des sources externes
Final Reflections / John Behr in Harvard Theological Review, 100/2 (April 2007)
[article]
Titre : Final Reflections Type de document : texte imprimé Auteurs : John Behr, Auteur ; Khaled Anatolios, Auteur Année de publication : 2008 Article en page(s) : pp. 173-175. Langues : Anglais (eng) Résumé : As a concluding comment, I should like to return to the point raised by Ayres, that it is not enough simply to tell a better version of the fourth-century history in the expectation that modern theologians will finally get it straight! This is a valid point: if we want to have Christianity's fourth-century heritage taken seriously, we need to be in dialogue with modern writers. But, if there is to be a dialogue, both sides must be allowed to speak, and so we are also responsible for expounding the historical material on its own terms. As Heidegger put it, “[O]nly when we think through what has been thought will we be of any use for what must still be thought.” Perhaps studying the figures from a distant era will open up for us possibilities we would never have dreamed of within our own modern presuppositions, so that we can recognize differences even beyond those which lie within our own horizon or tradition. If I am right in affirming that there is a different style of doing theology prior to Augustine and after him in the East than that which we find in the theological and scholarly tradition in which Ayres's book stands, then we must ask whether we need to address the question of the legitimacy of each (and ponder how one might even answer that) or whether a plurality of approaches is possible without reducing one to the other. In a way, this would be a further step toward deconstructing monolithic notions of “Orthodoxy” in recognition of genuine and legitimate diversity within early Christianity and among modern Christians. Might it be better not to speak of Nicaea and its legacy, but of the legacies of Nicaea—or better—“Christ and him crucified” (2 Cor 2:2) and the ways in which Nicaea and its interpreters affirm the true divinity of this one?
in Harvard Theological Review > 100/2 (April 2007) . - pp. 173-175.[article] Final Reflections [texte imprimé] / John Behr, Auteur ; Khaled Anatolios, Auteur . - 2008 . - pp. 173-175.
Langues : Anglais (eng)
in Harvard Theological Review > 100/2 (April 2007) . - pp. 173-175.
Résumé : As a concluding comment, I should like to return to the point raised by Ayres, that it is not enough simply to tell a better version of the fourth-century history in the expectation that modern theologians will finally get it straight! This is a valid point: if we want to have Christianity's fourth-century heritage taken seriously, we need to be in dialogue with modern writers. But, if there is to be a dialogue, both sides must be allowed to speak, and so we are also responsible for expounding the historical material on its own terms. As Heidegger put it, “[O]nly when we think through what has been thought will we be of any use for what must still be thought.” Perhaps studying the figures from a distant era will open up for us possibilities we would never have dreamed of within our own modern presuppositions, so that we can recognize differences even beyond those which lie within our own horizon or tradition. If I am right in affirming that there is a different style of doing theology prior to Augustine and after him in the East than that which we find in the theological and scholarly tradition in which Ayres's book stands, then we must ask whether we need to address the question of the legitimacy of each (and ponder how one might even answer that) or whether a plurality of approaches is possible without reducing one to the other. In a way, this would be a further step toward deconstructing monolithic notions of “Orthodoxy” in recognition of genuine and legitimate diversity within early Christianity and among modern Christians. Might it be better not to speak of Nicaea and its legacy, but of the legacies of Nicaea—or better—“Christ and him crucified” (2 Cor 2:2) and the ways in which Nicaea and its interpreters affirm the true divinity of this one?
Retrieving Nicaea / Khaled Anatolios
Titre : Retrieving Nicaea : the development and meaning of Trinitarian doctrine Type de document : texte imprimé Auteurs : Khaled Anatolios Editeur : Grand Rapids, Mich. : Baker Academic Année de publication : 2011 Importance : xviii, 322 p. Format : 24 cm ISBN/ISSN/EAN : 978-0-8010-3132-8 Index. décimale : 231/. Résumé : Khaled Anatolios offers a historically informed theological study of the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, showing its relevance to Christian life and thought today. --from publisher description Retrieving Nicaea : the development and meaning of Trinitarian doctrine [texte imprimé] / Khaled Anatolios . - Grand Rapids, Mich. : Baker Academic, 2011 . - xviii, 322 p. ; 24 cm.
ISBN : 978-0-8010-3132-8
Index. décimale : 231/. Résumé : Khaled Anatolios offers a historically informed theological study of the development of the doctrine of the Trinity, showing its relevance to Christian life and thought today. --from publisher description Réservation
Réserver ce document
Exemplaires(1)
Code-barres Cote Support Localisation Section Disponibilité TD 25.031 231/.0440901 Livres FACULTE DE THEOLOGIE Livres Exclu du prêt Yes and No / Khaled Anatolios in Harvard Theological Review, 100/2 (April 2007)
[article]
Titre : Yes and No : Reflections on Lewis Ayres, Nicaea and Its Legacy Type de document : texte imprimé Auteurs : Khaled Anatolios, Auteur Année de publication : 2008 Article en page(s) : pp. 153-158. Langues : Anglais (eng) Résumé : Lewis Ayres's Nicaea and its Legacy has created a stir among historians of Christian doctrine since its publication. Its relation to the previously existing body of scholarship on fourth-century trinitarian theology is one of both consolidation and provocation. Ayres accomplishes a prodigious work of consolidation by synthesizing much of the groundbreaking scholarship that has lately transpired in the study of fourth-century trinitarian debates, while simultaneously making his own contributions toward retelling the narrative of these debates. Following Hanson, Simonetti, Barnes, and others, Ayres rejects a simplistic division between more or less uniform camps of Nicene and “Arian” theologies. Somewhat paradoxically, however, his distinctive contribution to this retelling is to insist on a fundamental unity between pro-Nicene camps in both the Greek and Latin traditions. While Ayres makes this point with forceful persuasion, the point itself is not controversial among patristic scholars. The assertion of a substantive rift between Eastern and Western trinitarian theologies has not held much sway within this milieu; it is not found in either Hanson or Simonetti, for instance, and its genealogy, traced back to the figure of de Régnon, has been famously exposed by Michel Barnes. What is provocative, however, is Ayres's insistence that there existed a geographically consistent “pro-Nicene” culture in both East and West that was also internally consistent as a superior construal of the “plain sense” of canonical Scripture. More provocative still is Ayres's polemical engagement, in the concluding chapter of his work, with modern systematic theology. Here, Ayres offers a sweeping dismissal of modern trinitarian theology as wallowing in a Hegelian wasteland, in bondage to methodological commitments that are antithetical to “pro-Nicene culture,” with no hope of a redeeming synthesis in sight. The only way forward is first to return to an integration of historical and systematic theology, based on a reappropriation of the basic tenets of pro-Nicene culture.
in Harvard Theological Review > 100/2 (April 2007) . - pp. 153-158.[article] Yes and No : Reflections on Lewis Ayres, Nicaea and Its Legacy [texte imprimé] / Khaled Anatolios, Auteur . - 2008 . - pp. 153-158.
Langues : Anglais (eng)
in Harvard Theological Review > 100/2 (April 2007) . - pp. 153-158.
Résumé : Lewis Ayres's Nicaea and its Legacy has created a stir among historians of Christian doctrine since its publication. Its relation to the previously existing body of scholarship on fourth-century trinitarian theology is one of both consolidation and provocation. Ayres accomplishes a prodigious work of consolidation by synthesizing much of the groundbreaking scholarship that has lately transpired in the study of fourth-century trinitarian debates, while simultaneously making his own contributions toward retelling the narrative of these debates. Following Hanson, Simonetti, Barnes, and others, Ayres rejects a simplistic division between more or less uniform camps of Nicene and “Arian” theologies. Somewhat paradoxically, however, his distinctive contribution to this retelling is to insist on a fundamental unity between pro-Nicene camps in both the Greek and Latin traditions. While Ayres makes this point with forceful persuasion, the point itself is not controversial among patristic scholars. The assertion of a substantive rift between Eastern and Western trinitarian theologies has not held much sway within this milieu; it is not found in either Hanson or Simonetti, for instance, and its genealogy, traced back to the figure of de Régnon, has been famously exposed by Michel Barnes. What is provocative, however, is Ayres's insistence that there existed a geographically consistent “pro-Nicene” culture in both East and West that was also internally consistent as a superior construal of the “plain sense” of canonical Scripture. More provocative still is Ayres's polemical engagement, in the concluding chapter of his work, with modern systematic theology. Here, Ayres offers a sweeping dismissal of modern trinitarian theology as wallowing in a Hegelian wasteland, in bondage to methodological commitments that are antithetical to “pro-Nicene culture,” with no hope of a redeeming synthesis in sight. The only way forward is first to return to an integration of historical and systematic theology, based on a reappropriation of the basic tenets of pro-Nicene culture.