MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2605002472 · doi:10.1353/tho.2014.0047

Early Latin Theology by Bernard J. F. Lonergan

2014· article· en· W2605002472 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jeremy D. Wilkins

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly Review · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueMedieval Philosophy and Theology
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPhilosophyThomismNominalismMagisteriumTheologyRealismNobilityClassicsLiteratureHistoryEpistemologyLawPoliticsArt

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

630 BOOK REVIEWS this regard. I would only add a slight note of caution: The “Thomism” that was controverted in the second half of the sixteenth century is not the “Thomism” that was controverted in the second half of the nineteenth, nor is it the “Thomism” that serves as a litmus test today. At times, Mantovani can give this impression. He bolsters it by framing the debate about the existence of God in terms of realism versus nominalism, such that Vitoria and Soto become tainted with the contagion of nominalism from Paris—and Báñez is made out to be a prophet of the “realism” that will save us. This framing device, which interprets the history of philosophy using a single issue from the Middle Ages, is a bit timeworn, being a holdover from the historia philosophica philosophiae of seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Lutheran historians. It is not that these were not issues debated during the seventeenth century, of course, but the stubbornness with which historians use this trope to interpret every issue is quite alien to the theologians in question. In fine, Mantovani’s work is deeply learned, stimulating, and refreshing. Much needed information bristles upon almost every page. Still, there is one risk in the retrieval of Scholastic theology that I feel compelled to mention—a risk that, in the flowering of the commentatorial traditions during the seventeenth century, was commonly associated with another religious order. In the baroque age, theologians often complained that Jesuits read only Jesuits to the exclusion of the wider debate around them. Thomists today have everything to gain from reading the commentatorial tradition, but they risk misunderstanding it if they commit the sin once attributed to Jesuits. The Dominicans at Salamanca were not afraid to read theologians from other orders, and even learn from them. They were—dare I say—open to broader cultural currents, confident not only in the ability of Thomism, but indeed in the ability of the Church, to address and transform them. TRENT POMPLUN Loyola University Maryland Baltimore, Maryland Early Latin Theology. By BERNARD J. F. LONERGAN. Collected Works of Bernard Lonergan, vol. 19. Translated by MICHAEL G. SHIELDS. Edited by ROBERT M. DORAN and H. DANIEL MONSOUR. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2011. Pp. xviii + 713. $45.00 (paper). ISBN 978-14426 -1235-8. Bernard Lonergan finished his dissertation on operative grace in the thought of Thomas Aquinas in 1939. Whisked out of Rome on the eve of hostilities, he passed the next dozen years teaching in Jesuit theologates at Montreal and Toronto, before reassignment to the Gregorian University BOOK REVIEWS 631 beginning in the fall of 1953. It proved to be one of the most productive periods of his literary career. After rewriting his dissertation for publication (Grace and Freedom), he undertook a major study of Aquinas’s theory of the intellect (Verbum: Word and Idea in Aquinas). before composing his seminal philosophical text, Insight: A Study of Human Understanding (completed in September 1953 but not published until 1957). In addition to these projects that sprang from his personal research interests, his teaching duties engendered supplemental treatises on theoretical questions of special difficulty and high interest. Such comprise the selections in the present volume: three supplements on grace, an analysis of faith, an essay on the notion of sacrifice, and two supplements on Christology. All are reproduced in the original Latin with a facing English translation. His concern, almost entirely, is with the speculative and synthetic rather than the positive and analytic part of theology; it is, in short, to attain that imperfect, uncertain, but highly fruitful understanding of the mysteries lauded by Dei Filius of Vatican I. When Lonergan penned these supplements, his apprenticeship to Aquinas was in full bloom, and in many of these treatises he sets out to demonstrate the superiority of the method, principles, and doctrine of Aquinas, not only over the general run of Scholastic thought (Scotus and Suárez, in particular), but also over significant strands in the tradition of Thomistic commentary (Bañez, John of St. Thomas). His dissertation had taken direct aim at both the “Dominican” and the “Jesuit” parties in the controversy de auxiliis, on grace and freedom...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,920
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,002

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,239
Écart entre enseignants0,216 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe Thomist: A Speculative Quarterly ReviewMême sujetMedieval Philosophy and TheologyTravaux en français237 207