University as Church: Fides et Ratio as a Source for Ecclesiology

2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
M. J Iozzio
Keyword(s):  
Fides Et Ratio

Fides et Ratio: A Response to John Webster

2000 ◽  
Vol 81 (952) ◽  
pp. 225-235
Author(s):  
Thomas Weinandy
Keyword(s):  
John Webster ◽  
Fides Et Ratio

Fides et Ratio: Approaches to a Roman Catholic Political Philosophy

2000 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
James V. Schall
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Roman Catholic ◽  
The Political ◽  
Catholic Tradition ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Fides Et Ratio

The relationship between philosophy, revelation, and politics is a basic intellectual theme, either at the forefront or in the background, of all political philosophy. The 1998 publication of John Paul II's encyclicalFides et Ratiooccasioned much reflection on the relation of reason and revelation. Though not directly concerned with political philosophy, this encyclical provides a welcome opportunity to address many theologicalpolitical issues that have arisen in classic and contemporary political philosophy. The argument here states in straightforward terms how philosophy and theology, as understood in the Roman Catholic tradition, can be coherently related to fundamental questions that have legitimately recurred in the works of the political philosophers.

Filozofia analityczna a argument z przygodności

1970 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 201-219
Author(s):  
Stanisław Ziemiański
Keyword(s):  
Fides Et Ratio

W Encyklice Fides et ratio Jan Paweł II nawołuje do współpracy teologii z filozofią (n. 100). Podkreślając inspirującą rolę teologii dla filozofii, większy nacisk kładzie jednak na potrzeby dowartościowania filozofii, zwłaszcza metafizyki, która w wielu środowiskach, nawet w uczelniach kościelnych, została zaniedbana. Wśród licznych antymetafizycznych nurtów współczesnych, Papież wymienia pozytywizm, materializm, scjentyzm i relatywizm (n. 47). Różniąc się od siebie nurty te maja jednak z sobą coś wspólnego. Pozytywizm (i neopozytywizm) za źródło i kryterium prawdy uznaje doświadczenie zmysłowe. Zdania o zjawiskach danych w doświadczeniu maja wartość prawdopodobną. Zawsze istnieje możliwość ich zakwestionowania. Stąd relatywizm prawdy. Prócz tego ograniczenie poznania de empirii implikuje zamkniecie się na rzeczywistość pozazmysłową, duchową. Z nieuprawnionego metodologicznie przekonania, ze to co niepoznawalne zmysłami nie istnieje, rodzi się materializm. Konieczność dotyczy systemów formalnych, one jednak nie mają charakteru ontologicznego, nie mówią same z siebie niczego o rzeczywistości. Opierają się na konwencjach. To stanowi inne źródło relatywizmu.

Mariana I. Morawskiego SJ pojęcie filozofii w zastosowaniu do współczesnej dyskusji wokół encykliki Jana Pawła II Fides et ratio

1970 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-80
Author(s):  
Tadeusz Ślipko
Keyword(s):  
John Paul Ii ◽  
Vatican Council ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Considerable Work ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Fides Et Ratio ◽  
The Church

The encychcal Fides et ratio proclaimed by John Paul II on 14 September 1998 is a continuation of doctrinal statements by the Magisterium of the Church on a matter that has been an object of its concern from its very beginnings. This is the problem posed by the relationship between philosophy and faith. The solutions put forward by Vatican Council I (1869-1870) in connection with this problem provoked a response in Catholic philosophical and theological circles. One of the most important events in this field in Polish terms was the publication of Father Marian Ignacy Morawski's S J considerable work Filozofia i jej zadanie (1876). This work is the subject of discussion in the article below.

REASON AND BELIEF IN GOD

2003 ◽  
Vol 68 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-68
Author(s):  
Roy Clouser
Keyword(s):  
Pope John Paul Ii ◽  
Christian Doctrine ◽  
Faith And Reason ◽  
John Paul Ii ◽  
Belief In God ◽  
Present Essay ◽  
Important Concern ◽  
Real Progress ◽  
Fides Et Ratio

In his article “Fides et Ratio” (Philosophia Reformata 2000, 65: 72-104), Eduardo Echeverria states he is writing out of his concern that since “”¦ the lack of unity among Christians represents the grave obstacle for the proclamation of the gospel, we should take every suitable opportunity to increase the unity of all Christians. The present essay is meant as a contribution toward this goal.” (p.72). The increased unity he has in mind is a reconciliation of the traditional scholastic interpretation of Christian doctrine (which he designates the “TSC”), and the Calvinist tradition (which I will designate the “CT”). More specifically, he seeks a unity between them concerning the relation of faith and reason, that is, the role of reason in belief in God. To this end he compares what he understands of the CT, as represented by Calvin and Dooyeweerd, with the TSC as represented by St Thomas and the encyclical, Fides et Ratio (1998) by Pope John Paul II. In all that follows I will be agreeing with Echeverria that this is, indeed, an important concern and a laudable goal, and I hope that what I offer here in reply to his essay will be taken in that same charitable spirit. So even though I find that Echeverria’s account of the differences between the TSC and the CT is seriously mistaken, I do agree that it would go a long way toward greater cooperation between our two traditions if we could at least agree on what our differences are and work toward resolving them. For that reason I will be more concerned here with clarifying those differences than with arguing for the CT. That does not mean that I will not at times offer brief accounts of why I think the CT is right to differ from the TSC on certain points; it only means that I do not regard the case I will make for these points as anywhere near complete. This brevity is made necessary because I find the misunderstandings of Calvin, and especially of Dooyeweerd, to be so many and so knotted in “Fides et Ratio” as to form a tangled skein that would require more than just one article to unravel. I have also decided that there are so many strands to this skein that for the sake of clarity I will restrict myself to only a few of them. My assumption is that it would be better to make real progress with getting a few key differences in focus, than to end up producing a tangle of my own in an attempt to cover every point raised in Echeverria’s long article. My hope is that the treatment of the points I do cover will be sufficient to indicate how a more thorough untangling would proceed.

scholarly journals Sveti Toma u enciklici Fides et ratio

2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 295-302
Author(s):  
Serge–Thomas Bonino
Keyword(s):  
Saint Thomas Aquinas ◽  
Thomas Aquinas ◽  
Intellectual Life ◽  
Fides Et Ratio ◽  
The Church

The paragraphs contained in the encyclical Fides et Ratio which are explicitly devoted to Saint Thomas Aquinas comprise a condensed summation, or rather synthesis of the entire encyclical. These paragraphs incorporate the main themes which are expounded in other sections of the encyclical (philosophy opened to faith, theology mindful of philosophy, etc.) Encyclical teachings on the role of tradition in intellectual life justifies the constant recommendations of the Church regarding the favoured teachings of Saint Thomas, as in philosophy, so too in theology.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document