Christopher West Thanks and Responds to his critics
#39
(10-29-2009, 07:49 AM)iggyting Wrote: The starting perspective of the TOB is the man in history (the 'historical man'), disordered by the 'original sin', in need of salvation, and finds his destiny as the 'eschatological man' in the life-death-and-resurrection of Jesus Christ, the God-man. There is no provision for a material Darwinist evolution or to the pseudoscience theology of Chardin.

There are two accounts of creation in Genesis. The seven-day story ("In the beginning..") ends in the creation of man on the sixth day, and God finds all of creation 'very good'. The other account relates to the creation of Adam-Eve as much as to the Fall; the two aspects are linked in context. The 'not good' refers more than Adam lacking a mate but also to the lacking in human nature in its 'original' state, for in spite of the coupling, the Fall resulted. In this connection, it is not an oversight of God that the Second Person of the Trinity becomes man but it is His will "In the beginning..."

Jesus Christ is the God-man, the beloved son of God, and man become 'sons of God' through Him. The God-man is the mode to which man is fashioned after his salvation and resurrection. In this sense the God-man is the model of man. There is no suggestion in the TOB  that the 'historical man' is not in need of salvation through Jesus Christ. "God become man so that man might become a god" (cf St Athanasus in De Incarnatione). This is good patriarchy.

I think the TOB deserves a fair reading. Depending on your intellectual honesty, one can discard it into the dustbin or hold it up for deeper reflection. Again, my 2-cents worth!


I would counter with the fact that we are unclear on what JPII's personal reflections were on exactly what "Salvation" is.  His tendency to evoke the idea of Universal Salvation is yet another factor in trying to figure out where he stood in relation to healthy Catholic understanding of Revelation and novel errors.  Also, one can't help but notice that he's developed a sort of "Trinity of Man" in his Original/Historical/ Eschatological model. 

When he is talking about "Original Man" is he talking about Adam?  Does he believe in a specific man with a feast day in the Church on Dec. 24th?    Does he believe we can pray to St. Adam for his intercession? 

If he doesn't believe in that.  (and I believe he didn't, considering his unwillingness to affirm anything so fundamental)  We are starting off on completely different ideas and consequently I have no certitude that he's a viable guide for anything and I'll question every word he uses. 
Reply


Messages In This Thread
UO - by Historian - 10-29-2009, 01:49 AM
Re: UO - by Gerard - 10-29-2009, 10:51 AM
Re: Christopher West Thanks and Responds to his critics - by Gerard - 10-29-2009, 12:07 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)