Philosophy first, then Theology?
#21
(04-21-2012, 10:01 PM)Crusading Philologist Wrote: I think there are a couple differences. For Hadot, you can never fully extricate classical philosophy from pagan religion, so there is always some sort of spiritual element to philosophy, which I think distinguishes it from more modern views of philosophy that don't really think of it as having anything to do with the good life or spirituality of any sort. That said, he does still seem to see Christian theology and philosophy as incompatible, so I suppose he ultimately off on that question.

This position seems worse than the "wall of separation" one. Oh, Fr. Hadot, why did you leave?
Reply
#22
(04-21-2012, 10:03 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: This position seems worse than the "wall of separation" one. Oh, Fr. Hadot, why did you leave?

I doubt this is the case, but since he married only 3 years after leaving the priesthood, is it at all possible that he had met his (first) wife yet in '50? Perhaps his interest in mysticism, his fondness of Nietzsche and Heidegger, and his perception of Christinianity as outlawing of the ancient philosophical schools (which, in his opinion, was responsible for their eventual disappearance from the West) were contributing factors? I suppose it is possible he could have remained Catholic, but given the fact that he divorced and then remarried, that is unlikely. It's an interesting question, though.
Reply
#23
(04-21-2012, 10:34 PM)INPEFESS Wrote:
(04-21-2012, 10:03 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote: This position seems worse than the "wall of separation" one. Oh, Fr. Hadot, why did you leave?

I doubt this is the case, but since he married only 3 years after leaving the priesthood, is it at all possible that he had met his (first) wife yet in '50? Perhaps his interest in mysticism, his fondness of Nietzsche and Heidegger, and his perception of Christinianity as outlawing of the ancient philosophical schools (which, in his opinion, was responsible for their eventual disappearance from the West) were contributing factors? I suppose it is possible he could have remained Catholic, but given the fact that he divorced and then remarried, that is unlikely. It's an interesting question, though.

So he only left the priesthood, and not the Faith? Didn't know.
Reply
#24
(04-21-2012, 10:44 PM)Crusader_Philly Wrote:
(04-21-2012, 10:34 PM)INPEFESS Wrote: I doubt this is the case, but since he married only 3 years after leaving the priesthood, is it at all possible that he had met his (first) wife yet in '50? Perhaps his interest in mysticism, his fondness of Nietzsche and Heidegger, and his perception of Christinianity as outlawing of the ancient philosophical schools (which, in his opinion, was responsible for their eventual disappearance from the West) were contributing factors? I suppose it is possible he could have remained Catholic, but given the fact that he divorced and then remarried, that is unlikely. It's an interesting question, though.

So he only left the priesthood, and not the Faith? Didn't know.

No, that's not what I said. I said it is possible, but highly unlikely, since he apparently rejected the Church's teachings on marriage.
Reply
#25
(04-21-2012, 10:46 PM)INPEFESS Wrote: No, that's not what I said. I said it is possible, but highly unlikely, since he apparently rejected the Church's teachings on marriage.

Ok.
Reply
#26
(04-20-2012, 09:23 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote: It's my understanding that the study of philosophy should come before that of theology. Is that your understanding?


After trying to read Fr Garrigou Lagrange, O.P. and Fr Walter Farrells amongst other books with no knowledge of philosophy I can tell you, you need to do philosophy before theology, at least scholastic theology.
Reply
#27
Interesting perspectives have been presented.  To look at the question from a "historical perspective", the Church's classic pre VII seven year formation process for priests (post high school) was: three years philosophy followed by four years theology.  I don't have reference to a time line to see how this structure developed but this was the standard model at least from the 18th. century from materials I've seen.

During the philosophy years the candidates would also study languages (Latin and Greek) and history.  I imagine that topics such as scripture, liturgy, and canon law were covered primarily during the theology years (it's been a few decades since I've looked at a pre VII seminary curriciulum).  It goes with out saying that spiritual formation and direction  occured throughout the process.
Reply
#28
(04-22-2012, 07:29 AM)TrentCath Wrote:
(04-20-2012, 09:23 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote: It's my understanding that the study of philosophy should come before that of theology. Is that your understanding?


After trying to read Fr Garrigou Lagrange, O.P. and Fr Walter Farrells amongst other books with no knowledge of philosophy I can tell you, you need to do philosophy before theology, at least scholastic theology.

What about moral theology? Same answer?
Reply
#29
(04-22-2012, 11:40 AM)per_passionem_eius Wrote:
(04-22-2012, 07:29 AM)TrentCath Wrote:
(04-20-2012, 09:23 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote: It's my understanding that the study of philosophy should come before that of theology. Is that your understanding?


After trying to read Fr Garrigou Lagrange, O.P. and Fr Walter Farrells amongst other books with no knowledge of philosophy I can tell you, you need to do philosophy before theology, at least scholastic theology.

What about moral theology? Same answer?

No, speaking for myself thats actually pretty easy to read and understand.
Reply
#30
(04-22-2012, 11:43 AM)TrentCath Wrote:
(04-22-2012, 11:40 AM)per_passionem_eius Wrote:
(04-22-2012, 07:29 AM)TrentCath Wrote:
(04-20-2012, 09:23 PM)per_passionem_eius Wrote: It's my understanding that the study of philosophy should come before that of theology. Is that your understanding?


After trying to read Fr Garrigou Lagrange, O.P. and Fr Walter Farrells amongst other books with no knowledge of philosophy I can tell you, you need to do philosophy before theology, at least scholastic theology.

What about moral theology? Same answer?

No, speaking for myself thats actually pretty easy to read and understand.

O goody. What would you recommend for me?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)