Zenit: ON THE FEAST OF ST. STEPHEN
"St. Stephen is a Model for All Those Who Want to Serve the New Evangelization"
Friday, December 28, 2012
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
Rome Reports: Urbi et Orbi: Benedict XVI issues Christmas greeting in over 65 languages and includes message to China
Zenit: On the Visitation
"Let us Strive Again to Make Room in our Hearts to Welcome the Christ Dhild with Love and Humility"
Pope Benedict XVI's Urbi et Orbi Message
"Truth has Sprung Up, Bringing Kindness, Justice and Peace"
Benedict XVI's Christmas Eve Homily
"What would happen if Mary and Joseph were to knock at my door"
Chant Cafe: The Musical Portions of the Christmas Vigil
Misc.
Friend Honors Author Who Criticized Abuse of Vatican II
Michael Davies Was a 'Man of the Church'
Zenit: On the Visitation
"Let us Strive Again to Make Room in our Hearts to Welcome the Christ Dhild with Love and Humility"
Pope Benedict XVI's Urbi et Orbi Message
"Truth has Sprung Up, Bringing Kindness, Justice and Peace"
Benedict XVI's Christmas Eve Homily
"What would happen if Mary and Joseph were to knock at my door"
Chant Cafe: The Musical Portions of the Christmas Vigil
Misc.
Friend Honors Author Who Criticized Abuse of Vatican II
Michael Davies Was a 'Man of the Church'
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Monday, December 24, 2012
A wish list for books published by University of Notre Dame Press:
Thomas Aquinas as Reader of the Psalms by Thomas F. Ryan
Does God Suffer? by Thomas Weinandy, O.F.M.
John Buridan: Portrait of a Fourteenth-Century Arts Master by Jack Zupko
Logic and Philosophy: An Integrated Introduction by William H. Brenner
A Dialogue on Natural Philosophy (Dragmaticon Philosophiae) by William of Conches
Translated by Matthew Curr and Italo Ronca
Treatise on Divine Predestination by John Scottus Eriugena
Translated by Mary Brennan
Augustine and the Cure of Souls: Revising a Classical Ideal by Paul R. Kolbet
Loving the Fine: Virtue and Happiness in Aristotle's Ethics by Anna Lännström
Happiness and Benevolence by Robert Spaemann
Friendship and Politics: Essays in Political Thought Edited by John von Heyking and Richard Avramenko
God's Grace and Human Action: 'Merit' in the Theology of Thomas Aquinas by Joseph P. Wawrykow
The Case of Galileo: A Closed Question? by Annibale Fantoli
Translated by George V. Coyne, S.J.
Demonstration and Scientific Knowledge in William of Ockham: A Translation of Summa Logicae III-II: De Syllogismo Demonstrativo, and Selections from the Prologue to the Ordinatio by John Lee Longeway
Integral Humanism, Freedom in the Modern World, and A Letter on Independence, Revised Edition
Jacques Maritain
Edited by Otto Bird
Translated by Otto Bird, Joseph Evans, and Richard O’Sullivan, K.C.
Thomas Aquinas as Reader of the Psalms by Thomas F. Ryan
Does God Suffer? by Thomas Weinandy, O.F.M.
John Buridan: Portrait of a Fourteenth-Century Arts Master by Jack Zupko
Logic and Philosophy: An Integrated Introduction by William H. Brenner
A Dialogue on Natural Philosophy (Dragmaticon Philosophiae) by William of Conches
Translated by Matthew Curr and Italo Ronca
Treatise on Divine Predestination by John Scottus Eriugena
Translated by Mary Brennan
Augustine and the Cure of Souls: Revising a Classical Ideal by Paul R. Kolbet
Loving the Fine: Virtue and Happiness in Aristotle's Ethics by Anna Lännström
Happiness and Benevolence by Robert Spaemann
Friendship and Politics: Essays in Political Thought Edited by John von Heyking and Richard Avramenko
God's Grace and Human Action: 'Merit' in the Theology of Thomas Aquinas by Joseph P. Wawrykow
The Case of Galileo: A Closed Question? by Annibale Fantoli
Translated by George V. Coyne, S.J.
Demonstration and Scientific Knowledge in William of Ockham: A Translation of Summa Logicae III-II: De Syllogismo Demonstrativo, and Selections from the Prologue to the Ordinatio by John Lee Longeway
Integral Humanism, Freedom in the Modern World, and A Letter on Independence, Revised Edition
Jacques Maritain
Edited by Otto Bird
Translated by Otto Bird, Joseph Evans, and Richard O’Sullivan, K.C.
Sunday, December 23, 2012
Now Available for Pre-Ordering
From University of Notre Dame Press:
What Happened in and to Moral Philosophy in the Twentieth Century?
Philosophical Essays in Honor of Alasdair MacIntyre
Edited by Fran O'Rourke
I am considering getting a copy of this - Virtue and Politics: Alasdair MacIntyre’s Revolutionary Aristotelianism, edited by Paul Blackledge and Kelvin Knight
But will the contributors to the volume give too much of a "leftist spin" on MacIntyre? Is investigating if this is this the case and reading MacIntyre's response worth the price of the book, even with 40% off (until the end of the month)? I think I will see if it is available at a local university library first. Here's a review of the book at NDPR.
Another book I will delay purchasing: Reason, Tradition, and the Good: MacIntyre's Tradition-Constituted Reason and Frankfurt School Critical Theory by Jeffery L. Nicholas
A review at NDPR.
What Happened in and to Moral Philosophy in the Twentieth Century?
Philosophical Essays in Honor of Alasdair MacIntyre
Edited by Fran O'Rourke
I am considering getting a copy of this - Virtue and Politics: Alasdair MacIntyre’s Revolutionary Aristotelianism, edited by Paul Blackledge and Kelvin Knight
But will the contributors to the volume give too much of a "leftist spin" on MacIntyre? Is investigating if this is this the case and reading MacIntyre's response worth the price of the book, even with 40% off (until the end of the month)? I think I will see if it is available at a local university library first. Here's a review of the book at NDPR.
Another book I will delay purchasing: Reason, Tradition, and the Good: MacIntyre's Tradition-Constituted Reason and Frankfurt School Critical Theory by Jeffery L. Nicholas
A review at NDPR.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Aeon Magazine: End of Byzantium by Helena Drysdale
Besieged by a majority Turkish culture, Istanbul's Ecumenical Patriarch Barthomelew I attempts a cosmopolitan revival
Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople
“Bartholomew is Seeking to Reinvigorate Dialogue With Roman Catholics”
Besieged by a majority Turkish culture, Istanbul's Ecumenical Patriarch Barthomelew I attempts a cosmopolitan revival
Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople
“Bartholomew is Seeking to Reinvigorate Dialogue With Roman Catholics”
Friday, December 21, 2012
Lee Cheek reviews Political Philosophy: A Historical Introduction by Michael J. White: A Good Introduction to Political Philosophy
Thursday, December 20, 2012
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
The Debate on Logic
The Difference between Traditional and Modern Logic and the Difference it Makes (via First Thoughts, which refers on a recent Peter Kreeft article - William Randolph Brafford's first post responding to Kreeft - see the comments posted there)
Related:
Henry Babcock Veatch's Two Logics
Related:
Henry Babcock Veatch's Two Logics
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Monday, December 17, 2012
Making a Mountain...
Aristotle and Aquinas: The Vital Difference by Don DeMarco, Ph. D.
As far as I'm concerned, personalism is not a significant difference between the ethics of Aquinas and that of Aristotle. (We might even ask the question of whether contenmporary personalism is even important to the moral theology of Aquinas, or if we are just trading one word, e.g. human, for another, person.)
"The difference between the ethics of Aristotle and Aquinas has to do with how virtue comes about. It is reasonable to be virtuous. Surely “honesty is the best policy.” That is simply a reasonable statement that does not require love. And virtue, for Aristotle, lies between two extremes. Thus, the virtue of courage, for example, is the midpoint between the vices of timidity and foolishness. This is all very sensible, though something is missing.
Perhaps Aristotle overestimated our capacity to be reasonable and under-estimated the importance of love. Whereas Aristotle links virtue to reason, Aquinas links it more properly to love. Therefore, as the Angelic doctor states, “Love is the form of all virtues.” This means that every virtue derives its degree of virtuousness by its association with love."
The important difference is that Aristotle writes from a non-Christian perspective, one which is unaided by Divine Revelation. Aristotle does not talk about "love" but he does talk about friendship in all of its forms, as it exists between human beings. But not, friendship between man and God. Should we be surprised then that he has no understanding of the beatitude to which we are called, or the grace that is necessary? No account of the "supernatural organism" which is so central to the moral theology of Aquinas (and of good Christian moral theology in general)?
The differences in their ethics is not due to competing accounts of human nature (with respect to the material or formal causes) - but with respect to human nature as it relates to its Creator, God.
As far as I'm concerned, personalism is not a significant difference between the ethics of Aquinas and that of Aristotle. (We might even ask the question of whether contenmporary personalism is even important to the moral theology of Aquinas, or if we are just trading one word, e.g. human, for another, person.)
"The difference between the ethics of Aristotle and Aquinas has to do with how virtue comes about. It is reasonable to be virtuous. Surely “honesty is the best policy.” That is simply a reasonable statement that does not require love. And virtue, for Aristotle, lies between two extremes. Thus, the virtue of courage, for example, is the midpoint between the vices of timidity and foolishness. This is all very sensible, though something is missing.
Perhaps Aristotle overestimated our capacity to be reasonable and under-estimated the importance of love. Whereas Aristotle links virtue to reason, Aquinas links it more properly to love. Therefore, as the Angelic doctor states, “Love is the form of all virtues.” This means that every virtue derives its degree of virtuousness by its association with love."
The important difference is that Aristotle writes from a non-Christian perspective, one which is unaided by Divine Revelation. Aristotle does not talk about "love" but he does talk about friendship in all of its forms, as it exists between human beings. But not, friendship between man and God. Should we be surprised then that he has no understanding of the beatitude to which we are called, or the grace that is necessary? No account of the "supernatural organism" which is so central to the moral theology of Aquinas (and of good Christian moral theology in general)?
The differences in their ethics is not due to competing accounts of human nature (with respect to the material or formal causes) - but with respect to human nature as it relates to its Creator, God.
James Chastek, Rights and Justice
1. Ius (pl. iura) is the object of justice that is true; to translate it as right is potentially misleading since what is meant as ius by St. Thomas is not the same as what we mean by right in the sense of a moral faculty or freedom to do a certain action. It is proper to the Bill of Rights to list these moral faculties in order to safeguard them from being infringed by the Federal Government. The Bill of Rights sets to make explicit the limits to the authority of the Federal Government. [subjective active rights]
2. The other subjective "right," a title or claim to something, may be bound up with St. Thomas's notion of ius. Ius, as explained by St. Thomas, is proper to ethics is moral theology - determining what is owed to another, what must be done/rendered to another (an action, first of all) by a moral agent. Determining what is owed to me is proper to a judge or someone else mediating a dispute, though it is not without the flip side - if I have a legitimate claim to something, then it must be given to me. [subjective passive rights]
St. Thomas makes rights the object of justice, and they are recognizable as rights in our own sense (e.g. they are divided into natural and legal rights, and slaves as slaves do not have any). One important difference is that, by locating them in the context of justice, rights are properly had by others. It is certainly true that I have rights, but when I say this I am considering them so far as they can make someone else just. To consider rights as my own leaves them recognizable as rights, but it prescinds from the context that could make me a good, virtuous, happy person.
1. Ius (pl. iura) is the object of justice that is true; to translate it as right is potentially misleading since what is meant as ius by St. Thomas is not the same as what we mean by right in the sense of a moral faculty or freedom to do a certain action. It is proper to the Bill of Rights to list these moral faculties in order to safeguard them from being infringed by the Federal Government. The Bill of Rights sets to make explicit the limits to the authority of the Federal Government. [subjective active rights]
2. The other subjective "right," a title or claim to something, may be bound up with St. Thomas's notion of ius. Ius, as explained by St. Thomas, is proper to ethics is moral theology - determining what is owed to another, what must be done/rendered to another (an action, first of all) by a moral agent. Determining what is owed to me is proper to a judge or someone else mediating a dispute, though it is not without the flip side - if I have a legitimate claim to something, then it must be given to me. [subjective passive rights]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)