JOHN PAUL II, DEFENDER OF FAITH AND REASON

2017 ◽  
pp. 229-235
Keyword(s):  
Faith And Reason ◽  
John Paul Ii

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.

ONCE AGAIN, JOHN PAUL II’S FIDES ET RATIO

2004 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-52
Author(s):  
Eduardo J. Echeverria
Keyword(s):  
Human Reason ◽  
Faith And Reason ◽  
John Paul Ii ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Fides Et Ratio

Roy Clouser’s reply to my article on John Paul II’s 1998 encyclical Fides et Ratio (FR) is learned, engaging, clear--and, respectfully put, full of errors on many points regarding John Paul’s understanding of faith and reason.1 On this matter, he attacks a straw man. Indeed, at times I wondered whether Clouser and I had read the same encyclical. Despite this, however, let me underscore my genuine appreciation of Clouser for pressing me to be clearer on my view of the encyclical’s position on faith and reason.2 My reply is organized in two parts. First, I argue that in FR (1) faith is a form of knowing; (2) John Paul II is not a rationalist; and (3) the impact of the fall into sin on human reason is integral. Second, I defend the view of FR that a metaphysical theology is necessary in order to give an account of the intelligibility of the Christian revelation. Indeed, one of the biblical requirements for a “Scriptural philosophy” is a philosophy of a truly metaphysical range, according to John Paul (FR, nos. 80-83).

Faith and Reason: John Paul II and Descartes

2001 ◽  
Vol 78 (4) ◽  
pp. 301-316
Author(s):  
Thomas Lennon ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Faith And Reason ◽  
John Paul Ii

scholarly journals Fides et Ratio: a critical appraisal

2000 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. e1-e6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael B. Abbot
Keyword(s):  
Catholic Church ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Faith And Reason ◽  
John Paul Ii ◽  
Fides Et Ratio ◽  
The Catholic Church

Book review: Faith and Reason: Evangelical letter Fides et Ratio of the supreme pontiff John Paul II to the bishops of the Catholic Church on the relation between faith and reason, 1998, Libreria Editrice Vaticana/Veritas, Dublin.

Polska filozofia wobec encykliki „Fides et ratio", Toruń 19-21.04.1999. Materiały Konferencji [Polish Philosophy Faces the Encyclical „Fides et ratio". Toruń, April 19th-21st, 1999. The Proceedings from the Conference Held at the University of Toruń]

1970 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 247-249
Author(s):  
Krzysztof Mądel
Keyword(s):  
Pope John Paul Ii ◽  
Faith And Reason ◽  
Monthly Review ◽  
John Paul Ii ◽  
Polish Philosophy ◽  
Vatican City ◽  
Scientific Meetings ◽  
The University ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Fides Et Ratio

The encyclical Fides et ratio: On the Relationship Between Faith and Reason, written by Pope John Paul II in the summer of 1998 and published in the Vatican City 14th September of the same year, received considerable amount of commentaries in Poland. Several different volumes have already appeared: there are proceedings of some scientific meetings (Wiara i rozum na progu trzeciego tysiąclecia. Materiały na I Krajową Konferencję z cyklu Nauka na przełomie wieków, 6 maja 1999, Szczecin, Wydaw. Naukowe US, 1999, pp. 177; Wiara i rozum. Refleksje nad encykliką Jana Pawta II Fides et ratio. Zbiór przemówień i referatów z sesji naukowej. KUL 21 stycznia 1999, ed. by Gabriel Witaszek, Lublin 1999, KUL, pp. 160), some collected works (Rozum i wiara mowią do mnie. Wokół encykliki Jana Pawta II Fides et ratio, ed. by Krzysztof Mądel, Kraków 1999, WAM, pp. 263; Na skrzydtach wiary i rozumu, ed. by Ignacy Dec, Wroclaw, 1999, PFT, pp. 232), and a special, philosophical edition of the monthly review „Znak" (No. 527, 4/1999).

Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, Toronto, 11th July 1982

Moreana ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 41 (Number 157- (1-2) ◽  
pp. 58-71
Author(s):  
John McConica
Keyword(s):  
Catholic Church ◽  
Church Of England ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Roman Catholic ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Medieval Studies ◽  
John Paul Ii ◽  
The Church ◽  
The Catholic Church

During the period in which these papers were given, there were great achievements on the ecumenical scene, as the quest to restore the Church’s unity was pursued enthusiastically by all the major Christiandenominations. The Papal visit of John Paul II to England in 1982 witnessed a warmth in relationships between the Church of England and the Catholic Church that had not been experienced since the early 16th century Reformation in England to which More fell victim. The Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission was achieving considerable doctrinal consensus and revisionist scholarship was encouraging an historical review by which the faithful Catholic and the confessing Protestant could look upon each other respectfully and appreciatively. It is to this ecumenical theme that James McConica turns in his contribution.

Glaube und Vernunft

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-65
Author(s):  
Birgit Sandkaulen
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Approach ◽  
Human Mind ◽  
German Philosophy ◽  
Faith And Reason ◽  
Common Features ◽  
The Relationship

The question of the relationship between faith and reason marks one of the fundamental issues for classical German philosophy. The paper is guided by a systematic interest in identifying some common features in the approaches taken by Kant and Hegel that are also of interest for the contemporary discussion: 1. The specific modernity of Kant’s and Hegel’s considerations, evident in their rejection of the resources traditionally appealed to by religion and rationalist metaphysics; 2. the anti-naturalist conviction that, in contrast to animals, a metaphysical dimension is inscribed into the human mind; and 3. the thesis that metaphysical questions are existential questions arising from an impulse toward freedom, and hence that a purely theoretical approach is inadequate to address them.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document