By Danut Manastireanu
This examine seeks to enquire the trinitarian consistency of Dumitru Staniloae’s basic ecclesiology, by way of use of a ‘perichoretic version of the church’, rooted within the patristic thought of trinitarian perichoresis, which describes the reciprocal interpenetration of the divine individuals, in keeping with their universal divine ousia. Staniloae makes his japanese patristic figuring out of the Trinity the basis of his entire theological
construction, together with his ecclesiology. For him, the Church, as a theoanthropic fact, is termed to be an icon of the Trinity, a real mirrored image in area and time of the perichoretic kin present forever among the divine folks of the triune God. This demands an ecclesiology that's rooted both in Christology and in pneumatology, any imbalance during this dynamic major, in Staniloae’s opinion, both to over the top institutionalism and authoritarianism or to exaggerated individualism and subjectivism. The trinitarian inconsistencies printed through the research version we have now used come up extra from the attribute clericalist and sacramentalist trends inherent to Orthodoxy generally, than from the actual nature of Staniloae’s theology.
Read or Download A Perichoretic Model of the Church.The Trinitarian Ecclesiology of Dumitru Staniloae PDF
Best religious studies books
This scarce antiquarian publication is a facsimile reprint of the unique. as a result of its age, it could possibly include imperfections reminiscent of marks, notations, marginalia and incorrect pages. simply because we think this paintings is culturally vital, we've made it to be had as a part of our dedication for shielding, retaining, and selling the world's literature in reasonable, top of the range, sleek variations which are actual to the unique paintings.
All through heritage, arguments for and opposed to the lifestyles of God were mostly constrained to philosophy and theology. meanwhile, technological know-how has sat at the sidelines and quietly watched this online game of phrases march up and down the sphere. although technological know-how has revolutionised each point of human lifestyles and vastly clarified our figuring out of the realm, by some means the idea has arisen that it has not anything to assert in regards to the danger of a splendid being, which a lot of humanity worships because the resource of all truth.
- Al-Qur'an - The Miracle of Miracles
- Psychology and the Perennial Philosophy: Studies in Comparative Religion
- Hegel’s God: A Counterfeit Double?
- Handbook of Religion and Social Institutions (Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research)
- Being Reasonable About Religion
- Attachment, Evolution, and the Psychology of Religion
Extra resources for A Perichoretic Model of the Church.The Trinitarian Ecclesiology of Dumitru Staniloae
44). To his mind, the old orthodoxy was discredited, but the prevailing liberal theologies seemed like poor substitutes for the faith he had lost. It took him nearly fifteen years to assimilate the experience. Sociology offered an attractive methodological respite from the problems of theology. Berger enrolled at the New School for Social Research, where he studied under Carl Mayer, Albert Salomon, and Alfred Schutz. He completed his doctorate in 1954, a year after he joined the US Army, having become an American citizen in 1952.
It held up our starting on what to both of us was a more important project – The Social Construction of Reality. He joined me as co-author, probably did most of the writing, and greatly speeded up the completion of the work. This little item from the history of the early days of our thinking and writing together intimates something about an aspect of our collaboration which is relevant to the question who wrote what. Berger wrote well and fast – and, as I mentioned earlier, he also typed extremely fast, with two fingers.
I also type fast, with one or two more fingers than Berger, but not only do I write slowly in the first place, I also spend much time in rewriting what I have written. I think that Berger generally did more of the actual writing than I did, also in the writing of The Social Construction of Reality. As for the thinking, I should say that with the exception of the first two chapters, we contributed equally to the development of the main propositions of the book. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to disentangle one individual’s contributions from those of the other in what was an ongoing dialogue, a dialogue that had started many years before we sat down to write the book.