What book are you reading?

[ryland]

All the Pretty Horses by Cormac McCarthy.

Great book!

I'm looking forward to it!

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

An Introduction to Vatican II as an Ongoing Theological Event by Matthew Levering

[durangopipe]

+JMJ+

An Introduction to Vatican II as an Ongoing Theological Event by Matthew Levering

Love the subtitle, Wos.

[coco]

+JMJ+

An Introduction to Vatican II as an Ongoing Theological Event by Matthew Levering

I would like to hear your take on this one when you are done.

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

An Introduction to Vatican II as an Ongoing Theological Event by Matthew Levering

I would like to hear your take on this one when you are done.

I'm only about halfway through, but it doesn't seem hard to gauge, even at this point.

It's a rather basic, primarily methodological work — obviously meant to inspire further applicational studies — which employs B16's "Hermeneutic of Reform" (i.e. of "renewal in continuity"), against flatly reductive readings of either unhinged dynamism (Progressivism) or lifeless stasism (Reactionaryism) so as to hew close to the living, organic and crucifyingly challenging interpretive process which illustrates the only possible Catholic reading strategy.

IOW, what's not to like?

[ryland]

+JMJ+

An Introduction to Vatican II as an Ongoing Theological Event by Matthew Levering

I would like to hear your take on this one when you are done.

I'm only about halfway through, but it doesn't seem hard to gauge, even at this point.

It's a rather basic, primarily methodological work — obviously meant to inspire further applicational studies — which employs B16's "Hermeneutic of Reform" (i.e. of "renewal in continuity"), against flatly reductive readings of either unhinged dynamism (Progressivism) or lifeless stasism (Reactionaryism) so as to hew close to the living, organic and crucifyingly challenging interpretive process which illustrates the only possible Catholic reading strategy.

IOW, what's not to like?

Wos, I applaud your skill at reading! I used to think I read a lot.

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Wos, I applaud your skill at reading! I used to think I read a lot.

Having a life gets in the way. If you currently so burdened, ditch it ASAP.

[coco]

+JMJ+

Wos, I applaud your skill at reading! I used to think I read a lot.

Having a life gets in the way. If you currently so burdened, ditch it ASAP.

[ryland]

[Hovannes]

+JMJ+

An Introduction to Vatican II as an Ongoing Theological Event by Matthew Levering

I would like to hear your take on this one when you are done.

I'm only about halfway through, but it doesn't seem hard to gauge, even at this point.

It's a rather basic, primarily methodological work — obviously meant to inspire further applicational studies — which employs B16's "Hermeneutic of Reform" (i.e. of "renewal in continuity"), against flatly reductive readings of either unhinged dynamism (Progressivism) or lifeless stasism (Reactionaryism) so as to hew close to the living, organic and crucifyingly challenging interpretive process which illustrates the only possible Catholic reading strategy.

IOW, what's not to like?

What the author's take on Henri DeLubac & Newman on the development of Church Doctrine?

[Hovannes]

The Fragility of Order by Weigel

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

What the author's take on Henri DeLubac & Newman on the development of Church Doctrine?

AFAIK, de Lubac has no specific (at least, no novel) theory of development. Nothing uniquely Lubacian.

And Newman has been pretty much digested across the mainline schools. Who is seriously contesting Newman, these days? Maybe there are debates, but if so, they've certainly not been on my radar.

So based on that, I would wager that, by default, he follows Newman.

[Hovannes]

+JMJ+

What the author's take on Henri DeLubac & Newman on the development of Church Doctrine?

AFAIK, de Lubac has no specific (at least, no novel) theory of development. Nothing uniquely Lubacian.

And Newman has been pretty much digested across the mainline schools. Who is seriously contesting Newman, these days? Maybe there are debates, but if so, they've certainly not been on my radar.

So based on that, I would wager that, by default, he follows Newman.

True enough, de Lubac followed Newman, and took exception to Tuyaerts and Boyer

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

What the author's take on Henri DeLubac & Newman on the development of Church Doctrine?

AFAIK, de Lubac has no specific (at least, no novel) theory of development. Nothing uniquely Lubacian.

And Newman has been pretty much digested across the mainline schools. Who is seriously contesting Newman, these days? Maybe there are debates, but if so, they've certainly not been on my radar.

So based on that, I would wager that, by default, he follows Newman.

True enough, de Lubac followed Newman, and took exception to Tuyaerts and Boyer

To clarify per your question, I meant: "I'd wager that, by default, Levering follows Newman".

[Hovannes]

Thanks for setting me straight.

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Christ's Fulfillment of Torah and Temple: Salvation according to Thomas Aquinas by Matthew Levering

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Jewish-Christian Dialogue and the Life of Wisdom: Engagements with the Theology of David Novak by Matthew Levering

[coco]

[wosbald]

+JMJ+

Predestination: Biblical and Theological Paths by Matthew Levering

[Nature of a Man]

I'm currently reading some books related to music therapy (I'm legally on disability due to mentally overworking myself from my previous jobs and being diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, and my therapist recommended this for me).

I found a good book on Openlibrary.com related to classical music and its relaxing effects on the mind, and I'm enjoying it quite a bit.