书评:《通过十字架的神化:东方基督教的救赎神学》,作者:Khaled Anatolios

James J. Buckley
{"title":"书评:《通过十字架的神化:东方基督教的救赎神学》,作者:Khaled Anatolios","authors":"James J. Buckley","doi":"10.1177/10638512221076312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This remarkable book is for reading and studying—and (most unusually) praying—together. The title and subtitle are a clean summary of the thesis and approach. But they wisely reveal as well as hide: “deification”—“through the cross”? “Eastern”—and “Christian”? So I would make this required reading and studying and praying on salvation-theology for professors and pastors and anyone else who is reading thus far. But here I speak briefly as a provincial Roman Catholic theologian to give readers some small sense of the riches here. I begin with the sub-title and move toward the title. This is a “theology of salvation.” But it is written with “the distinctly modern befuddlement in the face of this central Christian doctrine” in mind (1). This includes befuddlement over the claim that Christ’s suffering and death save. It is exemplified in the marginalizing Christ’s death as expiatory sacrifice, the proliferation and fragmentation of un-normed “models” or “metaphors” of salvation (Aulen, Turner, Gunton, and McIntyre), and “the lack of experiential access to this doctrine” (23). The dismissal of clear Scriptural themes (such as expiatory sacrifice) for exemplifying the befuddlement is not as subtle a befuddlement as various proposals of un-normed “models” or “metaphors,” but each arises from and leads to the experiential vacuity of “salvation.” Anatolios’ alternative to these befuddlements is an “Eastern Christian” theology of salvation. What is this? In one of those rare moments when he calls attention to himself, Anatolios says he is a member of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, “which claims the same Byzantine dogmatic, liturgical, and spiritual heritage as the Byzantine Orthodox Churches, while also maintaining communion with the Church of Rome” (38, note 56). But “Eastern Christian” means a good deal more than this autobiographical sidenote. I have never read a book that so clearly and effectively criticizes Book Review","PeriodicalId":223812,"journal":{"name":"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology","volume":"100 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book Review: Deification Through the Cross: An Eastern Christian Theology of Salvation by Khaled Anatolios\",\"authors\":\"James J. Buckley\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10638512221076312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This remarkable book is for reading and studying—and (most unusually) praying—together. The title and subtitle are a clean summary of the thesis and approach. But they wisely reveal as well as hide: “deification”—“through the cross”? “Eastern”—and “Christian”? So I would make this required reading and studying and praying on salvation-theology for professors and pastors and anyone else who is reading thus far. But here I speak briefly as a provincial Roman Catholic theologian to give readers some small sense of the riches here. I begin with the sub-title and move toward the title. This is a “theology of salvation.” But it is written with “the distinctly modern befuddlement in the face of this central Christian doctrine” in mind (1). This includes befuddlement over the claim that Christ’s suffering and death save. It is exemplified in the marginalizing Christ’s death as expiatory sacrifice, the proliferation and fragmentation of un-normed “models” or “metaphors” of salvation (Aulen, Turner, Gunton, and McIntyre), and “the lack of experiential access to this doctrine” (23). The dismissal of clear Scriptural themes (such as expiatory sacrifice) for exemplifying the befuddlement is not as subtle a befuddlement as various proposals of un-normed “models” or “metaphors,” but each arises from and leads to the experiential vacuity of “salvation.” Anatolios’ alternative to these befuddlements is an “Eastern Christian” theology of salvation. What is this? In one of those rare moments when he calls attention to himself, Anatolios says he is a member of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, “which claims the same Byzantine dogmatic, liturgical, and spiritual heritage as the Byzantine Orthodox Churches, while also maintaining communion with the Church of Rome” (38, note 56). But “Eastern Christian” means a good deal more than this autobiographical sidenote. I have never read a book that so clearly and effectively criticizes Book Review\",\"PeriodicalId\":223812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology\",\"volume\":\"100 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10638512221076312\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pro Ecclesia: A Journal of Catholic and Evangelical Theology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10638512221076312","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这本非凡的书适合一起阅读和学习——以及(最不寻常的)祈祷。标题和副标题是对论文和方法的简洁总结。但他们明智地揭示和隐藏:“神化”-“通过十字架”?“东方”——“基督教”?所以我想把这本书定为教授、牧师和任何读过这本书的人的必读、学习和祷告。但在这里,我以一个外省的罗马天主教神学家的身份简要地说一下,让读者对这里的丰富有一些小小的了解。我从副标题开始讲到标题。这是一种“救赎神学”。但是,它写的时候,脑子里想着“面对基督教核心教义时明显的现代困惑”(1)。这包括对基督的受苦和死亡拯救这一说法的困惑。它体现在基督作为赎罪的牺牲而被边缘化,不规范的救赎“模式”或“隐喻”的扩散和分裂(艾伦、特纳、冈顿和麦金太尔),以及“缺乏对这一教义的经验接触”(23)。对明确的圣经主题(如赎罪祭)的摒弃,并不是像各种不规范的“模式”或“隐喻”那样微妙的困惑,但每一个都源于并导致了“救赎”的经验空虚。阿纳托利奥斯对这些困惑的替代是一种“东方基督教”的救赎神学。这是什么?阿纳托利奥斯说,他是梅尔基特希腊天主教会的一名成员,“该教会主张与拜占庭东正教教会相同的拜占庭教义、礼仪和精神遗产,同时也与罗马教会保持交流”(38,注释56)。但“东方基督徒”的含义远不止这篇自传式的旁注。我从来没有读过一本如此清晰有效地批评《书评》的书
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Book Review: Deification Through the Cross: An Eastern Christian Theology of Salvation by Khaled Anatolios
This remarkable book is for reading and studying—and (most unusually) praying—together. The title and subtitle are a clean summary of the thesis and approach. But they wisely reveal as well as hide: “deification”—“through the cross”? “Eastern”—and “Christian”? So I would make this required reading and studying and praying on salvation-theology for professors and pastors and anyone else who is reading thus far. But here I speak briefly as a provincial Roman Catholic theologian to give readers some small sense of the riches here. I begin with the sub-title and move toward the title. This is a “theology of salvation.” But it is written with “the distinctly modern befuddlement in the face of this central Christian doctrine” in mind (1). This includes befuddlement over the claim that Christ’s suffering and death save. It is exemplified in the marginalizing Christ’s death as expiatory sacrifice, the proliferation and fragmentation of un-normed “models” or “metaphors” of salvation (Aulen, Turner, Gunton, and McIntyre), and “the lack of experiential access to this doctrine” (23). The dismissal of clear Scriptural themes (such as expiatory sacrifice) for exemplifying the befuddlement is not as subtle a befuddlement as various proposals of un-normed “models” or “metaphors,” but each arises from and leads to the experiential vacuity of “salvation.” Anatolios’ alternative to these befuddlements is an “Eastern Christian” theology of salvation. What is this? In one of those rare moments when he calls attention to himself, Anatolios says he is a member of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church, “which claims the same Byzantine dogmatic, liturgical, and spiritual heritage as the Byzantine Orthodox Churches, while also maintaining communion with the Church of Rome” (38, note 56). But “Eastern Christian” means a good deal more than this autobiographical sidenote. I have never read a book that so clearly and effectively criticizes Book Review
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Catholicity and the Catholic Church: Protestant Concerns and (Roman) Catholic Perspectives Supremely Simple Trinity and Contemporary “Natural Theology”: Bonaventure Beyond Jenson and Plotinus Editor’s Note The Grammar of Salvation: The Function of Trinitarian Theology in the Works of Karen Kilby and Robert Jenson Reasons to Say Farewell
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1