Book Reviews by Matthew R Boulter
Published in _Pro Ecclesia_, Summer 2014.
Papers by Matthew R Boulter
Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses, 2023
According to the most penetrating twentieth-century scholarship on the topic, the notion of progr... more According to the most penetrating twentieth-century scholarship on the topic, the notion of progress that is central to the modern project has roots in some controversial theological moves of a twelfth-century mystic and monk, Joachim of Fiore 1. On this reading, Joachim's new Christian vision of history created the soil from which, in a long process that Eric Voegelin famously described as the "immanentization of the eschaton" 2 , the modern conception of progress was able to grow. Given this genealogy of the secular project of progress, any Christian response to it will have to be formulated in dialogue with the theology of Joachim of Fiore; we are dealing, to a significant extent, with an inner-Christian debate that must precede any attempt to tackle the issue in its secular form. The three theologians mentioned in the title of this article all understood this challenge, which is why they have offered significant responses to Joachimism. Joseph Ratzinger devoted his Habilitationsschrift to the issue. This did not go well, as the controversy surrounding the work almost cost Ratzinger his academic career. Henri de Lubac became so convinced that neo-Joachimism represents the central threat to the post-conciliar church that he published two large volumes on the subject, under the title La postérité spirituelle de Joachim de Flore. John Milbank, for his part, has written less voluminously, but no less decisively, on the subject of neo-Joachimism, which he recently contrasted negatively with the more Augustinian approach of Charles Péguy. Our intent in this article is to compare these three treatments, especially on the question of what they entail for their respective authors' views on the nature of the church in relation to modernity. What is at stake here is an authentically Christian notion of progress, one that does not immanetize the eschaton while acknowledging that the Christian faith entails a call to a better future in this life.
Ephemerides Theologicae Lovanienses: Louvain Journal of Theology and Canon Law, 2023
Writing his Habilitationsschrift as a young man in the late 1950’s, future Pontiff Joseph Ratzing... more Writing his Habilitationsschrift as a young man in the late 1950’s, future Pontiff Joseph Ratzinger opined that, when St. Bonaventure composed his Collationes in Hexaëmeron in the spring of 1273, not since St. Augustine’s De Civitate Dei contra Paganos had the world seen such a ground-breaking work on the logos of history. Indeed, Ratzinger has much in common with his thirteenth-century predecessor: both led tumultuous lives intellectually and practically, lives which demanded prudence in the extreme. Such vicissitudes, in fact, impacted and shaped their respective theologies of history in riveting ways. Both, moreover, faced challenges coming from both science and novel eschatologies. At issue in Bonaventure’s historical work is the widespread assumption, rooted in the newly “rediscovered” Aristotle, that history is unintelligible. For Bonaventure, deeply committed to historia salutis narrated in Scripture, this stance is however unacceptable. Here I show how mythos mediates the di...
Estuios: Filosofía, Historia, Letras , 2021
Philipp Rosemann & I describe the view of three towering theological thinkers (Joseph Ratzinger, ... more Philipp Rosemann & I describe the view of three towering theological thinkers (Joseph Ratzinger, Henri de Lubac, and John Milbank) vis-à-vis the legacy of medieval lightening rod Joachín de Fiore, whose controversial eschatological views have continued to ripple through the culture all the way into our own contemporary epoch.
Aquinas on Anger: Christian Philosophical & Theological Perspectives on Anger , 2021
In this book chapter I expound Thomas Aquinas' views on anger, based on this discussions containe... more In this book chapter I expound Thomas Aquinas' views on anger, based on this discussions contained in the _Summa Theologiae_.
Conference Presentations by Matthew R Boulter
This essay, which has been submitted for publication, was also a presentation I gave at Villanova... more This essay, which has been submitted for publication, was also a presentation I gave at Villanova's PMR Conference in 2017. I plan to include it (in revised form) as a chapter in my dissertation.
Ph. D. Dissertation by Matthew R Boulter
Writing his Habilitationsschrift as a young man in the late 1950’s, future Pontiff Joseph Ratzing... more Writing his Habilitationsschrift as a young man in the late 1950’s, future Pontiff Joseph Ratzinger opined that, when St. Bonaventure composed his Collationes in Hexaëmeron in the spring of 1273, not since St. Augustine’s De Civitate Dei contra Paganos had the world seen such a ground-breaking work on the logos of history.
Indeed, Ratzinger has much in common with his thirteenth-century predecessor: both led tumultuous lives intellectually and practically, lives which demanded prudence in the extreme. Such vicissitudes, in fact, impacted and shaped their respective theologies of history in riveting ways. Both, moreover, faced challenges coming from both science and novel eschatologies.
At issue in Bonaventure’s historical work is the widespread assumption, rooted in the newly “rediscovered” Aristotle, that history is unintelligible. For Bonaventure, deeply committed to historia salutis narrated in Scripture, this stance is however unacceptable. Here I show how mythos mediates the difference between science and history, yielding a non- positivistic approach to history.
But this history: is it static or progressive? Building on the dynamics of Plato’s Divided Line, I show that the days of creation, narrated by Bonaventure, structure both history and thought. Progressive though it be, on this journey the destination nevertheless returns back to its origin in a non-identical repetition ending on a higher plane. Yet the journey, crucially, must encompass the dimension of human affect, for both thinkers insist that, in order to reach our divine destination, our passions must be transfigured.
In the end these common features of mind and history must apply to the whole, on the largest possible scale. If history is a story, it has beginning and eschatological end. In the spirit of Bonaventure and Ratzinger, I insist that history and hence eschatology, finally, have a recognizable form.
What is the logos of history? It turns out that it is mythos.
Uploads
Book Reviews by Matthew R Boulter
Papers by Matthew R Boulter
Conference Presentations by Matthew R Boulter
Ph. D. Dissertation by Matthew R Boulter
Indeed, Ratzinger has much in common with his thirteenth-century predecessor: both led tumultuous lives intellectually and practically, lives which demanded prudence in the extreme. Such vicissitudes, in fact, impacted and shaped their respective theologies of history in riveting ways. Both, moreover, faced challenges coming from both science and novel eschatologies.
At issue in Bonaventure’s historical work is the widespread assumption, rooted in the newly “rediscovered” Aristotle, that history is unintelligible. For Bonaventure, deeply committed to historia salutis narrated in Scripture, this stance is however unacceptable. Here I show how mythos mediates the difference between science and history, yielding a non- positivistic approach to history.
But this history: is it static or progressive? Building on the dynamics of Plato’s Divided Line, I show that the days of creation, narrated by Bonaventure, structure both history and thought. Progressive though it be, on this journey the destination nevertheless returns back to its origin in a non-identical repetition ending on a higher plane. Yet the journey, crucially, must encompass the dimension of human affect, for both thinkers insist that, in order to reach our divine destination, our passions must be transfigured.
In the end these common features of mind and history must apply to the whole, on the largest possible scale. If history is a story, it has beginning and eschatological end. In the spirit of Bonaventure and Ratzinger, I insist that history and hence eschatology, finally, have a recognizable form.
What is the logos of history? It turns out that it is mythos.
Indeed, Ratzinger has much in common with his thirteenth-century predecessor: both led tumultuous lives intellectually and practically, lives which demanded prudence in the extreme. Such vicissitudes, in fact, impacted and shaped their respective theologies of history in riveting ways. Both, moreover, faced challenges coming from both science and novel eschatologies.
At issue in Bonaventure’s historical work is the widespread assumption, rooted in the newly “rediscovered” Aristotle, that history is unintelligible. For Bonaventure, deeply committed to historia salutis narrated in Scripture, this stance is however unacceptable. Here I show how mythos mediates the difference between science and history, yielding a non- positivistic approach to history.
But this history: is it static or progressive? Building on the dynamics of Plato’s Divided Line, I show that the days of creation, narrated by Bonaventure, structure both history and thought. Progressive though it be, on this journey the destination nevertheless returns back to its origin in a non-identical repetition ending on a higher plane. Yet the journey, crucially, must encompass the dimension of human affect, for both thinkers insist that, in order to reach our divine destination, our passions must be transfigured.
In the end these common features of mind and history must apply to the whole, on the largest possible scale. If history is a story, it has beginning and eschatological end. In the spirit of Bonaventure and Ratzinger, I insist that history and hence eschatology, finally, have a recognizable form.
What is the logos of history? It turns out that it is mythos.