托马斯·阿奎那论幸福观:基督论的缺陷

Q2 Arts and Humanities
TheoLogica Pub Date : 2018-10-30 DOI:10.14428/THL.V2I2.14733
Hans Boersma
{"title":"托马斯·阿奎那论幸福观:基督论的缺陷","authors":"Hans Boersma","doi":"10.14428/THL.V2I2.14733","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues Aquinas’s doctrine of the beatific vision suffers from a twofold christological deficit: (1) Aquinas rarely alludes to an eternally continuing link (whether as cause or as means) between Christ’s beatific vision and ours; and (2) for Aquinas the beatific vision is not theophanic, that is to say, for Aquinas, Christ is not the object of the beatific vision; instead, he maintains the divine essence constitutes the object.  Even if Aquinas were to have followed his “principle of the maximum” in the unfinished third part of the Summa and so had discussed Christ’s own beatific vision as the cause of the saints’ beatific vision, he would still have ended up with a christological deficit, inasmuch as Christ would still not be the means and the object of the saints’ beatific vision.  For a more christologically robust way forward, I draw on John Owen and several other Puritan theologians, who treat the beatific vision as the climactic theophany.","PeriodicalId":52326,"journal":{"name":"TheoLogica","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Thomas Aquinas on the Beatific Vision: A Christological Deficit\",\"authors\":\"Hans Boersma\",\"doi\":\"10.14428/THL.V2I2.14733\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues Aquinas’s doctrine of the beatific vision suffers from a twofold christological deficit: (1) Aquinas rarely alludes to an eternally continuing link (whether as cause or as means) between Christ’s beatific vision and ours; and (2) for Aquinas the beatific vision is not theophanic, that is to say, for Aquinas, Christ is not the object of the beatific vision; instead, he maintains the divine essence constitutes the object.  Even if Aquinas were to have followed his “principle of the maximum” in the unfinished third part of the Summa and so had discussed Christ’s own beatific vision as the cause of the saints’ beatific vision, he would still have ended up with a christological deficit, inasmuch as Christ would still not be the means and the object of the saints’ beatific vision.  For a more christologically robust way forward, I draw on John Owen and several other Puritan theologians, who treat the beatific vision as the climactic theophany.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TheoLogica\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TheoLogica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14428/THL.V2I2.14733\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TheoLogica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14428/THL.V2I2.14733","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,阿奎那关于幸福愿景的学说存在着双重的基督论缺陷:(1)阿奎那很少提到基督的幸福愿景与我们的幸福愿景之间存在着永恒的联系(无论是作为原因还是作为手段);(2)对阿奎那来说,幸福的愿景不是神性的,也就是说,对阿奎那来说,基督不是幸福愿景的对象;相反,他认为神圣的本质构成了客体。即使阿奎那在《总论》未完成的第三部分中遵循了他的“最大原则”,并讨论了基督自己的幸福愿景作为圣徒幸福愿景的原因,他仍然会以基督论的缺陷而结束,因为基督仍然不是圣徒幸福愿景的手段和对象。为了在基督论上更有力地向前推进,我引用了约翰·欧文和其他几位清教徒神学家的观点,他们把幸福的愿景视为高潮的神显。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Thomas Aquinas on the Beatific Vision: A Christological Deficit
This article argues Aquinas’s doctrine of the beatific vision suffers from a twofold christological deficit: (1) Aquinas rarely alludes to an eternally continuing link (whether as cause or as means) between Christ’s beatific vision and ours; and (2) for Aquinas the beatific vision is not theophanic, that is to say, for Aquinas, Christ is not the object of the beatific vision; instead, he maintains the divine essence constitutes the object.  Even if Aquinas were to have followed his “principle of the maximum” in the unfinished third part of the Summa and so had discussed Christ’s own beatific vision as the cause of the saints’ beatific vision, he would still have ended up with a christological deficit, inasmuch as Christ would still not be the means and the object of the saints’ beatific vision.  For a more christologically robust way forward, I draw on John Owen and several other Puritan theologians, who treat the beatific vision as the climactic theophany.
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
TheoLogica
TheoLogica Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
29
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信