Doctoral Oral Compre Exam Answers

8/12/2019 Doctoral Oral Compre Exam Answers

1/32


2/32

acrament is a sacred reality that e9ects what is signi7ed. *hat is

signi7ed is G(A8E: the presence of man6s participation in the life ofGod.

As a -isible sign 3acramentum2antum)$ the acrament of Marriagehas its own matter and form.

o 2he Matter is the gi-ing and accepting of the parties as

husband and wife4o 2he &orm is the external manifestation of consent.

o 2he 2hing igni7ed is the union of 8hrist and the 8hurch

o 2he upernatural E9ect is Grace 3(es 2antum).

2he ??).

;. Explain brie@y the 8anonical Impediments to a acramental Marriage.a. 1>B C Ageb. 1>#D Impotencyc. 1>?D 0re-ious bondligamen 3bond)d. 1>FD isparity of cult:

Example: D a catholic with a nonDbapti=ed or whose baptism isnot accepted by the 8hurch4

D Mixed Marriage 3not an impediment) A catholic with

another bapti=ed but not a catholic4

e. 2he minister needs a dispensation to administer marriage in case the

parties su9er from disparity of cult. A dispensation means relaxation of

the law.f. 1>D acred 'rderg. 1>D 0ublic and perpetual -ow of chastityh. 1>HD Abductioni. 1>H>D 8rime


3/32

. 1>H1D 8onsanguinity5. 1>H"D Anityl. 1>HBD 0ublic 0roprietym. 1>1"D /egal relationship

8. Explain brie@y the efects of Matrimonial 8onsent.. Explain brie@y the 8anonical &orm of Marriage.

#$ 321 Canon &a' on Consecrate- &i.e(s)r* +aul * "uison

1. Explain the ierarchical 8onstitution of the 8hurch.". Enumerate and explain brie@y the rights and obligations of the faithful.B. *hat are the -arious forms of (eligious /ifeJ Explain their similarities and

di9erences.

#$ 322Contextuali/e-&itur)y(s)r* +aul * "uison

1. *hat are the canonical implications of the acrament of ;aptismJ". *hat do you mean by %8ommunio in acrisJB. Explain the nature of public liturgy as a public celebration.

#$ 336*2#heolo)yo. the $uman o-yev* Orlan-o * n)elia, *#*D*

1* Explain the three 34 Ori)inal $uman Experience*

a* Ori)inal olitu-e

2he man is alone with God and enoys a uniKue relationship with God.

o while God created all the other animals in the Garden ust as he

created the man$ only the man is able to tal5 and listen to God.

God spea5s with us in a totally uniKue way. *e are di9erent from the

animals.

*e are uniKuely alone with God C we stand before God.

*e are in the presence of God. Lnli5e animals$ we relate directly with God.

*e ha-e a spirit that enables us to do this$ and by it we can 5now and

lo-e God$ the world$ and oursel-es

*e become conscious of 5nowing things and reali=e how we ha-ede-eloped as persons.

It is uniKue to us as human beings. 2hrough this fundamental or original

experience$ we come to sense the uniKueness of human life.

*e reali=e that we are able to 5now God$ the world 3other people) and

oursel-es.

*e begin to reali=e our personal identity.


4/32

5* Ori)inal nity

God created woman out of man6s rib. 2hey are of the same essence$ of

the same origin. 3*hy from a ribJ)

Man reali=es that the woman has a body li5e his. 2his body while similar is

di9erent from his.

e reali=es she is a person. o$ the man decides to be one with the woman.

e lea-es his former life and becomes one @esh with her. 2his is 'riginal

Lnity.

2he beauty and mystery of sexual di9erence speci7cally re-eals man and

woman6s call to communion

2he meaning of man6s original unity expresses itself as an o-ercoming of

the frontier of solitude and at the same time as an armation ofe-erything in solitude that constitutes man. 32'; H:")

'riginal unity o-ercomes man6s solitude without a woman 3and woman6s

solitude without man).

2he experience of original unity arms their solitude in the sense thatthey di9er from the animals because their union also di9ers essentiallyfrom that of animals.

As persons$ both man and woman ha-e selfD5nowledge and selfD

determination. 2hey are both subects in the world and are conscious ofthe meaning of their bodies.

ohn 0aul spea5s not only of %double unity but also of a %double solitude.

'nly two persons are capable of rendering to each other that biblical help.'nly two persons are capable of lo-e.

%ouble solitude then is the indispensable foundation of original unity. Itis also the sure foundation of the true eKuality of man and woman.

%In this communion of persons$ the whole depth of the original solitude of

man N is perfectly ensured and$ at the same time$ this solitude ispermeated and enlarged in a mar-elous way by the gift of the other.32'; 1:?)

2heir uniKueness as persons is not diminished in becoming %one with the

other. 2hrough communion man and woman li-e together$ with$ and foreach other in such a way that they redisco-er themsel-es$ arming allthat it means to be a person$ arming %e-erything in solitude thatconstitutes man.

If men and women are to 7nd themsel-es$ the solitude of e-ery %he or

%she must lead to the communion of a human %we through the selfDgi-ing of one to the other.

2he original unity and reciprocal enrichment of the sexes$ therefore$ mar5sOthe whole perspecti-e of 3man6s) history$ including the history ofsal-ation. 32'; 1>:1)

*hat in essence is 'riginal LnityJ It consists in: a) A88E02I+G and b)

GI


5/32

ohn 0aul II says this experience of unityis truly signi7cant because both

Adam and E-e gain a new sense of their own dignity. 2hey feel andexperience life in a new way. 2his radical experience of gi-ing andaccepting leads them to new life. 2hey are di9erent as a result of theexperience.

c* Ori)inal 7a8e-ness

is a symbol of freedom in communication

it is essential for the perfection of 'riginal Lnity. &or lo-e to be real$ it

must be freely gi-en and freely accepted.

o Adam and E-e were free C free from inner and outer restrictions. Adamand E-e experienced no barriers or diculties in their communication andlife together.

God did not create barriers to communication or diculties for people who

are trying to form friendships. 2hose barriers come from another source C'riginal in.

;oo5 of Genesis: %2hey were both na5ed$ and were not ashamed.: 2hey

had no inhibitions about their own bodies or the body of the other. As witha child running around na5ed$ young children ha-e this experience insome way. 2hey exhibit a degree of freedom 3not shame) about theirbodies.

o the experience of 'riginal +a5edness goes hand in hand with freedom$

which is a reality we ha-e doubtlessly experienced.

Pet freedom is deeper than mere choice. N &reedom means deciding tosurrender to the lo-e of another. 2hus it means choosing to be a betterperson by accepting this lo-e and the choices that go with it.

&reedom 7nds its fullest expression and meaning when we ma5e of

oursel-es a gift for others. It cannot be compared to the experience of young children who ha-e yet

to de-elop a sense of shame.

It cannot be compared also to shamelessness.

o A shameless na5edness is immodest.

o It in-ol-es a lac5 or suppression of shame when shame is rightly

called for 3er B:"DB)o hame in one6s na5edness is called for when na5edness poses a

threat to the dignity of the person.o 'riginal experience of na5edness completely lac5ed shame because

being na5ed posed no threat to the 7rst couple6s dignity.o they saw the body as the re-elation of the person and hisher

dignity.

'(IGI+A/ +A,E+E

D is precisely the experience of full consciousness of the meaning and

dignity of the body.

D there is no fear of standing na5ed before the other


6/32

D both man and woman recei-e from the other the armation and

acceptance they long for C which correspond perfectly with their

dignity.

'(IGI+A/ +A,E+E A A&&I(MA2I'+ '& 2E 0E('+

1) It testi7es to their authentic %communication to the purity of reciprocal

selfDgi-ing.

") It signi7es the original good of the di-ine -ision.

B) It signi7es the whole simplicity and fullness of this -ision:

D shows the Opure6 -alue of man as male and female

D shows the %pure6 -alue of the body and of sex 32'; 1B:1)

#) 2he more we ponder the meaning of original -ision of na5edness C this

%original innocence of 5nowledge C the more the reality of sin and lust

ma5e us want to weep.?) %2he garments of our misery 37g lea-es C Gregory of +yssa) constantly

reminds us of the tragedy of ha-ing lost sight of what God created our

bodies to re-eal C a) spiritual mystery of our humanity4 b) mystery

of his divinity

2* (an as a su59ect in elation

3* (an in the -imension o. )i.t

#$ 336*3 #he (oral #heolo)y an- Christic pirituality o. $umanexualityev* Orlan-o * n)elia, *#*D*

1. Elaborate why human sexuality is a gift and a tas5. *hy human sexualityis a means towards holiness in life.

". *hy does contraception of the use of arti7cial birth control -iolates theplan of God for marriage and family lifeJ


7/32

#$ 331 Eschatolo)y an- #heolo)y o. $istory+ro.* Ernel D* alla/a, #h*(*, +hD*

1. Discuss an- explain polemically, apolo)etically an- irenically the.ollo'in) eschatolo)ical topics:

1*1* #he uestion o. eschatolo)y in philosophy

It is worth to be considered that theology by -irtue of its reasonabilityis basically philosophical. ence the coherence of thought which is basicallyphilosophical in nature is always at the base of theological argumentation.2his premise is true e-en with the theological topic about eschatology. 0riorand alongside the de-elopment of 8hristian theology is the philosophicalde-elopment of thoughts related to eschatology such as the Kuestion aboutthe soul$ immortality and new world order. e-eral philosophers presentedtheir philosophical thoughts on this subect. 2hrough their thoughts we maytheori=e the perspecti-e of philosophy about eschatology.

2he di9erent philosophical thoughts generally classify life into the

physical and spiritual states. 0lato tal5s about the soul which is the spiritualdimension of man to apprehend the Good. /eibni= spea5s of theimmortalsoul component of man so that he is able to percei-e what is goodand ourney towards the di-ine. ,ant tal5s about immortality which can bereached through moral faith. Moral faith is li-ed concretely through practicalreason. 2he stoics tal5s of the existence of God immersed in the naturalorder of things in the world. Amidst the cyclical reDcreation of the world$ manregains his immortality when he is with God through oneness with nature.


8/32

2he ;uddhists tal5s about the series of spiritual rebirth of the physical being$the highest form of rebirth is +ir-ana in which the being 7nally loses itsphysical state but remains eternally spiritual and becomes one withe-erything. 2he physical state is limited and transitory while the spiritualstate is immortal and permanent.

2he di9erent philosophical thoughts are di-ided as far as the location ofthe spiritual state is concerned. 0lato accounts of the eudaimonia$ a state ofperfection that exist in the le-el of form and from which all materialexistences are ust limited manifestations thereof. 2he world of spirit issuperior and detached from the world of matter. *hile /eibni= agrees with0lato that being is composed of matter and form but li5e Aristotle$ heemphasi=es importance on the material form. %2here can be no form withoutmatter. 2he most important in man is his physicality from where he shallneed the soul to percei-e transcendentally. 2he soulspirit cannot existseparate from the body in as much as the form cannot exist independent

from matter. Matter is essential$ it is from where the world of the spiritformis generated from. ,ant presupposes the existence of a supreme being whichis the icon of immortality. Man is called to ha-e moral faith as a way towardsimmortality.

%+ot only did the philosophers re@ect on the future of the indi-idual4 theyalso thought deeply on the future of the world 32he octrine of the /ast2hings).&or the stoics$ the spiritual state in enshrined in the natural order ofthings. God is enshrined in nature. A component of human life is the soul.2hrough the soul$ the human being is able to percei-e the di-ine and therebyli-e in communion with nature. 2he ;uddhists argue of the spirit that go-erns

physical life forms and of a perfect spiritual state % the +ir-ana that is theultimate end of all beings. 2he eschatological hope is expressed in terms ofthe depth of the ethics and morality of the physical and rational being whichde7nes the criteria for the reunion of the physical with the spiritual state.

1*2* #he uestion o. eschatolo)y in reli)ion

Among the general features of religions are their theologies ofeschatology. &aith is an essential component in any religious belief. &aith isalways eschatological. owe-er$ as far as the content of eschatology isconcerned$ di9erent religions -ary. 2his obser-ation is generally -alid in as

much as religions also -ary according to their faith. A general loo5 at the fourmaor religions in the world may be enough to pro-e this contention.

+ir-ana is among the famous eschatological states promoted by

u--hism. +ir-ana refers to the perfect and eternal spiritual state that

someone may reach after series of spiritual and yet physical deaths and

rebirths. 2he theology of +ir-ana assumes that all li-ing beings are spirited.


9/32

+ir-ana is the highest spiritual rebirth that a li-ing being may attain through

proper obser-ance of the teachings of ;uddha$ a human 7gure who is the

founder of ;uddhism. Lnli5e the lower forms of rebirth in which the

spiritsoul is re-erted to a di9erent life form$ the subect in the state of

+ir-ana totally loses its physicality but instead remains eternally spiritual.

$in-uism tal5s about Mos5ha or selfDreali=ation. Mos5ha happens when an

enlightened human being is freed from the cycle of lifeDandDdeath 3the

endless cycle of death and reincarnation) and comes into a state of

completeness. e then becomes one with the ;hraman or God. ;y then has

attained the le-el of selfDreali=ation. Mos5ha is an eternal spiritual existence.

2he way to enlightenment is through prayer and consideration of the

teachings of the ;rahmans. (ohame-anism introduces the sensual

paradise. After death$ the belie-er in Islam is placed in a sensual paradise.

ensual in the sense that: the perfectness of life in this paradise is pro-ided

in the most human way of satisfying the human external senses through-arious human means highlighting sex and other sensuous pleasures. As the

sense of satisfaction is mainly designed for the male born$ the women are

conseKuently relegated to ser-ices that satisfy the males. 2he way to be

counted in the paradise is to follow the teachings of prophet Mohamed$ the

founder of Mohamedanism.

Generally$ these three religions and all other religions as a generalobser-ation profess their beliefs that human beings are spirited with souland that the spirit sur-i-es e-en after the human experience of corporeal

death. It is through the spiritual 3rather than the material) existence that theeschatological hope is attained. 2he ourney of the spirit is assured becauseof the faith that God exists and meets the deepest hope for eschatology. 2hepossibility of the spirit for total union with the di-ine is so much in@uencedby the moral integrity of the person when he was still physically ali-e. 2hemoral norms are de7ned by religion. Christianity con7rms of practicingthese faith expressions as well. Amidst these similarities$ 8hristianity has itsown peculiarities. 2he God that the 8hristians recogni=e to pro-ide forsal-ation is the same God who pro-ides at the time of creation. According tothe 8hristian faith$ the period for the reali=ation of the eschatological hopemay come not only after death but also e-en at the time when the belie-er is

still ali-e such as the case of the second coming of esus or the 7nalreali=ation of the ,ingdom of God. (elated to the 8hristian theology of the,ingdom of God$ sal-ation is a reality not only in a separate world order as inthe case of Mohamedanism but also in the midst of the world as the casemay be during the 7nal transformation of the world into God6s ,ingdom.*hile the 8hristian religion similar to its nonD8hristian counterparts considersthe prophets and the spiritual leaders as teachers of faith and morals$ the8hristian religion has a deeper source of its teachings: the *ord of God$ the


10/32

*ord made Man. esus himself is the *ord of eternal life. 2o the 8hristians$there is no other way except through 8hrist4 there is no other truth except8hrist himself.

1*3* #he relation o. eschatolo)y to the rest o. Christian

-o)matics ecclesiastical.ormulation o. the Christian .aith4

%Eschatology is the crown and capstone of dogmatic theology4ogmatics is a normati-e science in which we aim at absolute$ rather thanmere historical truth 32he octrine of the /ast 2hings). 2his means that thedi9erent subects of ogmatic 2heology li5ewise concerns eschatology. 2hewebDbased article entitled the octrine of the /ast 2hings explains furtherthat 2heology itself has an eschatological dimension in as much as itanswers the Kuestion of how God is 7nally perfectly glori7ed in the wor5 ofis hands$ and how the counsel of God is fully reali=ed. Eschatology is

anthropological: it answers the Kuestion about the meaning and purpose oflife and its 7nal destiny. Eschatology is 8hristological: it answers how thecross became the throne of -ictory and the message of sal-ation.Eschatology is ecclesiological: it pro-ides the 8hurch with hopes for thetransformation of the cosmos into the ,ingdom of God. &inally$ Eschatology ispneumatological: it answers how the oly pirit animates us to li-e the faithand brings the world into a perfect cosmic transformation.

2* Explain an- cite the eschatolo)ical stren)th an- 'ea8nesses o.the mo-ern treatment o. eschatolo)y

2*1* #he &i5eral pproach

2he 1Hth century was mar5ed with the in@ux of scienti7c theories$growth of natural sciences alongside critical studies of the cripture. 2heparadigm of 5nowing the truth has shifted from metaphysical toepistemological and historical. 2here was shift in theologi=ing fromconser-ati-e to liberal. 2he truth that was once considered absolute hasbecome relati-e. 2he theocentric core of the truth before has becomeanthropocentric. If before$ truth was approached through faith$ in this period$truth is approached through reason. 2he faith in particular and the theologyin general were endangered of being uprooted or percei-ed from an

erroneous perspecti-e. 2he result was li5eralism: this is an attempt toretain the 8hristian faith while bringing the scienti7c approach to religiousmatters.

In@uenced by the shift of apprehending the truth$ the historical methodwas used to interpret the ;ible and understand esus. 2his has reduced theemphasis in 5nowing the nature of 8hrist from the di-ine to the humandimension. 2he liberals stressed the present character of the 5ingdom4 the


11/32

,ingdom of God is not far remo-ed either spatially or temporarily. It issomething near which humans can enter. It reigns not from without but fromwithin the human hearts. It is percei-ed not as an external reality but as arealm of righteousness. 2o anyone who belie-es and li-es with the faith$ the,ingdom has come. 2he crux of the coming of the ,ingdom has been at

hand. 2he 5ernel or core of the ,ingdom has been handed on. *hile theliberals still belie-e that esus will come again in bodily form at the end ofage to establish his 5ingdom but such e-ent is merely the hus5 within whichis contained the true message$ the 5ernel.

*ith due recognition to the e9ort of this theology to sa-e the faithfrom the e-ils of empiricism$ it was found lac5ing in some ways: 31) Itsinterpretation of the ,ingdom as an inner and spiritual change within thehuman hearts has o-erloo5ed the following: 3a) the eschatological elementsin the traditions about esus$ 3b) the teachings of esus about the ,ingdom asan expression of an ideal social order. 3") 2he messianic ,ingdom as a

udeaoD8hristian concept was ne-er a subecti-e$ inward or spiritual realmbut was always pictured as a territory into which one enters$ a land in whichone has a share$ or as a treasure which comes down from hea-en.

/iberal theology has been able to cut an edge as it has upheld the faithamidst progress in the 7eld of science$ politics and economics. It hassucceeded in preaching the triumph of God o-er e-il blended with thedoctrine of progress. Its challenge is to continue 8hristiani=ing the socialorder as the ground of the ,ingdom rather than %an introspected eternalnow without demeaning the signi7cance of the second coming.

2*2* l5ert ch'eit/er: Demo-erni/e- Eschatolo)y

2he theology of chweit=er is a critical de-elopment from the liberalinterpretations and reconstructions of the life of esus. Against thepresentation of the liberals about esus who had little to say about the future$chweit=er argued that esus thoughts and actions were permeated by thethoroughgoing eschatology as this culminates in his future coming. *ith this$he coined the term %consistent eschatology. According to him$ the future3rather than the "ndcoming) is contained in the original plan of sal-ation4 it isthe centrality of the esus ministry and eschatological preaching.

chweit=er describes the future 5ingdom as sudden in its coming.chweit=er found many +ew 2estament references to apparently show that1stDcentury 8hristians belie-ed literally in the imminent ful7llment of thepromise of the *orldQs ending$ within the lifetime of esusQs original followers3Matt. "#:"F4 /5. "1:"BM5. H:11). chweit=er also belie-ed that the futurecoming is discontinuous from human history$ will be radically supernatural asit shall be introduced through cosmic catastrophe that one should prepare byrepenting. e noted that in the gospel of Mar5$ esus spea5s of a


12/32

RtribulationR$ with his coming in the clouds with great power and gloryR 3Mar51B:FD).

chweiter emphasi=es that the eschatological reality is a future e-ent.2his future can be so imminent. e then stresses on the li-eliness of the

person6s faith$ the rootedness of life in ethics and morality. E-ery belie-er iscalled to a life of spirituality. Lnfortunately$ chweiter6s eschatology isdetached from history$ it starts from the future. chweit=er6s theology isclothed with subecti-ism. is concept of sal-ation is highly personal ratherthan communitarian.

2*3* C*$* Do--: eali/e- Eschastolo)y

2he term %(eali=ed as used in this theology means achie-ed$accomplished$ done or 7nished. 2he element of time is -ery crucial inunderstanding this eschatological concept: the action point of the sentence

at the time it was stated and the status of the action which was to bedeli-ered now or in relation any ad-erb of time which the sentence maycontain. 'n this premise$ 8.. odd accounts that there ha-e beeneschatological statements that ha-e been accomplished already. ence$ theyare considered as reali=ed eschatology. May I cite a few examples: thehidden rule of God that was spo5en of in the 'ld 2estament has been reali=edin the +ew 2estament4 if anyone is in 8hrist he is a new creation 3II 8or. ?:).odd saw that the new age is here4 God has established the ,ingdom. 2heeschatology of the 'ld 2estament has been reali=ed in the ministry of esus.2he future of the 'ld 2estament prophecies has become present. esus hascome$ there is no more "ndcoming.

Eschatology therefore is a matter of the present. 2he future is now4 thefuture had come or begun. ence$ there is an importance of loo5ing bac5rather than loo5ing forward. owe-er$ this eschatological concept fails toconsider the second coming of 8hrist. /i5ewise$ it fails to Kualify that whilethe ,ingdom has already come$ it is not yet fully reali=ed. uch is ano-erstatement of the presentD the day of the /ord has already come.

2*


13/32

the dead is utterly inconcei-able$R he admitted. &or him$ the Easter e-ent isnot something that happened to the esus of history$ but something thathappened to the disciples$ who came to belie-e that esus had beenresurrected. Moreo-er$ the resurrected esus is indeed a li-ing presence inthe li-es of 8hristians. ;ultmannQs approach was thus not to reect

the mythical$ but to reinterpret it in modern terms. 2o deal with this problem$;ultmann used the existentialist method of eidegger$ especially thecategories of authentic-s. inauthenticlife. In his -iew the R7nal udgmentR itis not an e-ent in history$ but an e-ent which ta5es place within the heart ofeach person as he or she responds to the call of God in each existentialmoment. umans experience either ea-en or ell in each moment$ andfaith means radical obedience to God in the present.

2rue 8hristian freedom means following oneQs inner conscience$ ratherthan conforming to oppressi-e or corrupt social order.

2*!* Jur)en (oltman: +olitici/e- Eschatolo)y

urgen Moltmann is considered to be among the pillars of theeschatology of hope who is a product of the post moderni=ation period. It isworth noting how the paradigm of apprehending the truth has shifted sinceperiod of 1Hthcentury. 2he truth that was once apprehended metaphysicallybecomes historical$ practical$ and relati-e. 2his epistemological de-elopmenthas greatly a9ected the theology of the day. peci7cally$ here comes the/iberal Eschatology the particulari=es on history$ the (eali=ed Eschatology ofodds which claims that eschatology has happened at the time of thewriting$ the Existential Eschatology of ;ultman which focuses on the personal

here and now. Moltman saw that these were hopeless eschatology. e thenpresented the Eschatology of ope.

2he Eschatology of ope has two main di-isions: 2he promisewhichtal5s about the faithful God who has made a promise in the past andtherefore will still be faithful to his promise4 the hope which pro-idesenthusiasm so that the belie-er loo5s ahead and mo-es forward tore-olutioni=e and transform the present to ful7ll the promise.

Moltmann considers history as a guiding principle. e considers theKuality that enables history to -alidate the future most important. 8oncretely

Moltmann foresees history farther e-en than the 8ross. 2o him$ the cross of8hrist is nothing if the parousia is not reali=ed. esus has promised theparousia. 2he parousia is the center of hope because it will -alidate thehistoriasalutis and the ordosalutis.

2his means that the starting point of Moltmann6s history is the futurewhich shall -alidate the past. Moltman would understand ope as the


14/32

expectation of the things which &aith has belie-ed to ha-e been trulypromised by God. e therefore understands &aith dependent on ope.

*hat is strong about Moltmann6s theology is the usti7cation that oureschatology is an eschatology of hope. 8hrist6s parousia is our blessed hope.

Moltmann6s theology is also -ested with wea5nesses: &irst$ his doctrineof re-elation is problematic. God re-eals himself in the future. 2he existenceof God is -alidated by his actions. 2his is parallel to saying that our hope-alidates our faith. +e-ertheless Moltmann may argue that God remains tobe a faithful God truthful to his promise. Ideally$ howe-er$ it must be theother way around i.e.$ our faith -alidates our hope. 'ur faith is certainbecause it is founded on the promise of a faithful God. 'ur faith in Godproduces hope. econd$ the deity of God and his messianic title is pro-enwhen he returns. ence the cross is useless when there is no parousia.

2*6* Despensationalism: ystemati/e- Eschatolo)y

May I present my re@ection paper about the topic. 2heispensationalism is a theology of eschatology that di-ides the economy ofsal-ation into separate epochs. Amidst disagreements$ the number ofdispensations commonly agreed upon by the proponent theologians is se-en.Generally$ the 7rst up to the 7fth dispensation co-ers the history of sal-ationfrom the period of creation though out the period of the 'ld 2estament whenGod is belie-ed to ha-e re-ealed his massage of sal-ation to Israel as anation. 2he sixth dispensation refers to the period when God sent his onlyson after Israel as a nation failed to recogni=e the message. 2he sixth

dispensation refers to the period of the 8hurch otherwise 5nown by theproponent theologians as the spiritual Israel. &inally$ the se-enthdispensation tal5s the millennial 5ingdom when 8hrist will come again toful7ll the prophecy to the ewish nation and pro-ide sal-ation to all whobelie-e. According to this theology$ the 8hurch at the present age is locatedwithin either the sixth or the se-enth dispensation.

*hat is generally agreeable with this theology is the fact that the Godof creation is li5ewise the God of sal-ation. 2his theology li5ewise recogni=esthat esus is the 7nality of God6s re-elation$ and the second coming of 8hristis the 7nality of sal-ation. 2he 8hurch is a parenthesis in the history of

sal-ation i.e.$ it is not the beginning nor the 7nal end.

Amidst the points of agreement are somehow the points ofdisagreement as well. 2he idea that God came to sa-e Israel as a nation isnot a generally acceptable theology. If this is the case then we may as5 aKuestion: ad the nation Israel accepted the message$ 3a) what might ha-ehappened to the sal-ation of the rest of humanityJ$ 3b) would the &ather stillsend his only sonJ 2his argument seems to assume that the coming of esus$


15/32

the cross and the 8hurch was not foreseen in the 'ld 2estament. 2he di-isionof the economy of sal-ation into di9erent epochs with the coming of esusonly towards the end of these epochs is not a sound theology. I belie-e thatthe ;iblical concept of sal-ation is 8hristocentric. 2he coming of esus hasbeen prophesi=ed already from the period of creation 3Gen. B:1?). 2he

dispensationalist concept of the 7nality of sal-ation is di-isi-e the fact thatGod will redeem the nation Israel apart from the 8hurch.

I would rather belie-e that there is only one God$ one creation$ onehumanity$ and one sal-ation. 2his sal-ation is 8hristocentric. Alongside theo9er of sal-ation is the call addressed to e-eryone that all may be one. /etus all stand and be counted.

3* Comprehensively -iscuss the .ollo'in) principles o. eschatolo)yaccor-in) to Car-inal =alter >asper3*1* #he Christian messa)e o. eschatolo)ical .uture3*2* #he presence o. the eschatolo)ical no'3*3* #he practice o. eschatolo)ical hope an- its -imension

?aith an- the ?uture: 5y Car-inal >asperIt emphasi=es the restoration of creation before the fall.

May I organi=e my presentation by pro-iding a general summaryfollowing the outline pro-ided by ,aspers himself as follows: #he challen)eo. the .uture4 #he Christian messa)e o. the .uture4 #he presence o.the .uture4 +ractice o. hope an- the -imension o. hope. &inally may Igi-e a critiKue about the structure of the theological concept of ,aspers inthis article.

At the start of the article$ ,aspers noted of the structural destructionupon creation which is deliberately caused as a byproduct of humanity6serroneous options and priorities. ,aspers then presents the challenge ofrestoring creation to its state before the fall. +o one else is responsible forthe restoration but the same humanity who caused for the destruction. 2hecommitment and inter-ention reKuired is from the personal to the cosmicle-el. 2he challenge is posted realistically$ the fact that the human being is abeing of hope. ope presupposes faith and the essence of hope is sal-ationwhich is the faith achie-ed. 2he religious core of the destruction is moraldegradation4 the inter-ention therefore reKuires a moral system and a moralinstitution which ,aspers refers to the 8hurch. In this context$ li-ing the faithmeans ta5ing options for the determination of the future of humanity.,aspers seems to imply that what is enshrined in the future is an image ofwhat has been the perfect beginning. 2his can be percei-ed through the


16/32

ascent of faith. 2he essential beauty of the paradise at the time of creation isthe core message of sal-ation.

,aspers emphasi=ed that the 8hristian message of the future is to ta5ethe most upright optionD a 8hristian option amidst the alternati-es pro-ided

by the humanists$ the ideologues and technocrats. 2he option is one thataddresses the factors$ means and ends of eschatology along the course ofhistory. (an must 5e 5i5lical* $e must consi-er himsel. as a 5ein) o.hope; a hope that is .oun-e- on the .aith in o- 'ho create- himan- the o- 'ho saves him; the o- 'ho is the a5solute .uture inas much as $e is the a5solute 5e)innin)* (an must 5e a5le to livethe .aith accor-in) to its moral -imension vis@vis the earth*Central to the response in .aith, man must consi-er the cross 'hich'ill help him em5race the misery cause- 5y the -estruction an- thechallen)e .or reparation an- 'hich 'ill provi-e him the reali/ationo. $ope*

2he future is at hand$ it is present. esus 8hrist who is the 7nal andde7niti-e re-elation has come and has inaugurated the ,ingdom of Godwhich is the 7nal and de7niti-e future of the world. 2he people need toac5nowledge and li-e on the basis of this confession of faith.

,aspers enoins us to practice the message of 8hristian hope. /et ushope critically and positi-ely. /et us discern the message of God6s lo-ecritically other than the options pro-ided by the ideologues and thetechnocrats. 2hey o9er false messages of the ,ingdom. /et us 7x our faithnot to a reser-ed seat of sal-ation but to a promise 3n B:1F) which reKuires

our commitment for its reali=ation. 'ur faith is assured$ our e9ort will ne-erbe in -ain because beforehand God has re-ealed a promise of sal-ation.

3*


17/32

uni-erse or the need of man to be sa-ed. Amidst the beauty of theeschatological concept of ,aspers$ implementing his theology assumes theprior resolution of more basic problems pre-ailing within the 8hurch such asthe dissenting theological perspecti-es among the progressi-e$ the liberaland the conser-ati-e bloc5s.

DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD(o-ern #reatments o. Eschatolo)y

a* $istorical ?ace o. Eschatolo)y

May I import by re@ection paper as a way to answer this Kuestion.

istoricity is a signi7cant feature of 8hristian religion that separates itdistinctly from other religions. 8hristianity holds on to a monotheistic faiththat presents the God of creation as li5ewise the God of sal-ation. God6sre-elation was manifested along the course of history which culminated in

the coming of God6s only son$ esus 8hrist who is the 7nality of re-elationand who at the same time was the central icon of sal-ation. God manifestedhis promise of sal-ation as early as the moment of creation. 2he seed of awoman who shall crush the serpent6s head 3Gen. B:1?) is a prophecy ofesus who shall bring the 7nality of sal-ation of humanity. 2he whole stretchof the economy of sal-ation therefore is a 8hristocentirc period that startedfrom creation to the 7nal coming of 8hrist.

Another face of eschatological hope is the inauguration of the newcreation. 2he concept of the new creation stems from the idea that the 7rstcreation fell into sin and hence needs to be renewed. Anchored on this belief$

esus is considered as the 7nal redeemer who shall renew the face of theearth. 2he renewal of the face of the earth means lea-ing away fromsinfulness and 5eeping the creation from sinful structures. Among thehighlights of the new creation shall be the a-ailment of the eternal abbathof the /ord. 2he concept of the eternal abbath is a departure from the 'ld2estament abbath which was found inecient to renew the people fromsinfulness. (elated to the eschatological hope for the new creation is the,ingdom of God. 2he ,ingdom of God is an eschatological reality which willcome through the total transformation of the world and which shall beushered by the 8hurch.

*hate-er image we may assign to describe the concept of sal-ation$the fact remains that this concept is always associated with futurity and7nality. 2he wholesome appreciation of this reality can ne-er be detachedfrom the beginning of life which 8hristian religion labels as creation. In the8hristian perspecti-e$ the eschatological hope$ therefore$ is always historical.

e.erences:


18/32

1. Edward Adams 3">>>) 8onstructing the *orld: A tudy of 0aul6s8osmological /anguage.

Edinburgh E" "/S cotland: 2T28lar5 /22. erry /. *alls 3Ed) 3">>) 2he 'xford andboo5 of Eschatology. 'xford:

'xford Lni-ersity

0ress3. Alexander ones 3Gen Ed) 31HFF) 2he erusalem ;ible. 0hilippines: 0hil.;ible ociety

4. Ancient 2heories of oul3tanford Encyclopedia of 0hilosophy)plato.stanford.eduentriesancientDsoul 3ate (etrie-ed: 'ctober "F$

">11)5. 2he octrine 'f 2he /ast 2hings

http:www.biblecentre.nettheologyboo5slbstFB?.html U1>>">>F>H:BF:1# a.m.V 3ate (etrie-ed: 'ctober "F$ ">11)

6. Monism en.wi5ipedia.orgwi5iMonism 3ate (etrie-ed: 'ct. "F$ ">11.)7. Gottfried *ilhelm /eibni=

http:www.philosophy.leeds.ac.u5GM(hmpmodulesslHHHmoduleunitHsoul.html3ate (etrie-ed: 'ctober "F$ ">11)

8. ,antQs 0hilosophy of (eligion 3tanford Encyclopedia of 0hilosophy)plato.stanford.eduentries5antDreligion 3ate (etrie-ed: 'ct. "F$

">11)9. 0rophecies of the ;uddhawww.bci.orgprophecyD

ful7lledbuddhasa.htm 3ate (etrie-ed:'ct. "F$ ">11)

10. I+LIM : 2he worldQs third largest religionwww.religioustolerance.orgW *orld (eligions3ate (etrie-ed: 'ct. "F$ ">11.)

11. al-ation in induismwww.e-angelical.ushinduism.html (Date Retrieved:Oct. 26, 2011.)12. induism D

(eligion&actswww.religionfacts.comhinduismindex.htm (Date Retrieved:Oct. 26, 2011.)

13. Mohammed and Mohammedanism 38A2'/I8 E+8P8/'0EIA):www.newad-ent.org3ate (etrie-ed: 'ct. "F$ ">11.)

14. Albert chweit=erhttp:en.wi5ipedia.orgwi5i (Date Retrieved: Oct. 26, 2011.)
http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=plato%3A%20immortality%20of%20the%20soul&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDUQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Fancient-soul%2F&ei=glqpTonvCOqZiAeZzambDg&usg=AFQjCNGnIrvDIWtuI2V746tELFEpeosm8Ahttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=plato%3A%20immortality%20of%20the%20soul&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDUQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Fancient-soul%2F&ei=glqpTonvCOqZiAeZzambDg&usg=AFQjCNGnIrvDIWtuI2V746tELFEpeosm8Ahttp://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/GMR/hmp/modules/sl9899/module/unit9/soul.htmlhttp://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/GMR/hmp/modules/sl9899/module/unit9/soul.htmlhttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=kant%3A%20immortality%20as%20postulate%20of%20practical%20reason&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDEQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Fkant-religion%2F&ei=CbOoTt_xOYrjiALyiPGzBg&usg=AFQjCNE6rB-q9Ic4NSXE16fol0tRAamfxwhttp://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/buddhasa.htmhttp://www.google.com.ph/url?url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/var_rel.htm&rct=j&sa=X&ei=2G6qTrCzNI-aiQeq3eXmDw&sqi=2&ved=0CEEQ6QUoADAB&q=hinduism&usg=AFQjCNHdjXS66PZQxgwJPKiE-oKDeZOfcghttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=the%20concept%20of%20salvation%20in%20hinduism&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCkQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.evangelical.us%2Fhinduism.html&ei=6HOqTon0OsXaiQLi3rS1Cw&usg=AFQjCNEUckTDgWR5nOITXPFwZLT3DszxTAhttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=hinduism&source=web&cd=6&sqi=2&ved=0CFcQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.religionfacts.com%2Fhinduism%2Findex.htm&ei=unaqTqK0Ks6jiQeH_NDCDw&usg=AFQjCNFTIP3pm49BTg1HT023AuPHmE-9TAhttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=hinduism&source=web&cd=6&sqi=2&ved=0CFcQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.religionfacts.com%2Fhinduism%2Findex.htm&ei=unaqTqK0Ks6jiQeH_NDCDw&usg=AFQjCNFTIP3pm49BTg1HT023AuPHmE-9TAhttp://www.religionfacts.com/hinduism/index.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/http://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/GMR/hmp/modules/sl9899/module/unit9/soul.htmlhttp://www.philosophy.leeds.ac.uk/GMR/hmp/modules/sl9899/module/unit9/soul.htmlhttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=kant%3A%20immortality%20as%20postulate%20of%20practical%20reason&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDEQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Fkant-religion%2F&ei=CbOoTt_xOYrjiALyiPGzBg&usg=AFQjCNE6rB-q9Ic4NSXE16fol0tRAamfxwhttp://www.bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/buddhasa.htmhttp://www.google.com.ph/url?url=http://www.religioustolerance.org/var_rel.htm&rct=j&sa=X&ei=2G6qTrCzNI-aiQeq3eXmDw&sqi=2&ved=0CEEQ6QUoADAB&q=hinduism&usg=AFQjCNHdjXS66PZQxgwJPKiE-oKDeZOfcghttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=the%20concept%20of%20salvation%20in%20hinduism&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCkQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.evangelical.us%2Fhinduism.html&ei=6HOqTon0OsXaiQLi3rS1Cw&usg=AFQjCNEUckTDgWR5nOITXPFwZLT3DszxTAhttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=hinduism&source=web&cd=6&sqi=2&ved=0CFcQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.religionfacts.com%2Fhinduism%2Findex.htm&ei=unaqTqK0Ks6jiQeH_NDCDw&usg=AFQjCNFTIP3pm49BTg1HT023AuPHmE-9TAhttp://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=hinduism&source=web&cd=6&sqi=2&ved=0CFcQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.religionfacts.com%2Fhinduism%2Findex.htm&ei=unaqTqK0Ks6jiQeH_NDCDw&usg=AFQjCNFTIP3pm49BTg1HT023AuPHmE-9TAhttp://www.religionfacts.com/hinduism/index.htmhttp://www.newadvent.org/http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=plato%3A%20immortality%20of%20the%20soul&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CDUQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fplato.stanford.edu%2Fentries%2Fancient-soul%2F&ei=glqpTonvCOqZiAeZzambDg&usg=AFQjCNGnIrvDIWtuI2V746tELFEpeosm8A


19/32

#$ 332 Christolo)y an- oteriolo)y+ro.* Ernel D* alla/a, #h*(*, +hD*

1. 8ite and discuss the issues of 8hristological methodology.". Apologetically and polemically discuss the ecclesiological importance of

the full humanity and di-inity of 8hrist.B. iscuss the tenets of the doctrine of the two natures in one person.

#$ 33A ?aith, &an)ua)e an- ym5olism+ro.* Ernel D* alla/a, #h*(*, +hD*

1* Discuss 5rieBy the criptural terms .or i5lical .aith

2he oly cripture is 5nown to house the written reference of the8hristian &aith. &amous among the biblical texts concerning faith are the

ebrew 11 which is founded on the 'ld 2estament and (omans 1:1.

2he text in ebrew 11:1 Only faith can uarantee the !lessins that"e hope for# or pro$e the existence of the realities that at present remainunseen.%pro-ides us with the de7nition of faith. &rom this text$ ;ergant and,arris 31HH) describe faith as %the reality of things hoped for$ the e-idenceof things unseen. 2hey said that while &aith is personally appropriated$ it is7rst of all an obecti-e Kuality. Mo-ing on further$ ;ergant and ,arris explainthat %faith is an insight into the reality of the in-isible di-ine world. It isrelated to hope$ to be sure$ but as a moti-ation that sustains hope when thegoals hoped for are not -isible. 2he succeeding -erses tal5ed about the

examples of faith until the 7nal -erses of the chapter 3--. BHD#>) whichpro-ide us with a message that %God deferred the content of his promiseuntil the present time when the 8hristians respond in faith to the sa-ing wor5of 8hrist 3;ergant and ,arris$ 1HH). 2his brings us to another text aboutfaith accounted by 0aul in (om. 1:1 which I shall explain in the succeedingparagraph. ;efore I proceed to the 0auline concept of &aith may I pro-ide7rst for an explanation of the de7nition and a general understanding of faithbased on the ebrew text.

&aith is de7ned in eb. 11:1 as an obecti-e reality. It is obecti-e in asense that it is theori=ed from experiences. 2hus$ the succeeding -erses 3--.

"DB) are accounts about these experiences. &aith in this text 3eb. 11:1)refers also to a reality. 2his is a reality of the truth$ the in-isible and thedi-ine God who is faithful to the promise. Indeed$ faith and truth areinseparable. &aith is founded in truth and leads to truth. 2ruth in this casemeans the Absolute. In the 8hristian context we consider this truth as esuswho is the way the truth and the life 3n. 1#:F). 2o aid us in understandingcomprehensi-ely the text in eb. 11:1 is another concept of faith presentedin eb. 11:F &t is impossi!le to please 'o( "ithout faith# since anyone "ho


20/32

comes to him must !elie$e that he exists)%&aith in this text assumes theontological existence of God as a prereKuisite to the act of belie-ing. &aithli5ewise pro-ides the belie-er with the means to percei-e God6s di-inere-elation. &aith in this text therefore is understood as both a reality$ and ameans to apprehend this reality.

Among the etymological foundations of the ;iblical faith is the ebrewterm %e6emin which means to belie-e. 2his term emphasi=es onintellectual assent such as accepting a testimony as true. Another biblicalunderstanding of faith is from another the ebrew term %;atach whichmeans to con7de in$ to lean upon$ or to trust. *hile the former is an appealto the intellect$ the later is an appeal to the heart. till$ another origin of theterm is from the ebrew %8hasah which means to @ee or ta5e refuge. 2hishow the text in " am. "":B is understood: %I ta5e my refuge in him my roc5$my shield$ my horn of sal-ationN

2hese ebrew terms are action words which presuppose the existence

of the following: 3a) truth to be belie-ed in$ 3b) an obect of con7dence$ 3c) aplace of refuge. (eligion indenti7es this obecti-e truth as God.

Another famous text about faith is (om. 1:1 *ince this is "hatre$eals the +ustice of 'o( to us, it sho"s ho" faith lea(s to faith# or asscripture says -he upriht man /n(s life throuh faith.%According to theerome ;iblical 8ommentary 3;8)$ the text denotes the di-ine Kualitywhereby God acKuits his people$ as a way of manifesting towards them hisgracious power through ust udgment. In this text$ the ustice of God %iustitiaei is a manifestation of the grace that is bestowed by God. *ith thispremise in mind$ the ;8 recalls the original application of the text to the life

promised by Pahweh to udah whose only power to win the battle was her7delity to Pahweh against her 8haldean in-aders whose god was their might.ence$ the text states %the upright shall li-e by my faithfulness. 2he senseof uprightness or the %iustitia ei is disclosed only in the sphere of faith./i5ewise$ it is bestowed by God in the form of grace. 8orrespondingly$;ergant and ,arris 31HH) notes about the centrality of faith through thistext: E-erything starts and ends in &aith. As aba5u5 3":#) told hiscompatriots: %the upright man will li-e by his faithfulness. It is precisely thishuman faith which ma5es it possible for God to exercise his power to thefullest.

2he ;8 traces the etymological origin of the term 7delity as used inthis text from the ebrew %enuma and the Gree5 %pistis. 2he term %pistisalso applies to the life promised by God to udah as a form of temporaldeli-erance from her enemies. /i5ewise$ the ;8 obser-es otherinterpretations lin5ing faith %pistis to uprightness. owe-er$ in relation tothe religious beliefs of the Gree5s$ r. ErnelGalla=a noted one limitation ofthe Gree5 %pistis the fact that the Gree5s do not usually use the word inrelation to their gods and goddesses due to their conception of their gods


21/32

and goddesses as obects of fear rather than trust. owe-er$ as applied to8hristian religion$ pistis is a -ery rich term as it may mean life$ faith anduprightness both in the temporal and spiritual realms. 2he application theseterms always starts from God who is the cradle of life$ faithfulness anduprightness.

2* Explain the .ollo'in) un-er the topic: ?aitheli)ion an- Do)ma

2*1#he hetero-oxy o. 5elievers

2he heterodoxy that egundo refers to is the general -ariation ofpeople according to faith such as those who belie-e in God and hence belongto a religion and those who do not belie-e at all such as the atheists.egundo pro-ided a critiKue of the


22/32

2o end this critiKue$ we may as5 oursel-es this Kuestion: ow stable isthe faith that is founded on human witnessingJ 2he /ord reminds us thatwhen we build our house we ha-e to set it on a strong foundation 3/5. F:#D#H). E-en amidst the loftiness of our wisdom let us not forget to set always

the foundation of our faith in the /ord so that e-en if we go astray$ should wedecide to go bac5$ we are still assured of the way. 2he anthropological faithmust be able to process the di-ine inspiration in the human experiences.trengthened by the i-ine it hopes to dialogue with ideologies.

2*2 #he o- o. (etaphysics

egundo presented the metaphysical concept of God citing from 2racy.e made a critiKue of 2racy6s philosophy and concluded the section bypresenting his anthropological faith as a better option than 2racy6smetaphysical God.

According to him$ 2racy presented the concept of religion in theideological sense$ i.e.$ through the realm of instruments that is ideological.2his ideological realm is dangerous because of the absolute and sacredo-ertones that tend to cluster around it. Alongside$ he presented his conceptof religion which is understood in the anthropological sense. /i5e hisanthropological faith$ religion to him is a speci7cation of the set of -alues. eli5ewise noted of the obser-ation that religion used in this sense maybecome false generali=ation. 2he falsity is with reference to its pre-ailingconcept of God which has been reduced to a linguistic trap and hence led tomisunderstanding and the conseKuent spread of atheism.

egundo said that the set of -alues may li5ewise be referred to as thefundamental trust. According to him$ religion as a fundamental trust hasuni-ersal and anthropological dimensions which is beyond the bounds of8hristian (eligion. e cited 2racy6s understanding of God as an obecti-eground in reality for those limit experiences of 7nal con7dence and trustdisclosed in 8hristian language. 2his concept of God is con7ned in 8hristianreligion but which is not con7rmed in Gaudiumetspes. egundo said that onlymetaphysics not e-en 8hristian theology or 8hristian experience can achie-efull conceptual unity where the irreducible plurality exists. All de7nition ofGod is metaphysical$ howe-er this metaphysical de7nition is a source of

misunderstanding and the seed of atheism. e would rather prefer to use2racy6s new metaphysical conception of God as an eminently social$ temporaland related being which in a word means a /o-ing God.

Amidst all these egundo said that whate-er metaphysical de7nition ofGod may not be necessary anymore in -iew of the eKually symbolic languagethat has been articulated in 8hristian re-elation which egundo prefers tocall as &aith.


23/32

I thin5$ to be more comprehensi-e and wellDfounded$ faith and religionmust not be based only on the anthropological dimension as presented byegundo. 2o be holistic$ the anthropological sphere must li5ewise bebalanced by the theocentric dimension.

2*3 #he messa)e o. Jesus as an example

2he message of esus aids in the transformation of the human faithinto a religious faith and articulates the speci7c -alues in the person whoaccepts it. esus appeals of the religious faith that is not constituti-e of themere set of instruments. esus o9ered God and his di-ine will to the peopleand the 5ind of faith that is demanded thereof. 2hose who opted to acceptthe message are as5ed of a radical transformation 3metanoia). In theanthropological plane$ the implication of metanoia is the total reformation of

one6s life$ a radical change of lifestyle and e-en comfort in life. Metanoiameans change of mind$ criteria and -alues. It e-en alludes to the change inthe meaningDstructure i.e.$ in faith. ence$ the preaching of esus was asummon to the religious faith in the fullest sense of the term$ the faith whichis the source of the new meaning structure.

*as this possibleJ 2he person of esus is the melting point of the Godand man. esus was both human and di-ine. It was his preaching that 7nallylead the change that e9ects both in the sociological plane and the heart. eis the way$ the truth and the life 3n 1#:F). e was able to synthesi=e theanthropological and the theocentric. 2he call to metanoia is being ushered by

those who ha-e gone ahead until today.

3* n-er the topic, ?aith#rusteli)ion, a)ree an- critici/e the.ollo'in):

B.1. 0annenberg6s fundamental trust

According to 0annenberg faith is synonymous with trust. 2rust isfounded on the fundamental and basic moments of human life such as theexperiences of the person when still a small child with the signi7cant othersin his life or the structures or systems that assure his growth. 2his trust is

unconditioned as it leads the person to the undetermined$ e-en beyond theboundaries of any 8hristian a-owal.

egundo con7rmed of some similarities with 0annenberg: 3a) &aithand 2rust may be used synonymously$ although egundo noticed of thecomfort of 0annenberg to prefer the latter. 3b) &aith or 2rust is consideredfrom the anthropological rather than religious dimension. 2his &aith or 2rust


24/32

is placed 7rst in one6s parents. It is the human being who needs theunconditionedfundamental trust.

'n the other hand$ egundo li5ewise registered his di9erencesagainst 0annenberg: 3a) egundo prefers to use the term &aith rather than

2rust. is preference will be understood through the succeeding points ofdi9erence he stressed against 0annenberg. 3b) 2he obect of 0annenberg6s2rust is the %meaningDstructure which the human being has built uponhimself such as: the circumstances$ things$ persons and e-en structures orsystems that supports him to act such as -enturing into theun5ownundetermined. 8on-ersely$ egundo understands &aith referring tothe things or circumstances of -alue. &aith is the obect or reality where theperson is lead to. ence$ according to egundo$ the lac5 of &aith disorientsthe person while the lac5 of trust may ust cripple him.

Generally I noticed that the &aith of egundo refers to an End$

contrary to the 2rust of 0annenberg refers to the Means to an end. ;othphilosophers understood &aith and 2rust in the anthropological or secularperspecti-e. It is the human being who needs &aith and 2rust. In the conceptof egundo$ &aith may become the obect of 2rust.

&aith as an obect may refer to God$ institution or ideology.+ormally$ &aith must ha-e only one obect. %+o one can be a sla-e of twomasters 3Mtt. F:"#). &or anyone whose obect of &aith is God$ then the wayis through religion. (egardless of whate-er obect of &aith anyone may optfor$ what is essential is for the person to 5now the limits. E-en those whoopted for God are forewarned that the extreme practice of &aith or the failure

to recogni=e the one true God may e-en lead them to idolatry.

3*2* Jesus polemics a)ainst eli)ion

esus came not to abolish the law but to perfect it. is polemic againstreligion centers on the issue of obeying the religious commandments -ersusdoing good and the issue concerning the religious authority -ersus thehuman criteria.

As the on sent by the &ather to reali=e the i-ine 0lan of al-ation$

esus came so appropriately to guide humanity bac5 to the path of &aith.esus came at the pea5 of the age of the 'ld 2estament in which theemphasis on uprightness as a means to sal-ation has gone out of bounds.2he religion in the 'ld 2estament is founded on the /aw. 2he /aw of God issupposed to be perfect$ righteous and holy. It was through the /aw that Godmanifested his goodness and through which the people may li-eDout theirfaithDresponses. 2he religious realm of this monotheistic faith was throughthe /aw. 2he people$ howe-er$ fell short of their perception and response to


25/32

God6s plan of sal-ation. 2he faith in God which in the term of egundo wasthe -alueDstructure which they had built upon themsel-es was relati-i=ed.2he /aw which was supposed to be a means to their &aith became the centerof their li-es so that their li-es became subsumed to the /aw. *hile they stillrecogni=e the 'ne 2rue God as their 7nal end$ they were howe-er found

worshiping the /aw. As such$ their religious traditions were no longer inconsonance to the i-ine law. Amidst the confusion which the people refusedto recogni=e$ the religious realm which was supposed to contain the &aithfrom the i-ine has been reduced to an anthropological faith. 2he i-ine lawwas practiced more as a human law. 'bedience to the law has beenemphasi=ed at all cost. ence$ egundo said %esus attac5ed religionbecause it became an ideology rather than faith: an ideology which by -irtueof its di-ini=ed and absoluti=ed categories was particularly well eKuipped topass itself o9 as faith.

esus wanted to emphasi=e that obeying the law must considered both

obecti-ely in the sense that God is the /aw and subecti-ely in the sensethat obedience must be from the heart. More superior than the law is theperson and the upright li-ing of the &aith. In fact$ the problem in theobser-ance of faith ">>> years ago is still the same problem that confrontsthe 8hurch today. 2he challenge posted by esus to the udeans andGalileans is the same challenge that is being addressed to the 8hurch today:to purify her faith as a means to prepare for the coming of the ,ingdom.

3*3* #he .aith o. science an- reason

*ith the conKuest of humanism and the renaissance that propelled

empiricism$ science and reason became the way of 5nowledge. 2his wasagainst the way through faith which was the preceding approach. 2herenaissance was prominently recogni=ed as the age of enlightenment. 2hemeans to 5nowledge was science and reason and the pre-ailing -alue wasmaterialism. /ife became mundane rather than holy. 2he center of5nowledge and de-elopment was no longer the church but the sciencelaboratories. (eligiosity and faith 3which was opposed by materialism$ andempiricism or science T reason) was condemned as the culprit of misery andhence tri-iali=ed and dislodged. ince then$ science and reason amidst itsmanifestation of authority and dominance would always be considered asopposed to faith and religion. 2his dominance continues until the present

age. In Europe and generally in the west being the seat of empiricism$ thechurches became a thing of the past as they are being con-erted intomuseums if not totally closed.

'n the ">thcentury uan /uis egundo came out with his philosophicalpremise that faith$ science and reason are ne-er opposed to each other.(ather he said that the unalterable opposition 3of faith with science arereason as accounted by the empiricists) fades into complementarity.


26/32

egundo maintains that there is such an anthropoloical faith. Man isnaturally capable of theori=ing from the realm of the human$ material andconcrete experiences. 2hereby$ man is able to 5now their meanings andde-elop concepts. uch concepts can be structured or organi=ed$ theori=edand be assigned with -alue statements. Man may prioriti=e them according

to their importance and -alue to life. egundo calls this the meaninstructure. 2he meaningDstructure not only confers -alue on but also guidesthe scienti7c analysis which ser-es as its necessary means of mediation. Inprinciple$ the meaning structure is ne-er opposed to the use of science.

+ormally$ the starting point andor the end of man6s endea-or is themeaningDstructure in his life. egundo claims that the method whereby manconceptuali=es this meaningD structure is reasonable and hence no less thanscienti7c.

(eason and science as coined by the empiricists can be considered ust

as a play of terms which ha-e been contextuali=ed to its -ested ends. 2hephilosophy of egundo pro-ides a piece of information that faith and religionrelati-e to its own ends may correspondingly ha-e its own terms.

a* eason an- el. ali-atin) +remises

egundo usti7es that faith which comes in the concept of meaningDstructure is selfD-alidating -isDaD-is reason. 2he meaning ser-es primarily asa premise that determines our reason to exist. It measures or gauge realitynot in terms of what it is but in terms of what it ought to be: i.e.$ it terms ofits -alue. *ith this purpose$ the meaningDstructure stands independently. It is

not a9ected by the data it e-aluates.

'n the other hand$ egundo points out of the signi7cant moments inour li-es wherein we punctuate on our experiences and learn from them. 'urcogni=ance to these moments depends on our meaningDstructure. 2hesemoments$ howe-er$ are so signi7cant so that they may e-en selfD-alidate ourmeaningDstructures.

5* Examinin) #'o Current sa)e

egundo refers to the di9erent understanding of %ideology as they are

used in di9erent contexts. In this case he presents two ways ofunderstanding the term as he has used them to explain his concept. 2husegundo explained:

%Ideology in the more neutral sense refers to e-erything that liesoutside the precision of the sciences$ to the suprascienti7c or thesuperstructural realm. In that sense it is only logical to tal5 about a%Marxist ideology$ e-en though one may recogni=e a %scienti7c area


27/32

in it$ and we do hear such tal5 today. 2he second sense of the term isclearly negati-e. It refers to all the cogniti-e mechanisms whichdisguise$ excuse$ and e-en sacrali=e the existing mode of productionthus bene7ting those who pro7t from that mode of production.

Critiue: 2he concept of faith pro-ided by egundo is on ananthropological or secular dimension. uch$ howe-er may be applied e-en tothe religious dimension. If e-er$ there may ust ha-e to be a consideration ofthe starting point in philosophi=ing or theologi=ing. 2he philosophy ofegundo may be -ery helpful for religion as it may aid religion to re-isit howit has li-ed with the faith and thereby trace its reasonability inconceptuali=ing and manifesting the faith. 8are howe-er$ must be of utmostconcern especially by considering the shift in the starting point fromanthropological to theocentric or theological. 'therwise religion may not beable to lead the belie-ers to communion with God but rather to practice amere ideology.

2* #he Concept o. ?aith in +hilosophy $an-5oo8 o. ?aith4

a* Early ree8 +hilosophy

2he earliest models of 5nowing the truth that e-entually lead to theconcept of faith were presented by the early Gree5 philosophers. &rom onecamp were the cluster of philosophers such as Anaximander$ eraclitus and0armenides who commonly tal5ed about the absolute being who is the truth

and the principle of harmony and balance. 2hey tal5ed about the essence oftranscendental perfectness which is deri-ed through ascertaining the natureof what appears.

&rom another camp were the cluster of philosophers such as 0lato$Aristotle and 0lutinus who tal5ed about the realm of the ideal and the real asmeans of percei-ing these realities. peci7cally$ 0lato presented the conceptof the eudaimonia referring to the realm of the absolute goodness wherematerial existence reali=es its perfection. 2his is reached through the ascentof the soul. &rom another perspecti-e was Aristotle who argued from thebasis of reality in the material realm which leads to the conception of the

absolute. (elated to this$ the highest state that man can attain is theemulation of the existence of the absolute i.e.$ the unmo-ed mo-er throughcontemplation. 0lutinus tal5ed about the reciprocity of the i-ine truth toemanate and the human response to contemplate the di-ine. Generally$ theconcept of these three philosophers point out to a mythical faith in theabsolute to which the existence of e-ery being 7nds its perfection.


28/32

Generally$ the Gree5 philosophy considers the dri-e for wisdom to ha-ebeen permeated by religious concerns. According to this philosophy$rationality ends in the contemplation of the truth which is the ultimatesource of reality. 2he -alue of truth is primarily based on its ontological andmoral Kualities o-er the purely cogniti-e ones. An inKuiry into the truth if

faithfully carried is always religious. In -iew of the need to understand thetruth$ the human being transcends the limits of experiences and Kuestionsthat in which all that is$ is ultimately found. E-erything is unitary in nature inas much as there is only one absolute truth. 2he eKuation of God and truthentails maor philosophical and theological antimonies. It is from this premisethat philosophy and theology continually lin5 with each other amidst theirstruggle that both preser-es their full integrity. 2his is a case which was latercon7rmed by egel and remains to be so until today.

*hile the philosophers of this age are common according to theirunderstanding of the truth$ they greatly -ary in their starting points.

8on-ersely opposed according to the starting point is 0lato who ta5es o9from the realm of the absolute the transcendent$ and Aristotle who ta5es o9from the realm of the material the immanent.

5* #he Christian +hilosophy o. the (i--le )es

2he medie-al philosophy of religion was a de-elopment of the ancient.*hat was signi7cant during this age was its achie-ement to assign theabsolute reality with the face of God. 2he understanding and usage of theterm %religious has e-ol-ed into a higher plane. In the ancient time%religious was a description gi-en to absolute reality who was mythically

belie-ed to be the source of e-erything and can be percei-ed only throughthe aid of introspection. In the medie-al time$ the term religious was used todesignate the di-inity and holiness of God as the ultimate source and end ofreality. &urthermore$ the myth in ancient philosophy which came strongly inthe form of assumption arising from one6s deepest con-iction has beenrecogni=ed as faith in the medie-al time.

2here were two famous philosophers and theologians of this age: t.Augustine and t. 2homas AKuinas. ;oth of them agreed on the concept ofGod as the ultimate reality$ source and end of all existence. owe-er$In@uenced by 0lato and Aristotle$ they -ary in their starting points.

Augustine was nurtured according to the 0latonic philosophy. e beginswith an assumption in the existence of the transcendent absolute principlewhom he called God. 2hen$ he tal5s about faith as an essential component ofthe human to understand the absolute. E-en the 8hurch of the present ageKuotes a famous slogan from him: %belie-e that you may understand$ %Mysoul is restless until it rests in 2hee o /ord. AKuinas on the other hand wasin@uenced by the Aristotelian logic. e starts with the %&irst 0rinciples$ these


29/32

are the articles of faith which are perceptible to the senses and which are thedirect obect of (e-elation. 'f course$ re-elation is from God. 2hrough thelight of faith$ man is able to obectify his experiences into religious truths.

espite the -ariety of approaches or starting point$ what matters for

the medie-al philosophers and theologians is God6s own internal witness withcomes to us as re-ealed truths and which we recogni=e through the act offaith. 2heir starting point is reason$ hence anthropological.

c* (o-ern +hilosophy

2he modern period started with (ene escartes 31?HFD1F?>) at whosetime the %God of the philosophers was born. escartes argued about theexistence of God based not on faith but on pure reason. 2hrough pure reasonhe was able to deduce the truth about God. escartes understood faith as anascent beyond the reasonability of the mind.

&rom the period of escartes$ ;aruch pino=a 31FB"D1F) propagatedthe rationalist philosophy. According to him$ to be real is to be rational.pino=a considered God as real in as much as his existence can berationali=ed. is recourse to reason left no room for faith. 2o him God is boththe initial idea and the necessary conclusion of a consistent thought.owe-er he refused to accept the transcendence of God.

8ontrary to pino=a$ Gottfried *ilhelm


30/32

experience. imilar to ume the argumentation of /essing departed from theanthropological dimension.

Immanuel ,ant 31"#D1>#) presented a philosophy that ended therational deductions of the existence of God. ,ant e-en tal5ed about morality

and ethics as autonomous from any transcendent foundation. 8ontrary to hisprior thoughts about morality and religion$ an obser-ation has been notedwhen he placed himself in a dilemma as he later de7ned religion as therecognition of all duties as di-ine commands. 8ritiKues would argue that ,antmay ha-e either introduced a new element into morality whereby the morallaw becomes God6s law thus destroying the human being6s autonomy$ orrecogni=ed the remar5s extrinsic to moral law whereby religion loses itsmoral impact. +e-ertheless$ ,ant has stated a problem which is of -italimportance to the philosophy of religion. i9erent from ume and /essing,ant employed a deducti-e reasoning.

0ic5ing up from the representational concepts of re-ealed religion$Georg *ilhelm &riedrich egel 31>D1B1) constructed his ownmetaphysics. e accepted the uniKue authority of 8hristian re-elation. Pet healso argues that faith does not come fully into its own until it hasphilosophically thought the representational content of this re-elation. egelseemed to mo-e similar to the thought of Augustine %&aith must see5 tounderstand. It implies howe-er$ that religion cannot fully be true in its ownright until it has to be a philosophy. egel6s philosophical religion has to bethrough a process of cogniti-e dynamism. 2his is -ery much contrary to the8hristian understanding that faith ne-er ceases to be e-en if it may not beunderstood. egel6s case shows how dicult it is to 5eep the relationship of

faith and religion while both preser-e their full and independent integrity.

-* 20thCentury

In reaction to egel$ Martin eidegger 31HD1HF) argued that theGod of metaphysics is a result of misunderstanding and should therefore bediscarded with the misunderstanding itself. eidegger recogni=es theexistence of ;eing in the i-ine realm. e referred to this as the &irst 8ause.2he mind itself cannot comprehend this ;eing$ instead it can onlypresuppose it. e argued of the limitations of philosophy to engage with this;eing in as much as only the religious mind may be able to engage with it.

e said that what is reKuired of man to engage with this ;eing is a correctrelation with the latter rather than a logical mind.

,arl aspers 31BD1HFH) is existential in tone li5e eidegger. e tal5edabout existence and Existen=. Existence refers to immanent realities whileExisten= refers to those that are transcendent. eidegger explained that anauthentic participation in the existence must always in-ol-e the realm of thetranscendent. e therefore assumes that any immanent reality presupposes


31/32

a transcendental -aluation. 2he transcendent de7es all categoricalobecti7cations. e also argues that the transcendent always remain hiddenas it can ne-er be obecti7ed without doing -iolence against it. e istherefore opposed to the claims of historical re-elation about the absolutedespite his interest in the faith of the belie-er to re-elation.

asper6s philosophical faith is one that recogni=es the radicalcontingency permeating all our existence. owe-er$ this contingency canne-er be particulari=ed. *hile this faith in 2ranscendence sustains us indoubt and despair$ it may endanger us also to fall prey to nihilism anddespair.

e.erences:

15. Alexander ones 3Gen. Ed.) 31HFF) 2he erusalem ;ible. 0hilippines:0hil. ;ible ociety

1. ianne ;ergant$ 8A T (obert carris$ '&M 3Eds.) 31HH) 2he 8ollege-ille;ible 8ommentary. Minnesota: /iturgical 0ress

". ;rown$ (aymund ..$ &it=mayer$ ospeh A. ..$ Murphy$ (oland E. '.8arm. 3Eds.)31HH>) 2he +ew erome ;iblical 8ommentary. +ew ersey: 0rintice all

B. ames Michael /ee 3Ed. 31HH>) andboo5 on &aith. ;irmingham: (eligiousEducation 0ress

#. uan /uis egundo 31H") &aith and Ideologies. /ondon: 'rbis ;oo5s?. andouts and +otes in II(E& 2BB 8lass

#$ 333 Church Doctrines an- the ?athers o. the Churchev* +erseus D* on/ales, +hD

1. *hat are the Kuali7cations needed for some old ecclesiastical writers tomerit the title %8hurchJ Explain.

". *hat characteri=ed the writings of the Apostolic &athers of the 7rst threecenturiesJ

B. *hat were the concerns of the 8hurch during this particular contextJ

#. Most apologists are philosophers$ why are they called apologistsJ ow didtheir wor5s in@uence the 8anon of the criptures especially the +ew2estament as we read todayJ

?. In the second century$ three heterodox mo-ements de-eloped within the8hurch: udaeoD8hristianity$ Gnosticism$ and Montanism. iscuss thebasic tenets of these mo-ements and their in@uence to orthodoxy of the8hristian faith.


32/32

Documents

Doctoral Oral Compre Exam Answers