Theological Studies

During his Parisian “exile” from 1942 to 1954, Marie-Dominique Chenu’s experiences with worker communities transformed his vision of the church–world relationship. This article highlights the overlooked social dimension of Chenu’s pre-conciliar thought, tracing his shift from a “New Christendom” ecclesiology towards a church in a state of mission and his growing call for ecclesial structural change in light of changing social structures. These life experiences would lead him to advocate for a church that reads and responds to the “signs of times.”

Francis A. Sullivan, SJ made a number of significant contributions to the Catholic theology of charism. Through an accepted emendation, he helped write Lumen Gentium 12; he investigated the new movement of “Catholic Pentecostals” for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith; he later produced a number of related academic works exploring the nature of the charisms and their role in ecclesiology. This article argues that Sullivan’s reading of the division in Lumen Gentium 4 between charismatic and hierarchical gifts, and how he uses this division to argue that sacramental ordained ministry should presume prior charismatic gifts, has the capacity to support a re-conceptualization of ecclesial ministry.

This article analyzes the vision of Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov as a narrative riff on Kant’s three basic questions. The novel shows what it means to live out “What can I know?” “What ought we do?” and “What may we hope?” It argues that this approach, combined with a rejection of the modernist dichotomy of “faith vs. reason,” overcomes the problems many critics see in the text. Ivan lives out a “first critique materialism”; Zosima and Alyosha show how to live out a “revised second critique solidarity”; the evolution of Grushenka and Dmitri—both “different people” in the final third of the novel than they were earlier—demonstrates “what we may hope.” Dostoevsky does, despite some critics’ claims, offer realistic responses to Ivan’s profound challenges to faith in the often-excerpted chapters, “Rebellion” and “The Grand Inquisitor.” The essay suggests that the lessons the novel teaches are applicable in our own world, where grace is also fragile. Grace can be rejected, as it is by Ivan, yet also be found in and through flawed vessels like Zosima, Alyosha, Grushenka, and Dmitri.

Recent scholarship uses the metaphor of language to articulate why, even with good intentions, we Christians can hand on meanings and values at odds with the Christian message. Our “native” languages foreground our worlds, readily conforming our minds to the very realm we are called to transform (Rom 12:2). Related to the problem of “languages” is the brokenness of our conversations, themselves. Conversation can become a tool of destruction rather than a means of transformation. We Christians need a “new foundational language” in which to communicate the kerygma. This language is capable not only of communicating meanings and values that are faithful to the Christian message, but it is also capable of healing the very conversations we have by healing “the conversation that we are.” This article suggests how we Christians can learn a new foundational language by unfolding the radical consequences of our Trinitarian belief.

The issue of Mass intentions, where the priest is asked to “apply” a particular Mass for the intention of a donor, has been somewhat neglected in contemporary Eucharistic theology. But the continued practice raises a number of theological questions especially in light of the liturgical reform initiated by the Second Vatican Council. This article (the first of two) surveys the complex factors that went into the development of this practice. [Editor’s note: The second part will be published in the March 2021 issue.]

In light of the social-ecological crisis facing Puerto Rico, this article offers a response to deep incarnation theologies. Though it notes that deep incarnation offers a helpful account of divine presence and solidarity with all suffering creatures, the essay draws from liberationist theologians to argue that equating the cross with evolutionary death obscures the sinful causes of crucifixion. Ultimately, the essay insists that the notion of deep incarnation that addresses evolutionary suffering must be linked to a similarly “deep” notion of crucifixion rooted in historical reality.

This article examines the contribution made by the publishing house of Herder to the reception of the teaching and decisions of Vatican II (1962–1965). This input began with the five volumes of Commentary on the Documents of Vatican II (German original 1966–1968), edited by Herbert Vorgrimler and including contributions from twenty-one authors who had played roles in drafting the Council’s sixteen documents and could expound from the inside the authorial intentions (intentio auctoris) of these texts. The subsequent five volumes of the Herders Theologischer Kommentar (2004–2009), edited by Peter Hünermann, could also explore the post-Vatican II history of interpretation and implementation of the conciliar texts (the intentio textus) and the insights of readers with their different questions and expectations (the intentio legentis).

Balthasar’s reflections on the mystery of Christmas provide not only a basic entry into his thought, but also an expanded view of his theological vision. Drawing primarily upon his sermons and scriptural meditations, this essay presents a Balthasar both familiar and new: ideas at the heart of his Christology, Trinitarian theology, Mariology, and anthropology receive significant attention. Yet Balthasar’s reflections on Christmas also provide some of his most important engagements with less-noticed themes—particularly regarding Christian praxis toward the poor and oppressed. More than in other texts, these shorter pieces routinely insist that each Christian is called to follow the path taken by the Son of God and set out into the world in service of the poor and lowly.