Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Levering on N.T. Wright, Aquinas and Eschatology

Here's a very insightful lecture by Matthew Levering, one of the world's top Thomistic theologians. The full name of the paper is: "The Intermediate State and the Restoration of Israel: N.T. Wright and St. Thomas Aquinas On Our Eschatological Future." The audio is not great, but the substance is worth it.


5 comments:

Francis J. Beckwith said...

Michael:

Do you know where I can obtain a copy of the paper? I am writing a paper for the upcoming Evangelical Theological Society conference on Evangelicals, Aquinas, and Justification. I would love to see this gentleman's paper.

Frank

Michael Barber said...

Frank:

Great to hear from you. I do not have the paper nor do I have Levering's contact info but I would recommend you check out the fourth chapter (I think) in Levering's book "Scripture and Metaphysics" (Blackwell, 2004). If you really wanted to get a hold of Levering he's at University of Dayton.

God bless!

Michael Barber said...

Oh. . . and I would love to see your paper. When you're done with it, would you please send it to me? : )

Michael Barber said...

Oh. . . and I would love to see your paper. When you're done with it, would you please send it to me? : )

Francis J. Beckwith said...

Michael: I will send it to you when it's done. Here's the abstract:

"Doting Thomists: Evangelicals, Thomas Aquinas, and Justification."

Over the past several decades a growing number of Evangelical philosophers and theologians have described their views, on a variety of issues and arguments, as Thomistic. That is, they claim to be, on certain questions, followers of St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274). Although these thinkers often claim to be Thomistic almost exclusively on questions in philosophical theology, metaphysics, philosophical anthropology, and apologetics, a few of them have gone so far as to claim that Thomas’ views on justification are either (1) consistent with, or not obviously opposed to, a Reformed perspective, or (2) inconsistent with the doctrine of justification expounded by the Catholic Church at the Council of Trent and the 1994 Catechism of the Catholic Church. Among the thinkers who embrace this understanding of Thomas are Norman L. Geisler, R. C. Sproul, and John Gerstner. In this paper, I argue that their reading of Thomas is mistaken and that in fact Thomas’ soteriology was integral to the Council of Trent’s expounding of the doctrine of justification and that the Catechism’s presentation of justification is thoroughly Thomistic. I also argue that because Thomas was not writing in response to, or in the aftermath of, the Protestant Reformation, his work on justification is not driven by the issues over which Protestants and Catholics wrangle today. For this reason, these thinkers’ misreading of Thomas and his subsequent influence on the Catholic Church’s articulation of its soteriology is a hopeful sign that Evangelical Protestant friends of Thomas may also come to see that many who are in communion with Thomas’ Church are friends as well.