Autor: Lonergan, Bernard J.F.

Buch: The Trinune God: Systematics

Titel: The Triune God: Systematics

Stichwort: Unterschied: theologische Schlussfolgerung - Urteil über theologisches Verstehen

Kurzinhalt: The judgment about a theological understanding differs, then, from any and all theological conclusions ... In contrast, a judgment about a theological understanding is not easy ...

Textausschnitt: 47b Ninth, a judgment as to the consequent truth of theological understanding appears to rest chiefly on three considerations. First, we can examine this understanding in terms of what issues from it precisely as understanding. Does it solve some problem? Is the problem that it solves a divine mystery, something that can be understood by us in this life mediately, imperfecdy, analogically, obscurely? Is the understanding fruitful in the sense that it provides a virtual solution to other connected problems? Is there another analogy that is better or at least as good in resolving all the same problems, or is there no other analogy that can be known by us in this life?

47c Second, we can examine the same understanding not in itself but by way of historical comparison. Has the same problem been considered before? Was it considered directly or only indirectly? Was it considered in the same complex of problems or in a different one? Was the same analogy used or a different one? If the same one, is the analogy now being grasped more profoundly? Are new aspects being added to it, whether because of progress in the natural and human sciences or because of progress in studies of scripture, the councils, the Fathers, the medievals, and so on? Does understanding the principle really ground all the other conclusions deduced later in the treatise? Are more and more complete conclusions being deduced now than before? Is an overall view of the whole material now more easily reached? Can we now see further problems that call for and practically demand further progress in understanding, knowledge, and wisdom? (Fs)

49a Third, we can examine the same understanding by comparing it with the pseudo-problems and pseudo-systems that may have arisen with regard to this subject matter, that may have spread abroad, and that may still to some extent prevail. Are all the questions that have ever been considered with regard to this subject matter being given equal treatment, or is a selection perhaps being made, so that certain questions are given priority, others are treated as secondary, and still others are left unmentioned? And if a selection is being made, is it made on the basis of custom, or on the basis of some principle? Is the principle found in the fact that what is being sought is some understanding of divinely revealed mystery, and that problems that have arisen from misunderstanding are not to be considered except where treating them is the only way to remove certain widely held obstacles to understanding the mystery?

49b Tenth, if it is true that one major fruit of education is that we learn to use different criteria of judgment for different materials, then it is useful to compare the judgment regarding a theological understanding with other judgments that are made in theology. (Fs)

49c The judgment about a theological understanding differs, then, from any and all theological conclusions. Nothing is easier than to conclude correctly: once the premises are posited, the conclusion either follows necessarily or it does not; if it does not, it is not valid; if it does, it is no less true than the premises. (Fs)

49d In contrast, a judgment about a theological understanding is not easy; it is extremely difficult. What is in question is not a conclusion but a principle. The principle may be merely possible. It may be more or less probable. Sometimes all we can say about it is that at least it may be on the line or along the way that alone leads to the understanding that Vatican I referred to. (Fs)