Saturday, February 03, 2007
(4:37 PM) | Adam Kotsko:
Anknupfungspunkt!!!Reading through The Nature and Destiny of Man, I have been struck by the relative weakness of the second volume. The first volume isn't utterly superlative, but it is more tightly argued and seems to comprise the half of theological anthropology that Niebuhr has more investment in -- sin. The second volume, by comparison, is more meandering and, as far as I can see, less creative. There is, however, one little thing that I just read that I think is really right:
The other [concept of "natural law"] is the idea of a Schoepfungsordnung, an "order of creation," which is presumably, the directive given by God in the very structure of the created world. The difficulty with this concept is that human freedom alters and transmutes the "given" facts of creation so much that no human institutions can be judged purely by the criterion of fixed principles of "creation." (pg. 197)A kind of historical materialist rejection of the idea of the "created order," which I have long thought has no place in theological reflection.
Since I'm talking about theology, I had a question today while reading Augustine. In the sentence "sed in dedecus meum creveram..." (Confessions, Book V, Chapter 9, Loeb edition), am I correct in taking "deducus" as a misprint (should be "dedecum")? I once thought I found a misprint in the Corpus Christianorum editions, which was arrogant of me, but the odds of finding a misprint in the Loeb are higher, right? [UPDATE: I was wrong on a variety of levels here. It is not a misprint.]
UPDATE: Go, everyone, and collect your 100%'s.
Via Kieran Healy.
UPDATE: I finished Nature and Destiny. Now the only Imposing Tome left on the 20th Century list is the Ritschl book.