Excerpt from The Dublin Review, Vol. 142: Quarterly Nos 284, 285; January and April, 1908 The present writer speaks as one who from an education in Rome itself and from long association with those in Eng land, both inside and outside the Church, who concern themselves with these religious problems, felt keenly from the first that, quite apart from all question as to the effect of the Encyclical on Catholic theology, parts of it would be greatly misunderstood by non-catholics as to their object, embodying, as it does, to an ...
Read More
Excerpt from The Dublin Review, Vol. 142: Quarterly Nos 284, 285; January and April, 1908 The present writer speaks as one who from an education in Rome itself and from long association with those in Eng land, both inside and outside the Church, who concern themselves with these religious problems, felt keenly from the first that, quite apart from all question as to the effect of the Encyclical on Catholic theology, parts of it would be greatly misunderstood by non-catholics as to their object, embodying, as it does, to an extreme extent, traditions, language and thought in which some of the points of con flict contemplated are very far removed from those of our present-day controversies in England. The censure of a manner of expressing a great principle which ignores a theological distinction really based (perhaps) on defined truth, may easily be taken as a censure of the principle itself, by those who think exclusively of the broad lines of thought referred to. An obvious instance of this was pointed out to the present writer by one whose sympathies are certainly not with an unduly conservative position, - the condemnation in the Decree Lamentabili of the proposition that the Assent of Faith is ultimately based on probabilities. This is censurable as ignoring the supernatural grace on which faith is ultimately based and the authority of God revealing which is its ultimate motive. Yet it has been cited as a condemnation of Newman's view that the assent preceding the Act of Faith - what is called the judi cium credibilitatis - is based on a cumulus of transcendent probabilities generating a certitude. The distin???tion between the natural and supernatural assent, between the assent of reason and the assent of faith, was probably ignored by some Continental writer who has been consequently cen sured for his untheological language. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at ... This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Read Less
Add this copy of The Dublin Review, Vol 142 Quarterly Nos 284, 285 to cart. $22.15, new condition, Sold by Paperbackshop rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Bensenville, IL, UNITED STATES, published 2019 by Forgotten Books.
Add this copy of The Dublin Review, Vol 142 Quarterly Nos 284, 285 to cart. $34.69, new condition, Sold by Paperbackshop rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Bensenville, IL, UNITED STATES, published 2019 by Forgotten Books.
Add this copy of The Dublin Review, Vol. 142: Quarterly Nos 284, 285; to cart. $62.43, good condition, Sold by Bonita rated 4.0 out of 5 stars, ships from Newport Coast, CA, UNITED STATES, published 2018 by Forgotten Books.
