chevron_left
chevron_right
AUGUSTINISME ET THÉOLOGIE MODERNE
Format BrochéAuteur : LUBAC HENRI DE
59,45 €
TTC
Livraison sous 15 jours
Notes et avis clients
personne n'a encore posté d'avis
sur cet article
Description
Baius et Jansénius sont-ils des augustiniens excessifs ou des augustiniens fourvoyés ? La théologie moderne les a considérés comme fourvoyés. Depuis le XVIe jusqu'au XXe siècle, elle a pensé un nouveau type de relation de l'homme à Dieu, opposant une fin naturelle et une fin surnaturelle. Ce qu'il avait exposé dans une première partie de Surnaturel, le P. de Lubac le développe ici. Il affine sa compréhension de Baius et de Jansénius. Il montre les raisons philosophiques d'opposer deux fins et ces raisons viennent d'Avicenne, philosophe iranien du XIe siècle, et d'Averroès, philosophe arabe du XIle siècle, dont la pensée domina l'enseignement padouan au XVe et XVIe siècles. Saint Thomas les avait combattus « de la manière la plus efficace en continuant saint Augustin et en christianisant Aristote ». Henri de Lubac explique mieux la rupture entre philosophie et théologie, provoquée par cette opposition de deux fins, pensée par les théologiens. « Les philosophies séparées, devenues elles-mêmes des théologies sécularisées, doivent beaucoup à la théologie séparée. »
--
Are Baius and Jansenius excessive Augustinians, or are they mistaken Augustinians? Modern theology considers them to be the latter. From the 16th to the 20th century, it has envisaged a new kind of relation between man and God, opposing a natural end and a supernatural one. Here, Father de Lubac develops the case he made in the first part of Supernatural. He has refined his understanding of Baius et de Jansenius. He shows the philosophical reasons for opposing two ends and those reasons come from Avicenna, the Iranian 11th century philosopher, and Averroes, an Arab 12th century philosopher whose thinking dominated Paduan teaching in the 15th and 16th centuries. Saint Thomas had opposed them in the most efficient manner by prolonging Saint Augustine and Christianizing Aristotle'. Henri de Lubac explains more clearly the rupture between philosophy and theology, provoked by that opposition of two ends, as thought by theologians. Separate philosophies, which became secularized theologies, owe much to separate theology.
--
Are Baius and Jansenius excessive Augustinians, or are they mistaken Augustinians? Modern theology considers them to be the latter. From the 16th to the 20th century, it has envisaged a new kind of relation between man and God, opposing a natural end and a supernatural one. Here, Father de Lubac develops the case he made in the first part of Supernatural. He has refined his understanding of Baius et de Jansenius. He shows the philosophical reasons for opposing two ends and those reasons come from Avicenna, the Iranian 11th century philosopher, and Averroes, an Arab 12th century philosopher whose thinking dominated Paduan teaching in the 15th and 16th centuries. Saint Thomas had opposed them in the most efficient manner by prolonging Saint Augustine and Christianizing Aristotle'. Henri de Lubac explains more clearly the rupture between philosophy and theology, provoked by that opposition of two ends, as thought by theologians. Separate philosophies, which became secularized theologies, owe much to separate theology.