Comments on: Again on retrieval: Radical Orthodoxy

By: Kent Eilers

Kent Eilers — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 12:31:33 +0000

Yes, precisely. This carries over into RO’s appraisal of what “secular” might mean as well. The critique applies to the myth that a “secular” might exist at all, that any way of seeing the world would be without its own religious dynamics.

By: Matt Dodrill

Matt Dodrill — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:42:48 +0000

Ryan, I think this marginalization is probably the separation of the transcendent from the material. Milbank opens his “Theology and Social Theory” by saying “once there was no ‘secular.’” Milbank and other adherents of RO want to get away from the notion that the material world is not suspended from the transcendent, as Duns Scotus said was the case. RO wants Christians to affirm the world – to affirm the goodness of materiality.

By: Kent Eilers

Kent Eilers — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 14:28:40 +0000

Yes it was ETS.

By: Steven D.

Steven D. — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 23:48:23 +0000

Hello there! I’ve been silently following the blog for some time now.

Question: Which conference in New Orleans? I attended the ETS Conference (mostly the EPS sessions).

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 22:01:50 +0000

What is meant by the phrase “marginalization by metaphysics”? (I may have missed an important aspect of this discussion published at an earlier date, if so, I apologize.) In this setting does that imply a denial of the miraculous as a part of Christian orthodoxy, or is this referring to a Platonic worldview?

By: Kent Eilers

Kent Eilers — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:42:53 +0000

Here you go Peter: Simon Oliver, "Introducing Radical Orthodoxy" in The Radical Orthodoxy Reader (Routledge, 2009).

By: Peter Watson

Peter Watson — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 02:36:15 +0000

Kent,

Where is the Simon Oliver quote from?