INFORIIATION TO USERS
ThiImar-..:ript ...been reproducedfromlie rnitrcl8m rMIIIIr. iIrns . . . cIirdy fronl . .origiNI«CXlP¥abrNIId. ThI.I5.IGfM .-wj
~capiII . .WItypeMIIr . . .~'**-IMY blItram." type d
-_.
T h o _ o I _ _ ," _ _ tho_oIthocopy ...~Cltindiltindptir'(.cokndOfpoorqulllity. . . .
.... _ ptnt_. --....,. -
... c:on-..oy _ _.
In . .W'IIik8Iy
...m
h i didno!: lend UMI •c::ompIIN m8nUICripI end . . . miaing~ witbe"'*d. Also.if UMUIhofized c:apyrighlrIIIIIII'W Mdtobe .-ncNed.a'"
willndic*"~.~-(
_ .. __ ••. _ _ -..) .. _ b y .... __ ... -
. . . IigIll .. _ - - - -
~ _ ; n. . _ _ - - _
~ ; n...0llI'\I. _ _
fl".v_ .... _
__.._Ior..,_..__
in"
CIOPVbIn . . . .ctwga.CorUcIUMIcInc:IVtDorar.PnlOI-.t "*'"'-IonendLMming 300Narl'llelbRo.d,
_,-<lllOO
Am NtKIt...481QS.1348 USAUMf
NOTE TO USERS
This reproduction is the best copy available.
.+. :=--
:::::--~ ...
---
=,CINIUA-.TheautborbaspaDIOCla110II- exclusivetica>ce
aUowm,
tho Natioaal LiInryoCCaaadato~1_ _
oroeD
ccpiesoflbisthesis illmicroform, paperor _
rOl1llllS.
Theautbor ...altho c:opyriJIllilltbislbesis.Neitbertho
thesis ... it
may bepriIIledor otherwise rq>roducaI_thoaudlor's pamissioo.
L•auteura accordeIIDCIiceDccDOD
exclusive
_.11
Bibliotbeque _ duCanada de rqxodaire.~.dislribuerau ... deaccpiesde ""'"dlOse50US Ia _ demicrofic:ll<Jfilm,de reprocIacliaosurpapi«au .... _ 0Ie<:lr0aique.
L'_cooserYeIa~du
ckoit d'_qui ... """,dlOse.
Niladliseaidea_sui>sIaolieIs dec:dJo.QDC _
eu. ...
au
adraDeIltf'CIWodaits.asSOIl- .
0-612-66747-2
FUNCTIONAL SPECIALITIES AND THE ACADEMIC STl;"OY OF RELIGIO-S
C WIBemudBrodie
Athesissubminedtothe SchoolofGrod_SlUdi<s
inputiaIfui611DCD1oCtbc
rcquimnenlS forthe dqrtcof _ofMs
Deportmer<.(R.~P>usStudies
MemorialUaivmityof~
AUps12001
StJohn's
Bernardlonttpn contribute: 10 an undemandinganddevelopmentofthcmcthodoJo@y of religious studies as it is cunently P'K'tised in Canada': Tht: authorfirst
rnsenu'
brief history of Bernard lonergan's undmIandina ofthe' acaeXmic saudy of relipn, includins his encounter withthe phenomenon upon his return from Rome:, his revaluation of 1968, t!lc developmmloffin:rionalspccililisalton.,andhissubsequent refl«tions on therelationshipbetweenreligious saudicsandtMoIOIY. FonO'o'-ini' presentalion of functional spccililisatton as an empriQ,1 method is an analysis ofT1wStudyofRe/iglOfllll Canada,I series ofstatc~f·lhc-anreviews published by the CINIdian COfPOrltion for Shtdies in RcliliortThl:author isable10 discempartcms ofcritiqueamonplthe reviewmandgroundthe;rfindinpin L.onerpn's method. Finally,the authorpresentsa
$Criesof mctflodoIocical questions conct'l'nina tcliJious studies in
c.. .
andhis own~lIlivcanswers.
Mcmorial Uni\'crsity ofNey,foundland for his guidancc through thisprocess. His insistence on a return to the sources to examine not whal I thought was said but what was actuallysaidhasnotonly made the work stronger, ithas turned up some jr"cresting discovuies alongtheway.TolJwend, I would also like 10 thankDr.HansRollmann andtheJ*ti<:ipmsofRELS 6100 Interpretations ofRelieton for thcirpalieN.witness 10 earlierattemptsatthehistorical analysis.
I would also likc totake theoppMunity 10 thankPtlil and Sally McShane and all thep&rricipanu of the Second West Dublin conftfencc,notonly for their inpnand intcllectual stimulation,butalso fortheir support during a pcrwnal siuwion whichatlhe timeseemed tnllicbutwiththedistance of time has become somewhat amusing.
Dr.Pau.1BowlbyofSt. Mary's Univmiry did melhcgrcatserviceofJivingme a prc:·publicIlioncopyofR~ligiollSSIlJiuit!Atlan1k CtJNJdtl, ....ilich enabled me both10 compktc thisJX'Ojec:tin atimelymanner and 10 includethembR:Studyq'Rdigionlit
CtftJdaseries in my _ysis. Withouc. his act ofkindncss to a
suanacr,
this project wouklhivebeenfornouaht
And,ofcoune,toJodiMcDavid,for htrpllicncc,intelligence, and wit.
Tab"
Abstract Acknowledgcmenls Table o(ConIenU
iii
Chlpm I ReligiousStudies andtheWed ofBcmard Lonergan
1.1 TheOrigins of Religious Studies I
1.2 LonerganandReli&ious Stud'esandthe Writingof,\tfethodin Theology 4
1.3 Lonerpn'sUseofSoun:cs:ThteeExampies 12
1.4 LonerpnandTMHistoryofRelig,otts: Esurysill~thoJology 16
Chaper2 Lonerpn'sMethod:funaional Spcc:ialiSllion 22
2.1 "I'lveeType:sofSpecialisalKwl 23
2.2 AnEiatllfokf Division 26
2.3 Grounds oftbe' Division 31
2.4 IIIara,ioMObliqllQ 3.
Chaper 3 LonttpnandReliJiousStudies 44
3.1 TheRevaluation0(1961 44
3.2 Religtous ShIlfiesand1lIcoIoBY.DialopeandDial«tic: SO
Chapler4 A,.lysis. TMSlllliyofRellgiolllllConuJo 6'
4.1 TheAims ofTheSlwJy ofReligioll in CaNMla 66
4.2 ReligiolLf SludiesIIIAI!J<rlu(1912) 6.
4.3 us .cciencesrelig~llU$allQwib« depllis/972 (1911) 74
4.4 Religimts SluJiuillOrwurio(1992) &I
4.' "ReliJiousStudiesinMarUtcJb...(l991) '3
4.6 "Relipous Sludicsin Saskalchewan"(I99J)
••
4.7 TMSJwJyoflWig... BritWOcol...J>ia(lmj 104
~.9 R~·te";n¥tMR~'iew~rs '~7
~.IO AddressingtheRevin\'O'S:
The: Possible Contrib!A.ions of lonergan's\l~hodol~' 1..10
Ckaplcr 5 Towards a Conclusion. in Five Questions 146
5.1 15ReligiousStudies aFickiSpecialisation~ 146
5.2 DoesReligiousStudies ServeaMedia'illlFunction~ I'"
5.3 DoesReliJious ShadiesHaveSpecialClttples? 151 5." Is Religious SIUdicsISubjectSpecialisarion~ 161 5.S What Ire theSpecial Categories (orReligiousShadies~ 165
Conclusion Bibliography
168 170
Thepurpose of this thesis is 10 e:<pkR the JlO55ible rele\>'anee ofhn:tionalspecialiSoltion, thoheurislicmethod~IopedbythoCanadionp/lilosop/le<Uldtheoq;an8mwd Lonerpn, 10thestudyof religion ouuide of theology as il ispractisedinCanada inthe pteStI'dday.Infonni"llhisappk.ationisthehistoryofBemard Lonerpn'sown 1IDdetstaadiDa0frelilious studies.Atthouchthecentreofthe Ibc5isisthe
~de\-eIopmenl:orfuncrionalspccialisltion,muchoflhewod: is properly a Pars Artalytica andnot.Pars Syslema'ica.
ChapterOneis • briefhistoryofthemovement towards anKIdcmic:sa.Iyof rtliJionand Lonefpn's use ofsomeoCmdi5CO\'C'ries..Incll.lded isa
acnml
discussion on howinIerpmenIpIlfOICb theirsubject's useoCsources, and Loncrpn'sownusc of 1brec50Urces (BultmaDn, Manilowski,andOtto)are givenISexamples. Finally, Loocrpa" '~'orMi=aE1iado UldJosephIGupwa'seohoioIY,
111<HisJO'J' ofReligiotu: EssaysittJ,klltotJologyisshownas atuminapoint inhis ownrcvahaItionof rtliJious Aultics.ChapmTwois anexpllnlDoDoff"unctionalspec:iIIiwion.SectioDsone,two, andthreedescribetheD060nofspeciaIisItions thedivi»on intot1iIIOphases.aadthe further divisioclbyfour raullinainthedp.: fUnttionaI SJleCialibcs:resatdl, interpretation, history, dialectics, foundations, politics, systematics, and communications.
Scttioafour is.historyofhow thespecialities came to be.
~n..ein
...
lqillS""'C1loplcrOncleftolf. .. thoEliadoUldKitagawa anthology. Ho....-ever. inscead offocussins on the tonmbution ofthebookto lonerpn'smcthodoIop:aJwoR,it inskadlooks10them-ahwionofreligious~u:iics thatitinstilledin him. From 1961 on""....d,lonetpnhada Pov-inl appreciation forthe discipline aftd overthentlCtlat yearshemade frequeutrematb
conceminc
the ro&e be fttv;sa,ed rdipous studies 10 play in the modmlcomclCt anditsrclltionshipto thcology.Cbapk:rFour leavesthepmenwionofLoncrpn'sthouatncoanalyse: thesix volumeswhichcompriseTMSI~ofReligiollillConodo,' scric:sofstate-of-tbwrt reviewspublishedbytheClnIdiID Corporationfor Studies iD ReligiooICorpxatioa Canadicnnc desSl;iencesRelilPcueses. Followin,1 brief introduction. this lengthy chapterprescnIStheflDdinpoftbc m'iewers.. foc:ussinson their evalllllion of
underJraduate
C\IfricWaof reliJiousstudiesdq.'-.tmentsiftCanIda.Thechapterends withtwosectioDs.ODewhicbestablishesaDovaaUp.atm10thesmcs.
aodODewhich pllCCSthatpdmtinlOthe Loncrpnconteltt ISpmcmedinthetinathree chaplcn..ChapterFiveis. conclusionwhic:h,iD tiw:qucsboas.prcscaISIswnmuyofIII
undtmandiD&
ofrclipous SNdic:s within InewconIeXtin awaythatdoesn'teomp-omise tileimpona;atwedaItadybeiac
doneiatbcdiKipline:Isrclisious!lUdies • fidel specialiYtion? DoesrtliJiousstudic:sserve.
mediali... funttion?DocsreJiPOUSscudia haw: speaalCIIItIOries?Is rtli,tousShadic:s.subject sp:ciaIisIrion?WbIlarcthe special catqolies for relilPous studies?Anoteon amder languqe:ithasbeenmycustomintheputtouscthe'acncric she'in placeoCtbe'acnmche:' thatplttcmiscontin_ herein.
ell.pIa' OM: Rdit. . .
St_.,..
dlite: WorkofkrunilAHrp.This chapleTsets01.11 to pnmdc the background oftherelationship betv,-ccn theS1\Idyof reli"" ODdthe ""'"ofllemardLooerpn.theJ...p1U...ondlheoIogWt.
A1tboupdistancedby trainina.itshallbeshownthlllona'pn slowly assimi1lted some oClhtideasolauihonconsidered'c:anonicaI' inIhtsNdy ofrcliJion.putiadlrtyof Eliodeond theCIIicqoscbool.
I.
neOriel"
of . .i&iousc..diaTo give a precise date totheorisinsof rcligiousstudies wouldbe.bowevc:r infonned.Inedue:atedpatSS.Inthemid-IlineteendlcenIWY,11thelime: of empire- buildina.~with 'new'cultures coincidedwdhIhe lastflushoffOmlJllicism IDd thepIlcnorocoon of the'pdemetHcbolm.'III 1112.the bnlIhmGri published
me;,
6",coIlcc1ion offaUy-ules.III 1122. C1Iampoiliondeciphered theR S_.III 1"1,S.RicIlanI_ ...
hiscdmolooical
SltodySi>wlt.qwJ,iwllDas_IMQbillM Val/eyoftM/ttduf.In1870. Heiarich SchlianannmIdeIheIii,ItTroy.
n.c
poIypbonyofatlmtptS10undmIanddisncwocbcr,wiIh.tip ofthehittoROUSSCIM's nob~sa.... pvc:birth 10theirurrdIIccLyct-to-bc-made-distinct disciplinesof folklore, IftduOPOk»IY. philolotY,lnd religious scudics.WhentheinsiBfKcame 10tum these newtools ononcsdf.when it becameappuentthatwntcm'nomwive' culnart
This wall can be dated back. to 1680. lonerpn. in his 1968 paper ·1'hwlogy in itsNew Context,~gives Ihis date as the origin ofthm: k.ey mo\·ements in ..ntefn
thou&tt-"Fordill.itseems..wasthetimeofthc IfQlbegiMi.,Thenitwasthat HerbertButtenlC'ldplKcd the originsofmodemsctentt.,then thatPaul Hazardplaced thebqinninaoftheEnlightenment.then IhatYves Conpr placed the beginnina of
doamatic:
thcolQIY...1Theshiftfrom • deductive to an empiricalnotionof scienee tIuaacDcd. theoIop. the'queenof thescienc:cs.,'whosedassicisttbescswere"conclusions 10 be JlItWC!lfromthepcanisesprovided bySeripture andTradition...) Empiricalsciences.intheeyesoftheolosY.~notimpinae on maacn o(faith, which wereproven eitbetbyscripture alone forProtestants,or scriptW'C and tradition for Cathotics.TheFirst Vatican Council0(1170main&&inedthis subordinalion of sciences 10 thcoJoIy.IIwas in tNs climate thIt
rdiJious
studies,wt»ehsoupt10 examinemith, ntitioft,ritual.andboiywritinp.notaspranixs tobe deducedfrom,tu asdata.carne head10head with1heoloIY.
There WbreerI.fOlthesateofmissioloaYandpolitics. some effen atstudyina ocher tWNreswithintheconfiDeS oftheo&oaY. The: ReformationandtheCOUIUr- RcfonllODon
1Iod_
oheUIdioboessforlhe",-,of_,.ohe lrIdition intothevcmacuJu, even ifonlyeonceivedIS •transitional mc:ISurctowardsfull'ne. . '...
'i1 . . . .S-Mc£~~'.IIIpellev1bkW...-.~dIIivand._~Worbbap.MtI999.
Jaa-d~1lIecIklsJiaiUNlwe-.·A~C~. . .F.J.llyuaad
"""J.
TynI,.~0.-.Lo.p.ATodd, 19'74)' 55-67••55.1/NrI..5I.
themodem sense. as theafIQt~trI(Uof the First Vatican Council betray. Nevenhelcss, thestudyof religions developed in Europe, sometimes despite its detractors from theology,sometimeshidden withintherelative safety ofaneutral discipline like anthropoloBY. sometimes ostensibly withintheconfinesof theology. With a few extcpOons,thestudy of religionshasnever realtybeen conceived as aseparaIl:discipline inEurope.
Meanwhile. in NorthAmerica,abenineteenth centurysawthesiow developne1lt ofpropammesofreligion, with Ya1eoffcringthefintPhD in rdigion in 1869. Over time several private wtiversities. originallyfouoded asdenominltionalcentres of learning,severed or divided theirthcoiogicaland religious studies departments ITom one another. A pivocaltime forthenew discipliDe came intheeconomic boom followinathe endof theSecondWorld War. For the first time universitieswere heinS establishedde novo,and inCaMdawbIIv.ue once exclusively cbW'(;IHffiUated iDstitutions cameUDder the controlof provincialpemments.Scbools liketheUniversity ofOttawa (founded 1841. Wldcfprovinc;a1oon1nJ1196S). WUIdsor(foundcd IIS7ISAssumplionc.lleae.
underprovincial cootrol 1963).andMcMaslcr (founded 1817, under provincial control 1957) in 0nwi04allfound tbcmsclvesr«vaIllltina:their foundllionalSWImasthey donnedtheirnew 'secular' mantle. At the same time. anAmericanSupreme Court
• Haroldlenlus,Wil&un
eo-
James,and DuUdfraibll, IlIIiftauStdrsiIrGlIMlriJ:ASk1It+
dw-An1WtWw, Tbc 5cudy ofltelipoa ill CaftIdI Vol" (W1IerIoo: Wilhdta.ierPreu.1992). 6.
decisional~-edfortheacademicstudy of religion in stateuni\lmities.~Theology.
meanwhlk. ",'asstill in1tltprocessofrefltttingon wl\at ilcould pinfromancnding10 the'newleamina-'ForCatholicism.theSttondVatican Council(1962-6S).and most puticuJarlyitsdocumentC'J(IJJjWftn~s,calledfora rmeqJintheologyand for Ioleruce ofand enpaerncnlwithworldreligions.1t ..'ISinthis Itmosphm:that LoncrpnreturnedtoCaudafromRomeinFcbNuyof1965 10bqinwhatwouldhaw:
beenIyear-Md-a-halflona sabbatital.6
1. Loaerpa.IdRdiciouShdics Iltd IH WriUDI.rMdllD4l,.TkoIOfY Itshouldberemembered WI,forallintents andpwJlO$eS,as anacademic Lonerpn ....IEuropcu.HisNorthAmericanschoolinaconsistedofhisplrisbschool inBuckingham, St Michlel's,the Jesuil-nanboIrdina schoolin Monucal.1.oyola CoU.... 1Ild1Us _ l I l d i _ yanatGuclpIl.Hispb;1ooopIIy _ _at Hcydwop, hereceived •SAinlanpaaacsandma1hemarits11theUnivmityofLondon., IIldlUstheolctlY_OC...tbeG~hav;... puIlcd_tbeCGlIqe ...
l'lnunIculIIC-ConccptioninMontreal afteronlya fewmombs.Helhmtaughtfor
1WatIy~fiveyears .. CaIhoIic
col.
andunivmitie:s(six.CoiWFdeI'I~1'(~TuwrulrlpScltoolDislric,,,..x-..,,,,,...ol"""YQK1COl1C11fl1i11l1leproperroleoi reli,. .... rclipouliftItNction inP\IblicIChools,bidthe
rono.nn.
N1itlf:1hlllli"wcIIbe.aid_OM'ledueIlioIIilnot~witllout.lIIldyolCOlllpltlliw:mipoaordlellillotyorrdiaionsllldib relltioftihipto IIw:
"'.norlIId;
olc:iviliulion.Ie cataiIIIy may be Ilid_IhtBibleilwonhyoflNdy lOfib1icerwyllldhitloricqualiticl. NcldDI_IlI\ICllidllcRilldicata . . . -..cIyolDc8ibleorof rdi.-.wbaa~edob;eaivclyuPll1of. . . . .prcw-ol~..,lICIIbcdFecled COftIiIIeMIywiDthe'-n~ .&ce'ptedto-I.obertT. MiIIIrlid ...B.FJo.n.r.lIITI.,.",..&-a/ity:0IftA.SrGtt. •
*
s.-Cottn (Waco: Baytoru...,Pras. 1977).l-4'.• AllbiopIpbicaliaIJnuDoefor LoMrpt.WIIaJ ... adlcrwiJt.
iii"
FnderidE. C - .'--Jra.~<:tIribat1UbnSlrin(~MN:UIqiciII.... l992).
Rome). Ofthesc years.he hadIinle kind to say: "I taught theology for twent}'.five years under impossible conditions.It wasthat the whole setup of theschool"''aspredicated upon tlUngs thatwere fine inthesixteenth-<:entury. butyou couldnotuse modem scholarshipthewaythinp arc lined up.'" Therevolution(or, at lcast.lC"aluation) in theology thatbelonced forhadnot yetcome: "{1bc]situation Iwasinwashopelessly antiquated.but hadnotyet been demoHshed -ithassinc:e been demolished·.. Hisreturn toNorth America fHVidcdtheopportunity10workin an atmosphere ofmodcm sc:holuship inthemajor context ofthephmomena oftbestudyof reiilion15an empirical science: andthe proximatec:onItxtora generation of hisstudentsfrom CanadaandRome whoweretryingtoeffectthechanaeshe had beenadvocating
Soonafter IUs arrival. Loncrpn wasdiagnosedwid!luna: cancer, eventually I'C5II1tinaintheremoval oCltisright luna. Prone 10infection,hewas slowto rec:over, and beneverresumed his teachingpositionin Rome, Instead,bewasa professor Emeritus 11 RegisCollqe fortbc next ten years(withone)'Cll', 1971·72, as Stillman Professor at Harvard),andlater.from197510 1983,theVisitincDistinplishcdProfessoratBoston CoIle.._
From 1965to1971,Loncrpn, fearinghewouldnotfinishin time,workedon MelhodinTheology.Thebookwasadevelopmcnt of some of his earlier work.,most notably thecogn.itional strUClureoutlinedinImigltl.his1ftQB"1UftoptI.Jof 1957. bis
theGregorianumbC'tWC'CTI1951 and 1962, and retlectiOrtS on hisownthcologic:al writings.fromhis doctoral diSSC11llion onthenotionDf operati~gracein AquinastGthecourse manuals for his thtolog)'CGUrSC:Sin RDme.
loncrpn haddiscovaedthev.mofMircea Eliade in 1954.too!aletGinsert more than. footnok into/nsigltl.'Butin thevarious summer symposia liven onInsight folkswiDgitspuNicarioft, twoofwhicbhave beenpublished(theAvpst19511mumII SI. Mary'sUniversity in Halifaxwith thetitleUnderstandingQN/&i",.IOand the Aupst 19S9lcctumIIXavierUni~rsityinCineiMlbwiththe tideTopics in Educalion11).Eliadc'sworkis incCKpOf1.tcdintGthetext.Loneraln001e$Eliadc's insistencetJwthe:proper field 10 in'YCSliptethesipificancc of symbols is primitive ttliaions.andhowfundamenWimaaesformItranse:ultwallanpaae.12TwnaElildc withiuthe
JunPn
tradition.heROleStheJunsian
'collective unconsciousness'ISEJiIde's key10theSNdyofthehistory ofttliJ.ions. n Finally,heKknti6cs thchistoryofttHiPonsIS.untqucschool
oflboucld
in whicbEIiadcis'Mdjna.1S opposedkttomestudy'Iknwdt.c-pa.~AatIIwricwwiDFf.1krwd~S.I.•~AS«t1MC~209-30._
212.
't.-..draM _ _
1OEii*'s/"'Jrt~(hris:GIIIi... 1"2)_TIfIiM d~.Jm;,;o..<P-rit:hyol. 1941}irI1"""':As-ty.~~.ed. FrederictE.ero-
MdlobatM.DarM,CoIIemd WOfbol...Lo-quJ(TondD:lIIMniryorTOfDIlIlO 1'rns,1992}.S7211.1.11IedltintO(t/wdiscoverylO 19S4i$tllrou.... lmtrofSMay 19S4.IOF.Cr_.died inCRI'WC.~LoDerpa·sUllivmali.ViewofRdipML~Utdtod:JowrwItJ/u"",pSaMitJ 12 (1994), 14'·79•• 152.
I'Edked by EliDbeh A. MorrillandMarkD, Mordi RevisedandaupnentedbyFrederick E. C""'..
withIhecoIlaborviols of'EIiQbeUlA.Mordl~Mark D.Mordl~RabenM. Dorwl, IIIdThomaV. OIly Collected Worksof'&cn.dl..oaerIuS{T0f0lIG:Utivtrsily oITcromoP!as. 19l1D).
l'Editedbyl.obenM.Dann . . frederitkE.Crowe.revitinllIld....-..lhtunpublishcdIClll
~u:=::.,~~.:~~:.:~T~~~~1.24.6S_1.
49.221_1.21.
IJTllpia.~n
wwknakcn~Eli_ within another branchoflcamine.l~Intwospecial coones gi,-m in
InlellectuetMe1hodo" names Eliadc as OM wortdnaon the: project ofbridaing thc:
'chum'(takenfromLuke 16:26) between imdlcct Indthesenses.""DeSystanate et ffistoria" gives EliadcISan example ofprosress iabhumanKiencesdialcoatributes towards undemandinghistoryas, Kiente in the classical sense. 16
Afterthesesymposia,thoustt,withinthepublished material Eliadcismentioned less frequcntly. He is referenced in a footnote in the 1961textoffADeo Trino: Pan Attaiytica.n"'Time: and
Mcaninc."
,lecturePVCI\&ItheThomas More lnstiMcin MontrealinSeptember 1962, makes mcrwion of Eli_'sworkon shamanism and how it indicllcs theriseofindividuaJism.'·lastly, inatalkCMitJcd"Oimmsiol'lsofMe:aniIll"liven in May oll96SItManp1te Univmity, LonapneDUmC1'ttesEliadc in a list of diose: lJlVOIvcdinthetwentiethcenturyproject of theftdiscovayofmyth.withspecific mcrcoce apia\0Etildc's idcaofa primal, tramcuklnlsymbolic: Ianauqc." nusis theIasImenDon ofE1iadeinthe publishedwortsfOf •strcItboffourOffive years. duriftl
1'/"'121
"~~IJ",,*JI«"'''_dtodo.Nocaby . . . . .flthDosYc:oune.GrqariIII Univeniry,I9S9.2J..24f1lbeMS.
"Benard Lonerpn. IJ"S,.",..,,, Hi$fDri4,NotesrordleoIoIYCN'W.CiRtoriInUniversity. I'm.
IortlleMS.
17aa-dt.-pA,0.[)n)r,iIro:IYs AItlIi)1iaIOt-:ApIdMdesUtlivenMtis QRaorianM.
19611'"~'-Ju,-yjmeUldMeanifta.
..~_'TIwoItJtkd~J'$l-J9U.ed
Iloba'tC_ow..fredft:tE.Crowe. IIldItobenM. DorIa,CoIIaIdwortsof&e-dl.oaqM6 (TOR*O:U.wnityorTllfOMOPr-.I996),~121.• 120.
"aennu.q.."Di or,....,..C~.td.ff'llkridr:E.Crowe_ R*rtM DorIa,CoIIc:MW«bor~4(TCIIOI*):UlIMniryalT. . . 1911), 221045. _ 242.
Thereisa tendencytoreadthepcopkwe study StWne\ll;MI abstracted from their ownhistolYISiftheyarrivedat theirideasandtheir sourcesfull~·formed,andthat.
burl...themanfrom Porlock,wehaw:itall.WefOlJd thII thm1ftmomentswhen the .uthufha$~ltohaw:lhc: insiatnforshehasyettoread thesoun:a., wtUc:hp1)Vidclhc:
phantasm.Loncrpo's 'diseovcry'of Eliade, for example, came 100Iatc(or[Might,but ismcntiOftCdonlyin passin. in Met/tod in Theology, havinabeenabsofbedintotheIltJCT context ofLonerpn'sworkinbetween. Were one to plot. trajectory, there is a discernible 'bell curve' in Lonerpn's citations ofEliade, aehina itsapocee inthe Topics in Education1ectlRs of19S9.20A similarsraPh.apinreIdUnaiupeakin19S9 butwith •slowerdesc:cm,couJdalso bedemonstrued for his c:itllions ofKarlJaspers' TheOriginQItt/GooJofHiJloryoJlMidi bas been madeofLonnpnandJaspm.Ubut.
inthe publishedwork.1962's "Timeand
Mcanint'
isthe last timeJaspmVNTantsmore tt.I.SCIltenc:eottwo,lDdtheediton ofbodlCoIkcriotl(bolbtbe1967 mlI911 editions)and ...SuoltdCo//«tiolt, and1.onerpII hiJDKIfforM~tltodi1tT1wo/ogy,fO\Dl thercferenc:csso passinathIt lhcydeemed lbcmnot10watTWlIfoolDolcs.Thispoil'll
bees
IIIimponant question not simply forthe:Sl\Idyoflonerpnbut~1lIisoblaval.ionttusCOllMdM:u(or••le:atquaJilin)FredC~'._ _dlee~1O EliadelRrquIIrft'om [1954}01\,," in"l.onerpR'. UllMnaIiII V_ olRdi... IR
IIMidlIdBullock. ....(Sew
KIYen"
Loodoa:VlleVllivenityPraI.195)).Dl'hilipMtShua.f'of~..wtiIlawidliftdll'loIlerplltndk_hII"ttltcorrdltioll
benrIrealt.o.ra-·...
ot... JaIpen . . IIldIliCGMPiaI rarb df«tiII&cbqeiadlc~·dIrouPfUIlc:tioIIIItpecialiul:Mlft,1lId!he AaiIIPrISt . .~lOpuIli*-'s,...lOdlII_~...diI..
insight? Taking the editorial decisionsasour key,we can note various stages in theuse of sources. Firs1there is the point pcior to the encounter with the source, where the author maybegrappling withan idea.Thereis ananecdote (perhapsapocryphal)that illustratestNSpoint quite nicely.Allsymposium soon afterthepublication of/vfelhWIn
Theology,Lonerpnwasasked whetherhediscovacdtheimportaDccorfeclingsIfter readinlMaxScheler.Lonergan,inIvoicebocbhunand irritated,lookedat the interlocutor andSltd,"Ihave f«linptoo,you know...lJTheTeisa difrerenoe between undcrs1andingtheimponance ofan issueandhavingtheteehnicallppuatLlSand languase 10hand.Such wouldbe thesecond stage,whena soun:c isfound,is cited fRq~tly,is compared and conbUled withtheauthor'sownwork.,andis absorbedOf,if fOWldWlllling,discardccl
(The) studyoftbetextisIprocessof~na.AsoneItams,one discovers more andIl'IOfethequestionsthattoneemedtheauthor,the issuesthaiconfronted him,theproblemsbewas trying 10solve.the malCriallJld-\osiCIIresourcesIIhis disposal for soIvintllhem.
So one comes to set aside one's0'Mlinitial interestsandCODCCmS,to~ thoseof1lle''-,1Al.-.s1rUCt1llecontelllofbi.1hoqIltIJldspeeo:b.
Myownexperienceofthis changewasinwritiaa my doc:Ioral dissertation.
Ihadbeenbrouahtup. Molinist. IwasstudyiqSl Thomas'ThouJhton Gl'UliuOpttnuts,Istudy1aIerpublishedinTheulogiaJJSluJiu,1941- 1942.Within amomhor soitwas complc1elyevidemto methat MoIinismhadno contribution to make 101ftundcrscandina of Aquinas.:·
Thisprocessof1carnineisthis process ofplaying with anauthoror an ideauntilit
USeelillie26,beiDw,lOrasieli&ar1CClC*M.
uBcn.dl..oMrpn.,....ilI~(l.ondoa, 19'I2;IataIrepriftlTOI'OlIIO:lhivenityofTOIOfIO Preu,1994),I62-6JllIdlLlTIleIbldy .. iJrefeninl1a . . . .~.er.n_F~:
OptI'GflWGftftilltlttt'fbrItIof$ln.-asA...CoIIIcIedWorbofBa1llJdt.-pa I (Toromo Univeniry ClITCJnJ.-oPt-.2000).
'makes itscomn'bution10an undmtanding'Of.justas likely.docsnot Thus the spike of Eliadc andJaspersrer~ncesinTuplaillEJllCQliotI.Atme timehewouldhave been teachingthecourses ontheIncamMe WOfdandtheTrinityattheGregorian, preparing COUBCmanuals forboch,allthe:whiletryinllOintroducenotionsofhiscoricll consciousnessandempirical $f:holaBhip withinthe'impossible' conditions.v Thusthe Sccturc:swould have been. prime opportunity10 lestsomenewideaswithintheconflDeS of aneqeraudience.)6
FiDally, there is.thirdstlFtandthisis whatpromplSthequestion for interpreterS.There comes • point (ollowin.theproeess ofleamina whentheSOW'Cc has becDusimila1cd intothethou&hIoftheluchor.whenshe is no
lonacr
snadyingtbetext References,1ben.arenotin the.turt oCthose&omwiwn thc process ofamina-The soun::csue used impltcidy, as ifthcauthorisopcratilll withinthebadition,andrefcmlCC is made bKk 10thesource more as11'1iI1\1Sb'1tive example. This is especiallywe(OfBay19S9.~Md"""'_lXIWIt.dle Word"""(f"I95).F"I95S.
. . $frill:19S1).IIld_CIlIUnR TriIiry . . . ($friaII95S.StnI1951.... flll19S1).
'11laec:aur-.,-.l.,.... (·&ac:ilIlio·).opncivt . . . . .n.o.s,--...tdleanai
=:=.~.::...::::::=r:-;-~:~Oft~~~~
:.:::~7~~--=~~~==1~-=
in one""• •tMDftIIritIo(1964).T1leTopiuill~lKtInIwtre"JOtIlIdwiclled baweta ttlclWO . . . .CGUrlCltauPtifl ...l959c:alcfldlryw:.lXIWIton . . . .-"od(Dr ,,.11mII~1_. . .)ill1 IPfinIItllI.couneOflS)'SltlllandbillOrY(DrS,...~'~)iJltbt rall.FOfan~. .oI lOiauoducemoclenllChollnhipilllodlciftlPOllib'econ4iliouoflhe~==~~~I::::,s~I9S9~ ..
:JIII".iJtItiuc.XlWierinC i, oadlcpti~ofedutalioll. dlIIl_.loIol lbo~lMlp.F MII ForM.dliotslib_lfIdtllal t1II olecy tIliIp,n._HiIddnIId,_FriItp·book0l5c:llderWCft.bi 1_1bo ~ol.,_
0._...
-.t(J'OII--." ..Mr.em-widlFr.aer.nI..c.rt-S.I....AS«t1ftJJC~m
writing, andhe clearly saw himself.notas a Thomisl. but under Thomas"innuenct:.But olher sourC" thai enrichedandnuanced his work. like JaspersOfEliade. disaPJlear as source material butnotasinn~Theinsightsthat~.bring become habitual, and theycanbecalleduponwtlen conllC'Xt
warrara.
tnowil'llthai ...winkis asgoodas aDOd, thatfuUstItemerais superfluousandwouklonlyinitale...:1'By no mans was l.onerpn an EliadescboIuorJaspmscholar.butheknewc:nouah
10relMc: theirwort
tohis own.To iIIUSba1e. in"An InteMcw with Fr.Bcmardlonerpn,S. 1....Lonergan was twiceaskedaboulJaspers. "Asked to comment onthepnsmttulnnlcrisisinrdItioa10 hisown~interabandtoJaspm'T1wOrigilltmdGoo/ojHislory. Fr.Lonerpn mnutcd:'I'NOll',10 bid:toJaspcn(icissome timesiDccIreadhisbook).'nJIBut later.hedoescontrast hiswortwith Jaspers' morecxplicitJy:
OnbciDcasked.illthec:onIextofJaspc:rs'discllSSioftofuial periods.
wbabcrtbcshift.«lhcpossibility ofa c:ommlnl stUft.1O inIeriority, was axiII,Fr.~""'*,·Y", Ofeounc.witIlJ~lUsaxill...~ the CJ'lla'FDCC ofindividuaJismrDl:ftthan Ift)'1hin&.Mydisrinctionsare firstofall:raJmsofmeanina...It
Itis inthisspirit, perhlps, thatweshoWd proceedwhenRfcnina 10the relationship betweenLonerpnandreli&Jous studies.Hewas not a schoJu of rdilious
_lUspmaalollhe_ .....-Jyol_-..i.,~
study.,.ishina10discow:r similaritiesanddiffermces. tramandvariarions.Wbmasked tocommentonIheK similarities. he couk1
cnw
onwbIIhe hidreadin an inklliJmt, reasonable and responsible way without any claim 10 cxptrt11C.HeWIS, ineffect,working prcc:isely inthemaMtrheset(onhin his method:\llorkingv.;thinIIfunCtlonal specialiry. re1atina his work toothers ""ming within the samespeciality,rel.linethatto other specialities withinthedisciplin:. reillinathediscipline 10othersciences. rela!lna thesciences to human livinJ.)0
Itispossible. theft, 10 lookItthesourcesused by Lonerpnfrom rtlicious sndies (0<a>mmonIy ...bym;pous ...)ondseehow l!lcy shapeand"""plemcnllUs WOft..Widw:u~ngcxhausIive. these indudeButtmann,Malinowski.andQao.
Lonerpnmakes refcrencc frcq\Il:ady10 the
wort
ofRudolfBultmanntt.oupout hiswritin&.
bothin.aiticaland.supponi\'Cmanner. Inl,..,igItI. Loncrpn idmtifics Bl.lltmIM as one in whoseworkmythis. prominenttatCIO')'.llbutlocates Bultmannin thecxiSlentiaJist counlCrpOSitions dIII_e to "blocktheidentific:llion ofthercaJ",ith bci... ofbci.. with the imclliaemJy pspcd and"'-y .ffinned, ondofthe _... ofbcina
wilhdoeobjeasofpmM ....Ii.... ..., .... . . - afflfmltion...nBut.ill9SI's"MethodmCasholicThcoIoty,"Bultmannisancxamplt ofonewho ..leastlikesIhemethodoIocicaI
SItpofrevasinacournapositionl,JJ "..bile irtr
apiahiEJw:otiotl he isnotedfordr1.wina
hishermeneutical pinciplafrom •philosophicalstanee.u This is !pvcn fuller voice in 196O"s~ThePhilosophyofHistoT~":"
[Bultmann} distinguishes between understanding and preunderstanding.
VersldndmsandVorversUindnis.Theunderstanding, theVers/tindnis,is this intmocking ortlledata(allhouahheexpresses himself somewhat differently). Buttheprcunderstanding.theVon:erstdndms.is.
philosophy,and his philosoplly for inlCTpfetinclheNew TeswnenI is Hcideger's. Ilhinkhehas thebetter part oftbc argument spinsttheless sophistica1edNew Testament scholars, insofar astheysayheis using.
philosophy10 intetpretthe New Testament. 'BU1soareyoll:hesays.
'andIknow whatmy philosophyi~yows is just a setofunconscious assumptions.Iam makinB itquiteplaintopeoplewlwI am preswniftl.
~7:~~a.:off~~=ly~~~~~~J\
This 1000e-hatc relationshipwithBuhmann - ontheone hand. respecting him for explicitly rootina his bennenMksinphilosophy. on lbeocbcr, decryiDgthe philosophical principleshe isemployins -continues throup,ut his writins.and Bultmannis theprincipk: modem scripture scholarwithwhomLonerpnenpges.
Pahaps his definitive statement on Bultmann comesfrom1963's "Exegesisand
AttheprcscnItime inNewTestamenIstudies.lbereis BulbIWVl, who rqxaentSsomethinganaIotoustothe c:lassicallypC ofcxcacsis insor... as hedemands.ptilosophy\0stalehisullimall:~;hisphilosoph~.
however, isjustthe opposite oflhtclassical philosopby, which is in objecIive caIqOries.For BuIImann, objective~ ~myth,and CYCf)'Ihinahastobettansposedintosubjeclivily.J6
SuchistheftllW'CofLoncrpn's assessment ofBWtmann,andhe continues 10 make refcmlcc10thissplitthrouJhoulMethod;"T1teo/ogyand
me
associated wririnp.)0Topiailr~,121
"BerwdLoaerpn.'"1lle~loIot*YolHiltory,..I'ItiJoItJpAiaJ"~P."s./'S&-/964, 54-19,.S9-60.
-aen.dLoaerpn.~.IIIdDopl&,"P1tilt»opltkaJ"~p"'""S&-/964, 142·
1S9,.IS4
differences bc1vwecn practical tonccm5andtheoreticalooncems, between tommon suse andphilosophy. a theme retumnt tMou&hout loncrpn's ",Titings.J1He brinKS up Branislow Malinowski'sMagic.Sc~ItCr.andRldigJOII, DnJOthoEssap.~andlIsnthe Trobriand lslanden in tompuison withthemodemstiemist.
pncbcIIconcoms:prepor;l\&1Ilcpound, pIonIil\&\heseed,pulliaa \he - ....pnllhe ... kcePnl """""seedfordlcfol1owi...Butanyl!Hna
_do
lhat sp/Im of knowingwasmythandmqic.andsaidmagicwouldinteml~theprac:tical sphere wbcnsomctNncneworuncontrollable oc:tWftd.Simllarty.the1nOdcmscientisthasUlanalotous'MWlclvicw.TheTrobriandlslanckr isinklliacmandrasonIblcinthe practical.andinalionalinthethcomicaI. The modem scientist,100.isinIClliacmItId
andantimqie - •blank...
If.VKUWnexistsinthe: popularmind, aterrificinaaonalMtionaI toIlvWsion can resultThisis one ofthe maiD problansofOW' timc. We tIRDOIbe conlCnlmcrdy10make more cuhi'Vllcdandmorecivilisedthe inICffiF:dMelI1rionaI
'*"
ofTrobriand livinc.while majlUiaina.~DO ....·slandwbid:llllCd10be u.bIbiIcd by myth . .
map:
bulwIKhisnowemply -wedoDOitIdnil.~be . . .beasts;we simply do notbocheraboutit. The raJproblemof
a.um.
liviDcislite problemofoccupyinalhisICn'itory.INsblank. with imeDiaenceMel reasonIblcncss.justas we"vcoccupiedtheterritoryIhItcanbecontrolled~sensible consequences.:"
This isthesame"problemofme chasm' v.ith whichhewas strugglina inlk lnultmu el Methodo,llJalthoughhedocsnotallude10Malinowskithere.Itis thus,In effect,thencc:essityformethod.(Ofan imelligenl way to not only answer the questions thatarcprompted bycxlFncies outside sensible consequenceshuetomediateand communicllt those ansWCf5tothe1araercommUftity.
Malinowski also serves10i1IustrIIC theanaJoaousPfOb'emo(thcdifftma$
between Hebrew and Gr=kcultureiftthesectioninlk CMo Trillo IbNthe1fIIe.NK::ene movcmcm.~lHeisusedapil!;todiiCU5S,byitsabseftccin theTrobriand Islanden., tedulical aaninain1963's"'1bc AtlaJocyofMeaniJl&...u Loaerpn useshiminabc contextofcartylanBUlltin hissectiononNICSofmanina inMttItotJirtTMology.o Lastly,heis livenISan example ofdevelopncnts in the socio&ogy ofn:liponwheR religion is undersIoodas ultimately more sipif.cantlhlnmere supastition inthe1974 pipet"Method: Trmds IDd Vari.ItioGs,....InDODColthcinstucesdoes Loner. . 10 ineoanydetail on Malinowski's findiftlS:bedocsDOtcriticisemeIhods..checksowcc:s..
addmscritics.or any IaSktbaa "lWUIdbercqWrcdwerecae10become ani.-rpmerof Malinowski or anhiseorian of primitive cultures. Similarly, Lonapnmakalimited
JJ~,.uBt".,,101.
-SetnoteIS.1bcM
.IDllDtoTrlIto:p..,A~. .t1.5caioftsof'thcl964editio1l(~. .Pan~) WlfCn.llledand published ..natWG)'lONk«I,tnnI.C_O'Donovu" (PIiIIdrIphia: W. .lllillllcr Praa,1976).Tlecomspl:llllint,.... . .IOI-I09.
Cl:a.-da.o.p..'1\eAMlotYol"...~_,...,,..,.I'Jl.I"", .13-21)•• 194.
a " . . ...11troioD'.".
... 8enwdt..qa ""MDod:T... V A7»rIColltclitM:,.".,by~J.F.
L-...1.J.,fRldaictE. Crowe, . .(NewVon: '915), 13-21._19.
albeitnotuninfonned use ofRlJdolfQno'sTItt Itku o/tlreHo/y.~'In InsIght, Lonergan discusses
tne
sense of the unknown:[On)theintellccllallevclthe operatorisCOAl:rctelythedNthedand disintm:s&ed desire toknow. It is thisdcsire.notin «W'I1Cmplarion oCtile aI..."known, bod had<d _ r... knowlcdF. _ in..lhe known unknown.ThepritKipkofdynamkCOITt$pOIJl.ienQlIsfor.
harmooiousorierutioa.onIhcpsythickvcI.and.fromtheMbftofdle CISCsuch anorienlltionwouldhave10consist in sometoSmic:dimension.
in some intimllion ofunplwnbeddqlhs.tI'IIIlCCNCdin man'sCedinp.
emotions. sentiments. Nor is thismerely •theoretical conclusion. as R.
QUo'sstudyoftbenonrariouIekmenl inIhtldeaofllteHolyrather oIlundondyindicaIcs...
Bach 1970's 1 k Responseof'theJesuitasPriestandAposdcintheModem Worid"....,and thesectiononreligious experience inthedlapIcron rcliJion in MetltoJ111 Tlwology.intancuaaeso similarthaitbeymust have beenwrittea vimally contemporaneously, list Orto's mysltrilllft lre,.M,.,. tifasci1lQllS alongw;tblillich's 'JflSPofllhimllCconccm'and KarlRabnc:r's expoundinconSt.lpaltius Loyola's consoWionwithout •CIU$C.q
l.ofterpn·s usc orOtto is limited.butitisof.piece with. mIjorcontributionhe fOWld 10hiswortfromthehisIoryoftdiaionsschool, RIJIIdy,Fricdridl. Heiler's asay
"Tbt HiAory ofRdilionsasIPrepIntioftfordie CoopenhoII ofRdipm."inan anlholocY of~essayseditedbyMirml ElialndJosephKitlpwa.
This.nthol~..T"1wHIS/oryofReligions:Essu)~In.\kJhoJoIogy.~~seems to have fanen into lonergan's hands intheswnmcrOf carly autumn of196&_In,\/e,hoJ '"
TMoiogy.hecitesthreeanKles fromthevolume: Heiler's. Eliadt's -Methodololical RemarksontheStudyof Religious Symbolism,"andErnstBenz's
-au
UndcrsWldina Non-christian Relisions." Benz's work on Shintoism(and,to. Icsscfextent, Buddhism) is ci\edtoclarifYtheDation ofhicTophanies.theassociation ofthe:OIhawise imptnXivabJe. unimaginable divine.theobjectiveofthe~notionsin their ...nctodand_... -"_1bcolljcd. ...ritul1.or_lhol occasionsrclip.experience.'" Biade's essay isaivcnasTqll'CSCMltiYeofbis collcc1cdwortin Ibcareaofsymbolandprimitiverelip..SIItis Heiler's essaythaiLoncTpnfindsthemostuscfW.Thesummer of 1968was givenabove astheprobabledatefor Loncrpn'sfirsttrlCOuntCfwithtbc volume, because itis inOctoberandOcmnbcrofdw yearthatLonerpnpvctwopeperswhich tontain the(1nIreferences&0HeUer wftKh are 10bereferredtoapin DOlc:Wy iaAktltotJ ill T1t«J/ogybut~hiswritinpon rcliei0u5studiesiuthedecide
folJowinc.
'"1"heoaocY ....
MID'sF~"wuJiwn.
the~c:dcbrIboasofSt.LouiJ UDivasity011O;tobcr17. 1961.'1'bcFUIIftofCbristiaMy"W1SftnlJiven
atHoly CI'OS1 CoUqe, Wortata"tdasadIuscas.on December 14, 1961.8odl.as theirtides indiClk,1RtOncemCd. withthepIIc:cofCbristianity indiemodemworldandits relevancy forthef'uturc.Thetheme 0(51. Louis Univrnity·s cciebralory symposium was ·'ThcoioSY ir.~ne Cit}, ofMan.-Lonergan's paper takes the approach of dealing indireclly with theolo;y in th~(m;lnnc:rs: "asitiss;tWltc:d in II\:onlcmporil.~ uni\'crsit~inflUC'nc.:d by otrn:r discipline5.!Spossibly relevant to questions other disciplines raise andtoproblems~ confrontand,consequendy,lS makinaitscontribution tothethought that will directt.~e futureofman:·n For his firstIhemc.henoteifinareasthatmeril anention forthe influence thI1theyhavebadon theology: history. philosophy, religious studies, method, andcommuniCltiOftS.Onreligious studies,hegives. lengthydesl;riplion,herereJaftd in full.
A thirdmajorinfluence isthefteld of religious studies:the phenomenology of rei
ilion.
thepsycholom' of rclicion.thesociology of relipon.thehistoryof religions.andthephilosopbyofreligion. I call this• major influence. not becausetheinfluence has been conspicuous. but because ormysipiflClDl andpowcrl\dcontcmponry tmIds.Thefim stems from Vaticln n.anditconsistsintheChurch's concernwith ccumcDism.withnon-Cluistian religioDs, andwiththeatheistncptioa of religiOlL This fKt requiresthe
thcoJosian
tord1ec1on his reliJion, not in isolationfrom aUothers.but in conjuntrioowithothers.Itrequires him 10 attend.notonly10thedifferences5CpIl'Iling hisreligionfromotbeB.but alsotothe similaritiesthatCOfIDCCIthem with one 1I'JOlber. To meet sucb requirementsthcoIOI)'will beledinto thefieldofreligious studiesIftd.indeed,while
mainina
its idcDtity,toCODCCi\'CilK1f ISa particularIyJlt'of religiousstudies.There is a second fKtor leading 10thesame conclusion.Ihave:aIrcadyspokenofthere1ations oftheolOl)'withhistoryand with philosophy. ButifitistotakeitspllCe inconlempcntyculture. itbas also 10 berelatedto allthehW'IIIDsc:ieDces;uditisinthefield of religiousstudies.inthephcnomenoIOIYand psycholo£y and sociology of religioa.,thII itwiDfind. models eldubitiDa what canbedoneandaccouats ofwhatbasbeentried andfound lIftSItisfaaory. Finally,thereisthe
theoIoJical
doctrinethIIGodpullSallmen sufftcientgnc:efor their salvation.This dottrineisretevant
toreligious SNdies;itmakesthem1\16id.69
IJ~i...o.rpa."'T1McMotYIlldMaa·sFuftft.~AS«otrdColi«tiOlf,I3S-4t.llm.
st~ofthemanifold ways Goersgracecomes to men and operates as lheseedthaifalls on rocbor amidst thorns01by~ WI~Sidtor on good ground 10bringforth fruiltflirtyOfsiJtty or. hundred fold. II
Onhis thirdtheme, the contribution oftheo'ogy to ....\ethought that ",ill makethe funRofman,Lorw:rpnapindnwsthcCOftCllISionthaiultlrnaltly,wtlencnpFJ ina projectme aUlhcnlic penon, orthe penonstriving forauthenticity, willaskquestionsof
wontlwtUlc?Iswhat I hope for reallywonhwhile? BeausemcDcan raise slath questions, andIftSWCfthem,andliveby theanswers.theycanbeprincipies of benevolenceandbeneficence. of aenuine co-operation. ofuue 1000"e...MThis love. for Lonerpn,isnotmu'S IChievcmcnlbutCod'spft.Follo....ina an exhortation ofPaul (Rom. .5:5, 1:3.5, 31-39).he cites Heiler•• "cclebratedSNdtnlohcliJions."whohas lisIcdSC"iCnfCIIURScomrnoa10die '"bigbrdiliofts. 04S
Wbcft:asin
'1'htokItY
andMIn'sFuture"Heiler'sfindiapwam.masinatc l""I'"P>_dleend,bydle_-rheF...ofC1lrUliooOy"waspresent<d,two monthsIata.l.oncrpn uses Heiler'sSC"iCnfeaNrcsIS.
staninap3int:For d willdnw aacnIionaway tiomQatis ourward andIOWIfd whII:is inward andvitIJin rdipoa. h willrass&Rusthatthe C1ristiIncbllRhcs and~dapite theirmM)'ditramca.bt\ICillc:ommoa
SOUlCI!lina """
~>CryprofOOlDdonddynomic:. """ ... CIwistiIIli1y.fuNrc.thatconstituIa •t.sisforseriousdiaiopenoI0IIIyImOnI Christians but
amona
therepmaalivcsor
allthe ....«teIrtliliofts."The1cet\U'e is • further explonrion of how beina in love:inInwvestric:tedmanner
",Illitl.l)l.)9 to/WI...
"/W.'I..i
• ...;... t.-.-,"1lef"","olOrialiry,R.IfS«:oItt/C~.-1490163,. '49.
is a uni\"crsal phenomenon, andhow itis existential convnitment andnotappeal to dogmathaisets thecoune of how'olI"Clive inthe~"OI1d.
lfone: takesthevaOOtIS lecturesl.one1pn"''ISgi\;nlthrou.a,hout1968,~' neatlyconespond10 various sections within MttltodInTMoiogy.'"8dief:Todays Issue.Jlrouah1ytorTCSpOftdstosection S.'Beliefs.' ofc:hapIcr2.'TheHumanGood.'
"Nanni Knowledp:ofGod,..)Iwhichatltmpts10address whcthcrGodisanobjectthai.
canbeknown as such, aves its mark insection4,'Pluralism in RCbJious Lanpaae: of chapter 12. 'Foundations.'andsection 2.'CloscdOptions.,' ofc:hapIcr 13, 'Systematics,' Lecturesof 1969. most of them Wlpublished. can by their lilies .lonebelinked 10 scc:tions ofMe/hod."The generallhemes of'1'heologyIDdMan'sFuNtC:"and'"TheFutureof Christianity,"namelytheunivmal experienceofbtina inloveinI IunrestriacdTDIMl:f, areechoed in sections 3. 4,andS. 'Rdipus Expcricnc:e,''ExpmsioasofRclipous Exporicncc;IIld.RcJ;...Deve1opmer<
DiaIcc1icaI;
ofchaplcr'.'Rd;llion: _ he~Heiler'smaiftconchasioa 10I.
si.
puaarapll:fI'here'}is _least one sehl:UronwhomODemay callfewan explicit stIICmCIlt011tbcuas common10S&dworldrcli,poasaCIIrisIiIairy.
J_
bIam.lon>os1rion_1linoU...._
Taoism."ApIpa'prqlIAdlilr"Paae-aS~.F"'Synod""'PiaIblqIl.MIrdlI6.196I.
InAS«oIdC~'1-99.
:HIA~.*CTSACOft¥CIIlion.Washil'Jl'l...O.C.• Nnt 17-20,1961. InAs.c-tColl«tioIl.I17.
ll.
"naekawaillcludlMHittory,R.lbc'1"boalaMDre1lllliMc,MoauIII.FebnIwy 24, 1969; 1111 A1Cf11d Mi..:1beo1otYtndOtherDisciplines"1110IttheT1lomu MortIIlItitult.MontreI1.Feb. 2S.
1969;~Mcani".IS'C_...,oflntGJdIlioft,Mllemni111!1cS)'lIIposMn 011HenIIeneurics.nc CIIlbolicUnMniryol"-ic:l, W...on,D.C.• April 1S-26. 1969; "WUlb1'heololY1"'"
oriftution ...ColIep,WiDowdUc(TOlOlIO).s..-.16, 1969;..,. .udBelidi" • • lDCICtintoithe A-x.A.caI:I-rofRdiJioA,lWrilllort.0C:I0ber2" 1969;"lIInI'aukIudtllc l'Ili"*"PI!Yof'lkeIitic-M ....CImo6cUtivenilyoi"-ica. W. . . . .D.C~Hoot.21.1969;_
MadipMConIIIIUIeIlM • •
, ....
~oftllcu.iYtnilyof'5c.Mic:W.~T~l'b·21,For Friedrich Halerhasdescribedatsome length seven such common areas.Whik I cannotre:proctucchl:retherich 1C:ctUl'toftus thought. I must.atkasl.live ,liSl oflhetopitshetreats: thatthmis.transttndent reality;thathe isirn.manerf in hWMn~that heis supmnebea~.
truth.righlCCMnnS.lJOO(!ne:ss;thathe is kwe. mercy. cornJaUion;thatthe waytoIUmisrepentance,sdf-denial.prayer,thatdw:""'Iyis tove olonc's neighbor.even ofone's enemies;thattheway is loveofGod.50thatbliss is concei\U as
tnowledF
ofGod.unionwithhim,Ofdi~utioninto him.60'Reliaion'is.pivotal chlpw:r(in.bookfilledwith pivotalchapcm) on which turnsthe norianofNnctionai specialization. For throuah it,throu&bestablishingthe dynamism of sanctifyinllfKenotas simply atheoloaical (Christilll) ClIqOlybutas.
phenomenon found
throuahout
theworld,malrinaitas constinaivc oCthc hwnan pmonspecialities intotwoIf'OUJBof four. one which is prior toconvmioft.and one which rollows.
Thus withHeiltr,Lonerpnis
makin&'
move that willlit . . . .tohismethod:bcina inkwcin anunresaric:stdmamer. Hei1cr'ssc:YCnlRaStomInllIItowortd~liJions.
oao·s"')'Stui....~nfo;rciIwMJ,Tillich's'paspol~"","",,'St.
Ipltius Loyola'scomoIII:ion without, cause. theorientationIOMRismyacry ill
observed in Malinowski's Trobriand Islanlim.andBultmlM's Iboncdway ofcopina withthechasm all informtUnctionaispecialisationanditsimpOftlDCC.
-A.IIt*Iditt1llrWce',109.
been, year·Ind·,.half long sabbatical. HismajorconccmIIthaitimewasthe:olocical me:Ihod,distoYerina' way oftumin&
thcotocY
intoanempi~scte:nce that is~asanOftlOi"lprocess andnola pe:nnanmtac:hieve:mcnl Since 1959. he:t.d beenteaching spe:daJcourses onIheoklgicaImethodatthe:Grqorianum.Iandwtw.was published 15/lUig1rlhid,oriJiully.been tonetived as, preface 1O.lheoloaicalmcthod.1 InFebruaryof1965,though,. moment ofinsiaht hit him. andhedrew. primitive diap'amwhichwasIhcfim ae.wive dc:scriptioaoffuncrioaaI spcciJJisation.J
hisIoIyolbow1he:specialitiescame 10
be:distiJlcWshed
willcome aftcfwards.T1Ic mIjor divisionsofthis chapler comedirtttlyfromthetintthm: sectionsofthe:fifthchapter of }"k,1todinTMoIogy."FunctionalSptcialitics...IT_OlIlnIS",P-wD _ _CM"""'M~'_._"'ollm... _ . dIclilloll96l;bodl_CRIIII-littIdwithpllikltoplly . . , - = - b i l l l - .T1ntcc:u.s calWOf,.... . . ._o«ered;_.dlt oll962(maa-~toManl'l1llolclm'),o.
illbotIIlhesprilll" falloll96J(theIMler01"'"_aou-liIledlOpli'1oIopIJy.wflilcthe
rom.
is ftOt._ucrou-/i. . . .T...*...,).
Des,.-"HiJlOritl_otrer.dilltMWor 1959. for all o(!JleMCIOIll'-.,then weeilhertlilOWl'llaurtlllMlOl"amsllkeaby It\IdenlsIlld~byM",forciraalMioe. TllaeilooeAwtber_hmdllC(aIlofl9S4,CMUt*dJWfivtnHIf
~::n.~~·~~i"'~'='':-U::=':==ion~e:--apIanliollO(
. . . . ....,.~forl...,.oId1t...O(....,.·-I",. ... As-.J
c
26J.71,.261.' ~V. 7. I (Mn),avIiIIWItu..AIdM:I • •L-.aa-dl . . . . T _ .
I. nreeTypaefSpeta.liutiw
Specialisation is first and foremost a form of collabofalion. Collaboration is
~when thecfTon required to accomptish a spttifictaskexcm1sthe abilitiesof onepenon.Theharvestisplentiful.~theIabow'cnarefew. When. task need be performedonlyonce.,collaborationtanproceedon. moreOfInsadhocbasis..WhenI taskisDnFing, coIlIbontionbecomes nonnative.
A taskcanbesimple or complUnd. A task is simple whenittannotbebroken downinto twoOfmore smaller. differenttasks.Ataskis compoundwhenitcanbe broken down intotwoor more simple tasks. Ylhen a simple wk cJ«:eedstheabilities of one penon.coIlaboruioatakn tbc fonn of divictinauptheIabow'requiredand havi"l _hpersonperform.panofw same simplewk.When. task is comp:lWld, coIlabocationc:antakeone of two fewms.,eitberdivMlinaupthelabourrequiredaDd _vina CKh person perform.J*\of CKh simpletuk,or dividinathecompowMl task inlOitssimple: tlskslftdbavin,CKhpenon perform.specific: simple:lastinitstntirdy.
Wbm.comp:NDd task is
onaotnl
andcoIl1bomionisnonnative" compound task dividedintoitsantiNall simpic labCIIIci1bcrbeperformedbyhavinc
diesimp&c tubperfOf1Dedbyvariouspersonson anad hocbasisorbyhlviftlthesame person performtheSIrhesimple wk on anonaoinabais.When thesame penon perl'ormsthe same simp'e task on an onaoinl basJs., that is specialisation.When.simple taske~c:ecd:stheabilitiesofone person, and collaboration takes theform ofdividi..up die labour Jequirccland hM... CIlChpenon perform.pariofthc samesimpletask.divisioneMeitherbeId hocOfbaedontheCOMtlIlofthe &ask.Whal
thaI 100is specialisation.
Whena compound task. is divided intoitssimpletasks.eachlaskcanbelocatedin time accorckng10its relationship10the other simplewks.Thus,eachtask.save for the first andthelast.has.wk lhatcomesbefore it andonethatcomes after. When atask needbepcrfonncdonly once, the firstwk hasnothing prior andthelast taskhasnothing to rollow: tbtfirst task isthelqinning andthelasttask.istheend.When a task is onaoing,thefirst and lw tasksare first and last only ronnally: there is no begiMing and noend.,thefirsttask followsthe last.andthelasttask is followedbythefirst.
As.task is ongoing,asnewsituationsarise, apersonpcrfonningthesame simple taskdevisesnewtechniques,newlansuqe,newinsights intothe task.beingperformed.
A simple taskmayevol'le into. compowtdwk.andfunhcr collaboration may be required. Traditionsdevelopandprogress,andtcdutiques, language,aDdinsipts are puscd down
tbrouJh
thetradition,ever arowinl morecomplexand specialised.Traditions decline.andthewealthoflCChniqucandskillneverthelessforgetsthaithereis alaraer,unified,compound task of whichtheyue but •
.-n.
albeit, like 8Uthe other constituenttasks,an integral pert. These is instad an emphasis onthecontem00wlUcb tbctasksartptrfonncd.11ucet)'ptSof specialisation cannow be discerned.Thereis specialisationbased onthedivi$ionofcontentof the formally first task.Thereis spccialiSliionbasedonthe divisionofCODICIdofthefonnallylasttask. There isspecialisatioobIsedon the divisioa ofa compculdtaskintoitssimple tasks priortothedivision ofcomcmofthc simple
2'
Thetask of any human science is 10 mediate bct""un a cultural mau'ixandthe signifiCaJKCandrole of somethingInthat matrix.Thetask of mediation entails a movement from the accumulation of data tothecommunication of results. There is tbus atypeofspccialisationbased on a division oftheaa:umulalcd data.,(heformally fim task,which Lonerpn caUs faeld specialisation.Thereis atypeof specialisation based on
• division ofthc communicated results.,theformally last task, subject specialisation.
Thereis.typeofspecialiSilion based onthedivisionsofwks in the movemcnl from datato results.. funetjonal specialisation.
Whenoneundcntandsone's speciality simply intermsoftbe dataonc investiptes. oneunderstandsoneself as workina 'inthefield of... • Thusthefield of theoI08)'canbedividedintothegenera of scripnual, patristic, medieval, reformation studies(intO'aJ;Q)~Kripcuralstudicsc:anbe further divided intothespecies oCOld Testamentand. NewTestament; Old Testamentstudiescanbe furtherdividedimothe subspecies ofLlw,thePrOf)hets.theWritinp.WhenoneundeB1ands one's speciality simply in terms
or
theresults10be communicated. one undcrstaDds oneselfISwodiq 'inw SlIbjcctof... • ThusthesubjectofthcolOiY can be divided intotheacnmof biblical.posunI.hi_....
one! ....JoPeaIdeputmcnIs;lhebiblicaldcpIrlmmt '""be dividedinto Semiticlanauaaes. Hebrewhistory,thereligions ortbc ancient Near East, and Christiantheology.~·11lae~aretaken&omlo*rJratiiffT1tt%f;y, 125-26.Ma---'t.Mtcalldlilltolfidd special_iondftcrmilllirllwMl:yowprilIlaryIOIoIIt:aare.wtliletubjlCl spciali1aioadnaaiIIninwlIicb
Thedanll!er \loith both field and subject specialisation is Iwofold. First. as one's s~iality(eilher field or subj«t) grows nanowu.there is a tendency to forgethow the task one is performing relatestothetasks othersaTeperforming \\-ithin the collaborative enterprise.Second.as one's speciality (either field or subject)growsnanower,lhereis.
tendency to pm'onn allthesimple tasks that constitule the compound task of moving ITom dati to results and thereby fail10distinguish bctwccnthevarious tasks.
Functional specialisation answers the twofolddangerof field and subject specialisation.ItdistinguishesandscplU3tes successive stqes intheproce$Sfiomdata 10 results. the ordering of tasks from what isConna1ly first to what is ((lfIN]ly last. This division isnotthecontingent division ofdata offteld spccialisatiOD orthecontingent division ofcommunication ofresutts of subject spec1aJisation. but is grounded inthe copitionaJ structure ofthehumanpenon.II isnot Ireplaccmentof faeld or subject specialisation: rather.it,ubI.testbem.1ocatina them within alaraer heuristic framework.
1. A. £iptfold Divilioa
Thefe areeipal'unc:tionalspeeialilies:raeuch,interpreWion, history.dialectic.
foundations. doctrines(policies).systematics.,and commwUeations.
Research is conccmcdwiththepthcri..ordaIa. ItmatesIvailablethedata releYanl toinvcstiption. Research is of twokinds.
aeneral
and special. General reseatth is the Iocatiorl. exca\lluon. and mapping ofancientcities,thefillina ofmuseums and archiveswithttanse:riptions,inscriplions, symbols, andswues,
thedecipherinl of[email protected] and collalion ofte:cts,thedevelopment ofcritical editions.the composition orindm.It makes1M best dataavailable inlhebtuway. Specialresearch IS theasscmblinS ofdati relevant 10.~KularqUoeS1ion or problem: it reapsthefruitsof theloo1s and. aechniques of~Ircscuth.,~is pedonnedbyor for someone opeminain one oftheother functional specialities. As resnrch is concerned (ortmOSt withdata,ittsthefonnally nrstsp:cwily.
Inlcrpretatton is conumedwithunderstandina whatWISmear4.. It seeksto understand.what theaUlhorwaswri1inslbout.wbatluaua8C the IUthorused10 expcss herself.andwhattheauthor W'derstood aboutwhatshewas Mitin, about.SThemoreI textis wriaen in asystematicway.the lessitstandsinneedofexqesis:.buttheless it was wrinm inIsystematic ...yandthemcxcitwas written inthe c:ommonsense mode ofthetimeandpl8cc:in which it waswriaen, themoreitstandsiJllCCdofcxqcsjs.
Comine10undemand. thecommon$tMItmilteu in whichthetextwaswriacnis.slow
andone'sowncommonSCftSC:milicu.1Dd judainawhether it beauthentic or inaulhemic:.
in •stu:ofpRlI.I'eSSor •stMCofdecl.. 1'beRisalsothetaskof
judPna
whether one'sundm&and:in&
is corrm (wtUeh is noIlhe sameISjq;nawbcthnthe.utbor's undcrsundinawastoITC'Cl).andswine_
meani. .otthc1CXtThis-.cmcnt is.tcchrricalreswement ofthc author's undcrstandin, inImanner sw1lblc for vcriftcltion.
J·Aul:hor'c:.IhcRbcundcnloodlS·pn;IlMerrAlaI,'wil:btCldillitsbrolder_~·Clrl'Wr:JI."'·
TBditioNlthDosY" obviouIIy.mDIIly~widKriplUrtlDd~c::c.iIiIr'"aeydical
~tMm-it~Ii""""""lDdIae.~dlII""ID""""'"
(riluaI.~<n1~flJ..lIlIterialcdn.Ift,IIC.)c:MbclUbjectlOtIIt---"1Ild acpricalaltol~Tht~-'-'.MlIIDYde"'IO_il_~_ol
h isnota declarative on ""hat \I,as actually going forward atthetime ohhe lext's composition.
HistOf)' is conmncdwith FncralltlO\'emmtsthrouchtimeandIdual events.
HistOf)' pbccstheundcfuanding of ate:aasdisccmcd~'theinterpreter within" broider contexlWhere theinlcrptttt makes ju:ipnents onwht:thcfbet'uncicntandinaofthe authof is cOfTtC't.thehistorianmakes judgments onwMtherthe.~hor'sundcrswtdinaof whatwasgoingfOfWlldiscorrect.
Hmo.y
canthusbebrokendown inlO threetypes:basic. special and aeneral. Basic history is concernedwithwbmandw~and how who did wbat to whic:btnd.Ittherefore finds the factsoflUstofy within thedillof thetclCt (thehi5tOl'y thatwas 'MittenaboutwithintheIUSlOr)' thaiwaswrinen). Specialhistoryis concerned withmovcmcnb:cultural. institutional, or doctriDl1 General historyisbtiic histofyi11umiPlledbyspecialhistory.As.funttional spc:cwity of. discipline,the historian'smaiDfocuswould bethespecial hisIocy~to IbIt discipline:for
theoloaY.
itis thedoctrinalhisay ofChristian theoklty,whmas(or economies it would be theinstiuioaal bisIofyofCCODOaliccxc 8&f:within thc speciality !be special history-.Id~_ historyond mnoin_In>m
FnenIhistory,,,IS withinthefull view Ihc:recanbepasped.thedift'"cmK:a and similariOes 100Ihct--
Wbcreputoftht historian's task is10idmtifythncdifferencesandsimilarities betweenmovement5,dialmic is concernedwithchotec.Itseeks fim to classifythe:diffcrcnccs bctwccn movements.MovementsCMdiffer in three ways:theycanbe
genetic. complementary, or irreducible. Genetic differences are different by differences in stages of development. later
staaes
presuppose earlier stages. panlytoinclude and panly to uansform. thus genetic differences are either different moments y,ithin the same development or,whencrossing cultures,momentsfrom cultures at differentstagesof development. Complementary differencesartdifferences of speciality within compound tasks. Differentobjectsinvolve different techniques, as do different conlents, thus complementary differences canbeovatOlnCbytheir integration into a larger whole (whic:b,as an example, is what Lonergan'smethodattemptsto do).Irreducible differences are what can oot be explainedbyzcnetic or complementary differenc:c. What for one isbl,d;fortheother is white: one yes.. one no: one wron& one right.Dialectic seeks to orderthedilTcrcnccsandthesimilarities. find ...hat is attherootoflbem. II prepares theway forthechoosing ofone over the other.Thefifth speciality, foundations. thcmatizes and objectifiesthechoice. Wherethe first four phases were amcemedwiththe_liscerUna: to biSiOfY.thespecialist in folmdltions voiceswhcTeshestandsinthecourse ofameraJhistory,towhich movement shebeJonss,thereason sbc bclonp10that movementandnotto 0Cbcrs.Thecbotte she has made iscxistential:itis not. simpJcc:xpression of preference. it is ins1Cad a constitutive shiftbywhichsheceases 10 be an obseNerandbecomes.putitiplnl.
Althoughthe ,boiceispersonal. it isnotnccmarily private. asthechoice canbemade by manyandthus a commWliIy can be formedtosustain uchotherinthe consequences of their choic:e.and thiscommunity can sprad histori",ly
throuah
aenmtions and across cultures.AstheIDO\'mICnIeximintime,itissubjectbothtoproaress andtodecline: the specialities of dialecticandfoundations arc thus in an ongoing process of choosing and expressing those choices.Thefoundationalist is also concerned ....ilh the mediating nature of her discipline withinthelarger shift in horizon oftheexistentialact of choosina. Foundations is thus also concerned with the developmcrl of specialand general calegolies. General cateaorics arcthosesharedwlthother disciplines. while spula! categories are puricularly otherown.Lastly,foundationsaddresses the irreducible differencesfrom thehorimnof onewhohas made the choicebydcvelopin&
positionsanclreversinl eouDter-p:tSitions.
Doctrines arctheexpressions ofthejudgmentsoffllf:t and value embodied inthe positions developedbyfoundations.Theyarenotsimplytheobjectification ofthc existential choice of foWldltions. which locatethepresentinthemovements ofthepast, butare alSOcxpressiol1S of bowthemovement istoensaae the f\lltllrC.Assuch. they are equivalent topol~cs,inthattheydealwithattitudes and ends. Ifone ofmeaims ofthe functional specialityhistoryistostudythespecial historywithinthe«lfttextof
acncraJ
historytodetermine whatwasICtllIIly !JOin.forward. doctrines reaffinns thlt whitwas goingfOl'Wlt'd sbouId continuetoaoforwardandplay •roleintbebroeder social context bystatinc definitively whatthatmovanentadUllly as. 1ftlhcolotY.docuinciSI permanentICIUevement inthIt themeaning remains true despite its expression being historically conditioned.Itis a retrieval ofwhattruths maybelos!:by a uadition in de(:line orbytheconfusioncaused bydifferencesillcommon sense meaninssand 1b_Iy«lllditioned ...
Systematits aimsIImakina:thestalemcntsofdoctrinesIDkntandabIcand
lhcttfOl'C effective.Itisthe:P'c:panltion forecrecti\~communication. .00. is thus conccmcd\\omthe reinlCpMxtofdoctrinalmeaning in awaythallddresseshisloncalr~·
conditioned human Iivina. In a dassicist mode: it enllilcd simplytheinlelli~tordenng ofanswmextrinsieoftbclCCidmtaIsoftwmanhistory,but inImodemconteXl il also must contend withthevarietiesof human experienl:c: andthedifferences in common sense.ThemoRsystematic •len.thelessilis in need of exegesis and inlelp'CWion.
ThesystemItidanmust tbcreforebeISconcernedwithher own cultural milieu asthe interpreter isconcemcd withthec:ulhU'lI milieu oftbe author she seeks 10 interpret. As doctrines conespond10polK:tes.so systematics correspondstopolicy planning.
Communicationsisconcerned with •discipline in its eX1emal relations. A diseiplmetIDooJy CXJlfCSS iuelfthrouabits~thus conUrl\mitltionsisthespeciality ofdIta
JCIICfIlioa.
Adiscipline relatesboth10otherdisciplinesand10people of tommOn SCftSCinall cuhllmandplK:cs.1IlditseekstoWtcIdvantqeofany comm-ativemediiavai"'l0itItisthe c:xcaaionolthepoliciesIDIdeilldocbines andpIamcdinsysaemabc:s.J\ISlISCKbspecialityperformsits0'Imform ofspecial raardI~aa.diequr:sboDitseeks 10answer,sotooCKhspcciaIitybasits0'<1111 form ofs;peaaI alIIIJIlUIIicab 'Ibm isCOIMlIlllicalionIInOnIspecialitiesas wen as IIIXRICdisciplines.The daIIIaeneI1Iedistbcresultof. discipline's ref1cc:tiolL, and is thus thefOl1Dlllylast spcciality.3. GI"OtI...dae0MIi0.
'Thefuncbona1
spccwmts
II'CDOt,inMme,difl'aatIfrom whIlwe:nlbereft:therehadbeendoctrinal theologians. systematic: theologians. histonans. lnlcrpRlers. and soforthpriortoLonergan.Butlonnpn'smethod~acesthem\\;unn a frameworkdw hasIS its validity two invariants: the structure of inttnlional conscIousness and the two movements ofleaming.
IlUigN is awad thatconcentraIeSon cOIftitional SlnJeture,theinvariant manner in which humans come toknow.InitloneTpndiKems~elements ftakenfrom AquinasandAristotle) that make up the movement from dall.lO a judpnenl offact:
experience, quesrionfonnation.insipt inlO phantasm. answer formulation, question for
~f1cction,rdlc:c:tivcinsiJbt.jladpncnt.Eachelement canbeSocatedonone ofthtee le\.oels: experience, understandins. andjudgment.
The level ofexperience is c:onstiMCdbyone element.experienceofdata.T'hinp are only kDowft\0us
throup
oursensa.. sisfll.
smell.taste,!OUCh,andhearinc.We have memory,sowhatwe tc:eaJllTom previous experiences(wMtherundcmoodor noI)can alsobeexperienced. ToI'IOlexperienceis tobein somedrcamJc:sss~butwecan also besimply indaIbw10thedIIaofsense.AttheIeYdofcxpcricnotweareIIourmost embodied.ItourIDO$lanimalistic.and our aacntion may bedra....T1 ...yfrom data by otherc:onseqPoaeDCaof ourembodinlCftl,weha non-intenliOllll5lllcsudtrends. But bei..iM.aentive10data canbe COI'TtC1tdwhenweseek10undm&Ind.TheSevelof
undcnlandina
isconstihftdby dweelements: question formation.insiahtintophamasm.andansWCf formulation.Thequestioneffectstheshiftfrom simply~dlc . . .
to"" *
iIKIliFat quc:stioIl, ''MIllis it:" The insist- intophu'III:smischcciscemmtntofanorpnis.aioalJprinciple..pIIIan..withindlcotheTwi5C:randomdata.Thereis thus an answer10the-WhaIISitT ql.teStion, which can bemade aniculate either as. formula or some form of5U.lemmtFailing 10 effect the shift (rom cxpericnc:c to undemanding.notaskingwhititISone is experientinl. is anKt
weconstructcanbeeither toospantofdata.in which caseW'CC.ilto take relevantdati intoKCOWtt,ortooawash indIla,inwhich case wetakeirrdtYanldataintoaetOWll Butbangstupidcanbec~whmweseek10
judac.
Thelevel ofjudpnenl is constitutedbythree clements: reflective qucstion formation, retlective insipt.andjudCJnent.Thereflective: question effectstheshiftfrom anappImIamwertoaskingthercasonabk question. 'Is itthe
riaht
answer?'The reflective~&htseeksboththeconditionsthatMedtobe fulfilled in Ofder forthe answer10betrueandwbecherthoKconditioftsarc indeed fulfilled. The judplml isthe 'ya'or 'no' answcrtotherdlcctive question. Failina:toeffecttheshiftfromaJthouPwecanalsobesillyinow judging. We maybe100 quicktoaJrtml tbc rwfilmall ofCODditions.or we1M)'100reI~toevercommitourxIYCS 10anUlSWCf.
1tl/1tSigItI.judamenUof valueworkedalone1hcsameSU\lCQftu judgmcms of factThesameSCYCIIclements ftomdata10jud£mcnt werein cft'ect,btl:mequestioa 'WhItitit?'wasreplacedby'Whatgoodis it?'But after lnsigJu,thenotionora distinct fourthlevel begins to appear: the level ofdecision..6There are severalapproKhesto
