Przeglądaj wg Autor "Menke, Karl-Heinz"

Teraz wyświetlane 1 - 5 z 5

Boży postulat bezwarunkowej solidarności i jego wypełnienie przez Chrystusa
Menke, Karl-Heinz (Wydawnictwo Pallottinum, 1993)
Joseph Ratzingers Antwort auf die religionsgeschichtliche Relativierung des Christentums
Menke, Karl-Heinz (Wydawnictwo Towarzystwa Naukowego Katolickiego Uniwersytetu Lubelskiego, 2019)
Joseph Ratzinger, who is author of the teaching document “Dominus Iesus”, published by Pope John Paul II at the turn of the millennium, opposes the relativisation of the Christian truth claim as it is made from the perspective of comparative religion. He distinguishes between an ascendant variation of religion (which is also called ‘Asian’ or ‘related to mysticism’) and a descendent variation of religion (which is also called ‘monotheistic’ or ‘revelatory’). The former is determined by the relativisation of all dogmatic statements in favour of a transcendent truth, which each may interpret in their own way. The descendant variation, on the other hand, takes God, not man as a starting point. It is − whether in the form of Judaism, Christianity or Islam – monotheistic. For it is based on the personal self-revelation of the one and only Creator in the finitude of space and time. Whereas Judaism identifies the one and only truth of God with the history experienced and remembered by the people of Israel, Islam identifies the only truth of God with a book, the Qu’ran, as it is very much in contrast to Christianity where the person of Jesus Christ is considered the only truth of God. According to Joseph Ratzinger it makes a huge difference whether a person or a book is regarded to be the self-revelation of the absolute, i.e. God. This is because a person is not an object. The only logic that does justice to a person is the dia-logic, i.e. inter-communication or inter-action. A Christianity which remains faithful to its origin and to its true nature can never, as the emeritus Pope emphasizes by distancing himself from the Heidelberg Egyptologist Jan Asmann, commit any kind of violence against dissenters. Because the God whom Christians testify is none other than the man who said of himself, “He who has seen me has seen the Father.” (Joh 14.9) He is none other but the Redeemer, who allows Himself to be crucified rather than imposing something through violence, and may it objectively be the best which could be wished for.
Kreuz und Trinität oder der wahre Dornbusch
Menke, Karl-Heinz (Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II & Towarzystwo Teologów Dogmatyków, 2018)
In German theology, even in the context of the cross and the resurrection, sin is barely talked about. By referring to the unconditional forgiveness of God, the Christ event is explained as the revelation of unconditional love. Incarnation and the cross are not seen as essential for defeating sin, but are rather regarded as a revelation of God’s solidarity the people. This view is countered by Menke’s thesis that in the New Testament hardly anything is so clearly attested as that Jesus was crucified „because of our sins” (1 Cor. 15,3). Menke explains sin as the only reality which man himself can create out of nothing; as the reality which God does not want on any account and yet cannot prevent, because he does not revoke the free will he granted man. What can be understood as failure of self-causality of creation on the ‘pre-conscious’ levels of evolution is recognized as sin on the level of human beings who are endowed with consciousness and free will. God is not indifferent to sin, as the writings of the Old Testament testify. But if he wishes to perpetuate the sinner’s free will he can only encounter the consequences of perverted freedom where there is sin: within the boundaries of time and space. Only because of the fact that Jesus is hypostatically united to God the Son as second person of the Trinity, he can convey God himself even to where there is the opposite of communion with God: namely sin. The Old Testament compares the ‘place’ which is the negation of God, i.e. sin, with a prison (‘Sheol’) into which the sinner has locked himself. The Easter event means that with Jesus, God himself reaches out to where the opposite of trinitarian love is, i.e. Sheol. In their confession of faith Christians have confessed that God „descended into hell”. Since then ‘Sheol’ no longer exists. Since then, sin no longer has the power to separate the sinner from God – unless the sinner willfully rejects the Redeemer’s hand, which reaches out to the sinner even in the most hopeless situation. Therefore, Hans Urs von Balthasar distinguishes between the ‘Sheol’, which at Easter was defeated once and for all and the many hells of each individual, who reject the hand of Christ offered to them for reconciliation. Nevertheless can this rejection be revoked at any time by the sinner’s free decision to grasp God’s hand and thus reconcile with the Redeemer.
Posynodalna adhortacja apostolska „Amoris laetitia” w polu napięcia między wolnością i prawdą
Menke, Karl-Heinz (Wydawnictwo Pallottinum, 2016)
Wolność teonomiczna i libertariańska. Porównanie metakrytyczne
Menke, Karl-Heinz (Katolicki Uniwersytet Lubelski Jana Pawła II & Towarzystwo Teologów Dogmatyków, 2023)
In this article, Karl-Heinz Menke takes up an argument with two Catholic thinkers, namely Magnus Striet, a fundamental theologian from Freiburg, and Saskia Wendel, a professor-theologian from Tübingen. Striet and Wendel transfer Protestant formulas of sola to recent Catholic theology, building on the libertarian conception of freedom that has continued from Duns Scotus through W. Ockham to I. Kant. The libertarian turn demanded of the Church by Striet and Wendel would be to take the content of revelation ‒ which for them is merely an interpretation ‒ not as subject-independent insights of theoretical reason, but as claims of practical reason. According to them, revelation and reason, grace and freedom are ‒ as K.-H. notes. Menke ‒ first of all a very personal experience. Therefore, the Church’s magisterial teaching is a discriminatory one that fits into the whole history of human oppression. These and other theses are ultimately decisively rejected by Prof. Menke, who represents the classical position of Catholic theology.