Browse results
Contributors include: Michael W. Dunne, Jean-François Genest†, Michael Haren, Elżbieta Jung, Severin V. Kitanov, Stephen Lahey, Monika Michałowska, Simon Nolan O.Carm, Bridget Riley, Chris Schabel, and John T. Slotemaker
Contributors include: Michael W. Dunne, Jean-François Genest†, Michael Haren, Elżbieta Jung, Severin V. Kitanov, Stephen Lahey, Monika Michałowska, Simon Nolan O.Carm, Bridget Riley, Chris Schabel, and John T. Slotemaker
Abstract
In 1894 Germain Morin identified a collection of 31 Pseudo-Chrysostomic sermons as the work of a single late antique Latin author. Although widely read in the Middle Ages, there is still little consensus about where or when this author wrote. Morin himself originally proposed sixth-century Naples, Adalbert de Vogüé noticed parallels with the Rule of the Master, and, most recently, Jean-Paul Bouhot and Francois Leroy have argued for fifth-century North Africa. This paper explores the collection’s contextual clues, pre-baptismal liturgy, and anti-Arian and anti-Pelagian theology to make a case for considering it the product of clerical circles within Ostrogothic Rome. The author may have been writing during the Second Semi-Pelagian Controversy (519–529 CE), perhaps in direct dialogue with Fulgentius of Ruspe. He displays an attitude towards human free will that is surprisingly similar to Boethius’s and may have been a member of the circles of Boethius, Proba, and the deacon John in the early 520s.
Contributors include: Joseph Herl, Jane Schatkin Hettrick, E.J. Hutchinson, Jack D. Kilcrease, E. Christian Kopf, John G. Nordling, Piergiacomo Petrioli, Eric G. Phillips, Richard J. Serina, Jr, R. Alden Smith, Carl P.E. Springer, Manfred Svensson, William P. Weaver, and Daniel Zager.
Contributors include: Joseph Herl, Jane Schatkin Hettrick, E.J. Hutchinson, Jack D. Kilcrease, E. Christian Kopf, John G. Nordling, Piergiacomo Petrioli, Eric G. Phillips, Richard J. Serina, Jr, R. Alden Smith, Carl P.E. Springer, Manfred Svensson, William P. Weaver, and Daniel Zager.
Zhang makes use of Plato’s cave allegory to explain Suhrawardī’s Illuminationist project. Focusing on three areas—the theory of presential knowledge, the ontological discussion of mental considerations, and Light Metaphysics—Zhang convincingly reveals the Nominalist and Existential nature of Illuminationism and thereby proposes a new way of understanding how Suhrawardī’s central philosophical ideas cohere.
Zhang makes use of Plato’s cave allegory to explain Suhrawardī’s Illuminationist project. Focusing on three areas—the theory of presential knowledge, the ontological discussion of mental considerations, and Light Metaphysics—Zhang convincingly reveals the Nominalist and Existential nature of Illuminationism and thereby proposes a new way of understanding how Suhrawardī’s central philosophical ideas cohere.