[quote="Dear_God, post:9, topic:112643"]
I did an internet search for Tillich and Catholicism and came up with this forum's link. Given that I'm responding to a 2008 posting, I doubt that others will follow but here is my two cents worth.
Awww, DeeGee, you've come back for more!!
Now why did you tell us you did an Internet search for Tillich and Catholicism? We all know how you tried to ram Tillich's version of Protestantism down our throats in another thread very recently. Didn't you DeeGee? That thread got taken down. Just as well, because it contained so much heresy.
I highly recommend Tillich and he has many books and there are many critical papers on him.
No wonder there are so many 'critical papers' on him. Considering how he had a difficult upbringing which influenced his beliefs and writings.
Tillich can be considered as the beginning of what is classified as liberal theology.
Liberal Theology?!! You mean a self indulgent, relativistic theory on how to please yourself and God all at the same time?
Note that there is a difference as to what one is speaking of when regards to theology and Christianity.
Well, DeeGee, another of your asinine sentences that needs interpreting. If my interpretation of this one is correct, you are telling us that theology is different from Christianity......:shrug:
Tillich is hard to read and I recommend his various books regarding specific issues.
Tillich hard to read?! You are kidding me, right? He is easy to read, but his message is confusing and that might be what you are referring to. That is not surprising really, because Tillich himself was confused.
As one begins to understand each issue, not that you have to agree with his thesis, you will begin to understand how he writes and you may find his Systematic Theology easier to read. Tillich is like Aquinas in his writing.
Oh DeeGee, now I know you are joshing. Tillich doesn't come anywhere near Aquinas. Aquinas is leagues ahead of Tillich in substance, style, erudition, scope and originality. Besides, Aquinas knew exactly what he believed in. Tillich didn't.
His theology is very philosophical, and therefore explained very concisely. This is when one begins to understand Tillich, when one understands his way of writing. Tillich writes from history (Christian Thought is a book of Tillich's), from psychology and as I said from philosophy. Which means that 1 + 1 = 2. He writes in truths. His writing is systematically the laying out of truths as history knows truths. This understanding of Tillich's writing makes understanding Tillich much easier.
Well, you don't seem to understand Tillich very well. In that last thread you never did explain how Tillich kept saying he was intellectually attracted to Catholicism and why he stated, in his own words, that Protestanism could never survive without the core system of Catholicism. He accepted that the 'Protestant Principle' was deeply flawed.
Another post in this forum stated that Tillich imparts what Protestantism is about. Wrong, at least from the standpoint that what most Catholics understand of Protestantism is not Tillich's theology. Tillich's theology is largely rejected by most understanding of Protestants. Fact is most Christians fail to understand their own religion let alone another's religion. For the most part, Christians, whether Catholic or Protestant, have no more than an opinion regarding other denominations.
Oh my DeeGee, what sweeping statements! Of course you have here adopted the typical intellectual position of the moral and intellectual relativist (excuse the oxymoron) by telling us that anyone who responds to you will only be expressing an opinion.
Well guess what DeeGee. Some of us have informed opinions. Here's mine - In the last thread where you bombarded us with quote after quote from Tillich, I pointed out the inherent problem with Tillich's position because it embraced the problem of Antinomianism. Antinomianism is heretical to Catholic Church teachings and dogma. No ifs, buts or maybes. You failed to address this issue despite repeated requests on that last thread.
I said I highly recommend Tillich. Tillich will establish meaning and definition of Christian symbolism. He will also establish a new symbolism because what once was understood now no longer is understood and needs a new meaning to reestablish the original sense of the Christian symbol. What comes to mind is Christian understanding of spirit. Tillich is a good learning tool to regain the historical perspective of Christianity.
Oh give us a break DeeGee. Please. We have well established and well recognised Christian symbols. Tillich was a confused thinker who had one foot in the Catholic Church and one foot out. The only reason he didn't convert was because of his experiences having a strict father and of being bought up in strict Prussian society.
Search any topic combined with Tillich and you will find some critical thought to read. This would be a most certain learning experience for any Christian.
Go and read the Catechism instead. It's far more educational. And, of course, for really good philosophical insights and particularly in relation to the Natural Law, which underpins Catholicism, read Aquinas. His influence on western thought has been immense. Not like Tillich, whose theology DeeGee tells us is "...largely rejected by most understanding of Protestants."