RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR DULLES II Boston College对杜尔斯教授的回应波士顿学院.pdfVIP

RESPONSE TO PROFESSOR DULLES-I I I presume that the logic of inviting me here was that I should respond to the section of the paper which deals with me. I will there- fore confine my remarks almost exclusively to those pages of Professor Dulless paper. Of the material in the last section of the paper I can only say that I find it very unpersuasive and that the categories used are inadequate to deal with the religious issue that interests me. I am sure that most of you have had the surprising and depressing experience of seeing yourself summarized in print. Naturally one feels the summary is unfair; if it could be said in seven pages one would not have taken three hundred. I know that Professor Dulles has no axe to grind either ideological or personal in his criticism of me; neither do I in these remarks directed at him. Dulles says of me : I do not wish to imply that his reflections are of small value to the theology of revelation. That is a kind statement but not an accurate one. If his criticisms of me are correct then my work should be judged a disaster. More importantly, he assumes that I am writing theology although I was explicitly challenging the existence of theology. I was not attempting to out-theologize Karl Rahner; I was not writing in the field of theology at all. In an article I had in the Wanderer recently I wrote : The only thing I plead for is that I not be attacked for failing to throw touchdown passes when I am trying to hit home runs. I could write a more negative review of my own book than any that has yet been written. But I would like it criticized for its obvious weaknesses, especially for its tinge of sexism and its inadequate devel-