This article introduces the French philosopher Jean-Luc Nancy to theologians by placing him in critical dialogue with Karl Rahner. It examines how Nancy's deconstruction of Christianity accuses Western reason, including Christianity, of forgetting the body and supporting an ethos of disembodiment. Nancy proposes a new opening of reason (déclosion, “dis-closure”) and a corresponding praxis (“adoration”). This reason and praxis involve an exit from Christianity. Rahnerian essays on matter, spirit, and sacramentality demonstrate that while Christianity has, historically, fallen prey to the pathologies Nancy identifies, it also has thought in terms of something like dis-closed reason and has practiced something like “adoration.” While Nancy's insistence on the need for an exit from Christianity is not necessarily well posed, his deconstruction of Christianity can help Christian theologians as they develop thinking that supports an ethos sensitive to the body—or that keeps the body's sense open.

John Thiel's development of the category of “dramatic development” in his stimulating and influential Senses of Tradition offers a valuable entry point into the current discussion of the continuity or discontinuity between Vatican II and traditional Roman Catholic thought. This article extends and modifies Thiel's arguments in light of criticisms by Kathryn Tanner and Alasdair MacIntyre's description of the different ways in which traditions make or fail to make progress. It tests this revised theory against an application to Dignitatis Humanae and its contested relation to traditional Roman Catholic thought.

There is significant correspondence between two phenomena that are very rarely treated together yet reveal intriguing similarities: liturgical theology and German Romanticism. The key shared concept is “organism,” a category expressing active life as well as coherence. It shows a way out of the deadlock caused by a simple opposition of objectivism and subjectivism. This article first of all presents an interesting kind of liturgical theology that was done by representatives of the Catholic Tübingen School, and then shows that the emerging Liturgical Movement was intrinsically Romantic in its theological approach to the liturgy.

Charles Taylor's exploration of modern social imaginaries sheds light on the differing ways that university faculty and leaders today reflect and help shape the world. This article examines Taylor's work as a point of departure for suggesting two contrasting models of social imaginary abroad in university education—namely, cosmopolis and new Jerusalem. It explores what a robust Catholic imagination represented by the latter model might mean for the contemporary Catholic university, especially as regards the desire for integration of knowledge that is truly reflective of the term “university.” It pays particular attention to Bernard Lonergan's notion of cosmopolis as a way of imagining anew the ways that Catholic universities form students and contribute to research and scholarship, and emphasizes the task of faculty formation as central to Catholic mission in the academy.

Contrary to what may appear in a superficial understanding of his spirituality, John of the Cross strongly affirms the goodness of creation and its capacity to mediate the presence of God. He specifically identifies the web of mutual interactions among creatures as a primary manifestation of divine love, and he affirms that the more a person participates in God, the more he or she participates fully and joyfully in this community of creatures. Activation of creation's full capacity to mediate divinity, however, depends on the full fruition of the human person in God. Experientially, this involves a lengthy process of a back-and-forth rhythm between the glimpse of God in creation and the complete renunciation of dependence on creaturely knowledge in favor of faith. John's writings invite us to participate in the healing of the natural world by pursuing this contemplative rhythm all the way to its fruitional climax.

The pastoral constitution Gaudium et Spes of Vatican II represents a significant shift for the church, not only ecclesiologically but also intellectually, with deep consequences for the culture of the church and especially for Catholic institutions of higher education. This change has clear implications for the core curriculum of a learning Catholic Church—and of every learning Catholic. In the “modern cosmopolitan culture” of the church of Vatican II, the liberal arts have a central place. The ability to make a judgment on “the signs of the times” requires a cultural awareness that is the opposite of utilitarianism. Care for the “common good” requires “core knowledge” because the world—as it is presented in Gaudium et Spes—is nontransparent, ambiguous, and ever changing. In this sense the pastoral constitution is an antipositivistic manifesto for humanization that needs to be rediscovered.

In light of the problem of the postmodern “de-centered” subject for Christianity, I address the loss of a common expectation horizon of the eschatological future. This loss is situated within the wider collapse of modern metanarratives and the dispersal of the primacy and critical power of the future, leading to an incomplete and even shattered process of identity formation for Christians. By recovering elements of Edward Schillebeeckx's eschatology, I suggest a way forward by drawing on the wider Christian tradition and hope for salvation as an essential element for the ongoing process of identity formation, while using his thought to critique the fractured postmodern “self” and contemporary trends in culture, religion, and economics.

The 2014 extraordinary meeting of the Synod of Bishops explicitly referenced gradualism three times in the Relatio post Disceptationem. Is this moral theology concept helpful for analyzing relationships? This question is more difficult than it first seems. One needs to first ask “which gradualism,” as the three references imply three different understandings: Gradualism as Growth in Holiness, Gradualism as Pastoral Practice, and Gradualism as Inclusivism. Second, one must ask “whose relationship” it can help. I turn to hookup culture as it is a ubiquitous phenomenon on college campuses. As only Gradualism as Inclusivism proves helpful in hookup culture, it has the best potential to help those pursuing good relationships that might not readily align with church teaching.

Several decades ago David Tracy wrote that theologians speak to three publics: the academy, the church, and society. Since then many theologians have exhibited, in Tracy's words, “that drive to publicness which constitutes all good theological discourse[,] … a drive from and to those three publics.”1 Our four roundtable authors discuss how and why theologians engage the public sphere in the twenty-first century. In arguing for the necessity of such engagement, they also draw attention to the promise and perils of doing public theology today.

There is nothing more wonderful, or more satisfying, than writing about God and the things of God, and sharing that writing in a public space. Public theological writing—whether it be for a journal of opinion, a catechetical resource, or a blog—responds to the gospel call to “proclaim on the housetops” what you hear whispered (Matt 10:27), and in its own way participates in the Christian calling to “set on a lampstand” that light that gives glory to God (Matt 5:15). There can also be great satisfaction in shaping religious publications and designing and speaking at live events during which people interact around theological subjects. All this is very good.

In his important 2005 analysis of the Catholic Church in America, Peter Steinfels observed that

Public theology involves political and rhetorical engagement in political debates about the social consequences of Christian commitment, and prudential attempts to judge and form public debate with Christian theological and moral principles. It has consequences for our understanding of Christian discipleship as much as it does for public debate.

This exchange between ethicist Peter Gathje and one of the guests of Manna House of Hospitality (Memphis, Tennessee) points to the task of the public theologian. Gathje serves at Manna House, sharing meals and prayers with its guests. Through his blog Radical Hospitality he echoes and responds to the theology of the people he serves, and their deep questions about justice in our world. In this dialogical movement he enters the locations where he serves meals and prays with his “public,” who in turn ask for a justice that seems all too elusive from their vantage point. His “public,” the guests and others who pass through Manna House, are sources for theological imagination and critical questioning, shaping the way Gathje organizes his vision of the Christian story and the liberating truth it seeks to relate to the world.

This article1 offers an impressionistic look back over the past five decades, from 1968 to 2016, in Catholic theology in the United States. At the heart of this story are Christology, the world of grace, and their relationship. This memoir unfolds in three parts: “Running on Empty, 1968–1980”; “Jesus and the World of Grace, 1980–2016”; “Can Liberal Catholics Come Back?” It identifies the most neuralgic question left to us from this period: How is Christ related to the world of grace?