In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

336 BOOK REVIEWS he also shows how totally unique his teachings are by contrasting them to those of St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Augustine, and others. Eckhart's basic weakness is also mentioned: "Although Eckhart analyzed the harmful effects of the fall of humanity on the order of the universe and in daily life, his fundamentally optimistic view of creation had little appreciation for the demonic power of evil" (106). McGinn presents a fascinating exposition on the meaning of imago Dei first by rehearsing earlier teachings on it and then contrasting imago with ad imaginem. Eckhart's teaching radicalizes something that is already quite radical. "'IfI am to know God without medium,' says Eckhart in Pr. 70, "without image, and without likeness, God actually has to become me and I have to become God'" (111). Just as in the Incarnation God underwent hominification so that humans might be deified, so for every soul God must be hominified so that the soul might be deified. This can only happen because of the grunt. It can only happen because of the "uncreated something" in the soul and "this uncreated something in the soul is intellect insofar as it is intellect" (113). The task of the preacher was to "rouse his hearers to a new state of awareness that would lead back to the divine ground within" (114); "Eckhart basically wanted his audience ... to be so dedicated to fulfilling the will of God, so unconcerned with self, that their every action proceeds from the 'wellexercised ground' in which God and humans are one" (161). An appendix on Eckhart's sources is a very valuable addition to the book; the notes are extremely useful and informative. The book as a whole is as clear as an exposition of Eckhart can get, profound in its simplicity and simple in its profundity. If Eckhart's teachings are true then he truly was, as he claimed, the man from whom God hid nothing. Providence College Providence, Rhode Island LEONARD P. HlNDSLEY JosefFuchs on NaturalI.Aw. ByMARKGRAHAM.Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2002. Pp. 292. $49.95 (cloth) ISBN 0-87840-382-5. Mark Graham has written a very useful book. Students now have a cogent source to help them grasp the parade of complicated journal articles and books on revisionist thought that have appeared over the last decades. Graham's book may well supersede other sources on revisionist thinking and become a standard ofsorts for those interested in both the recent history ofWestern moral theology and a clear and fair defense of the revisionist method itself. Graham is excellent at analyzing both the strengths of revisionism as phrased by Fuchs and others, BOOK REVIEWS 337 and clearly noting its weaknesses. He has researched the critics of Fuchs as well and explicated their thinking fully and fairly. Fuchs himself is presented as groundbreaking in his move from a "nature"-centered natural-law approach to a recta ratio approach, but also noted is his frustrating generalized thinking and expression as he attempts to explain his method. The key controversial point within Fuchs's method, as expected, centers around the theoretical existence or nonexistence of intrinsically evil acts. Graham invites the reader to consider this issue again as he discloses his own agreement with Fuchs on the nonexistence of such acts, known from the object alone. Graham also gives one of the clearest explanations of what revisionists do and do not hold regarding judgments about moral evil. Nobody [i.e. revisionists] denies that formal norms such as "be just" ... are always valid.... Nor does anyone dispute that analytic moral norms such as "do not commit murder" ... are exceptionless.... A third class of valid exceptionless norms, which articulates specific circumstances for an act to be considered wrong, also is not disputed by anyone. "Do not kill your spouse in anger or jeal.ousy." The only class of norms at issue in the contemporary controversy over exceptionless norms is that prohibiting concrete, specifiable actions in which the object chosen by the moral agent and described in ... morally neutral language is always wrong, regardless of attendant circumstances. (224-25) This last class is the group of norms that traditional moralists would call intrinsically...

pdf

Share