Abstract
AbstractJohn Milbank's work repeatedly invites two fundamental criticisms: he supposedly prioritises abstract thought over concrete reality, and he claims for himself a God's eye perspective on reality that is forgetful of any epistemological limits concerning a truthful human vision of the whole. Contrary to the first criticism, this article appreciates the way in which Milbank follows twentieth‐century Ressourcement theologies in relating concrete reality and abstract systematic thought. The second criticism does not disqualify Milbank's ontology, but encourages a more consequent application of this ontology in his assessment of concrete reality. As a corrective, Edward Schillebeeckx's contribution to Ressourcement theologies is revisited, as his work bears the promise of attaining an ever more limitless vision of God, via the path of contemplating concrete reality.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
