tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post1034264902791474750..comments2023-12-08T04:43:40.135-06:00Comments on The Fire and the Rose: Plenary #4: “Balthasar and ‘Contradictory’ Material in the Gospels” (Reichgott)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-40534601361250097662008-03-23T21:18:00.000-05:002008-03-23T21:18:00.000-05:00Thanks for the good words, Tony.About appearing an...Thanks for the good words, Tony.<BR/><BR/>About appearing and disappearing--I agree. It was Balthasar who first made me pay attention to the disappearances in particular.<BR/><BR/>And yes, Balthasar's view of Peter and John probably doesn't work well outside a Roman Catholic view that's pretty uncritical of the hierarchy.Heather W. Reichgotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04678926165429957396noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11393723.post-55136565075461445012008-03-23T04:36:00.000-05:002008-03-23T04:36:00.000-05:00Excellent piece. Personally, I've always found Ba...Excellent piece. Personally, I've always found Balthasar's treatment of the apparitions or "appearances and disappearances", the "appearing and disappearing" of the Risen Lord, a powerful tool in understanding the dynamic of the texts on the Resurrection... In his MYSTERIUM PASCHALE, it is actually the last chapter on the Resurrection ("Going to the Father") that I find to be his most balanced account of what biblical exegesis may or may not allow us to say(many would however be uncomfortable with his interpretation of John's account of the relationship between Peter and the Disciple whom Jesus Loved [Jn 20, Jn 21]).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com