Request a Copy
Request an exam/desk copy for college or graduate-level classroom use
or a review copy for a journal.
Submit Request
About the Author
Joshua R. Brotherton
Joshua R. Brotherton holds an M.A. in Philosophy from the University of Dallas, an M.A. in Theology from Franciscan University of Steubenville, and a Ph.D. in Systematic Theology from Catholic University of America. He has published in a wide variety of scholarly journals.
What People Are Saying
arrow_back_ios
With breadth of vision, Brotherton orients the reader to the state of this highly relevant question and stimulates further debate. Reading Balthasar in light of Maritain and others, he attempts a critical and broadly Thomistic appropriation of central elements of Balthasar’s thought. Through a complex negotiation, Brotherton seeks to retrieve Balthasar’s essential view of Christ’s salvific suffering, while resisting Balthasar’s projection of kenosis into the Trinity itself—a problem he perceptively traces to Balthasar’s lack of an adequate theory concerning the relationship of grace and freedom.
Robert J. Matava
Christendom College
Hans Urs von Balthasar’s speculations on Christ’s descent into Hell and its significance for the Trinity have been celebrated by some as epochal insights and denounced by others as bordering on heresy. Joshua Brotherton admirably avoids partisan extremes in this careful and penetrating analysis. Displaying a striking command of the issues and literature, Brotherton sympathetically lays out Balthasar’s important contribution, but does not shy away from fundamental criticism.
Michael Root
Catholic University of America
Joshua Brotherton’s reading of Balthasar’s reflection on the Trinity from a Thomistic point of view is at once fundamentally appreciative and critical, in equal parts surprisingly positive and bracing. At no time does one doubt his grasp of those theological points that divide Aquinas from Balthasar. Yet marking disagreements is in the service of staging a genuine encounter between two theologians who are an expression and fruit of the Church. The encounter needs to continue.
Cyril O'Regan
University of Notre Dame
With breadth of vision, Brotherton orients the reader to the state of this highly relevant question and stimulates further debate. Reading Balthasar in light of Maritain and others, he attempts a critical and broadly Thomistic appropriation of central elements of Balthasar’s thought. Through a complex negotiation, Brotherton seeks to retrieve Balthasar’s essential view of Christ’s salvific suffering, while resisting Balthasar’s projection of kenosis into the Trinity itself—a problem he perceptively traces to Balthasar’s lack of an adequate theory concerning the relationship of grace and freedom.
Robert J. Matava
Christendom College
Hans Urs von Balthasar’s speculations on Christ’s descent into Hell and its significance for the Trinity have been celebrated by some as epochal insights and denounced by others as bordering on heresy. Joshua Brotherton admirably avoids partisan extremes in this careful and penetrating analysis. Displaying a striking command of the issues and literature, Brotherton sympathetically lays out Balthasar’s important contribution, but does not shy away from fundamental criticism.
Michael Root
Catholic University of America
Joshua Brotherton’s reading of Balthasar’s reflection on the Trinity from a Thomistic point of view is at once fundamentally appreciative and critical, in equal parts surprisingly positive and bracing. At no time does one doubt his grasp of those theological points that divide Aquinas from Balthasar. Yet marking disagreements is in the service of staging a genuine encounter between two theologians who are an expression and fruit of the Church. The encounter needs to continue.
Cyril O'Regan
University of Notre Dame
With breadth of vision, Brotherton orients the reader to the state of this highly relevant question and stimulates further debate. Reading Balthasar in light of Maritain and others, he attempts a critical and broadly Thomistic appropriation of central elements of Balthasar’s thought. Through a complex negotiation, Brotherton seeks to retrieve Balthasar’s essential view of Christ’s salvific suffering, while resisting Balthasar’s projection of kenosis into the Trinity itself—a problem he perceptively traces to Balthasar’s lack of an adequate theory concerning the relationship of grace and freedom.
Robert J. Matava
Christendom College
arrow_forward_ios
array:5 [▼
"authors" => array:1 [▶
0 => "Joshua R. Brotherton"
]
"pages" => 352
"publish_date" => "2020"
"publisher" => "Emmaus Academic"
"series" => "Renewal within Tradition"
]
authors
Joshua R. Brotherton
pages
publish_date
publisher
series