Well, for your own sake, be careful. Galileo is most informative on what happens when one questions academic orthodoxy. Professors will bring whatever cudgel is handy down on you. And even if the pope himself is a dear friend, there is nothing to be done to hold back the pack of ravening wolves that is professors.

i picked it up a few wks ago.

Obviously these sentiments are not my own; we can see them going back to the earliest stages of the Church, and finding people such as St Bernard or St Bonaventure bringing them up at the advent of the university system. Balthasar, I would say, is also in this tradition. But I know there are many others like myself who think this way — I talk to them often, so I think there is hope, but I fear many will wander away into the dark side as academia traps them and forces them to do what is needed just to survive.

Nice looking book; I picked up Zizek, a (very) critical introduction by Marcus Pound while at the conference. I really wish I knew Badiou was there, since I would have gone to his session (which Zizek was supposed to be at, but cancelled soon enough to have it noted in the printed edition of the AAR conference schedule)

It is on Scripture, and I think you’d enjoy its fairly easy and uplifting read.

Also, I found this yesterday and thought of you:

I do think Cone’s criticism of Christology was the most tragic part of his statements, because I think a true, orthodox Christology can be adaptive (as is needed, and he is right there) but also would put more strengths to his discussion on oppression. Putting Balthasar and Cone together, would, I think be the way to go.

I also share your concerns about where Cone might be drifting. The new introduction to God of the Oppressed gives an update on his thinking on christology, and I found parts of it troubling. His theology of the cross remains one of the most profound I have ever read, though. I’m looking forward to his upcoming book on the cross.