<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: James Bernauer on Foucault and Christian Technologies of Confession</title>
	<atom:link href="http://percaritatem.com/2010/03/23/james-bernauer-on-foucault-and-christian-technologies-of-confession/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://percaritatem.com/2010/03/23/james-bernauer-on-foucault-and-christian-technologies-of-confession/</link>
	<description>Non intratur in veritatem nisi per caritatem.  St. Augustine</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:27:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bret Saunders</title>
		<link>http://percaritatem.com/2010/03/23/james-bernauer-on-foucault-and-christian-technologies-of-confession/comment-page-1/#comment-5691</link>
		<dc:creator>Bret Saunders</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 22:26:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://percaritatem.com/?p=1934#comment-5691</guid>
		<description>Cynthia,

A good conference of Foucault and Christianity.  I just wanted to point out that in fact Cartesian self is only &#039;transparent&#039; in a few--albeit important--respects, such as its existence as a thinking thing and its grasp of innate ideas.  In other respects it is a dark abyss of possibility: &quot;I could have many other faculties that I have not yet discovered&quot; (Med III; my paraphrase).  Thus even the Cartesian self is open to infinite &#039;confessional&#039; commentary and self-prescription.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cynthia,</p>
<p>A good conference of Foucault and Christianity.  I just wanted to point out that in fact Cartesian self is only &#8216;transparent&#8217; in a few&#8211;albeit important&#8211;respects, such as its existence as a thinking thing and its grasp of innate ideas.  In other respects it is a dark abyss of possibility: &#8220;I could have many other faculties that I have not yet discovered&#8221; (Med III; my paraphrase).  Thus even the Cartesian self is open to infinite &#8216;confessional&#8217; commentary and self-prescription.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

