So a few days back I made the decision to switch my summer reading from Current (New) Progressive Roman Catholic theologies to Roger Haight’s Christology. I still have the packet from Prof. Haight’s class on the Catholic theologies which I still plan on reading through sometime in the future. If you’re curious as to who made the list, he includes the following in the readings: Amaladoss, Aquino, Copeland, Ellacuría, Espín, Goizueta, Gutiérrez, Haight, Johnson, Lonergan, Metz, Nyamiti, Rahner, Schillebeeckx, Schüssler Fiorenza, Sobrino and Tracy.
However, despite such an interesting reading list, I decided to go with Haight’s Christology (you can see the one of the fruits of the class here). I didn’t want to regret not taking a guided reading from the author on his own material, particularly when AAR itself has held sessions titled “Haight’s Thought.” So now the blog will get a dose of some hard core spirit Christology that the Vatican (read here: Ratzinger) really doesn’t like (but is still faithful to Vatican II, or so Haight claims).
In other news, I finished Volf’s The End of Memory: Remembering Rightly in a Violent World and I’ll write about it later.
flying.farther 
you know, Dave, I’m a little surprised/offended that you didn’t include me in your reading list, the preeminent theologian that I am. Just because this co-called “AAR” hasn’t held sessions on “Wilson’s Thought” doesn’t mean anything to me, and it shouldn’t to you, either. Get with it, man.
You are a bit of a tease. I have not seen your response to The End of Memory. My lovely bride purchased this for me recently and I am currently feeling a bit skeptical about it – I don’t think I agree with some of his initial claims. Should I dive in, or stick to Exclusion and Embrace and invest instead in Dogmatics in Outline, due to arrive any day? I’m a lost pedagogical developmentalist in a theological forest (steeples for trees).
I’m planning on writing it in the next couple of days really. Overall, as a work on its own, I think it can be fruitful, but only in very specific, contextualized and individualistic ways. I found some other pretty interesting stuff, primarily about remembering rightly at the beginning. However, if you do read this book, you really should finish it, the important parts for me was the first third and the postscript (which I think was an organizational mismanagement – it should’ve been somewhere in the meat of the material). It was also very readable and could go pretty quick in most places I think. Above all, it is very personal and ultimately I think that is one of the best points about the book. Sadly I haven’t yet read Exclusion and Embrace, so I can’t compare them, but I think The End of Memory is worth a read by people looking to work on personal relationships – small and big.