<?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: Thomas Aquinas on Creation (Or How to Read Thomas Aquinas)2. Religious Language and Participation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://willgwitt.org/thomas-aquinas-on-creation2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://willgwitt.org</link>
	<description>Musings About Theology, Mostly</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2012 18:40:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spengler — A First Things Blog</title>
		<link>http://willgwitt.org/thomas-aquinas-on-creation2/comment-page-1/#comment-697</link>
		<dc:creator>Spengler — A First Things Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2009 12:27:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://willgwitt.org/?page_id=191#comment-697</guid>
		<description>[...] it pointed out to me.) Even interpreters of Aquinas differ over what the analogy is an analogy of. According to William Witt, Ralph McInerny holds that the analogy is only &#8220;only a tool of logic, not an ontological [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] it pointed out to me.) Even interpreters of Aquinas differ over what the analogy is an analogy of. According to William Witt, Ralph McInerny holds that the analogy is only &#8220;only a tool of logic, not an ontological [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

