Author Archives: admin

PART ONE: HOW CHRIS WRIGHT AND GK BEALE POSE QUESTIONS TO WHICH THEOLOGY HAS NO MEANS OF RESPONDING A reflection on human sin and brokenness is always the first stage in any missional presentation of the Christian faith. Read C.S. … Continue reading →

The husband head of his wife’: sexism and hierarchy in the ‘hardest’ passage of St Paul (I Corinthians 11) I Corinthians 11 vv. 3 ff. is surely one of the ‘hardest’ passages for people who want to take the Bible … Continue reading →

Spiritualities of Life: The Neglected Role of the Artistic Paradigm  JCR 25.1 Jan 2010 Takes up Heelas’s notion of ‘life’ spirituality and extends it beyond New Age spiritualities to encompass expressivist values characteristic of contemporary mainstream culture, normally considered ‘humanist’ … Continue reading →

BENTLEY-HART’S UNIVERSALISM THE GIFT, JOHN BARCLAY AND ST PAUL I have a particular interest in Barclay’s recent book Paul and the Gift.  Partly, because I have written a PhD thesis on a related – though much broader – topic, using … Continue reading →

Why a user’s guide? The thought of this early Christian thinker is rich, complex, and crops up in the various current theological contexts.  For example: For all of which reasons Irenaeus’ ideas might seem very ‘timely’.  But you won’t want … Continue reading →

IRENAEUS AGAINST HERESIES: A USER’S GUIDE ST GREGORY OF NYSSA: WHY HIS SHAME AT OUR EARTHLY CONDITION? The point of the resurrection, says N.T. Wright, is that the present life is not valueless just because it will die.  God will … Continue reading →

Sometimes, a change in the translation of just a few Scriptural words can attest a potential cultural shift of incalculable importance.  In the case I am about to discuss the change doesn’t simply ‘attest’ the shift, it can guide us … Continue reading →

Posted on March 10, 2020 by admin Conclusions My conclusions, then, on what we retrieve? Recover the Catholic understanding of the Eucharist as a sacrifice in which we share Christ’s agency, and as the locus of the continued institution of … Continue reading →

But what about transubstantiation? But now we come to the Eucharistic issue that, regrettably in my view, has tended – and still tends – to dominate discussions of this subject on both: the first issue, by Feingold’s classification, namely that … Continue reading →

PART ONE: WHAT WE NEED TO RETRIEVE In this blog, I’m interested in using a confrontation of Roman Catholic texts on Eucharist theology (de Lubac, Corpus Mysticum; Feingold, The Eucharist; Ratzinger, The Spirit of the Liturgy) to discern elements of … Continue reading →