Showing papers in "Theology in 1968"
4 citations
3 citations
TL;DR: The Incarnation is a mighty circuit a circuit in which, like a powerful electric current, love runs from God to man and back from man to God, and this is how atonement happens as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: tiona! forgiveness, but also to find ourselves caught up in perfect man's response of unconditional self-surrender. The Incarnation is a mighty circuit a circuit in which, like a powerful electric current, love runs from God to man and back from man to God. And the Gospel is that man is involved in the proper Man, Christ Jesus. And this is how atonement happens. It starts from what God in Man has done, from his gracious approach and the response he has already evoked from Man in Christ Jesus. It is by incorporation in Christ, by baptism into his death, that real repentance begins to become possible. Christ, and, in Christ, the Church, is the locus of reconciliation; and, through it, the rest of mankind and, indeed, the whole universe is to be brought into the harmony of God's design.
3 citations
TL;DR: In this country many humanists go along with Christians. (Of course, they may not.) The desire always to be different was the undoing of the old Christendom group as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: it as a basis for tackling local situations. Industry, commerce, social welfare, racerelations are obvious areas to think of in this connexion. In all this there is immense scope; but much hard work is needed, much casting of bread upon the waters, much ability to listen to others, much mediating of the views of one person to another who hardly ever meet and don't find it easy to understand one another's language and style of approach. It requires the spiritual resources to live with a lot of untidy and unresolved problems. The priest is in an excellent position to do this. He will almost always be accepted as an \"honest broker\" if he goes about it the right way, that is to say with tact and free from any strain of triumphalism. Four things may be said in conclusion. The priest should hold fast to Christ as the source and goal of his understanding. The priest should not always want to have something different to say qua Christian from what some others may be saying. Fortunately in our pluralist society ethical attitudes and moral decisions often overlap. Christians may find themselves in agreement with others. (Ofcourse, they may not.) The desire always to be different was the undoing of the old Christendom group. The priest should therefore welcome allies where he can find them. In this country many humanists go along with Christians. This is a matter for rejoicing, not for worry lest the faith be contaminated. Equally it is necessary to show where humanism can end by being inhuman in the light of a deeper humanism in Christ. The priest should encourage action as well as talk. Each needs to feed the other. Where possible the action should be community based rather than Church based; and where a Church basis is appropriate it should, wherever possible, be ecumenically based. There is a lot to be done before the Churches habitually act like this; but this is what it means to take a plural society seriously.
3 citations
TL;DR: The heresy of orthodoxy is one of the best seller books worldwide as discussed by the authors. But have you had it? Not at all? Foolish of you. Now, you could get this incredible publication merely here.
Abstract: This is really going to save you time and your money in something should think about. If you're seeking then search around for online. Without a doubt there are several these available and a lot of them have the freedom. However no doubt you receive what you spend on. An alternate way to get ideas would be to check another the heresy of orthodoxy. the heresy of orthodoxy by is among the best seller books worldwide? Have you had it? Not at all? Foolish of you. Now, you could get this incredible publication merely here. Locate them is style of ppt, kindle, pdf, word, txt, rar, and zip. How? Simply download and even read online in this site. Now, never ever late to read this the heresy of orthodoxy. Are you looking to uncover the heresy of orthodoxy Digitalbook. Correct here it is possible to locate as well as download the heresy of orthodoxy Book. We've got ebooks for every single topic the heresy of orthodoxy accessible for download cost-free. Search the site also as find Jean Campbell eBook in layout. We also have a fantastic collection of information connected to this Digitalbook for you. As well because the best part is you could assessment as well as download for the heresy of orthodoxy eBook GO TO THE TECHNICAL WRITING FOR AN EXPANDED TYPE OF THIS THE HERESY OF ORTHODOXY, ALONG WITH A CORRECTLY FORMATTED VERSION OF THE INSTANCE MANUAL PAGE ABOVE.
2 citations
TL;DR: A group of Christian philosophers, scientists and theologians, drawn from British universities, meets annually in September to discuss the bearing of analytical philosophy upon religious belief as discussed by the authors. But there will be no dissent amongst those interested in the subject of prayer fronl the opinion that Dewi Phillips has provided a most trenchant and stimulating discussion of that subject.
Abstract: or not its author has achieved his objectives. But there will be no dissent amongst those interested in the subject of prayer fronl the opinion that Dewi Phillips has provided a most trenchant and stimulating discussion of that subject. A group of Christian philosophers, scientists and theologians, drawn from British universities, meets annually in September to discuss the bearing of analytical philosophy upon religious belief1 At their last meeting, they took Phillips's book as a starting point and discussed some of the questions which seemed to them to arisefrom it. Abridged versions of some of the papers read to this group are printed in the following pages. Professor John Hick calls in question Phillips's short way with the contention that religious belief requires some general justification. Dr Humphrey Palmer looks critically at the conclusion, which seems to follow from some of the premisses to which Phillips's views commit him, namely, that only believers can understand religion. Mr Phillips then replies. In philosophy, the problems are seldom, if ever, finally solved a fact, no doubt, which occasioned the impolite remark about philosophers being like blind men in a dark room looking for a black cat that isn't there ! Well, maybe. Philosophers in this group would certainly not want to claim that, in their discussions, they ever get the cat of a final solution indisputably in the bag. What, I think, they would venture to hope is that occasionallythey attain the humbler objective ofclearing up perplexities which are due to confusion of showing the fly the way out of the fly-bottle. The reader will have to judge for himself whether or not what follows helps to this end, so far as his own thoughts about belief and understanding in general, and the presuppositions of prayer in particular, are concerned.
TL;DR: In this article, it is made clear that this "atheism" is an ideological interpretation of a real cultural phenomenon which can also be made intelligible and meaningful without recourse to an atheistic interpretation, and thus, can be also be meaningfully integrated in a Christian way.
Abstract: discovery of the human sphere of rational understanding, a self-understanding of man which naturally takes place in history so that secularization accompanies the growing essence of humanity itself. This is unmistakably the positive side of the whole process of secularization. On the other hand we come to an entirely different level, namely, that of the interpretation of this cultural and sociological phenomenon: secularity is being interpreted as atheism, because many think that faith in God remains an obstacle to secularization in the cultural and historical sense. In other words the \"God of religion\" is historically so burdened, that for many the end of the \"God of religion\" is also the end of the \"living God\" or the God of faith. So it is that the phenomenon itself is often presented together with this atheistic interpretation. The whole, phenomenon and interpretation, is being called secularization. Thus the ambiguity of this word. Consequently, it should be made clear that this \"atheism\" is an ideological interpretation of a real cultural phenomenon which can also be made intelligible and meaningful without recourse to an atheistic interpretation, and thus, can also be meaningfully integrated in a Christian way. Very briefly, I have tried to situate the background to our problem because there are two tendencies in the books and articles that deal with our \"speaking about God\" which ought, in my opinion, to be avoided. It is possible to describe these two tendencies, not completely accurately, but certainly suggestively, with the well-known terms \"naturalism\" and \"supernaturalism\". The first, \"naturalism\", tends to let God remain implicit in our human existence and to experience religion only in the form of concern for the world and our fellow-man, while excluding every form of explicit religiosity. The second, \"supernaturalism\", tends on the other hand to regard God as being in competition with man and to reduce authentic religiosity to the Church's explicit homage to God in the liturgy or to man's interpersonal experience of God in prayer. As the Second Vatican Council so rightly said, a division of this kind between life and religion, whatever direction it decides to take, is the most serious error of our times.' (To be concluded)
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that the time is approaching, if not already here (as some of us have become convinced), when the availability of alternative sources of protein will not permit us to argue that meat, fowl or fish are nutritional necessities.
Abstract: sentient material whenever possible, the reduction of the number ofanimals used by eliminating all unnecessary tests and duplication, and the refinement of procedures so as to cause only the minimum of discomfort. Because of Genesis 9: 3, vegetarianism has never been a prominent issue in Christianity. This verse has been decisive for most theologians, even if: like Paley, they felt that the practice offlesh-eating was otherwise indefensible. Commenting on Paley's reference to what \"many tribes of Hindoos actually do\", \\V. H. Drummond pointed out that whilst vegetarianism might be possible \"in tropical regions abounding in esculent roots and vegetables\", it certainly was not in \"regions of perpetual sterility\", for \"Greenlanders and Esquimaux\".' The ethics of realistic reverence would undoubtedly concede this point, extending its validity well beyond such geographical limits, but would add that the time is approaching, if not already here (as some of us have become convinced), when the availability of alternative sources of protein will not permit us to argue that meat, fowl or fish are nutritional necessities. Research into the production ofsimulated nleat products, similar not only in food value but in taste and texture, is being undertaken in several countries with encouraging results, and if economically developed it will have a direct bearing on the ethics of diet, apart from helping to meet world food shortage. Natural meat, according to one agricultural magazine, will remain as a prestige food; but if so, it would not be permissible to those motivated by realistic reverence, that verdict being reinforced by the dubious morality of factory farming. Meanwhile, this ethic requires at least our support of those societies which are doing such excellent work to promote humane standards; to those who occupy pulpits it is also a challenge not to give any occupant of the pew reason to quote the complaint of Mauleverer in Sir Arthur Helps's Animals and Their Masters: