Showing papers in "Theology in 1974"
TL;DR: The Archbishop gave a characteristic performance, in the lecture and in his hour of questioning, the sort of thing which vve in the Church of England have come to relish, and which stirred this largely Roman Catholic audience to prolonged applause and to a most moving demonstration of affection and admiration as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: winter His Grace gave a Worth Abbey Conference, on some obstacles to oecumenism. The largest hall in the school had to be taken, so extended was the audience, and that was overcrowded. The Archbishop gave a characteristic performance, in the lecture and in his hour of questioning: the sort of thing which vve in the Church ofEngland have come to relish, and which stirred this largely Roman Catholic audience to prolonged applause and to a most moving demonstration ofaffection and admiration. When he was gone a senior monk of Worth asked, "Why is your Archbishop so hard on the Crown's appointrnent of bishops, the system by which he was himself elected? You get much better bishops than...." Perhaps the comparison were better not pursued.
4 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors explore concepts such as election, foreknowledge and free-will in the gospels, and suggest that their biblical meanings are frequently contrary to those assumed by Augustine.
Abstract: nature of the Christ event. More particularly the book demonstrates that the antecedent mythology giving energy to the gospel symbols was almost always Judaic rather than pagan, and within this frame ofreference the Hebrew creation myth was especially prominent. Frequently otherwise obscure phrases, themes and tendencies in the gospels are illuminated. Lamentably no biblical index has been provided. The book by Forster and Marston, with its extremely conservative presuppositions, knows nothing of myth or symbol. Its core is an expansive exegesis of Romans 9-11. In a rather homiletical style the authors explore concepts such as election, foreknowledge and free-will, and suggest that their biblical meanings are frequently contrary to those assumed by Augustine. In a short book (there are 42 pages of very technical notes) which makes heavy demands on the reader, Mr Jones yet manages to illuminate the three-fold theine of 2 Corinthians 1-9, viz. suffering apostolate, partnership between apostle and congregation, and thanksgiving. The passages 2 Cor. 3: 1-4: 6 and 4: 16-5: 10 are clarified especially well. By the association of strict exegesis with facets of the contemporary religi?us situation, this work becomes an exploratory hermeneutical exercise. Lincoln Theological College D. G. DEEKS
4 citations
TL;DR: Preston's concluding essay as mentioned in this paper suggests that the search should proceed for the right balance between the framework of law necessary to contain industrial conflict and the liberty of movement and negotiation necessary for its healthy direction and resolution.
Abstract: By this time there is warmth, rapport, between authors and readers; the atmosphere is right for the best wine, the vin d'honl1eur, in Canon Preston's concluding essay. He sets himself five pertinent questions, and answers them directly. He indicates how the search should proceed for the right balance between the framework of law necessary to contain industrial conflict and the liberty of movement and negotiation necessary for its healthy direction and resolution. Through the use of the principles of the common good, proportion and discrimination he points back into the Christian-humanist tradition of moral contribution to the containment of wider strife. And he grounds justice in charity: \"Love luay demand more than justice but never less than justice.\" Industrial conflict has become more acute and more decisive in English social and political life while this book has been coming through the press. Its emergence now is timely; for in the interval between the last General Election and the next or, if we will, between the last economic crisis and the next hard thinking has to be done about the distribution and balance of power, and above all about its control, in the interest of this same common good.
4 citations
3 citations
2 citations
TL;DR: In his "Meditations for every day inthe year Bishop Challoner, the eighteenth-century Roman Catholic bishop, proposes as the theme for today "The Excellence of the Eucharistic Sacrifice" as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: In hisMeditationsforEveryDay inthe Year Bishop Challoner, the eighteenthcentury Roman Catholic bishop, proposes as the theme for today \"The Excellence of the Eucharistic Sacrifice\".\" It would be tempting to follow his direction and yet I do no think that my task of commenting on present developments in eucharistic spirituality can be best served by commenting on the notion of eucharistic sacrifice, or indeed on any other single aspectof the eucharist. For we are living in a time when no one view of the nature of the eucharist commands overall support even within the confines of one denomination. Nor can the task be served simply by passing under review the various forms of eucharistic rites which have emerged in the last thirty or forty years; for even if it is proper to welcome a greater degree of diversity in eucharistic thought and practicewe must still have some standards ofjudgment by which to assess new developments in the field. Instead, what I want to do is to offer some reflections on the social factors which make changes in our eucharistic ritual imperative, and to set these considerations in the context of a wider discussionof present-day spirituality. I am not, that is, going to speculate about the future of eucharistic spirituality, but only to point to pressing tasks which face the Church at the moment. There are those who believe that, while theology has to interpret its tradition so radically that any hope of continuity must be laid on one side, we can nevertheless take comfort from the fact that there is an assured continuity in the spiritual life of the Church. I would neither share their pessimism about the theological interpretation of the tradition, nor their uncritical optimism about the assured continuity of the spiritual life of the Church. Indeed, I would be very critical of the sharp divide between theology and spirituality which such a view seems to accept. All I can hope to do is to show the urgency ofthe task ofreworking traditional Christian spirituality, without (I am afraid) offering here any positive suggestions. A recent writer has said that the discussionof the \"essence of Christian spirituality today centres on the relationship between love of God and
TL;DR: The relation between Christ and the Church is not only: 1, the Truth, but the Way and the Life to be shared by the disciple (likeness ofJesus and disciple), but also 2, Jesus as the process of transfiguration, both as actor and recipient as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: transcendence in Jesus Christ, but I doubt whether it is right or safe for us or appropriate to Jesus Christ to seek to isolate it or to speak of it apart from its context in the way ofJesus, for which \"dispute\" and \"proximity\" seem to me to be good terms. So, the relation between Jesus and the Church (disciple, missionary, theologian, Christianity and Christianity's relation with other religions) is not only: 1, Jesus as achieved transcendence: to be proclaimed by those who have not achieved transcendence (unlikenessofJesus and disciple); but also 2, Jesus as the processoftranscendence, both as actor and recipient: so not only the Truth, but the Way and the Life to be shared by the disciple (likeness ofJesus and disciple). Thus, we do not need to ignore the later history in order to talk of inclusiveness in him; his inclusiveness was always only of the disputing kind. We can never approach a Christian theology of other religions as though there is anywhere a possibility of getting beyond dispute: there is only the way of disputing creatively and recreatively rather than destructively. There are many loose ends in all this; for example, I have said nothing about the really important matter of describing in detail the difference between good and bad disputing the attempt to do so might bring my whole way of thinking to breaking point. At the moment, though, all I want to do is to argue for a basic description of the problem of the distinctiveness of Christ which requires such an analysis of disputing, in place of one which can do without it.