Blogs

Which theological terms would make your shortlist? Here’s the list of terms found in “Jargon-Busting: A Glossary of Theological Terms,” at the back of Alister E. McGrath’s excellent Christian Theology: An Introduction (25th Anniversary Edition). adoptionism aggiornamento Alexandrian School allegory Anabaptism analogy of being (analogia entis) analogy of faith (analogia fidei) anthropomorphism Antiochene School anti-Pelagian writings apocalyptic apologetics apophatic apostolic era appropriation Arianism atonement Barthian beatific vision Beatitudes Calvinism Cappadocian fathers Cartesianism catechism catharsis catholic Chalcedonian definition charisma, charismatic Charismatic movement Christology circumincessio conciliarism confession consubstantial consubstantiation contemplation creed Deism dialectical theology Docetism Donatism doxology Ebionitism ecclesiology Enlightenment eschatology Eucharist evangelical exegesis exemplarism fathers fideism filioque Five Ways fourth gospel fundamentalism hermeneutics hesychasm historical Jesus historico-critical method history of religions school homoousios humanism hypostatic union icons ideology incarnation justification by faith, doctrine of kenoticism kerygma liberal Protestantism liberation theology liturgy logos Lutheranism Manicheism modalism monophysitism neo-orthodoxy ontological argument orthodoxy parousia patripassianism patristic Pelagianism perichoresis Pietism postliberalism postmodernism praxis Protestantism Quadriga radical Reformation Reformed Sabellianism sacrament schism scholasticism Scripture principle Socinianism soteriology synoptic gospels synoptic problem theodicy theopaschitism theotokos Thomism transubstantiation Trinity two natures, doctrine of typology Vulgate Zwinglianism

At this point, this is just a sketch. But I’m wondering how we Anglican Christians ought to be careful to keep our precious “via media” (“middle way”) mentality and methodology separate from what’s known as the “middle ground” fallacy. The “Via Media” According to Donald McKim in the Westminster Dictionary of Theological Terms, the “via media” is (Lat. “the middle way”) Term used to describe the identity of Anglicanism as a middle way between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism. It was coined by John Henry Newman (1801–90) during the Oxford movement (337). ...

Over on his blog, “Non Sermoni Res,” Dr. William Witt has written several excellent essays on the topic of women’s ordination. Here’s the guide that Witt put together in order to orient readers to his essays. What I’ve done is to combine the blog posts into a single PDF, with bookmarks. Here it is: [Witt\_Womens-Ordination-Essays](https://joshuapsteele.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Witt_Womens-Ordination-Essays.pdf)[Download](https://joshuapsteele.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Witt_Womens-Ordination-Essays.pdf)

Editor’s Note: The piece below represents the opinion of the author. Anglican Pastor does not take a site-wide position for or against women’s ordination. We do, however, require both clarity and charity. We ask that your responses to it do so as well. After reading this piece, please see Lee Nelson’s response and Emily McGowin’s rejoinder. The connection between christology and soteriology A cornerstone of orthodox Christian theology is summed up in the phrase “what is not assumed is not healed”. The phrase is echoed by many early church fathers, but it is credited to St. Gregory of Nazianzus. ...

[Karl Barth’s Church Dogmatics Original Publication Dates, courtesy of PostBarthian.com](https://postbarthian.com/2016/04/21/karl-barths-church-dogmatics-original-publication-dates/).If you’re trying to grasp the contours and contents of Karl Barth’s massive *[Church Dogmatics](https://www.logos.com/product/5758/barths-church-dogmatics),* it helps to have an outline! Here’s a helpful PDF version, with subheadings included, from Princeton’s [Center for Barth Studies](http://barth.ptsem.edu). [Barth\_Outline of Church Dogmatics](https://joshuapsteele.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Barth_Outline-of-Church-Dogmatics.pdf)[Download](https://joshuapsteele.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Barth_Outline-of-Church-Dogmatics.pdf)Below is a version that I’ve created from my Logos edition of *Church Dogmatics*. It’s the version found in the Index (CD V/1, 1–13). (Want to learn more about Karl Barth, but not quite ready to dive into the Church Dogmatics? Check out Keith Johnson’s extremely helpful The Essential Karl Barth: A Reader and Commentary [affiliate link].) ...

The following templates come from They Say / I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. Introducing What They Say A number of $$$ have recently suggested that $$$. It has become common today to dismiss $$$. In their recent work, Y and Z have offered harsh critiques of Dr. X for $$$. Introducing Standard Views American today tend to believe that $$$ Conventional wisdom has it that $$$ Common sense seems to dictate that $$$ The standard way of thinking about topic X has it that $$$ It is often said that $$$ My whole life I have heard it said that $$$ You would think that $$$ Many people assumed that $$$ Making What They Say Something You Say ...

This summer, I’ve spent most of my reading/writing time working on a paper on Barth’s Römerbrief reading of Romans 10. This paper is for the 2019 Barth Graduate Student Colloquium, and it has taken way longer than I originally anticipated. Will I get to use this paper in my dissertation? I’m not sure. At first, I got excited, because, in my work on Genesis 1–3 last school year, I discovered some differences in how Barth and Bonhoeffer handled Genesis 1–3 vis-a-vis the subsequent history of Israel. Namely, while Barth takes care to work his way from Eden to the Church only after moving through the history of Israel and Jesus, Bonhoeffer jumps right from Eden to the Church via Christ. This difference in what I’m provisionally calling “Christological immediacy”—which is perhaps a confessional one that parallels some of the exegetical differences between Calvin and Luther—has me wondering whether Barth and Bonhoeffer differed in important ways on Israel. ...

UPDATE: Here is the paper that I gave at the 2019 Karl Barth Graduate Student Colloquium at the Center for Barth Studies at Princeton Theological Seminary. INTRODUCTION: “GENTILES” = “WORLD” IS WORSE THAN “ISRAEL” = “CHURCH” On at least one level, Karl Barth’s Römerbrief reading of Romans 9–11 is supersessionist. In general, especially in the second edition, when Paul refers to “Israel” in Romans 9–11, Barth refers to the “Church.”[1] He replaces Israel with the Church. That’s supersessionism, case closed. Right? Well, yes and no. It has become increasingly common to at least mitigate or nuance the charge of supersessionism against Barth’s reading of Romans 9–11. Various scholars have broadly argued that, yes, Barth’s handling of Romans 9–11 at least leaves the door open for at least a certain kind of supersessionism, but, no, he wasn’t being quite as careless with Israel as it might initially seem.[2] By and large, I agree with these assessments. Barth should have said more about the actual people and history of Israel, but he wasn’t trying to merely displace Israel with the Church, as if the latter were superior and the former were forgotten. He was trying to bring Israel and the Church together in solidarity, in opposition to the arrogance of the Church. ...

I’m scheduled to give a paper on Karl Barth’s reading of Romans 9:30–10:21 in Der Römerbrief at the 2019 Barth Graduate Student Colloquium at Princeton in August. Now, of course, it’s a pleasure and a privilege to give a paper at the colloquium. However, in hindsight, I don’t know why I thought giving a paper on chapter 10 of Barth’s Römerbrief was a good idea! Granted, I don’t have to solve all of the exegetical issues (of which there are many) in Romans 9:30–10:21. I just have to make some sense of what Barth thought about the passage. ...

John Webster’s Idea Like so many others, I desperately wish that John Webster were still alive. After all, my dissertation topic owes much to his essay: “Reading the Bible: The Example of Barth and Bonhoeffer.” The essay (previously published as ‘“In the Shadow of Biblical Work:” Barth and Bonhoeffer on Reading the Bible,’and then published in Word and Church: Essays in Christian Dogmatics) begins: Two things at least are clear about the relationship of Barth and Bonhoeffer: that disentangling the history of their relation is of considerable importance for making sense of Bonhoeffer, if not of Barth; and that the disentangling is a rather delicate operation which involves some discriminating interpretation of the writings of two complex theologians. Much, for example, hangs on what we are to make of Bonhoeffer’s scattered remarks on Barth, revelation and non-religious interpretation in the prison writings, and of Barth’s puzzled response to them (87). ...

I got my dissertation proposal approved in the Spring of 2018. Working title: “Scriptural but Not Religious: Karl Barth, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, and a Biblical Critique of Religion.” Barth + Bonhoeffer + Bible + Religion. “Barth, Bonhoeffer, and Bible” is the gap/niche. But that would be too much to tackle comprehensively in a dissertation. So “religion” is designed to be the delimiter—specifically, Barth’s and Bonhoeffer’s theological critiques of religion. Dissertation-wise, I didn’t make as much progress as I would’ve liked to during the 2018–19 school year. However, I became a father and I passed all my courses. So I’m counting that as a win. ...

I’m two years in to my PhD program, and I need to finish writing this dissertation soon, or it’s going to be the death of me! Don’t get me wrong. I love Wheaton’s program. My supervisor and second reader are fantastic. And I think that this Barth, Bonhoeffer, and the Bible project is worthwhile. But I’ve got a wife, a kid, a commitment to the Church, and I need to move on with my life. ...

SOURCE: Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Indexes and Supplementary Materials, ed. Victoria J. Barnett et al., vol. 17, Dietrich Bonhoeffer Works (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2014), 154–158. Sermons and Meditations Address on Jeremiah 27–28—(DBWE vol. )9 Address on John 19—9 Address on Luke 12:35ff.—9 Address on Matthew 21:28–31—9 Address on the Decalogue—9 Address on the First Commandment—9 Baptismal Homily on Joshua 24:15—13 Baptism Sermon on 1 John 4:16—11 Baptism Sermon on Ephesians 5:14—11 Bible Reading and Prayer on 1 Corinthians 4:20—13 Biblical Reflection: Morning—14 Catechesis in the Second Theological Examination on the Fifth Petition of the Lord’s Prayer—10 Catechetical Examination on Matthew 8:5–13—9 Catechetical Outline concerning the Second Article of Faith—9 Children’s Address on Psalm 24:7–9 Communion Homily on 1 Corinthians 15:55—15 Confession Homily on Micah 4:9—15 Confirmation—15 Confirmation Question Confirmation Sermon on Mark 9:24 Confirmation Verses Devotional Aids for the Moravian Daily Texts—16 Daily Text Meditation for June 7 and 8, 1944 Daily Text Meditation for Pentecost 1944 Devotions on John 8:31–32—11 Devotions on Luke 4:3–4—11 Devotions on Luke 4:5–8—11 Draft for a Catechism: As You Believe, So You Receive—11 Draft for a Liturgy, Remembrance Sunday—10 Draft for a Liturgy, Reminiscere (Memorial Day)—10 Opening Liturgy Prayer Draft for Worship Service on 2 Corinthians 2:14; 6:10; 6:1—15 Exegesis and Catechetical Lesson on Luke 9:57–62—9 Exegesis and Sermon on James 1:21–25—9 Exposition on Romans 9–11 (Student Notes)—14 Exposition on the First Table of the Ten Words of God—16 Fragment of a Wedding Sermon—13 Funeral Address on Luke 2:29–30—13 Funeral Liturgy and Homily on Proverbs 23:26 for Hans-Friedrich von Kleist-Retzow—16 Guide to Scriptural Meditation—14 Homily for the Children’s Service—10 Homily on Daniel 10:1, 8, 16–19—12 Liturgy for a Seminar Worship Service—12 Liturgy Fragment for Christmas—15 Marriage Sermon on Ruth 1:16–17—13 Meditation and Catechetical Lesson on “Honor”—9 Meditation and Sermon on Luke 9:51–56 for the Theological Examination—9 Meditation on Luke 9:57–62—13 Meditation on Psalm 119—15 Bonhoeffer’s Meditation (Fragment) Two Structural Outlines of Psalm 119 Notes for a Young Man—10 Outline for a Homily for Personal Confession on Proverbs 28:13–14 Outline on Proverbs 3:27–33—14 Recommended Devotions on Jeremiah 16:21 and Ephesians 1:22–23—16 Sermon for Evening Worship Service on 2 Corinthians 12:9—13 Sermon for Evening Worship Service on Proverbs 16:9–13 Sermon for the Lector on Matthew 2:13–23—15 Sermon for the Second Theological Examination on 1 Thessalonians 5:16–18—10 Sermon (Fragment) on Deuteronomy 32:48–52—10 Sermon (Fragment) on Luke 12:49—10 Sermon (Fragment) on Matthew 7:1—10 Sermon (Fragment) on Song of Solomon 8:6b—10 Sermon Meditation on Isaiah 9:6–7—16 Sermon Meditation on Revelation 2:1–7—14 Sermon Meditations—15 Sermon Meditation on John 3:16–21 for the Second Day of Pentecost Sermon Meditation on John 10:11–16 for Misericordias Domini Sunday Sermon Meditation on John 14:23–31 for the First Day of Pentecost Sermon Meditations on John 20:19–31 for Quasimodogeniti Sunday Sermon on 1 Corinthians 2:7–10—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 12:27, 26—10 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 13:1–3—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 13:4–7—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 13:8–12—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 13:13—13 Sermon on 1 Corinthians 15:17—10 Pulpit Notes Sermon Sermon on 1 John 2:17—10 Sermon on 1 John 4:16—10, 11 Sermon on 1 Peter 1:7b–9—12 Sermon on 2 Chronicles 20:12—11 Sermon on 2 Corinthians 5:10—13 Sermon on 2 Corinthians 5:20—13 Sermon on 2 Corinthians 12:9—10 Sermon on Colossians 3:1–4—11 Sermon on Genesis 32:25–32; 33:10—11 Sermon on Exodus 32:1–8, 15–16, 18–20, 30–35—12 Sermon on Jeremiah 20:7—13 Sermon on John 8:32—11 Sermon on Judges 6:15–16; 7:2; 8:23—12 Sermon on Luke 1:39–56—14 Sermon on Luke 1:46–55 Sermon on Luke 12:35–40—11 Sermon on Luke 13:1–5—13 Sermon on Luke 16:19–31—11 Sermon on Luke 17:7–10—9 Sermon on Luke 17:33—10 Sermon on Luke 21:28—13 Sermon on Mark 9:23–24—13 Sermon on Matthew 5:8—10 Sermon on Matthew 8:23–27—12 Sermon on Matthew 11:28–30—13 Sermon on Matthew 16:13–18—12 Sermon on Matthew 18:21–35—14 Sermon on Matthew 24:6–14—11 Sermon on Matthew 26:45b–50—14 Sermon on Matthew 28:20—10 Sermon on Philippians 4:7—10 Sermon on Psalm 42—14 Sermon on Psalm 58—14 Sermon on Psalm 62:2—10 Sermon on Psalm 63:3—11 Sermon on Psalm 90—14 Sermon on Psalm 98:1—13 Sermon on Psalm 127:1—9 Sermon on Revelation 2:4–5, 7—12 Sermon on Revelation 3:20—10 Sermon on Revelation 14:6–13—14 Sermon on Romans 5:1–5—15 Sermon on Romans 11:6—10 Sermon on Romans 12:11c—10 Sermon on Romans 12:17–21—15 Sermon on Wisdom 3:3—13 Sermon on Zechariah 3:1–5—14 Supplements to the Monthly Letters from the Confessing Church Council of Brethren in Pomerania to Its Pastors—15 Meditation on Christmas Meditation on Epiphany Theological Reflection on the Lord’s Supper Wedding Sermon from the Prison Cell—8 Wedding Sermon on 1 Thessalonians 5:16–18—14 Wedding Sermon on John 13:34—14

(Here’s a PDF of this paper: STEELE_The Tree of Religion Barth and Bonhoeffer on the Tree of Knowledge.) Introduction The precise meaning of the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (=TK) has long vexed interpreters of Genesis 2:4–3:24.[1] While the “tree of life” (=TL) is mentioned and alluded to throughout the Bible, the TK is explicitly mentioned by its full name just twice (Gen. 2:9, 17).[2] Nevertheless, because of the significant role that the TK plays in the narrative, both Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Karl Barth highlight the TK in their theological interpretations of Genesis 1–3. Furthermore, both theologians describe the TK and the knowledge of good and evil (=KGE) in ways that resemble their theological critiques of “religion” as an improper response to divine revelation. ...

(Here’s a PDF of this paper: STEELE_When Will Thy Kingdom Come.) Introduction: “Thy Kingdom [Has/Will] Come”? Just how eschatological is the Lord’s Prayer (=LP; Matt. 6:9–13; Luke 11:2–4), particularly in light of its second petition, “Your kingdom come” (ἐλθέτω ἡ βασιλεία σου, Matt. 6:10a; Luke 11:2d)? In other words, when will God’s kingdom come? Has it already arrived (not eschatological)? Is it in the process of arriving? Or will it arrive at some point in the future (eschatological)? Furthermore, who brings the kingdom about? Humans? God? Or some combination of the two? Settling the question of eschatology involves both the timing and the agency, the when and the who, of the kingdom. ...