I write this editorial en route from Colombia, where I met with several teachers of theology at the Universidad Javeriana in Cali and learned something about their questions and concerns as theologians in the church. The issues they raised were not altogether unlike those I have encountered in the United States, where theologians bemoan the
What is the relationship between the conversion (1) of the elements into the (real) Body of Christ and (2) of the participants into the (mystical) Body of Christ? When we bring this and related questions to the early church, the Middle Ages, and the Reformation, we find that the conversion of the eucharistic elements has indeed been understood by unimpeachably sincere Christians in a broad variety of ways. In contrast, there has been a remarkably constant convergence regarding the all-importance of the conversion of the participants. Were this taken as the starting point, we might discover that we have much more ecumenical unity regarding the Eucharist than is usually thought to be the case.
Christian theologians assume that systematic theology should make use of the language and methodology of natural science wherever possible to set forth contemporary understanding of Christian doctrine. To this end Joseph Bracken employs the notion of open-ended systems of entities in dynamic interrelation as the basis for an evolutionary understanding of the cosmic process within
Sign up to receive updates and relevant information from Theological Studies.
"*" indicates required fields
