Volume 20, Issue 2, June 2007

This article focuses on Vision Two of Hildegard of Bingen’s Book of Divine Works [LDO]. The main argument is that this vision, understood within the context of the book as a whole, presents a dynamic, allegorical cosmic map which provides guidance for a spiritual journey through life in this world to union with God. A close analysis of the various symbols in the map, their probable sources, and the frameworks that connect them opens up a basic understanding of what this vision is expressing. A parallel insight into the nature of this vision sees it as part of a theological response to the early reformers who would come to be called the Cathars. After considering the nature of Hildegard’s work as art and theology, I place Vision Two of LDO in the historical context of the rise of the Cathar movement and argue for an interpretation of the overall vision, as well as many of its specific symbols, as offering a Catholic alternative to the Cathar view of the cosmos.

This article aims to show that the Paraclete is portrayed in the Johannine farewell discourse (chapters 14-16) as the successor to Jesus in his ministry in the world and as the mediator of Jesus’ ongoing presence. Jesus and the Paraclete are functionally similar yet not identical in person; they are distinct yet united. Their intimacy is such that the Paraclete can be understood as one who makes the presence of Jesus felt in the period of Jesus’ absence. Contrary to some tendencies in Johannine scholarship, the Paraclete is not to be described as Jesus returned in another "form". A close reading of the five Paraclete texts of the Johannine farewell discourse (14:16-17; 14:25-26; 15:26; 16:7-11; 16:13-15) shows that the Paraclete is Jesus’ successor and the mediator of his presence. This implies that the two characters are distinct – and respects the sense of Jesus’ impending death and absence – as well as implying that there is an inextricable intimacy between them.

The issue of the relationship between Church History and Systematic Theology has become more pressing, not only in the context of the rise of the modern critical historical method, but above all because, to an unprecedented degree, church history is presenting challenges to Christian ethics that go right through to core tenets of Christian belief and therefore to systematics. Unique in this respect is the challenge presented by the Holocaust and the response of Christian theologians in the general context of anti-semitism that surrounded and promoted it. This article takes the German martyr theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer as a test case of the relationship between systematic theology and history, assessing both the strengths and weaknesses of his response to the Nazi persecution of the Jews, in the light of his highly ethical approach to the theological task.

After a brief biographical introduction, this essay traces Schwager’s approach to the problematic of divine violence, a prevalent theme in the Old Testament. By relating this notion to Jesus’ non-violent teaching and conduct on the one hand, and to his judgement sayings on the other, Schwager interprets the tension as “drama”. What renders his theology “dramatic” is the pathos of God as reflected in the biblical text. When read through the dramatic lens, it reveals a non-violent God who in Christ turns unconditionally to sinful humanity to effect a radical deliverance from human entanglement with “sacred violence”. The article concludes with a reflection on the heuristic value of the dramatic view, pointing to the cruciality of the non-violent image of God for a faith that works its own way into a violent world through God’s action in history.  

The tragic unfolding of world events since September 11, 2001, has added great urgency to practical and theoretical issues arising from the phenomenon of international terrorism.  This paper applies a traditional concept of just war theory drawing largely on Aquinas and Augustine to legitimate violent action against groups who are not (or need not be) themselves representatives of states.  Traditional just war theory is couched largely in terms of the legitimacy of defensive war directed at polities.  New applications of the theory are required to deal with contemporary international terrorism.  In presenting a new application of the theory I argue that the purely defensive conception of just war advocated in recent Catholic Church documents and taken up by some contemporary theologians and philosophers is problematic. In dialogue particularly with Joseph Boyle, I maintain that traditional just war theory provides the salient criteria for a polity’s violent actions against groups that are not themselves, or at least, need not be polities – including actions that may be characterised as punitive rather than purely defensive in nature. The traditional concept of just war is in this respect more coherent.