New Theology Review <p><em>New Theology Review</em> is a Catholic journal of theology and ministry published by Catholic Theological Union through the Paul Bechtold Library.&nbsp;&nbsp;Its mission is to serve the Church&nbsp;by&nbsp;providing, through the publication of&nbsp;articles, a forum for theologians and pastoral ministersto engage the Catholic tradition in respectful, constructive, and critical dialogue.</p> Catholic Theological Union through the Paul Bechtold Library en-US New Theology Review 0896-4297 <p>This is an agreement between <em>NTR</em> and the author for the publication of the submitted article in the online journal <em>New Theology Review</em>.&nbsp; By submitting this agreement, the author and the <em>NTR</em> agree as follows:<br><br>1) The author grants to the <em>NTR</em> the exclusive right of first publication in the article, as well as the ongoing and perpetual non-exclusive right to reuse and republish the article for any purpose, including, but not limited to, the right to copy, migrate or convert the article, without alteration of the content, to any medium or format to ensure continuous access and preservation.&nbsp; The author agrees that the article may be used and published by the <em>NTR</em> in electronic or printed format and/or in any other medium now in existence or that may be created hereafter.<br><br>2) <em>NTR</em> will publish and distribute the article worldwide in the online journal <em>New Theology Review</em> using a Creative Commons “Attribution, Non-Commercial, No Derivative Works” license.&nbsp; The author understands and agrees that this license permits users of the journal to print and/or copy the article for noncommercial purposes. <em>NTR</em> will make all reasonable efforts to ensure that the author’s name remains clearly associated with the article.<br><br>3) Except for the rights granted to&nbsp;<em>NTR</em> in this agreement, the author retains ownership, including all other copyrights, in the article and may republish the article in any format and at any time subsequent to publication in <em>New Theology Review</em>. The author agrees, however, to acknowledge in all subsequent publications that the article was first published in<em> NTR.</em><br><br>4) The author represents and warrants that the article is his or her original work and that it either has not been published or submitted for publication in any prior forum, or that it has been substantially revised and updated from a prior version.&nbsp; The author further represents that he or she has the right to grant this license to <em>NTR</em> and that, to the best of the author’s knowledge, the article is neither defamatory of any persons or products nor infringing upon any third party’s copyrights.&nbsp; If the article contains material for which the author does not hold the copyright, the author represents that such material is clearly identified and acknowledge within the text and that such use is either with the permission of the copyright holder or authorized by Title 17 of the United States Code.<br><br>5) In the event of any subsequent dispute over the copyrights to material contain in the article, the author agrees to indemnify and hold harmless <em>NTR</em> and its employees and agents for any uses of the article authorized by this agreement.</p> Masthead Jaime Briceno ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-26 2018-03-26 30 2 i i Editorial Dianne Bergant ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-19 2018-03-19 30 2 ii ii Do It From The Inside <p>Inculturation and contextualisation are familiar themes in mission when it comes to crossing cultures. They usually conjure up in the mind’s eye mission work in foreign lands or at least among people distinct because of ethnicity or religion. However, the church in the West has been much slower to apply these mission insights to home base. This article explores what it might look like to inculturate the gospel in the Western contexts, or, as John Taylor put it in the&nbsp;<em>Primal Vision</em>,&nbsp;to “do it from the inside.” This paper was presented as the Louis J. Luzbetak Lecture on Mission and Culture given at Catholic Theological Union in Chicago in October 2017.</p> Jonny Baker ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-01-04 2018-01-04 30 2 1 9 Christian Humanism, Anthropocentrism, and the Contemporary Ecological Crisis <p>The tradition of Christian humanism is one of the greatest treasures of the Catholic Church. As ecological concerns loom over the world, the Catholic Church has been presenting an environmentalism faithfully founded on this tradition, which can be traced back to the early Church Fathers, and indeed Jesus himself. Unfortunately, the term "humanism" has been co-opted by those holding secularist views, and Catholic humanistic environmentalism has not always been understood by those looking to evaluate the Church’s disposition towards the ecology, often mistaking it for a form of anthropocentrism. The discussion shows that Catholic environmentalism is a sound expression of the rich tradition of Christian humanism. It also asserts that Catholic environmentalism must be understood within this unique humanistic outlook without references to the notion of anthropocentrism, which has its own controversy about meaning and usage. &nbsp;</p> Anthony Le Duc ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-01 2018-03-01 30 2 10 19 "Hope Requires Participants" <p>The current rising trend towards populism occurring around the world has been arguably epitomized by the 2016 election of television celebrity Donald Trump to the presidency of the United States. President Trump’s recent withdrawal of the United States from the Paris climate accord in order to bolster big business suggests a politic that favors the free market over both human and non-human life itself. His campaign to “make America great again” garnered the support of white supremacists, ringing of nationalism tinged with racist ideology. The fact that vast numbers of white Christians continue to support Trump’s extreme policies and racist rhetoric calls for a robust political theology that addresses the conflation of Christian doctrine with capitalist, nationalist ideology.&nbsp; German political theologian Dorothee Sölle (1929-2003), with her warning against what she terms as “Christofascism,” or Christianity’s tendency to perpetuate extreme capitalism, provides an apt analysis useful for contending with the current American political climate which also may be useful for addressing the rise in populism globally. Sölle’s task for political theology to become practical by way of her concept of “Phantasie” provides Christians with a concrete and constructive way forward. This article hopes to portray Sölle’s criticism <em>and</em> task as a crucial framework for understanding and responding to the political issues we face as Christians, especially in the United States context today.</p> Dannis M. Matteson ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-01 2018-03-01 30 2 20 30 Reading the Bible Through Stained Glass: Postliberal Resistance to the Historical-Critical Method <p>The Pontifical Biblical Commission in 1964 envisaged that modern biblical scholarship could contribute to the continuing development of doctrine, in 1993 deeming the historical-critical method indispensable for the interpretation of scripture. So too, the Second Vatican Council in its <em>Dogmatic Constitution on Divine</em> <em>Revelation</em><em>&nbsp;</em>endorsed the necessity of historical-critical exegesis and envisaged that modern Biblical scholarship would enable the Church to mature in its understanding of scripture. Nonetheless, insights derived through modern biblical scholarship, even when they represent broad scholarly consensus, appear to have had little impact on the magisterium’s presentation of doctrine in the<em> Catechism of the Catholic Church. </em>Against this backdrop, Robert Barron regards the historical-critical method as inherently problematic, infused with the assumptions of rational-skepticism and deeply Protestant in its quest for the intentions of the human authors of scripture. Barron proposes a postliberal hermeneutics that seeks to subordinate historical-critical concerns to a doctrinally conditioned interpretation of the bible. Barron argues for the epistemic priority of Christ, extending his argument so as to assert the epistemic priority of images, doctrines, and narratives regarding Christ as derived from the tradition. Barron holds that these doctrinally conditioned lenses trump historical-critical considerations, themselves transcending the need for historical-critical interpretation. In response, the present paper argues a thesis that a postliberal interpretation of scripture through the lens of traditional images and positions, granting these facets of the tradition an epistemological priority over historical-critical considerations, would impede the development of doctrine. When the bible is read through the hermeneutical lens of traditional interpretations and imagery, that is, stained glass, as it were, these components of the tradition are regarded as normative. Hence, the biblical text under consideration is not given an opportunity to stand in creative tension with the canon and the broader tradition of which it constitutes a part and to speak on its own terms.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p> <p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> Alan Bernard McGill ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-24 2018-03-24 30 2 31 42 The Critics of Pope Francis and Amoris Laetitia <p>Natural Law Theorists John Finnis and Germain Grisez published an “Open Letter to Pope Francis” on the website of <em>First Things </em>on 12/9/16. Their letter requested the pope “to condemn eight positions against the Catholic faith that are being supported, or likely will be, by the misuse of the Apostolic Exhortation <em>Amoris Laetitia.</em>” In this essay, we analyze and critique their doctrinal and pastoral concerns with <em>Amoris Laetitia </em>with the intention of initiating a dialogue with them. We offer both a “soft” critique, arguing that <em>Amoris Laetitia</em> cannot be used to defend the positions Finnis and Grisez condemn without distorting the text itself and a “hard” critique, arguing that none of these positions are contrary to Catholic doctrine.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p> Todd A. Salzman Michael G. Lawler ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2017-08-28 2017-08-28 30 2 43 54 Catechesis and Faith Formation: Classroom Teaching Practices as Embodied, Contextual Liturgical Formation Eileen Maggiore ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-19 2018-03-19 30 2 55 58 New Voices: <i>Feminicidio</i> and the Image of God Adriana Calzada ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-01 2018-03-01 30 2 59 61 Signs of the Times: Theological Anthropology in Light of #MeToo Megan Kathleen McCabe ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-01 2018-03-01 30 2 62 64 Theology at the Cutting Edge: Engaging our Diversity through Interculturality Roger Schroeder ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-01 2018-03-01 30 2 65 68 Word and Worship: When You Pray Gilbert Ostdiek, OFM ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-12 2018-03-12 30 2 69 73 <i>Galatians and the Rhetoric of Crisis</i> John Clabeaux ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-01 2018-03-01 30 2 74 75 The Transformed Heart Mary Frohlich ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-01 2018-03-01 30 2 76 76 A Lúcás Chan Reader Conor Kelly ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-03-01 2018-03-01 30 2 77 78 Incarnate Grace <p>Book review</p> Thomas A. Shannon ##submission.copyrightStatement## 2018-01-09 2018-01-09 30 2 79 80