A Response to the Critics of Nicaea and Its Legacy

Let me turn in this “Response” to the concerns of those who have been unhappy with particular features of Nicaea and Its Legacy. Although the bulk of my discussion will be taken up with the responses of Khaled Anatolios and John Behr, I want also to range a little more widely. For the most part, cri...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Ayres, Lewis (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: Cambridge Univ. Press 2007
In: Harvard theological review
Year: 2007, Volume: 100, Issue: 2, Pages: 159-171
Online Access: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1784651745
003 DE-627
005 20220105043214.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 220105s2007 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1017/S0017816007001514  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1784651745 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1784651745 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Ayres, Lewis  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 2 |a A Response to the Critics of Nicaea and Its Legacy 
264 1 |c 2007 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Let me turn in this “Response” to the concerns of those who have been unhappy with particular features of Nicaea and Its Legacy. Although the bulk of my discussion will be taken up with the responses of Khaled Anatolios and John Behr, I want also to range a little more widely. For the most part, criticisms of my book Nicaea have stemmed as much from opposition to my overall attitude towards the task of historical theology as from opposition to my interpretation of particular episodes of the fourth century. A range of related questions focuses on the relationship between the good practice of theology and the implications of the forms of modern historical consciousness that I have clearly found persuasive. The three critics that I engage here all seem to me to be pushing in directions that (consciously or unconsciously) inappropriately restrict the scope and character of theological—and particularly of historical theological—investigation. I must confess at the beginning of this discussion that I assumed the majority of negative responses to my project as a whole (as opposed to negative responses to particular sections of the argument) would come from what might be termed the theological “left”: those who are convinced by some of the fundamental lines of post-Enlightenment and recent liberal critique of classical Christian tradition. It has, however, been fascinating to see other critics emerge from what might perhaps be termed the theological “right”: those sympathetic to modern attempts to retrieve the centrality of classical Christian texts, theologians, and exegetical methods. Both forms of critique demand a response. 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Harvard theological review  |d Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1908  |g 100(2007), 2, Seite 159-171  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)331504553  |w (DE-600)2051494-3  |w (DE-576)094533326  |x 1475-4517  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:100  |g year:2007  |g number:2  |g pages:159-171 
856 |3 Volltext  |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/4495110  |x JSTOR 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.1017/S0017816007001514  |x Resolving-System  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/harvard-theological-review/article/response-to-the-critics-of-nicaea-and-its-legacy/8ABB59C78AA49C8603FBCF5EFD580CB2  |x Verlag  |z lizenzpflichtig  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 100  |j 2007  |e 2  |h 159-171 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
ITA |a 1  |t 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4029956084 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1784651745 
LOK |0 005 20220105043214 
LOK |0 008 220105||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-28#41524D49B0DC4505B8E0FE30F99EBEE85BDB189D 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 866   |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/4495110 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a ixrk  |a zota 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw