Robert Prichard examines both high-church and evangelical theology in the nineteenth-century Episcopal church, claiming a commonality between the two that has been neglected in the study of Anglican history. Parting company with the interpretation dominant among historians of the Episcopal church for more than sixty years, he focuses on shared theological assumptions rather than on liturgical divisions. By focusing on these shared theological assumptions, he sheds new light on the Episcopal church, helping the reader to see the evangelical and high-church parties as concerned with theological as well as liturgical topics. Prichard's approach avoids overemphasis on division and opens the way for a broader comparison of the Episcopal church's relationship to other Protestant churches.

An integrated overview of history The volume in this series are arranged topically to cover biography, literature, doctrines, practices, institutions, worship, missions, and daily life. Archaeology and art as well as writings are drawn on to illuminate the Christian movement in its early centuries. Ample attention is also given to the relation of Christianity to pagan thought and life, to the Roman state, to Judaism, and to doctrines and practices that came to be judged as heretical or schismatic. Introductions to each volume tie the articles together for an integrated understanding of the history. Offers insights and understanding The aim of the collection is to give balanced and comprehensive coverage, selected on the basis of the following criteria: original and excellent research and writing; subject matter of use to teachers and students; groundbreaking importance for the history of research; background information for issues and opinions. Understanding the development of early Christianity and its impact on Western history and thought offers valuable insights into the modern world and the present state of Christiantiy. It also provides perspective on comparable developments in other periods of history and reveals human nature in its religious dimension.

This is my 5th book of poetry. Inside I explore and work through descriptions of victim-hood using poetry and stories. Interspersed with 30 poems written sequentially are poems that dealt with the same topics yet where written before or after the specific date.

This study provides a compelling account of the major works of Henri de Lubac, one of the most influential theologians of the twentieth century, and argues that soteriology provides a lens through which their inner unity can be discerned. The writings of Henri de Lubac have left an indelible mark on Catholic theology, preparing the ground for, giving shape to, and explaining the seminal event of twentieth-century Catholicism: the Second Vatican Council. Like the Council itself, though, de Lubac remains a contested figure, difficult to classify. Salvation in Henri de Lubac presents an overview of de Lubac’s major works in light of his own statements that a mystical vision animated them all. De Lubac’s mystical theology hinges upon a vision of salvation, understood as humanity’s incorporation into the triune God through the cross and resurrection of the incarnate Christ. From his writings on the supernatural and theological epistemology, to his treatments of the spiritual interpretation of Scripture, ecclesiology, sacramental theology, and the theology of history, the mystery of the cross looms large, gathering these disparate topics into one focal center while also allowing their distinct contours to remain. By attending to de Lubac’s work in this light, Eugene R. Schlesinger brings important themes from French language scholarship into the English-speaking conversation and clarifies the nature of de Lubac’s ressourcement. It is not a method, nor a sensibility, but the outgrowth of a conviction: in the mystery of Christ a definitive and unsurpassable gift has been given, one that constitutes the meaning of the world and its history, one whose riches can never be exhausted. Schlesinger claims that unless we understand de Lubac and his work in light of his own motivations and emphases, we risk distorting his contribution, reducing him to a proxy in the struggle for post-conciliar Catholic self-definition.