Abstract
The inadequacy of historical-critical methods as the privileged approach to Scripture is well documented, and recent years have witnessed the emergence of new readings more robustly anchored in established doctrines of Christian orthodoxy, especially Nicaea. These interpretive shifts reverberate beyond the sacred page as part of a movement that promises a renewal in the field of theology at both the academic and pastoral levels. Yet, at the same time, these developments unwittingly threaten to attenuate a full appreciation for the contribution of Nicaea to something more than just the mere ‘clarification’ of biblical material. Amidst this threat, the work of Bernard Lonergan, who was neither an exegete nor a historical theologian, serves as an essential and seminal corrective.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
