Irish Theological Quarterly

Recent authors have debated the continuity of Augustine’s thought in the mid-390s, as well as the continuity of On the Free Choice of the Will (De libero arbitrio), which he completed around that time. This study contributes to the current debate surrounding De libero arbitrio by identifying one strand of thought that Augustine develops with a natural continuity throughout the dialogue, namely, his natural law theory. This article argues that, when read as a unified whole, De libero arbitrio implies a working natural law theory centered on the order of the universe and applied to man particularly through his ordered nature, with attendant rewards and punishments. The argument proceeds through the themes of order, nature, and retribution in turn, explaining each from passages in De libero arbitrio. The first of these sections also discusses some of Augustine’s other early works as important background for understanding his concept of order.

The Historia scholastica of Peter Comestor (d. 1178) was for centuries the main work of reference for the study in the Latin West of Biblical history, just as Peter Lombard’s Four Books of Sentences were for the study of systematic theology and the Decretum of Gratian of Bologna for the study of canon law. Hundreds of manuscript copies of each of these manuals survive, and the Historia scholastica was conspicuous for the attention it gave to the details of the historical events narrated in the Bible, to such matters as places, names, and dates. The work does not offer moral or spiritual interpretation of the Bible. Some examples of Peter’s presentation of biblical chronology are presented in this essay.

In a series of studies Francis Moloney has argued, along narrative critical lines, that the phrase ‘the Scripture’ in John 20:9 should be understood as a reference to the Fourth Gospel itself, which presents itself to later believers as ‘Scripture’ in continuity with the Scriptures of Israel. This interpretation, while resolving the long-noted tension between v. 8 and v. 9 towards the end of the passage, is not tenable on the grounds that such a reinterpretation of γραϕή places too great a demand upon the reader in view of the use of the term up to this point. The transition across vv. 8–9 is better explained as a reference to ‘Scripture’ in a global sense as providing the divinely appointed ‘script’ for the paradoxical messianic mission of the Son.

Jesus’ resurrection to bodily life after death by crucifixion is foundational to orthodox Christianity. The disciples had encounters with Jesus after his crucifixion which caused them to believe he had been bodily resurrected to life again. Psychiatric hypotheses have been proposed as naturalistic explanations for his disciples’ beliefs, which include hallucinations, conversion disorder, and bereavement experiences. Since they propose hallucinatory symptoms that suggest the presence of underlying medical pathology, clinical appraisal of these hypotheses for the disciples’ encounters with the resurrected Jesus is warranted. Psychiatric hypotheses for the disciples’ belief in Jesus’ resurrection are found to be inconsistent with current medical understanding and do not offer plausible explanations for the biblical story of Easter.