Laudato Si’ contains a prophetic vision of what time is and is for. It challenges development organisations to think critically about the way they conceive ‘progress’, the way they measure their ‘success’. In doing so, it invites them to ask how they express in their activity a particular conception of the meaning of time. This paper argues that Laudato Si’ proposes a vision of time which is theological, teleological, dialectical and contemplative, and that it is this vision which underpins its contrast between true and false notions of progress. The paper seeks to articulate a foundation for the formulation of authentic ‘measures of success’ that are expressive of this understanding of time, and to imagine what the organisational implications of such measures might be.

The opening chapter of the Gospel of Luke establishes a connection between the Temple and Mary, the mother of Jesus. This connection is developed over the centuries by theologians, often in connection to Marian doctrines, but also in service of Christology. This research considers what the theological implications of such a typology might be—what are theologians saying about Mary, and often Jesus, when they draw a typological connection between the Temple and Mary? Furthermore, what is a feminist theologian to make of such a theological statement? Is Mary a monolithic, bland symbol or does a typological connection between the Temple and Mary make for a powerfully feminist Marian theology?

The article questions whether it is possible to derive natural laws from human sociability. It examines the work of Aristotle, Augustine and Aquinas, and concludes that there are certain natural laws that can be derived from the social character of human beings. Some of these hold across all societies and at all times (semper et ad semper) whereas others hold only in general but are subject to exceptions (semper sed non ad semper). The article concludes by confronting an anti-social and immoralist challenge to the idea of natural laws of sociability.

Joseph Ratzinger/Pope Benedict XVI called Blessed John Henry Newman “an important influence in my own life and thought.” In his memoirs, Ratzinger describes the energy with which Newman's work on conscience, history, and on the development of doctrine was read and discussed in his seminary days. Yet, in terms of Ratzinger's own work on history, tradition, and revelation, he makes almost no direct mention of Newman in his writings over his long theological career. This paper, by comparing the two theologians’ writings on the subject, seeks to ascertain whether and to what extent Newman's theology of tradition and revelation had an impact on Ratzinger's theology.

This article seeks to explore the thinking of Edward Bouverie Pusey on the doctrine of transubstantiation. It begins by looking at the conflicted way Pusey is considered and goes on to examine Pusey's writings on transubstantiation. The article points out that Pusey's early writing on transubstantiation wrongly believed that the doctrine implied a carnal view of Christ's presence in the Eucharist, but that in his mature thinking this caricature was abandoned and he came to understand that transubstantiation is a form of moderate realism. Some detailed examination of Pusey's mature thinking is undertaken, including a very important set of correspondence between Edward Pusey and John Newman in 1867 which addressed the doctrine of transubstantiation. Pusey's thinking reveals that he is prepared to accept the word transubstantiation as long as it does not imply a change in the substance of the bread and wine of the Eucharist. The article concludes with discussion on the term transubstantiation itself and controversially cites evidence from both Anglican and Roman Catholic sources which suggest that the dependence on a particular scholastic philosophical analysis which attempts to explain the ‘how’ of the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist may be less useful than an approach of ‘what’. Pusey's mature thinking on transubstantiation is seen as useful for ecumenical dialogue between the Anglican and Roman Catholic Churches.