This essay is an exercise in practical theology, the theological reflection arising out of and in response to the church's actual situation. Practical theology insists that it is not enough to analyze the church's actual situation with deductive, ahistorical theological principles, but that it is necessary, first, to uncover and, then, reflect critically on the actual situation to test it for the presence of the Spirit, relevance, and significance in light of the gospel. Practical theology grows out of the relationship between theoria and praxis which, for the church, is the relationship between faith and praxis. The essay argues that to recognize scientifically the church's actual situation and to perform the required theological reflection practical theology requires sociology.

The essay explores, therefore, the relationship between practical theology and the data of sociological research. It also examines the theological realities, sensus fidei and reception, and explores their relationship to that data. The exploration is concretized theologically by a consideration of the sociological data and theology about two Catholic moral doctrines, divorce and remarriage without prior annulment and artificial contraception. A theological reflection on the actual situation of both doctrines and a sociological consideration of the data suggest the conclusion that a dramatic development and re-reception of both doctrines, in line with previous dramatic developments of doctrine in the church, is under way.

Commentators have concluded that frequent reference in Veritatis splendor to Gaudium et spes demonstrates a continuity of thought with the pastoral constitution, characteristic of a reiterative model of the use of prior magisterial teaching, one continuous teaching applied to additional issues. Recent centuries have shown that the encyclical teachings are often a vehicle for papal reinterpretation or recontextualization of previous teachings. This paper contends that the use of Gaudium et spes in Veritatis splendor follows this second model. The study demonstrates: first, that the theological anthropology of Gaudium et spes is recast in a dualist, individualist concept in Veritatis splendor, and second, that Veritatis splendor has re-contextualized quotations from Gaudium et spes on change, conscience, human autonomy, and human anthropology into teachings on law and precept. Thirdly, reliance on selective wording from Gaudium et spes enables Veritatis splendor to transform the role of the moral theologian into that of exclusively a disseminator of magisterial teaching.

This article considers the “perennial” appeal of Ramana Maharshi, the twentieth-century Hindu saint from South India (1879–1950). While not as well-known in the West as either Ramakrishna or Ramana's contemporary, Sri Aurobindo, Ramana's life and teaching have evoked a surprisingly strong positive reaction from Indians and Westerners alike. The reason for this, first of all, is to be located in the perennial philosophy which his life and teaching implicate, and the use made of that philosophy by neo-Hindu apologists or Western scholars and spiritual figures interested in “mysticism” across cultures or interfaith dialogue. Second, the appeal of Ramana can also be located in the compelling attraction of holiness, a phenomenon which raises the fundamental question of what it means to be human. In the case of Ramana, the compelling example of human “being” provokes inquiry into the depth dimension of human existence, where, in the non-dualistic tradition which he represents, one discovers divinity.

The article presents an analysis of Newman's understanding of theology and its role in the Catholic University of Ireland. In explaining Newman's understanding of university theology, the article focuses on two elements of Newman's thought. The first is Newman's understanding of theology as a form of liberal knowledge. An application of the elements of liberal knowledge to theology reveals the main characteristics of Newman's understanding of university theology. The second is Newman's understanding of the relationship between the church and the university. Newman distinguishes between the mission of the Catholic Church and the mission of the Catholic university. The distinct mission of the university indicates that the objective of university theology is different from the teaching mission of the magisterium. In the final section, the article examines the significance of Newman's ideas for Catholic universities in the United States today.

The document Dominus Iesus, issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on September 5, 2000, was perhaps the most talked-about document in recent church history, both within and without the Catholic Church. Some of the reactions to it, which came from all quarters, were profound, and provided both a field day for the mass media and much data for theological reflections. Significantly missing from theological journals in the West, however, is the response of the Asian church and its implications for Asian theologies. This is a serious omission since Dominus Iesus, seems to have been written because of and for the Asian church in general and its theologians in particular. The present essay, therefore, looks at this Asian factor, especially in the context of the renewal inaugurated by the Second Vatican Council.

What light might a greater attentiveness to the role of the Holy Spirit radiate over the tangled question of apostolic succession and the validity of orders? Here I have in mind the question of orders in the Protestant communities, as understood from a Roman Catholic perspective, although the question is relevant to some of the Eastern Orthodox and other Eastern Christian churches as well. For although it is commonly held, given the teaching of Vatican II (Unitatis Redintegratio, Decree on Ecumenism, no. 15) and later papal teaching (John Paul II, Ut Unum Sint, no. 50), that Catholics recognize the validity of orders of the Orthodox, the recognition is not always mutual.

The typical Roman Catholic view of the “Protestant question,” if I may abbreviate it in this way, is that an unbridgeable break—a radical disruption—occurred at the Reformation in both the form and the matter of apostolic succession. That is, the teaching (or doctrine) about orders, as well as the concrete, institutionalized forms of its presence in the threefold diaconate-priesthood-episcopacy, were fatally disrupted at the Reformation. Apostolic succession was thereby fatally flawed, at least as regards ordained ministry. And this fatal flaw was in turn reflected in the liturgical rites and larger ecclesial institutional forms of the Protestant communities.