Over the last year (or so) my first monograph, Trinity and Organism (New York and London: T&T Clark/Bloomsbury, 2012), has been reviewed on a couple of blogs. It featured on the Allkirk Network, and has also been covered by Derek Rishmawy. In Rishmawy’s review, I particularly appreciated that he used the review to explore why detailed historical theology is worthwhile to the church: as communities committed to the importance of truth (and the corresponding duty not to bear false witness of one’s neighbour, even if that neighbour lived in the past), and that strive for right doctrine, churches benefit from historical theology. To that, Rishmawy adds (and I agree!):
Beyond avoiding error, studies in historical theology prove that our Fathers and Mothers in the faith may still have something to new to say to us. Corrective studies like Eglinton’s have the possibility of opening up theological vistas or impasses in current theological and churchly debate because it comes from another time that’s not caught up in the assumptions we share. This is true whether it’s simply reminding ourselves of older sources we merely forgot or by gaining an understanding of their answers that weren’t properly heard the first time around. In this way, historical theology can become a timely word from another time.