A diptych reading of Christ’s transfiguration: trans and intersex aesthetics reveal baptismal identity

too supernaturalistic, and too rigid. But this is not to deny that the meaning of revelation can be mediated through true propositions, as we shall see below. second major approach to revelation in current theology is designated as historical. There are several forms of this theory, but for the present I shall advert only to the most extreme, which would hold that reveals Himself not just by inspiring a prophetic interpretation of ambiguous events but by producing in history events with a clear meaning accessible to all reasonable observers. In the 1950's the biblical theologian George Ernest Wright maintained that revelation was originally and adequately imparted through God's deeds in history. More recently Wolfhart Pannenberg and his circle have contended that revelation is objectively given in historical events which, under the cool scrutiny of reason, can be unequivocally interpreted as having a specific meaning. It is basic to this theory that revelatory events are self-interpreting: speaks the language of facts. In opposition to the first school, Pannenberg denies that revelation is actually given in the form of words. Words, he holds, can promise a revelation yet to be given; they can subsequently report what has been revealed through deeds; but they are not themselves revelation. On this second theory there is, again, no particular problem in seeing how revelation can be true. truth of the deed is that of its evident significance. When translated into propositional statements, historical revelation has the speculative kind of truth that attaches to philosophical judgments about the import of history. Pannenberg's own doctrine of revelation is in essence a comprehensive theory of the meaning and end of universal history. Pannenberg's theses, however, are subject to serious objections. Important though history may be as a medium of revelation, it is doubtful whether an academic historian, unmotivated by religious concerns, could be convinced by the biblical accounts, contemplated in the light of universal reason, that revelation had in fact occurred. Nor does it seem that the biblical authors themselves regarded historical events, apart from any inspired interpretation or prophetic commentary, as a sufficient channel of revelation. According to a third modern theory, much in vogue in the early part of the present century, revelation occurs essentially through an inner experience of the divine, quasi-mystical in character. Such is, in a general 5 G. E. Wright, Who Acts: Biblical as Recital (London: SCM, 1952). 6 W. Pannenberg and others, as History (New York: Macmillan, 1968) esp. 132-33. In order to bring out what is distinctive in Pannenberg's position, I have inevitably simplified it, especially in view of his own subsequent explanations, e.g., in Basic Questions in 2 (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971) 28-64. 54 THEOLOGICAL STUDIES way, the position of distinguished spiritual writers and philosophers such as Baron Friedrich von Hugel, Dean William R. Inge, Evelyn Underhill, and William Ernest Hocking. Writers such as these commonly assert that Himself, immediately experienced by the religious consciousness, is the real content of revelation, and that the credal statements and doctrinal tenets of any specific community are merely human interpretations. As Evelyn Underhill has it, The particular mental image which the mystic forms of his objective, the traditional theory he accepts, is not essential. Since it is never adequate, the degree of its inadequacy is of secondary importance We cannot honestly say that there is any wide difference between the Brahman, Sufi, or mystic at their best. This approach, with its nonconceptual view of religious truth, paves the way for an easy reconciliation among the world's religions and even between religion and humanistic psychology, as the work of Abraham Maslow bears witness. theory, however, rather summarily dismisses the specific witness of particular religious traditions. Furthermore, it may be doubted whether psychological peak experiences, even of a very intense kind, deserve to be called revelation; for, as William James pointed out, such experiences have no clear content. They admit of a wide variety of interpretations, theistic, pantheistic, polytheistic, and even atheistic. A fourth typical theory of revelation, too subtle and complicated for coherent analysis in these schematic remarks, is the dialectical. Karl Barth, Emil Brunner, Rudolf Bultmann, and several associates, writing in the wake of World War I, vehemently rejected the optimistic liberalism which lay at the root of the theories of Auguste Sabatier and many Modernists. At the same time they refused to return to the orthodoxy of traditional dogmatism. Revelation, they maintained, is God's free act in Jesus Christ, to which the Bible and proclamation bear witness. Written and spoken words, being creatures, could never be revelation in themselves, but they can become revelation when it pleases to speak through them. God's word, being identical with Himself, cannot be contained in history, even though it may touch history at a dimensionless point, as a tangent touches a circle. Nor can religious experience be rightly called revelation, for is knowable only through faith in His word. truth of revelation, for this school, is of a unique kind having no analogy in other spheres. is a dark and mysterious meeting 7 E. Underhill, Essentials of Mysticism (New York: Dutton, 1960) 4. 8 A. H. Maslow, Religions, Values, and Peak-Experiences (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State Univ., 1964) 19-20, 28. 9 W. James, Varieties of Religious Experience (New York: Mentor, 1958) 326, 387. 10 For a good summary with ample references, see the section Revelation in Dialectical Theology in G. O'Collins, Foundations of (Chicago: Loyola Univ., 1971) 31-44. SYMBOLIC STRUCTURE OF REVELATION 55 with in faith. revealed God, said Barth, is also the hidden God. He is revealed precisely as the hidden one. Dialectical theology aroused considerable enthusiasm in the period between the two World Wars and brought about a remarkable revival of interest in revelation as God's address to man. But many critics found that the theory was too polemically oriented against other schools, that it lacked internal coherence, and that it failed to answer the critical questions arising out of ordinary experience. While its vivid contrasts between faith and reason, between God's word and human words, and between revelation and religion were rhetorically effective, these contrasts were difficult to carry through in a systematic way. unknown of dialectical theology was all too similar to the dead God of Christian atheism. For these and other reasons dialectical theology steadily declined in popularity after World War II and has few supporters today. Yet, as we shall see, many of the insights of the dialectical theologians have abiding value.

Reviewed by: Invitation and Encounter: Evangelizing through the Sacraments by Timothy P. O'Malley Roland Millare Timothy P. O'Malley Invitation and Encounter: Evangelizing through the Sacraments Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor, 2022 121 pages. Paperback. $15.95. The Church continues to suffer from a precipitous decline in the number of people receiving each of the sacraments. There is no shortage of commentary upon the state of the current sacramental crisis that plagues the Church. One of the most common explanations has been the popular notion that many of the faithful have been sacramentalized but not evangelized. In Invitation and Encounter: Evangelizing through the Sacraments, Timothy O'Malley presents a counter thesis: the sacraments are "always evangelizing, because they make available the salvation offered by Jesus Christ to the Church and to the world" (11). O'Malley offers the personalist view of sacramental theology that contends the sacraments are encounters with Jesus Christ and His love. O'Malley draws upon an array of theologians throughout his work to weave a unity between sacraments and evangelization, [End Page 323] including Thomas Aquinas, Gregory of Nazianzus, Marc Ouellet, Gary Anderson, Joseph Ratzinger, Sara Butler, Hans Urs von Balthasar, and John Paul II. The most prominent author cited throughout is the nineteenth-century theologian Matthias Scheeben, who articulated the unity between the human and divine actions of Jesus Christ, which will have implications for our encounter with Christ in the sacraments: "The humanity of Christ is able to operate in a supernatural manner within itself, and also to perform acts which are of supernatural benefit to all creatures and to achieve much that in itself can be effected only by the infinite power of God. Thus the humanity of Christ can communicate to others the supernatural life which it possesses itself" (17). Contrary to the Pelagian tendency that would empty the sacraments of their efficacy by emphasizing the work of the individual, O'Malley highlights succinctly how each sacrament is first and foremost a work of Jesus Christ, who evangelizes and forms us. Baptism, confirmation, and holy orders (chapter two) transform our identity as priests of Christ. Once again, Scheeben posits that "the character of the members of Christ's mystical body must consist in a seal which establishes and exhibits their relationship to the Logos; their character must be analogous to the hypostatic union and grounded upon it" (36). Baptism bestows the grace of divine filiation, enabling us to become sons and daughters in the Son. confirmation strengthens and deepens this identity and "orients us toward mission" (48). Holy orders enables men to act in the person of Christ the Priest or Christ the Servant, so they may serve the common priesthood through a "total, self-giving love and service" (55). Holy orders is not about power, but service to assist the faithful to realize their own identity, given in baptism and confirmation. The reflections on the mystery of the Eucharist (chapter three) build upon the notion of identity to focus on our creation for sacrificial worship. Citing St. Thomas (Summa Theologiae, III, q. 73, a. 4), O'Malley notes that the Eucharist is a movement between the past, present, and future. Every celebration of the Eucharist is a remembering of what has been wrought for humanity in the past (salvation history), which effectively brings about the unique sacramental [End Page 324] presence of Christ here and now, to prepare us for the immediate future and for the eschaton. The heart of worship is sacrifice, which is defined by a love that transforms all of space and time. Consequently the "new worship" of the Eucharist according to Benedict XVI in Sacramentum Caritatis "cannot be relegated to something private and individual, but tends by its nature to permeate every aspect of our existence" (73). The Eucharist becomes the very form for how all believers should live their lives as a reflection of Christ's presence, sacrifice, and communion. Marriage, like the Eucharist, is instituted to transform the mundane world (chapter four). O'Malley summarizes marriage's transformation well: "The day-to-day mission of loving one's spouse, raising children, and participating in social life may become an efficacious sign of divine love...

Reviewed by: Ecce Homo: On the Divine Unity of Christ by Aaron Riches Matthew Levering Ecce Homo: On the Divine Unity of Christ by Aaron Riches ( Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2016), xxi + 279 pp. Aaron Riches begins this extraordinary book by quoting Pope Pius XII's Sempiternus Rex, in which the Pope emphasized that Christ's human nature must not be presented as though it existed on its own rather than in the Word. Riches notes that Pius XII's teaching on the fifteen-hundredth anniversary of the Council of Chalcedon squares with the Apostle Paul's affirmation of "one Lord Jesus Christ" [End Page 1284] (1 Cor 8:6; cf. the Niceno-Constantinopolitan Creed) and belongs to the Church's fundamental teaching that "the human Jesus … shares a unity and identity with God (in the person of the Son and Logos)" (3). On this basis, Riches sets forth the thesis of his book: "Therefore, the only tenable starting point for Christology lies in the absolute unitas of the human Jesus with the divine Son. This opposes any alternative starting point that would begin from a theoretical or ontological sepa-ratio of divinity and humanity in Christ in order to proceed discreetly 'from below'" (ibid.). Central to his argument is the point that no separation from God is needed or helpful in determining what Jesus's human nature is or does. Riches gives two reasons in support of this argument. The first reason involves a paradox, given the incompatibility of the divine attributes (for example, that God cannot change and is eternal) with creaturely attributes. While differing infinitely from his divinity, Jesus's humanity cannot be truly known outside the union of his human nature with the divine nature in the Word. Riches remarks that, "if the reality of the human being 'Jesus' is ontologically constituted through union with the Logos, the human birth and real crucifixion of this human being is made possible only in the divine unity of the Logos" (5). There would literally be no human nature of Jesus if there were no union of that human nature with the divine nature in the Word, and so understanding Jesus's humanity cannot involve bracketing his divinity. Second, and correspondingly, no separation from God is needed or helpful for analyzing Jesus's human nature because, in fact Jesus is verus homo et verus Deus, and so "the fullness and excellence of perfect humanity is constituted by the intimacy of its union with God" (6). Whereas it might seem that union with God makes Jesus less truly human, in fact, it makes Jesus more truly human. To know what is truly human cannot be attempted, therefore, by bracketing God. Rather, human nature becomes more what it distinctly is the more it is united with God. Riches states that "the irreducible difference of the human being in relation to God is perfected in direct (as opposed to inverse) relation to the perfection of the unio of his humanity with the divine Logos" (7). We might think that what is truly human is known and protected in Jesus by downplaying or bracketing what is truly divine. But, in fact, the opposite is the case, as befits the Creator God's ontological noncompetitiveness with creatures. When we emphasize Jesus's full divinity, we illumine his true humanity. Riches argues that the same point extends to knowing our own [End Page 1285] human nature, which is known rightly when we know it as united to the divine nature in the Word. As Riches puts it, "only the confession of the 'one Lord Jesus Christ' maximally preserves the integrity and difference of verus homo before verus Deus" (7). Indeed, Riches makes the point even more strongly, denying that we can begin in any way "from an abstract idea of what his humanity might be apart from that unio" (8). The suggestion is that, to know what true humanity is, we must look to Christ, and we cannot import a concept of true humanity from outside the hypostatic union. Riches has in mind first and foremost the two main Christological heresies, Monophysitism and Nestorianism. Monophysitism appears to strongly affirm the unio, but it does...

Unlike other mediaeval male theologians, Julian of Norwich reflects ‘feminine capacity’ in her theology by avoiding dichotomy of the body and soul and taking her body and Christ’s body as the locus of her theology. Because the human body is sexually ambiguous, which is inescapable reality, Julian sees that the body can be an important means to receive God’s revelation. In fact, she understands that the body and soul are God’s precious creatures. Her understanding of the human body is related to her physical sickness. She experiences God’s mystery and feels the Passion of Christ through her severe illness. By doing so, her body makes a bridge between herself and God. Furthermore, she explains that the incarnation of Jesus Christ appears in her physical sickness. Because the Christ’s Passion does not happen in His words, but in His body, without the emphasis on the body of Christ, His Passion becomes abstract. Because Christ’ spiritual suffering comes with His physical affliction, Christ came to this world as a real human being. Julian comprehends that the Church dogma stress the divinity of Jesus and Trinity, which does not the body and humanity of Christ. Instead, Julian confirms Christ’s humanity by emphasizing the birth of infant Jesus through Mary’s womb. By applying this female image of mercy to Jesus Christ, she places that God’s mercy takes care of God’s children through Christ. It is a unique view that Julian appreciates Jesus Christ in the perspective of motherhood because her theology focuses on the body of Christ. In this point, Christ’s plentiful bleeding during the crucifixion signifies women’s menstruation and it functions mother’s milk for an infant, which indicates Christ’s real suffering. Although Menstruation has been regarded as a taboo in the both church tradition and patriarchal society, women’s discharge of blood stands for creating life as human reproduction. In addition, in arguing when a mother gives birth to a baby, she bleeds, Julian claims that Christ becomes the head of the Church and the Church become the body of Christ through Christ’s bleeding. Therefore, her body and Christ’s are an important tool to demonstrate ‘feminine capacity’ in the male dominant society.

Artykuł ukazuje kluczowe aspekty chrystologicznego ujęcia nauki Karla Bartha na temat „człowieczeństwa Boga”. Autor dowodzi, iż w lustrze człowieczeństwa Jezusa Chrystusa objawia się włączone w Jego boskość człowieczeństwo Boga. To w Jezusie Chrystusie w zadziwiający sposób spotykają się kenosis i gloria, humanum i divinum, które w przestrzeni negocjacyjnej, jaką jest Jego Osoba, wzajemnie się wyjaśniają, przemawiając donośniej własnym głosem. Stąd punktem wyjścia do refleksji nad postawionym tematem jest przyjrzenie się formalnym podstawom uprawianej przez Bartha teologii. Centralne miejsce Jezusa Chrystusa – pod względem treści, formy i metody – uznawane jest za jeden z najważniejszych jej atrybutów. Swoją naukę o człowieczeństwie Boga, autor Die Kirchliche Dogmatik rozpoczyna od omówienia preegzystencji Jezusa Chrystusa za pomocą doktryny „łaskawego wyboru”, która stanowi zmodyfikowaną koncepcję jego wcześniejszej teologii trynitarnej. Mówi ona, że Bóg „od początku” jest ukierunkowany na człowieka, przypisując proludzki charakter Boskiego bycia i działania. W świetle barthiańskiej doktryny Jezus Chrystus, jako druga Osoba Trójcy, jest nie tylko „przedmiotem wyboru” (object of election), ale jest On także „wybierającym podmiotem” (the electing subject). Jako Pragnący wykonać zbawcze dzieło Ojca, stanowi uzasadnienie i gwarancję naszego zbawienia. Barth z całą stanowczością opowiada się za paradygmatem chrystologicznym Objawienia, stwierdzając, że wokół historii i dialogu, w którym Bóg i człowiek spotykają się razem i są ze sobą – wokół rzeczywistości obustronnie utrzymywanego i dokonanego związku – istnieje najpełniejsze otwarcie i wymiana. Dokonuje się ona w Osobie, ponieważ Jezus Chrystus jest w stopniu jedynym i najwyższym: prawdziwym Bogiem człowieka (Gott des Menschen) i prawdziwym Człowiekiem Bożym (Mensch Gottes). Wypowiedź o „człowieczeństwie Boga” – to Emmanuel, do którego zmierzamy z chrystologicznego centrum, mając na uwadze wypływajace z tego ruchu konsekwencje teologiczne i antropologiczne.

The Expression of Divinity and Humanity of Christ through His Body and Clothes in the Medieval Paintings, Transfiguration

702 BOOK REVIEWS more points. :Moreover, his theological presuppositions frequently intrude in the explanation. For example, he writes: "Paul greets the Church ... in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, that is, in the faith of the Trinity and of the divinity and humanity of Christ, because our beatitude will consist in knowing them. He mentions only the person of the Father and the incarnate Son, in which two is understood the Holy Spirit who is the bond between the Father and the Son." (p. 5) Again, in discussing 1 Th. 4:4 he distinguishes between venial sin, when concupiscence is present in relations with one's wife, and mortal sin, when adultery is committed. (pp. 30 f.) Modern scholars have not overcome this "hermeneutical circle," though they are more aware of its presence. Thirdly, we occasionally find a theological insight that is of major significance in the development of ontological theology. Perhaps the most important of these in this commentary is Thomas's recognition, in 1 Th. 4:14, of the role of the resurrection of Christ in man's redemption, a role that has only recently been re-discovered by modern theologians. During the last several hundred years theologians commonly had reduced the resurrection to little more than epilogue in the theology of redemption, to an apologetic for Christ's divinity. Redemption was almost exclusively attached to Christ's passion and death. It is embarrassingly clear now that the Scriptures, and especially St. Paul, had already proclaimed the active, if not dominant role of Christ's resurrection in our justification. 1 Th. 4:14 is only one of several Pauline statements on the subject, and not the most forceful at that. Nevertheless, St. Thomas comments unequivocally that " Christ's resurrection is the cause of our resurrection. . . . He is also the efficient cause of our resurrection, for the things done by Christ's humanity were done not only by the power of His human nature, but also by virtue of His divinty united in Him." (p. 35) This is not the place for a detailed discussion of the significance of this insight for a theology of redemption. We might say simply that it would almost justify by itself the publication of this translation of St. Thomas's commentary. Mt. St. Mary's of the West Norwood, Ohio EuGENE H. MALY The Origin and Evolution of the Priesthood. By JAMEs A. MoHLER, S. J. New York: Alba House, 1970. Pp. 15~. $3.95. This book presents an account of the origin and evolution of the Christian priesthood from its beginnings, when it bore the marks of contemporary Jewish governing bodies, to its attainment, during the fourth century, of a degree of perfection rivalling that of the Jewish priesthood of Aaron. At this peak of development, the Christian priesthood, reflecting BOOK REVIEWS 703 the struggles of the Church with secular ruling powers, had come to symbolize the triumph of the Church. The functions of the episcopate, representing the fullness of the priesthood, had become surrounded with something like imperial dignity and splendor. The divine power of bishops and priests was stressed; their human capacities and responsibilities were viewed in their relationship of instrumentality to what God would accomplish within the Church. The author sketches quite summarily the results of his scholarly research which could be expanded, as he must have pursued it, into a volume many times the size of this one. In the main part of the book the exposition is positive and factual, with little evidence of any kind of personal viewpoint. In the introduction, however, the author suggests his conviction that the Church may have reached today a turning point in history which will demand re-examination of the concept of the priesthood . The pastor of souls who, in the past, served as marriage counselor, psychologist, legal advisor, teacher and confessor, now finds many of these tasks taken over by professionally trained lay experts. Even the liturgical services, over which the priest continues to preside, have been opened up more and more to lay participation. Does this mean that the priesthood itself is no longer relevant to the needs of contemporary man? Should the Church now be...

Queer Bodies, Queer Technologies, and Queer Policies

This chapter considers the implications for soteriology of Barth's doctrine of election. Following an introduction to the doctrine, this chapter reflects on criticism of Barth, and offers an analytical approach to the doctrine within the framework of the larger theme of universality in Christ. Primarily, it argues that the doctrine of election is the foundation of Barth's soteriology in terms of the eternal election of humanity in Christ. It is advocated that this doctrine tends very strongly in a universalist direction. However, the principal focus is to demonstrate that these universalist leanings do not in any way undermine particularity. This is demonstrated through a special focus on Barth's doctrine of eternity. This chapter provides part of the reflective theological material for the formative aspect of the book's interpretation of universal salvation in the Son in Chapter 4.

This paper examines Vincent of Lérin's teaching about grace as expressed in his Christology. Vincent, who has regularly been assumed to have opposed Augustine's doctrine on grace, advanced his own teaching most clearly in a little known work, the Excerpta. The excerpts in question were significantly taken from Augustine's writings, among them the Antipelagian treatises circulated in Gaul. Exc. shows Vincent to have been a discriminating student of Augustinian theology who embraced predestination as a way of describing grace at work in Jesus Christ. A comparison of Vincent's teaching with Augustine's and with John Cassian's (their contemporary, who like Vincent has often stood accused of 'Semipelagianism') demonstrates that the three of them asserted Christ as the exemplar of grace in confrontation with Pelagianism. On this basis, the paper suggests that further re-evaluation of how Augustine's works were received by his contemporaries in Gaul is seriously needed.

ABSTRACTThe question of Christianity's relationship to the religious traditions of the world lies at the center of Jacques Dupuis' theological work. This essay contends that Dupuis' Christology provides the ground for his pursuit of this larger question. An exploration of Dupuis' positive assertions about who Jesus Christ is reveals both a new Christological view and an implicit critique of conventional notions of what it means to be human. By challenging traditional Christology and creatively restructuring the relationship of our humanity to Christ's humanity, Dupuis invigorates the purpose of humanity's role in salvation history. This shift in emphasis, toward Christ's and our shared humanity, allows Dupuis to recognize the theological significance in all mainstream religious traditions.

The article presents the Council of Chalcedon; its theological and historical context and its consequences. The author starts with the theological context of this Council. In that time the question of relation between humanity and divinity in Christ was discussed. Apollinarius of Laodicea taught that in the person of Christ there were two elements: the Logos and the body. The Logos replaced the soul. He propagated the formula mia physis tou theou logou sesarkomene. Others theologians were not agree with his opinion. Generally, there were two theological schools which worked on this matter: school of Alexandria and of Antioch. In the first one, the Christ was seen especially as God who became man. In the second one, He was seen as the man who was God’s Son. With other words, in Alexandria the starting point of reflection was the Divinity of Christ. In Antioch the starting of reflection was His humanity. The author mentioned Eutyches whose ideas on Christology produced a lot of trouble. In such a context, the Council of Chalcedon was organized (451). It was the proposal of Emperor Marcjan. The Council, after having condemned Eutyches and Dioskur of Alexandria because of their position on theological matter, proclaimed a new definition of the catholic faith. The base of this definition was the Letter of Pope Leo the Great Ad Flavianum. The most important point of this definition was the statement that Divinity and humanity meet in Christ, and both form one person. Such a declaration seems to be clear, but it did not satisfy Greek theologians. They did not want to accept the formula two natures (duo physeis) in one person, because in their opinion it signifies a separation between the Divinity and the humanity of Christ. They preferred to speak about mia physis tou Theou Logou sesarkomene. Surely, by the term physis they did not understand nature, but a being. While saying mia physis they did not mean one nature, but one being. In their conception, Jesus Christ was a Being in which met Divinity and humanity. Many theologians were suspicious of the term person (prosopon); they supposed that it had a modalistic meaning. The main opinion of Modalists is: there is only One God who appears sometimes as Father, sometimes as Son, sometime as Holy Spirit. There were also other reasons of contesting the definition of Chalcedon. It was known that that this definition was imposed by the Greek emperor, influenced by the Bishop of Rome (Pope). Many theologians, especially in monastic milieu, did not want to accept the intervention of the civil authorities in religious matter. They did not have a very good opinion about Latin theology. In the fifth century there were some anti-Hellenic tendencies in the eastern part of the Empire. Many Oriental theologians rejected the definition of Chalcedon because it was „a for­mula of Rom and Constantinople”. In such circumstances, a lot of Christians separated themselves from the Catholic Church, forming Monophysite Churches. Those who remained in unity with Rome and Constantinople, keeping the defini­tion of Chalcedon, were called Melchites. Another problem was the canon 28, which gave some privileges to the bishop see of Constantinople. Pope Leo the Great did not approve this canon. Anti-Hellenic tendencies were so strong that in the time of Islamic invasions the people of Palestine, Syria, and Egypt welcomed Arabic soldiers as liberators from Byzantine domination. It is to be said that Arabic authorities, after having taken power in a country, were friendly towards Monophysites and persecuted Melchites. So, the contestation of the definition of Chalcedon prepared the ground for the victory of Islam in the East. The article is ended by an observation of a French theologian Joseph Moingt: declaration that Divinity and humanity make union the person of Jesus Christ produced division not only in the Church, but also in the Roman Empire. This is one of great paradoxes in the history of Christianity.

Jesus Christ (4) The Childhood and Humanity of Christ

This chapter addresses the legislative, judicial and state policies aimed at trans persons, seeking to critically reflect, from an interdisciplinary approach, on the current Brazilian panorama. As is well known, the violence suffered by the trans population in Brazil is serious; constant violations of trans rights remain unsanctioned. The particularities of the Brazilian legislation are also taken up cursorily here, such as the regulation of the right to name and gender identity; the absence of the “third sex/gender” in registrations; the relationship between the rights of trans persons and of gay, lesbian and intersex persons in the country; and broader discussions about how sex/gender can be viewed as legal categories in the Brazilian context.KeywordsCivil statusTrans personsSexGender fluidityGender binarySelf-determinationTrans identityBrazil

Respect for different sexual options and orientations prevents the occurrence of hate crimes against lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex (LGTBI) persons for this reason. Our aim was to review the legislation that protects the rights of LGTBI people and to quantify the victimization rates of hate crimes based on sexual identity and orientation. A retrospective observational study was conducted across all regions of Spain from 2011–2021. The laws on LGTBI rights in each region were identified. Hate crime victimization data on sexual identity and orientation were collected in annual rates per 100,000 inhabitants, annual percentage change and average change during the study period to assess the trend. The regulatory development of laws against discrimination against LGTBI individuals is heterogeneous across regions. Overall, in Spain there is an upward trend in the number of hate crime victimizations motivated by sexual identity or orientation. The effectiveness of data collection, thanks to better training and awareness of police forces regarding hate crimes and the processes of data cleansing and consolidation contributes to a greater visibility of hate crimes against LGTBI people.