N. T. Wright | |
|---|---|
| Bishop of Durham | |
 Wright speaking at a conference in December 2007 | |
| Church | Church of England |
| Diocese | Durham |
| In office | 2003 to 2010 |
| Other posts |
|
| Orders | |
| Ordination | 1975 |
| Consecration | 2003 |
| Personal details | |
| Born | Nicholas Thomas Wright (1948-12-01)1 December 1948 (age 77) Morpeth, Northumberland, England |
| Denomination | Anglican |
| Residence |
|
| Spouse | Maggie[2] |
| Children | 4[2] |
| Education | |
| Member of theHouse of Lords | |
| In office 5 November 2003 – 31 August 2010 | |
Nicholas Thomas WrightFRSE (born 1 December 1948), known asN. T. Wright orTom Wright,[3] is an EnglishNew Testament scholar,Paulinetheologian andAnglican bishop. He was thebishop of Durham andLord Spiritual in the UK Parliament from 2003 to 2010. He then became research professor of New Testament and Early Christianity atSt Mary's College in theUniversity of St Andrews in Scotland until 2019, when he became a senior research fellow atWycliffe Hall at theUniversity of Oxford.[4]
Wright writes about theology and Christian life and the relationship between them. He advocates a biblical re-evaluation of theological matters such asjustification,[5] women's ordination,[6] and popular Christian views about life after death.[7] He has also criticised the idea of a literalRapture.[8]
The author of over seventy books, Wright is highly regarded in academic and theological circles for his "Christian Origins and the Question of God" series.[9] The third volume,The Resurrection of the Son of God, is considered by many clergy and theologians to be a seminal Christian work on theresurrection of Jesus.[10][11]
Wright was born inMorpeth, Northumberland. In a 2003 interview, he said that he could never remember a time when he was not aware of the presence and love of God and recalled an occasion when he was four or five when "sitting by myself at Morpeth and being completely overcome, coming to tears, by the fact that God loved me so much he died for me. Everything that has happened to me since has produced wave upon wave of the same."[12]
He was educated atSedbergh School in the Yorkshire Dales, and in the late 1960s Wright sang and played guitar in a folk club on the west side of Vancouver.[13] In 1971, Wright received his BA inliterae humaniores, with first class honours, fromExeter College, Oxford. During that time he was president of the undergraduateOxford Inter-Collegiate Christian Union.
From 1971 to 1975, he studied for theAnglican ministry atWycliffe Hall, Oxford, receiving his(Oxford) MA at the end of this period. He was later awarded aDoctor of Divinity (DD) degree by theUniversity of Oxford.[14]
In 1975 he became a junior research fellow atMerton College, Oxford, and later also junior chaplain. From 1978 to 1981 he was a fellow and chaplain atDowning College,Cambridge. In 1981 he received his DPhil from Merton College, his thesis topic being "The Messiah and the People of God: A Study in Pauline Theology with Particular Reference to the Argument of the Epistle to the Romans". After this, he served as assistant professor of New Testament studies atMcGill University, Montreal (1981 to 1986), then as chaplain, fellow and tutor atWorcester College and lecturer in New Testament in the University of Oxford (1986 to 1993).
He moved from Oxford to become dean ofLichfield Cathedral (1994 to 1999) and then returned briefly to Oxford as a visiting fellow at Merton College, before taking up his appointment as canon theologian atWestminster Abbey in 2000.
From 1995 to 2000, Wright wrote the weekly Sunday's "Readings" column for theChurch Times. He has said that writing the column gave him the "courage" to embark upon his popular... for Everyone (SPCK) series of commentaries on New Testament books.[15]
In 2003 Wright became theBishop of Durham; he was consecrated a bishop on 3 July 2003 atYork Minster byDavid Hope,Archbishop of York.[16] On 4 August 2006 he was appointed to theCourt of Ecclesiastical Causes Reserved for a period of five years.[17]
He resigned from Durham on 31 August 2010 to take up an appointment as research professor of New Testament and Early Christianity atSt Mary's College, St Andrews which enabled him to concentrate on his academic and broadcasting work.[18][19]
In 2019 he delivered theGifford Lectures onDiscerning the Dawn: History, Eschatology and New Creation at theUniversity of Aberdeen.[20]
On 1 October 2019 Wright was appointed a senior research fellow atWycliffe Hall, Oxford, where he had originally studied for the Anglican ministry from 1971 to 1973.[4]
In his popular 2008 bookSurprised by Hope,[21] Wright outlines the scriptural emphasis onresurrection as the proper hope of all Christians. Wright is critical of the North American church's overemphasis on "going toheaven when you die" and the underemphasis on the resurrection from the dead, though he does not deny the teaching that a person'ssoul lives on after death. He advocates a reunion ofsoteriology andecclesiology, commenting that such a connection is often neglected inProtestantism. In addition, he is critical of various popular theological ideas, such as thedispensationalist doctrine of therapture.[22]
Wright is one of the leading figures in theNew Perspective on Paul interpretation, or rather group of interpretations,[23] of the Pauline letters.[24][25] Wright contends that Paul cannot be ignored by any serious Christian and that, through his central place within the New Testament canon, Paul has come to be abused, misunderstood, imposed upon, and approached with incorrect or inappropriate questions about the Christian faith.[26] According to Wright, "Paul in the twentieth century, then, has been used and abused much as in the first. Can we, as the century draws towards its close, listen a bit more closely to him? Can we somehow repent of the ways we have mishandled him and respect his own way of doing things a bit more?"[27]
This question reflects the key consideration for the New Perspective on Paul and a fundamental aim of Wright's scholarship: to allow the apostle Paul to speak for himself without imposing modern considerations and questions upon him and in so doing, seeking to ascertain what St. Paul was really trying to say to the people he was writing to.[28] From this, Wright contends that by examining the Pauline corpus through this unique perspective, difficult passages within the text become illuminated in new ways, his letters gain coherence both in their particularities as well as with one another, and it provides an overall picture of what Paul was about, without doing violence to the little details within the letters.[29]
The beginning of the "new perspective" is the work ofE. P. Sanders and his bookPaul and Palestinian Judaism.[30] In this 1977 work, Sanders argued that the prevailing view of first-century Judaism in the New Testament was inaccurate. He described it instead as "covenantal nomism", which emphasised God's election of a people and adherence to the Torah as a way of "staying in" the religion (rather than a way of "getting in").
Wright found that Sanders supported the picture he himself had been forming, but nevertheless for the next decade much of what Wright wrote was in disagreement with Sanders on various points. Wright agrees with other "new perspective" scholars that the assumption that the Jews were guilty of a kind of "works-righteousness" is untrue, and that the story of God and the covenant people Israel comes to a climax with Jesus.[23]
In speaking on justification, Wright contends, "the discussions of justification in much of the history of the church, certainly since Augustine, got off on the wrong foot – at least in terms of understanding Paul – and they have stayed there ever since."[31] In this way, the Church, according to Wright, has subsumed discussions surrounding the reconciliation of man to God under the label of justification, which has subsequently given the concept an emphasis quite absent from what he believes is found within the New Testament.[31] This leads Wright to argue that this incorrect perception of justification has done violence to the text for hundreds of years[32] and that the text itself should be the starting point in determining what Paul seeks to say about justification.[33]
Through his attempt of returning to the text to allow Paul to speak for himself as he suggests, Wright offers a definition of what he believes the apostle means by ‘justification,’ which is contrary to popular belief. In crafting said definition, the interpreter identifies three pieces, which he believes to be vital to this consideration: that justification is dependent upon covenant language, that it utilises law-court language, functioning within the covenantal setting as a strong explanatory metaphor of justification, and that it cannot be understood within a Pauline context as separate from eschatology.[34] Through the inclusion of covenant language, justification alludes to the presence of sin and wickedness in the world and the way in which the covenant was instituted to bring about salvation. Within this context, the law-court metaphorical language acknowledges God's role as judge who is to put the world to rights, to deal with evil and to restore justice and order to the cosmos. Finally, Wright's definition of ‘justification’ within Paul's letters acknowledges that the term is not associated, as has commonly been perceived, with one's personal needs necessary to attain salvation, but instead with what marked someone as a member of God's people.
In 2008, Wright criticised "secular utopianism", accusing it of advocating "the right to kill unborn children and surplus old people".[35]The Times columnistDavid Aaronovitch challenged Wright specifically to substantiate his claim that any secular group does indeed advocate the killing of elderly people, leading to an exchange in which Wright held to his main point.[36][37][38][39]
Regarding thehistorical Jesus, Wright follows the "thoroughgoing eschatology" tradition ofAlbert Schweitzer against the "thoroughgoingscepticism" ofWilliam Wrede and theJesus Seminar,[40][41] whom he regards as Wrede's modern-day counterparts.[40][42][43] Wright also argues for a 'very Jewish' Jesus who was nonetheless opposed to some high-profile aspects of first-century Judaism. Similarly, Wright speaks of Jesus as 'doubly', 'multiply', 'thoroughly', and 'deeply' subversive, while at the same time distancing Jesus from other known seditious and revolutionary movements within first-century Palestine.[44] In some ways his views are similar to those of such scholars asE. P. Sanders and the lesser-knownBen F. Meyer (whom Wright calls "the unsung hero" ofNew Testament studies).[45] However he disagrees with the view of Sanders that thePharisees would not have exhibited the violent opposition to Jesus depicted in the Gospels.[46] He has also defended the belief in a literal Second Coming and theresurrection of the dead as central to Christianity.[7]
Wright is critical of moreliberal theological circles. The Jesus Seminar'sMarcus Borg, with whom Wright shared mutual admiration and respect, co-authoredThe Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions with Wright to elaborate their contrasting opinions.[47] In 2005, at the Greer-Heard Point-Counterpoint Forum, Wright discussed the historicity of Jesus' resurrection with Jesus Seminar co-founderJohn Dominic Crossan. Wright and Crossan, who also have mutual admiration, hold very different opinions on this foundational Christian doctrine. For Crossan, the resurrection of Jesus is a theological interpretation of events by the writers of the New Testament. For Wright, however, the resurrection is a historical event—coherent with the worldview ofSecond Temple Judaism—fundamental to the New Testament.[48]
With the publication of Wright's 2012 book,How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels, Wright has been critical of some ideas concerning the historical Jesus in both US evangelical preaching and the work ofC. S. Lewis, who Wright admits was a major influence in his own life. In an interview,[49] Wright summarises this critique: "One of the targets of this book is Christians who say: Yes, the Bible is true. It's inerrant and so on. But, then, they pay no attention to what the Bible actually says. For too many Christians it seems sufficient to say Christ was born of a Virgin, died on a cross and was resurrected—but never did anything else in between. I'm saying: That’s not the way to understand the Gospels."
Wright was the senior member from the Church of England of theLambeth Commission set up to deal with controversies following the ordination ofGene Robinson as a bishop of theEpiscopal Church in the United States.[50] In 2009, the Episcopal Church authorised the clergy to celebrate commitment liturgies for people in same-sex relationships. Writing onThe Times, Wright described the action as a "clear break with the rest of the Anglican Communion".[51]
In December 2005 he announced to the press, on the day that the firstcivil partnership ceremonies took place in England, that he would be likely to take disciplinary action against any clergy registering as civil partners or any clergy blessing such partnerships.[52]
He has argued that "Justice never means 'treating everybody the same way', but 'treating people appropriately'".[51] In August 2009, he issued a statement saying:
...someone, sooner or later, needs to spell out further (wearisome though it will be) the difference between (a) the "human dignity and civil liberty" of those with homosexual and similar instincts and (b) their "rights", as practising let alone ordained Christians, to give physical expression to those instincts. As thePope has pointed out, the language of "human rights" has now been downgraded in public discourse to the special pleading of every interest-group.[53][54]
Wright's work has been praised by many scholars of varying views, includingJames Dunn,Gordon Fee,Richard B. Hays andRowan Williams, formerArchbishop of Canterbury. For instance, James Crossley described Wright'sThe Resurrection of the Son of God as having "much to commend" and that "Many will be persuaded that his representations of post-mortem beliefs in the Graeco-Roman world, Hebrew Bible, early Judaism and early Christianity are generally accurate."[55] Rafael Rodriguez described Wright alongsideJames DG Dunn as "two behemoths of NT and historical Jesus scholarship."[56] Wright has received praise from Catholics,[57] such as bishopRobert Barron, who has cited Wright's historical scholarship on multiple occasions.[58][59]
Critics of his work are also found across a broad range of theological camps. SomeReformed theologians such asJohn Piper have questioned Wright's theology, particularly over whether or not he denies theProtestantdoctrine ofjustification by faith alone. Although Piper considers Wright's presentation confusing, he does not dismiss Wright's view as false. In response, Wright has stated he wishes Piper would "exegete Paul differently" and that his book "isn’t always a critique of what I’m actually saying." Wright also expressed how he has warmed to Piper and considers him a "good, beloved brother in Christ, doing a good job, building people up in the faith, teaching them how to live."[60] In 2009, Wright has since addressed the issue in his bookJustification: God’s Plan and Paul's Vision.[5] He has sought to clarify his position further in an interview withInterVarsity Press.[61]
Many conservative evangelicals have also questioned whether Wright deniespenal substitution, but Wright has stated that he denies only its caricature but affirms this doctrine, especially within the overall framework of theChristus Victor model of atonement.[62]
Despite criticism of some of his work by Reformed theologians, other Reformed leaders have embraced his contribution in other areas, such asTim Keller who praised Wright's work on the resurrection.[63]
Writing an extensive review ofThe Resurrection of the Son of God onThe Heythrop Journal, Catholicfundamental theologian Joseph J. SmithSJ has criticised Wright's views about theresurrection of Jesus, stating that neither the Gospel narratives of the Resurrection appearances nor Pauline texts cited by Wright support his view that the resurrected body was "robustly physical".[64]
In 2019, Wright delivered the 32ndErasmus Lecture, titledLoving to Know, organized byFirst Things magazine and the Institute on Religion and Public Life. In his lecture, Wright explored the relationship between love, knowledge, and truth within the Christian intellectual tradition. Drawing from Scripture, theology, and philosophy, he argued that genuine understanding arises not from detached rationality but from an engaged love for God and creation — a theme central to his broader work on faith and reason.[65]
Wright has been awarded several honorary doctoral degrees,[66] including fromDurham University in July 2007,[67] theJohn Leland Center for Theological Studies in April 2008,[68] theUniversity of St Andrews in 2009,[69]Heythrop College (University of London) in 2010 and the Ecumenical Institute of Theology atSt. Mary's Seminary & University in May 2012.
In 2014, he was awarded theBurkitt Medal by theBritish Academy "in recognition of special service to Biblical Studies".[70] It was announced in March 2015 that he was to be made a fellow of theRoyal Society of Edinburgh (FRSE).
Four volumes published, two more planned:
TheFor Everyone series, a commentary by Wright on the New Testament, was completed in 2011:
| Church of England titles | ||
|---|---|---|
| Preceded by | Bishop of Durham 2003–2010 | Succeeded by |
| International | |
|---|---|
| National | |
| Academics | |
| Artists | |
| People | |
| Other | |
