• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
Some Sources for Further Thought on Coleridge:
 Hoffman, Daniel. “S. T. Coleridge and the Attack on Inerrancy.”
Trinity Journal
n.s. 7 (1986):55-68.“Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1854) is often recognized today only as a great English romantic poet,but in the nineteenth century he was better known as a theologian.”Roberts, Martin. “Coleridge’s Philosophical and Theological Thinking and its Significance for Today.”
 Religious Studies
20: 487-96.Forstman, H. Jackson. “Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s Notes Toward the Understanding of Doctrine.”
 Journal of Religion
44 (Oct 1964): 310-327.Werkmeister, Lucyle. “Coleridge on Science, Philosophy, and Poetry: Their Relation to Religion.”
 Harvard Theological Review
52 (1959): 85-118.“From the combined teachings of [Berkeley and Burke], Coleridge ultimately derived suggestions for atheology broad enough to account for and to give meaning and purpose to all human activities.”Janzen, J. Gerald. “Coleridge and the
Pistis Christou
.”
The Expository Times
107 (June 1996):265-68.Need, Stephen W. “Holiness and Idolatry: Coleridge and Tillich on the Nature of Symbols.”
Theology
99 (Jan-Feb 1996): 45-52.Aarsleff, Hans. “Locke’s Reputation in Nineteenth-Century England.”
The Monist 
55.3 (July 1971):392-422. [Coleridge’s opinion of Locke extracted on 400-405]Noble, Christopher S. “A Transcendent and Pragmatic Vision: Samuel Taylor Coleridge at theBorders of Christian Orthodoxy.”
Christianity and Literature
48.1 (Fall 1998): 29-43.“[Coleridge’s] rhetorical self-containment–especially evidenced by anxiety over the question of pantheism, and by complex forays into and retreats from the project of philosophicalsystematizing–pervades both Coleridge’s poetics and his understanding of religious orthodoxy. Theself-containment typically consists of a double motion: ‘forward’ steps are motivated by a desire tounify knowledge and defy facile dualisms, while ‘backward’ steps are characterized by a strongcontrolling bent best described as Christian pragmatism.”Harding, Anthony John. “Coleridge, Scripture, and the Active Reader.”
Christianity and Literature
.36.4 (Summer 1987): 33-42.“Coleridge knew about what we now call “reader-response,” about textual indeterminacy, andintertextuality. He was, moreover, an exceptionally devoted and persistent reader . . .” but, despitewritings which treat Coleridge as “an anticipation of some kinds of contemporary or postmodernistcritical theory . . . Coleridge’s phenomenology of reading was formed in the Scriptural tradition, and . . .to ignore this fact is to dismiss one vital aspect of his thought.”
Some Brief Explications of Coleridge’s Religious Thought
 
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...