1 See the letter by Nicholas Lash in The Tablet 24.3.2007 who quotes a passage from Volume One of The Glory of the Lord which looks equally as “assumptionist” ‐ British theologians would customarily say “adoptionist” ‐ as that which the CDF quotes from Sobrino.

2 This is what medieval theologians meant by theology as a sub‐alternate science. See G Turner, ‘St Thomas Aquinas on the “Scientific” Nature of Theology’, New Blackfriars, November 1997, especially pp. 468‐480 and 471f.

3 See Jeremias, J, ‘Abba’ in The Prayers of Jesus, SCM Press, London 1967, pp. 11‐66Google Scholar.

4 Sanders, E P, Jesus and Judaism, SCM Press, London 1985, pp. 306‐8Google Scholar.

5 Although John Paul II is quoted by the CDF with approval in this context, he is more cautious in what he writes about Jesus’ self‐consciousness: ‘His [Jesus’] eyes remain fixed on the Father. Precisely because of the knowledge and experience of the Father which he alone has, even at this moment of darkness he sees clearly the gravity of sin and suffers because of it. He alone, who sees the Father and rejoices fully in him, can understand completely what it means to resist the Father's love by sin’ (John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Novo Millennio Ineunte, 26).

6 Schnelle, U, Apostle Paul, His Life and Theology, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids, Michigan 2005, p. 481Google Scholar.

7 Dunn, J D G, The Theology of Paul the Apostle, T & T Clark, Edinburgh 1998, p. 396fGoogle Scholar.

8 Ibid., p. 398. In addition to ‘in Christ’, there are 34 uses in total of ‘in the Lord’ in the definitely authentic letters by Dunn's count. The so‐called subjective uses of ‘in Christ’ are: Romans 6.11; 8.1; 12.5; 16.3, 7, 9, 10; 1 Corinthians 1.2;, 30; 4.10; 15.18; 2 Corinthians 5.17; 12.2; Galatians 1.22; 2.4; 3.26, 28; Philippians 1.1; 2.1; 4.7, 21; 1 Thessalonians 1.1, 14; 4.16; Philemon 23. See note 42 in Dunn, p. 398. I have excluded some references to those letters of Paul that are not accepted by everyone as being authentic, though I would be happy to accept 2 Thessalonians. Subjective uses of ‘in the Lord’ are: Romans 16.2, 8, 11, 12, 13, 22; 1 Corinthians 4.17; 16.19 Philemon 16.

9 It is not particularly germane to this discussion but I broadly accept Wright's view that Christ is normally used as a title in Paul's ‘Christ Jesus’, still with its original Jewish sense of ‘messiah’ ‐ Wright, N T, Jesus and Victory of God, SPCK, London 1996, p. 486fGoogle Scholar.

10 A Schweitzer, The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle, p. 127, quoted by Dunn, Op. cit., p. 392.

11 For a discussion of the vocabulary and meaning of Philippians see P Doble, ‘“Vile Bodies” or Transformed Persons? Philippians 3.21 in Context’, JSNT, 86, 2002.

12 Notification on the Works of Father Jon Sobrino SJ, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, para 8.

13 There are 15 direct, though sometimes modified quotations at 2.6, 3.4, 3.10, 3.11, 3.14, 3.20, 4.7‐8, 8.36, 10.18, 11.9‐10, 15.3, 15.9, and 15.11. There are 5 adaptations, sometimes loose, of Psalm passages at 1.16, 1.23, 3.14, 5.5 and 9.5. And there are 4 cases of free use of or connections with the Psalms at 2.21, 3.2, 7.14 and 8.30.

14 Campbell, D A, The Quest for Paul's Gospel, T & T Clark, London 2005Google Scholar, ch.9 ‘The Meaning of “Faith” in Paul's Gospel’, pp. 178‐207.

15 Schnelle, Op. cit., p. 523, as a good Lutheran, still opts for the objective genitive reading, but he refers readers to the two sides of the debate in Richard Hays, ‘PISTIS and Pauline Christology’ in Looking Back, Pressing On, ed. By E Elizabeth Johnson and David M Hay, vol 4 of Pauline Theology, Scholars Press, Atlanta 1997, pp. 35‐60Google Scholar for arguments for the subjective genitive (one might also read the more recent D A Campbell, Op. cit., pp. 208‐232), and for the objective genitive J D G Dunn, ‘Once More: Pistis Christou’ in the same volume pp. 61‐81, and also The Theology of Paul the Apostle, pp. 379‐385.