<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel rdf:about="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36821">
    <title>OAR@UM Collection:</title>
    <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36821</link>
    <description />
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36870" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36867" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36866" />
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36865" />
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
    <dc:date>2026-04-14T20:16:27Z</dc:date>
  </channel>
  <item rdf:about="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36870">
    <title>Can a Catholic be a liberal? Catholic social teaching and communitarianism</title>
    <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36870</link>
    <description>Title: Can a Catholic be a liberal? Catholic social teaching and communitarianism
Abstract: The question posed in my title is meant to be thought-provoking, but it and the topics announced in the subtitle are broad and not altogether easy to discuss. Moreover the difficulty is not simply one of the scale of the subject matter. For it is by no means clear that there is any single political view that may claim the title "Liberalism" , or that there is a definite set of historically articulated principles that can be set out as giving the content of something called "Catholic Social Teaching", or that there is one thing that deserves the label "Communitarianism".</description>
    <dc:date>1992-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36867">
    <title>Book reviews [Melita Theologica, 43(2)]</title>
    <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36867</link>
    <description>Title: Book reviews [Melita Theologica, 43(2)]
Abstract: Jacob MILGROM. Leviticus 1-16 (Anchor Bible 3. Doubleday; New York 1991) xvili.1163pp. -- Joe Friggieri, Actions and Speech Actions in the Philosophy of JL. Austin, (Mireva Publications; Malta 1991) 279pp.</description>
    <dc:date>1992-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36866">
    <title>Some major challenges for Christology</title>
    <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36866</link>
    <description>Title: Some major challenges for Christology
Abstract: In the light of Christian faith, practice and worship, that branch of theology called christology reflects systematically on the being and doing of Jesus of Nazareth (c. 5 B.C. - c. A.D. 30). In seeking to clarify the essential truths about him, it investigates his person and being (who and what he was/is) and work (what he did/does). Was/is he both human and divine? Ifso, how is that possible and not such a contradiction in terms as being a 'married bachelor'? Should we envisage his revealing and redeeming 'work' as having an impact not only on all men and women of all times and places, but also on the whole created cosmos? In any case, can we describe or even minimally explain that salvific 'work'? In facing and tackling these and other such questions, historical, philosophical and linguistic considerations play a crucial role. They can be distinguished, if not finally separated.</description>
    <dc:date>1992-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
  <item rdf:about="https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36865">
    <title>The structure of Hebrews 1,1-3,6</title>
    <link>https://www.um.edu.mt/library/oar/handle/123456789/36865</link>
    <description>Title: The structure of Hebrews 1,1-3,6
Abstract: Among the many challenges offered interpreters by the Epistle to the Hebrews, the structure is far from being the easiest to confront. One has only to consult three of the most recent commentaries to become aware of the matter. The present article concentrates on the crucial initial chapters of the epistle - crucial, because they establish the perspectives for everything which follows. &#xD;
A key passage from the standpoint of discovery (''via inventionis") with regard to Heb 1,1- 3,6 is Heb 3,1-6, at least at the present stage of research on the epistle. For this passage is often regarded as exposition which faces forward. But the vocabulary points rather to paraenesis building on what has preceded: hothen, adelphoi hagioi (the first time the author speaks directly to the addressees), the use of the imperative katanoesate with direct reference again to the addressees.</description>
    <dc:date>1992-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </item>
</rdf:RDF>

