Scholarly work
Wright's work has been praised by many scholars of varying views, including Professor James D.G. Dunn, Richard B. Hays and Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury. Critics of his work are also found across the broad range of theological camps. He has been criticized by liberals such as Robert J. Miller and John Shelby Spong, and although
Wright describes himself as a reformed Calvinist, some reformed theologians such as [[John Piper]] have sought to question Wright's theology, particularly over whether or not he denies the [[Protestantism|Protestant]] [[doctrine]] of [[Sola fide|justification by faith alone]]. Although [[John Piper]] finds Wright's presentation confusing, he did not dismiss Wright's view as false. Wright has since addressed the issue in his book "Justification". He sought to clarify this further in an interview with [[InterVarsity Press]]. Others have questioned whether Wright denies penal substitution, but Wright has come out to say that he denies only its caricature, but affirms this doctrine especially within the overall framework of the Christus Victor model of atonement. Despite the criticism by reformed theologians, he has been well embraced by other reformed leaders such as Tim Keller who praised N.T. Wright's work on the resurrection, and was invited as a speaker at Tim Keller's Redeemer church in NYC.
Jesus Seminar
Wright has also received heavy criticism in some decidedly more liberal circles, e.g. by Robert J. Miller. In contrast, the Jesus Seminar's Marcus Borg, with whom Wright shares mutual admiration and respect, has co-authored with Wright the book
The Meaning of Jesus: Two Visions. In 2005, at the Greer-Heard Point-Counterpoint Forum, Wright also dialogued with Jesus Seminar co-founder John Dominic Crossan on the historicity of Jesus' resurrection. Wright and Crossan, who also hold mutual admiration for one another, 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 historic event...coherent with the worldview of Second Temple Judaism...fundamental to the New Testament.
Secular utopianism
In 2008, Wright attracted controversy by stating that "secular utopianism is based on a belief in an unstoppable human ability to make a better world, while at the same time it believes that we have the right to kill unborn children and surplus old people, and to play games with the humanity of those in between." Times columnist David Aaronovitch challenged Wright specifically to substantiate his claim that any secular group does indeed advocate the killing of elderly people, adding that he believed the Bishop's comments to be "as close to a lie as makes no difference". Wright did not respond directly to the challenge, but promised to do so if Aaronovitch would answer three questions of his own. In response, Aaronovitch claimed to address Wright's questions, and called upon Wright now to corroborate his original statement as promised. In an article published by The Times, Wright wrote in support of palliative care, and addressed Aaronovitch's criticism: "I said 'surplus' people. It might well be said that they are not 'surplus', but simply 'suffering'. Fair point, but once you legalise killing (or 'helping people kill themselves'), the key question will be: how do you know which people can be killed?'". Nonetheless, he added, "I stand by my (admittedly abbreviated) form of words".
Historical Jesus
Regarding the Historical Jesus, Wright stands broadly in the tradition of Albert Schweitzer (thoroughgoing eschatology), against what he sees as the thoroughgoing skepticism of William Wrede (famous for his thesis on the Messianic Secret in the Gospel of Mark as an apologetic and ahistorical device) and the Jesus Seminar, Wrede's modern-day counterparts. He tends to agree with and laud such scholars as E.P. Sanders and the lesser-known Ben F. Meyer (whom Wright calls "the unsung hero" of New Testament studies), although he thinks Sanders and others go too far in their use of form criticism. He also thinks it is a mistake to say that Jesus expected the imminence of the end of history, as Schweitzer thought, but rather thinks that Jesus spoke of the Kingdom of God as something both present and future. He has also defended a literal belief in the Second Coming and the resurrection of the dead as central to Christianity.
Windsor Report and later events
Wright was the senior member from the Church of England of the Lambeth Commission set up to deal with controversies that emerged following Episcopal Church in the United States of America's ordination of a practising homosexual as bishop. In 2009 the Episcopal Church authorized consecration to the clergy of individuals in committed same-sex relationships. Wright described the action as a "clear break with the rest of the Anglican Communion" in a
Times opinion piece.
Clergy involvement in civil partnerships
Wright attracted media attention in December 2005 when he announced to the press, on the day that the first civil partnership ceremonies took place in England, that he would likely take disciplinary action against any clergy registering as civil partners or any clergy blessing such partnerships. However, in a letter to clergy in Durham diocese at this time he said: "I shall be very sorry if members of the clergy, by holding services of blessing or near equivalent, force me to make disciplinary enquiries".
Human rights
He has argued that "Justice never means 'treating everybody the same way', but 'treating people appropriately'". 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 the Pope has pointed out, the language of "human rights" has now been downgraded in public discourse to the special pleading of every interest-group.
