"the need for renewed attention to particularity in Methodist theology"

Since "The expulsion of B.T. Roberts and others from the Genesee Conference", "Methodism . . . has tended to be more comfortable with a big-tent vision for Methodism than with wrestling with the details and boundaries that are necessary in order for there to be a theological tradition."

     Kevin M. Watson, Old or New School Methodism?: The fragmentation of a theological tradition (New York:  Oxford University Press, 2019), 280, 284, underscoring mine.  The headline is from p. 283.
     "There was a recognizable theological tradition in American Methodism from the first Methodists who traveled from Britain to the British Colonies that would become the United States of America in the 1760s until the 1850s. The particularities of that tradition were largely articulated by John Wesley’s preaching and writing, which stated that the mission of Methodism was to 'spread scriptural holiness.' Throughout this period of time there was a formal commitment in the Doctrines and Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church, as well as other denominations formed subsequent to the MEC, to the doctrine of entire sanctification, or Christian perfection. American Methodism was also committed to a set of practices that would 'raise up a holy people'" (278, underscoring mine).

Satisfy our just desires

"Lord our God, we humbly ask you, that, through the working of this mystery, our offences may be cleansed and our just desires fulfilled.  Through."

"Domine Deus noster, suppliciter te rogamus, ut, huius operatione mysterii, vitia nostra purgentur, et iusta desideria compleantur.  Per."

     Post-communion, Second Sunday after the Nativity, Roman missal.  This derives from the 8th century Old Gelasian.  See Corpus orationum no. 5708, on p. 84 of vol. 9

Suppliciter te rogamus, domine deus noster, ut huius operatione mysterii et vitia nostra purgentur et iusta desideria compleantur.

and Bruylants no. 813, on p. 230 of vol. 2:

Per hujus, Domine, operationem mysterii, et vitia nostra purgentur, et justa desideria compleantur.  Per.

     Cf. James 4:3:  "You ask and do not receive, because you ask wrongly [(male)], to spend it on your passions [(concupiscentiis)]."  Also Jn 8:44:  "You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires [(desideria)]."  Most importantly, Ps 37:4:  "Take delight in the Lord, and he will give you the desires [(petitiones)] of your heart."  Etc.
     Cf. also St. Augustine.

"But what one cannot do . . . is found their authority upon the authority of the Magisterium"

"Tradition and Scripture alone contain [(Mais cela n'empêche pas la Tradition et l'Écriture de contenir seules)] the revelation and constitute the theological loci that are fundamental.  The Church has no other role than to determine with an infallible authority what is contained in Tradition and Scripture.  Logically speaking, the Church comes after Tradition and Scripture [and is subordinate to these].  If, then, one begins by treating [(l'on fait débuter)] the theological loci with a consideration of the theological loci of the Church, this could be based on a decision of a practical order that is pedagogically useful but in no way necessary [(ce n'est là qu'un ordre pratique, commode, nullement necessaire)].  But what one cannot do without acting against the proper character of the theological principles of faith as such [(sans aller contre genie proper du Traité des Lieux théologiques)] is to attempt to found their authority upon the authority of the Magisterium of the Church in so far as this authority results from rational proofs of rational apologetics [(des preuves rationnelles de l’Apologétique) such as historical-critical reasons in favor of the faith].  This is to interpret reductively [(rabaisser)] the theological loci which are the foundation of theology and must be the starting points in faith from the beginning [(qui, étant le fondement de la Théologie, doivent débuter d'emblée en pleine foi)].  Between these starting points [(eux)] and the goal pursued in a rational apologetical argument on behalf of the faith [(et la fin du traité apologétique de l’Église)], there is a gulf that can only be crossed by the total and definitive adhesion to the Catholic faith [(il y a eu l’adhésion de la foi catholique totale et définitive)], and with this the apologetical arguments are finished.  There is a discontinuity between the science of rational defense of the credibility of faith and the science of theology [(entre l’Apologétique et la Théologie)].  In the interval between the two is a psychological act of faith, free and supernatural. . . .  It is the faith and not the conclusions of apologetics that stands at the origins of theology 'quae procedit ex principiis fidei.'"

     Ambroise Gardeil, O.P., La crédibilité et l'apologétique (Paris:  J. Gabalda et Fils, 1912), 221-222, as trans. Thomas Joseph White, O.P., at The incarnate Lord:  a Thomistic study in Christology (Washington, DC:  The Catholic University of America Press, 2015), 56n47.  White cites the printing of 1928.

"Harnack is in error on" the Hellenization of Christianity. "ignorance of ontology is ignorance of Christ."

"from a historical and biblical point of view [the claim that the 'biblical, ethical Christology' of scripture was unfortunately Hellenized] can be shown to be untenable. . . .  To state things in so gentle a way, however, is in fact already to concede too much.  For if Harnack is in error on this point (which I take to be the case), then we should be concerned not merely to establish the right of the interpreter to consider the ontological dimension of the mystery of Christ, as if this were one way of reading scripture among others.  Rather, we must say that unless we study the mystery of Jesus ontologically, we fundamentally cannot understand the New Testament.  For generally speaking the Bible is deeply concerned with the ontological structure of reality and its dependence upon God.  The New Testament in particular, however, is concerned above all and before all else with the ontological identity of Christ and the fact that he is both God and man.  No teaching is more central [to it].  It is the truth that underlies all other scriptural affirmations regarding Jesus.  Consequently, to study the New Testament realistically at all is to study the being and person of Christ. . . .  ignorance of ontology is ignorance of Christ.  The understanding of the Bible offered by the fathers and the scholastics, then, is not merely something that can be justified as one possible form of reading among others (defensively, as against a post-critical anthropological turn in modern philosophy).  Rather, it is the only form of reading that attains objectively to the deepest truth about the New Testament:  a truth concerning the identity of Christ as the God-man.  By the same measure, only this reading of scripture can attain to a proper understanding of the subject of biblical theology as such."

     Thomas Joseph White, O.P., The incarnate Lord:  a Thomistic study in Christology (Washington, DC:  The Catholic University of America Press, 2015), 7-8, underscoring mine.  White then proceeds to a supportive initial sub-section entitled "The biblical ontology of the New Testament."  "Scholasticism," understood as "the scientific examination of the very causes of being," "is inevitable . . . whenever theology becomes truly itself" (29).  And from p. 117:

Seeking to understand the New Testament claims about Christ non-ontologically is in the end a non-biblical exercise.

Grant, we pray, that we may feel her to [be] interceding for us

. . . grant, we pray, that we may sense [(sentiamus)] her to [be] interced[ing] for us, through whom we were found worthy to receive the author of life, our Lord Jesus Christ your Son.

"Deus, qui salutis aeternae beatae Mariae virginitate fecunda humano generi praemia praestitisti, tribue, quaesumus, ut ipsam pro nobis intercedere sentiamus, per quam meruimus auctorem vitae suscipere, Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum, Filium tuum."

". . . grant, we pray, that we may experience the intercession of her, through whom we were found worthy to receive the author of life, our Lord Jesus Christ your Son."

     Collect for the Solemnity of Mary, the Holy Mother of God, Roman missal.  This is Bruylants, vol. 2, no. 440 (on p. 122), which he traces back to the Gelasian sacramentary of the early 8th century. =Corpus orationum no. 2113b.  Cf. Corpus orationum no. 2113a, which begins as follows:

Deus, qui spe[m] salutis aeternae beatae Mariae virginitate. . . .

See also Cuthbert Johnson & Anthony Ward, The sources of the Roman missal (1975) I:  Advent, Christmas (Notitiae 240-242 (Rome, 1986)): 213/653-214/654.
     Sentiamus (that one form alone) occurs twenty times in the current Roman missal.

You who are "not an appraiser of merit, but a bestower of grace"

. . . to whose fellowship grant us, we pray, admittance, [you who are] not an appraiser of merit [(aestimator meriti)], but a (liberal) bestower of pardon [(veniae . . . largitor)].  Through Christ our Lord.

"intra quorum nos consortium, non aestimator meriti, sed veniae, quaesumus, largitor admitte.  Per Christum Dominum nostrum."

"admit us, we beseech you, into their company, not weighing our merits, but granting us your pardon, through Christ our Lord."

     Eucharistic Prayer I, current Missal; Canon of the Mass, Tridentine Missal.

"Into their company we pray thee to admit us, not weighing our deserts, but freely granting us forgiveness:  through Christ our Lord" (trans. J. O'Connell & H. P. R. Finberg).

"Graciously admit us to their company, not considering what we truly deserve but granting us forgiveness" (Robert Louis Wilken).

     See, among other things, the Appendix "On the formal cause of justification" in Newman's 1838 Anglican Lectures on the doctrine of justification, which reminds me of the Tridentine concerns of Seripando on the theory of the duplex iustitia.

     The pre-2010 ICEL translation pulled the portion in red (below) down from the "Nobis quoque peccatoribus" and translated this portion (without so much as a nod at this point to the consortium) as follows:

"Though we are still sinners, we trust in your mercy and love.  Do not consider what we truly deserve, but grant us your forgiveness."

"Liberals have learned, at fearful cost, the lesson that absolute power corrupts absolutely. They have yet to learn that absolute liberty may also corrupt absolutely."

Source

     Gertrude Himmelfarb, On liberty and liberalism:  the case of John Stuart Mill (New York:  Knopf, 1974), as quoted by Peter L. Berger in "Mill vs. Mill," Commentary 58, no. 4 (October 1974): 80-81.  I.e., the "absolute liberty" of the radically feminist Mill of On liberty, not the more carefully qualified liberty of the other Mill, whether before or after 1859.