Response to my critics in the journal of pentecostal theology

In this response article, Coakley replies to the three Pentecostal theologians who, in this issue of the Journal of Pentecostal Theology, dialogue with her book God, Sexuality and the Self: An Essay ‘On the Trinity’ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013). She suggests ways in which her future work will attempt to reflect their insights. Keywords: Holy Spirit; Pneumatology; Trinity; charisma * Sarah Coakley is Norris-Hulse Professor of Divinity at the Faculty of Divinity, University of Cambridge, West Road, Cambridge cb3 9bs, uk. She was previously (1995–2007) Edward Mallinckrodt, Jr., Professor of Divinity at Harvard Divinity School. First, I would like to offer the warmest thanks to my three critics and interlocutors in this issue of the Journal of Pentecostal Theology, especially for the care they have taken in reading God, Sexuality and the Self (hereafter, gss) and the intricacies of its argument. I would be the first to admit that this is a complex book, enunciating a complex method; and despite all my attempts to make it as ‘accessible’ as possible to a non-academic readership, I am aware that it is a demanding matter to take account of all the streams and eddies within it. Despite these challenge, Stephenson, Green, and Castelo have evidenced in their responses all the qualities of what I call the ‘hermeneutics of charity’, whilst at the same time urging me on to greater clarification and providing a number of incisive critiques. I shall do my best in what follows to answer them in the same spirit/Spirit