Bishop Wright suggests that the lens through which we should see Paul's writings is not in the legal / forensic sense that we have historically associated with 1st century Judaism, in which the Pharissees "tithed mint, dill, and cummin while neglecting the weightier matters, and strained out gnats while swallowing camels; and cleaned the outside of the cup and dish while all the while eating and drinking filth (Matt 23:23-25)," but rather in a strictly covenantal sense. So the question is not "am I right with God," but "am I in the covenant?" It is this twist, more than anything else I think, that allows Wright to stray so far from historical and Reformed hermeneutics.

-R