Search

In this article, I analyse ways that the modern depersonalisation of knowledge production has contributed to breakdown in climate change education, and by extension, prevented moral and religious education from taking on a more ecological dimension. I draw on analysis by indigenous scholars which focusses on an indigenous re-personalising of science in order to make a case for a form of religious, moral and values education as an explicitly ecological pursuit, which arises from situated personal forms of knowledge. I argue that the work of re-personalising teaching and learning also requires educators to confront problems embedded in the models of ethics, values and belief which underpin our pedagogical approaches, particularly the unexpectedly problematic idea of ‘world religions’ and related binary conceptions of knowledge that have emerged from specific Christian lineages. By reconfiguring pedagogy we can pursue more holistic approaches that can in turn help us to overcome depersonalized (and colonial) forms of knowledge production and connect more intimately with the ecologies that sustain creaturely life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article sketches an intellectual history of the distinction between Christian theology and Christian ethics. The twists and turns of that history have been obscured by a recent tendency to deny the distinction's usefulness, as part of a wider strategy for reasserting theology's relevance to modern social problems. By contrast, earlier theologians assumed the value of the theology/ethics divide, interpreting it through Aristotelian, neo‐Kantian, and finally Marxist categories. The distinction fell into disrepute because theologians struggled to maintain the distinction consistently and disagreed on the concerns implicated by it, variously using it to affirm the moral subject's agency, the divine/human difference, or the complexity of real people's circumstances. Nonetheless, the distinction has persisted as a useful shorthand for recognizing the limitations of Christian theology, qua a conceptual discourse, in fully apprehending its subject matter of the Christian life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the book "Christian Social Ethics" by Elmar Nass, which provides a comprehensive guide to Christian social ethics. Nass explores various topics such as the mission of Christians in the world, the dialogue between Christian ethics and other ethical models, and the application of socio-ethical principles in different fields. The book emphasizes the importance of human dignity and the Christian perspective in addressing social issues. Nass engages in a constructive dialogue with non-Christian ethical models while remaining rooted in Christian principles. [Extracted from the article]

The Journal of Religious Ethics (JRE) was established at a particular moment in the United States in the early 1970s. This article investigates how that moment—in the institutional milieu of academic theology and religious studies in which the (JRE) emerged—influenced its founding. It does this through attention to three main sources: (1) the original charter and bylaws of the JRE, (2) publications from the JRE and other scholarly outlets in the period, and (3) a collection of interviews with scholars who occupied editorial roles in the first 10 years of the life of the journal. The article suggests that the JRE's early period was driven by three key forces: the emergence of Christian ethics as a field of academic theology, deepening engagement with academic philosophy among students of Christian ethics, and growing attention to the pedagogical requirements of increasingly pluralist tertiary educational environments. In conclusion, I describe my own place in this history, asking how the dynamics around the founding of the JRE shape my participation in the practice enacted in its pages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Different forms of reasons for environmental ethics are analyzed, and the author argues for an ecological enlightenment of anthropocentrism and for a deepened interconnectedness as a foundational principle for environmental ethics. Maybe the extensive work of German environmental ethicist Ott who develops environmental ethics on the grounds of discourse ethics can explain the rather low profile of in Vogt's approach. Nevertheless discourse ethics as a central theory for political ethics is playing a marginal role in the author's theoretical elaborations. [Extracted from the article]

This article deals with the political ethics of the Wittenberg reformer Martin Luther. It begins by explaining that, according to Luther, every human being finds himself in two relationships: On the one hand, he is in relation to God, and on the other hand, he is in relation to the world and thus to his fellow human beings (coram deo/coram mundo). It was particularly important for Luther that the two relationships are categorically differentiated. This has important consequences for political ethics, which is shown in the second section using Luther's book on secular authority (1523). Although the secular legal order is irrelevant to true Christians because they never do evil, since there are very few true Christians, it is indispensable so that the law of the strongest does not prevail. Because this legal protection for the weak is willed by God, Christians also participate in it out of love for their neighbour by rendering obedience to the authorities and cooperating in the enforcement of the law. However, the competence of the secular legal order must not be extended to people's inner convictions. The third and last section asks about the significance of Luther's teachings for contemporary political ethics. This is done by taking into account its reception history. While Luther's political ethics since the 16th century was mostly understood as the basis of a Christian ideal of the state, it has been interpreted in German Protestantism since the 20th century as the basis of an un-derstanding of the state oriented towards freedom of faith and conscience as well as religious pluralism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The critical onboarding of ethnography evinced by scholars in theology, religious studies and Christian ethics compellingly generates ecclesiologies and other theologies inclusive of non-academic life. Yet, in a critical reflection on methodologies in ecclesiological research, this paper questions the growing predominance of ethnography, specifically ethnographic thickness. Drawing upon the work of anthropologist Audra Simpson, this paper argues that the ethnographic turn in religious ethics and theology and religious studies misses (at best) or ignores (at worst) the epistemological violence lurking at the root of this method. By looking into practices of ethnographic thinness and refusal, this paper highlights apophasis as the best theological grounding for scholars engaging with ethnography. Ethnographic apophasis requires practitioners to heed the colonial and settler colonial realities inherent in the method of ethnography itself; ethically pushing notions of solidarity into anticolonial practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay considers how the JRE has engaged Catholic ethics in the last 50 years and how the concerns of Catholic ethics during this period of exceptional change are reflected and developed in the JRE. It discusses the transformation of Catholic ethics by focusing on the transitions: (i) from classical to historical consciousness; (ii) from an essentialist concept of human nature to a dynamic concept of the moral subject; (iii) from abstract to contextual moral reason; and (iv) from a discourse that ignored the politics of power to one that reckons with it, analyzing the distinct ways in which the JRE engaged with these transformations. It concludes by looking to the future and suggests that a deeper engagement with the breadth of Catholic ethics internationally may help advance the Journal's mission and that a fuller interaction with the comparative and humanistic dimensions of the JRE's mission will enhance Catholic ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this essay, I argue that Christian ethicists should not think of themselves as religious ethicists. I defend this claim by arguing that the concept of religious ethics, as it has come to be understood as a discipline that is distinct from secular ethics, is incoherent. In part one, I describe the fraught attempts by theologians in the 20th century to identify the distinctiveness of Christian ethics. In part two, I argue that certain accounts of natural law unwittingly reinforce a problematic conception of secular ethics. Part three examines some trends in religious studies and comparative religious ethics to highlight problematic conceptions of religion. Drawing together these strands of inquiry, I contend that that the secular‐religious dichotomy in contemporary ethics should be rejected, but by the same token, I suggest that comparative ethics remains a worthwhile enterprise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article "Shelter Theology: The Religious Lives of People without Homes" by Susan J. Dunlap explores the religious experiences, beliefs, and practices of individuals at Urban Ministries of Durham, a homeless shelter in North Carolina. Dunlap delves into the practical theologies of the community members, highlighting liturgical practices, lived beliefs, narratives, and theological doctrines. She challenges pastoral caregivers to understand and respect the beliefs of those experiencing extreme poverty, emphasizing the need to disentangle harmful ideologies like neoliberal capitalism and white supremacy from religious practices. The book is recommended for students in pastoral formation and religious ethics courses addressing poverty and race. [Extracted from the article]

The Journal of Religious Ethics has published only two full‐length articles focusing on American Indian religious ethics in the last decade. This may signal that the field is uneasy about integrating American Indian religious ethics into its broader discourse. To fill this research lacuna and take a step toward normalizing religious‐ethical engagement with American Indian ethics, this article argues that the field needs an intentionally anticolonial, self‐aware approach to understanding American Indian religious ethics—one that decenters methods and approaches that may facilitate the analysis of Christian texts, groups, and phenomena, yet limit insights into the religious‐moral beliefs and practices of Native Americans. The article first shows examples of how religious‐ethical methods, definitions, and epistemological starting points can obfuscate rich and accurate understandings of Native American religious‐ethical systems and phenomena. Next, it turns to historical and anthropological studies and Native American philosophy and ethics to outline an interdisciplinary framework for integrating American Indian traditions into the discourses of religious ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

James M. Gustafson, who died in 2021, has influenced generations of theologians and ethicists. In this article, five students, colleagues, and friends provide short reflections on what Gustafson has meant for their work as scholars of theology and religious ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Anthropocentrism is an old and persisting problem for Christian ecology. This article argues that one way Christian ecological ethics can begin moving beyond anthropocentrism is by looking outside itself to other traditions that practice and observe a more ecocentric ethic. Specifically, it suggests an engagement with indigenous traditions of North America. Holding up the ecocentric tactics and discursive strategies employed by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (SRST) during the 2016 Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) protests the article shows how American Indian ecologies can help move Christians toward a more ecocentric worldview. It then examines the ways certain Christian groups approached their allyship with the SRST during the DAPL protests and asks which of these groups approached this case of interreligious, ecological resistance most effectively as allies. That is, it asks which Christian groups partnered with the SRST in ways that actually aided the protests and, additionally, fostered the possibility of learning from the SRST's ecocentric, indigenous religious ecology. The aim is to provide an example of how collaborative, respectful, anticolonial dialogue and allyship can happen between Christian and indigenous eco‐activists in a way that is mutually beneficial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Should we as religious ethicists seek to understand what traditions other than our own or our own area of scholarship have to say about particular ethical issues as knowledge parallel to our own, or can we allow what we learn to make a difference in our own ethical positions? Writing from the perspective of Christian ethics, the author argues that we can indeed allow what we learn to inform Christian ethical evaluations and to shape ethical conclusions, with neighbor love and concern for the common good as grounds for doing this. Using forms of commitments to political nonviolence as a test case, the author first reviews major positions on war and peace ethics within Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, and then explores how Jewish and Muslim ethical assessments can inform a choice between Christian absolute pacifism and practical pacifism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The intersection of ethics, religion, theology, and peace studies is intensifying through increasingly multi‐disciplinary, contextual, explicitly normative scholarship. This book discussion demonstrates this claim through its profiles of an introduction to Christian ethics by Ellen Ott Marshall, a case study of the School of the Americas Watch by Kyle B. T. Lambelet, a case study of the American Jewish Palestine solidarity movement by Atalia Omer, and a global, historical study of Christian ethics by Cecilia Lynch. Though their methods and subjects vary, these authors are collectively renewing a history of mutual enrichment between religious ethics and peace studies, employing theories of lived, ambivalent religion. To begin, this essay provides introductory remarks about the field of peace studies, highlighting the evolving involvement of religious actors. To conclude, it makes a plea for greater use of conflict theory and peace practice in religious ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Estudios Filosóficos is the property of Estudios Filosoficos and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article follows a strand of ethical thought that weaves itself throughout Leo Tolstoy's religious writings: the injunction of non-resistance. This ethical position has been described by some critics as a form of religious idolatry in Tolstoy's work. I challenge that claim in this article by deploying the work of Emmanuel Levinas to provide much needed nuance to Tolstoy's call for non-resistance. Via the ethical framework provided by Levinas, I contend that Tolstoy's positions are built upon a conception of the finite world that sees a proper comportment to finitude as the mode by which one engages the infinite. This ethical call is one that escapes satiation by demanding a ceaseless act of non-resistance—which is, for him, the essential kernel of the Christian message. Tolstoy's God, I argue, is this infinite demand; something akin to an ethical claim that marks the subject—a mandate that is met when one enacts the ethical obligation of non-resistance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay assesses the oft‐made link between Walter Rauschenbusch and Martin Luther King Jr. Denying neither Rauschenbusch's influence on King nor King's social gospel status, it nevertheless questions the way historians locate Rauschenbusch's legacy in King and the civil rights movement. This strategy, however unintentionally, reproduces the white social gospel's "astigmatism" on race and undermines the contributions of black social gospel (and other neglected) leaders even as revised histories affirm them. After exploring King's references to Rauschenbusch and Rauschenbusch's reflections on race, the paper compares their theologies. This comparison reveals key differences on race and economic justice that ramify across Rauschenbusch's and King's distinctive articulations of social gospel categories, further complicating historians' claims on King. Oversimplifying the connection between these important figures in religious ethics distorts theological understanding of social gospel legacies and compromises their power for future generations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The contributors to this reflection on the field consider the legacy of Christian ethics in comparative religious ethics (CRE), particularly in regard to whether the latter has escaped the parochialism and hegemony of the former, whether the legacy is simply vicious or whether it can be virtuous, and the specific ways in which the former has influenced the discipline of CRE in regard to methods and themes. Beyond these methodological questions, the contributors also speak to the historical development of Christian ethics and CRE in the cultural and institutional contexts of late twentieth century America and provide reflections on the politics of CRE as it is now practiced and debated in the field and in the academy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay is an exploratory inquiry into possible Christian ethical residues in the field of comparative religious ethics (CRE), focusing particularly on the themes of tradition and canon, trajectories of ethical reflection, emancipatory criticism, common morality, and the notion of discipline. It is suggested that even if such traces exist, they may not be detrimental to the field as currently practiced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The filial relationship between Christian ethics and Comparative Religious Ethics (CRE) need not be perniciously distortive and can be salutary for comparative work. I suggest that the suspicions about CRE as a disguised form of a "Christian ethical enterprise" are overstated and that we can appreciate the value of the legacy of Christian ethics for comparative work in the focal themes of emancipatory criticism and common morality. Both of these themes, even if influenced by Christian ethics, reflect more universal social‐moral problems that can be discerned in cross‐cultural contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

I present a brief historical narrative of the legacy of Christian ethics in comparative religious ethics (CRE) that attempts to make sense of the tensions within the field from the perspective of the politics of identity with reference to its changing content and practices—its internal history—and what might be called the background conditions—its external history—that shaped not only the content and methods of CRE but also its self‐understanding. Given the politics of Christian identity and the historical development of religious ethics within the American academy, I recommend that scholars of CRE adopt a more confessional mode of inquiry that makes explicit their ultimate commitments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dieser Beitrag bietet eine umfassende Diskussion des Textes "Humanismus und Christentum" (1950) des dänischen Philosophen und Theologen Knud E. Løgstrup. Er verortet den Text in seinem geistesgeschichtlichen Kontext und analysiert seine wichtigsten Argumente wie auch seine zentrale These, der zufolge Humanismus und Christentum einen entscheidenden Grundsatz teilen, insofern beide die Ethik als "stumm" oder "unausgesprochen" verstehen. Darüber hinaus wird dargelegt, wie Løgstrups Text zentrale Überlegungen in dessen späteren Publikationen, besonders in dem Hauptwerk Die ethische Forderung (1956), vorwegnimmt. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the ethical problems of scientists. The author explores the meaning of science and its relation to ethics and religion. As defined by the author science is a study of the world as it is, including the observation of natural phenomena and of planned experiments, together with mathematical or deductive reasoning based on the results of previous and present observations which lead to theories or statements of supposed laws on which fresh experiments can be based. The section discusses the relation of Christian ethic to contemporary science. It also enumerates several problems of morality presented to scientists during the armaments race.

I argue that even if the influence of Christian ethics on comparative religious ethics (CRE) is inevitable, it need not be problematic. The legacy would only be worrisome if it stacked the deck in favor of Christian ethics or predisposed comparative ethicists to conform to the methods or thematic concerns of Christian ethics. Following Gadamer, I suggest that the ideal of presuppositionless objectivity is an illusion that applies to not only those who emerge from a Christian cultural context but in every global context. Given the specific historical and cultural contexts of the emergence of CRE, the residue of Christian ethics in CRE is understandable and expected. Thus, the legacy of Christian ethics in CRE will only be problematic to the extent that the potential dangers of Christian hegemony remain hidden, which does not seem to be the case in the contemporary academic context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This is a preface to three essays on different aspects of ontological and economic debt as themes in religious ethics. It frames their contribution by arguing that debt is central to traditions of philosophical and religious ethics yet is woefully neglected as a thematic problem and problematic in contemporary iterations of these traditions. In order to situate debt as a central moral concern, it is argued that any consideration of debt must wrestle with how debt exists on two axes. One is the axis of ontological and economic debt. The other is the axis of debt as an expression of mutuality and debt as a mode of domination. These axes generate deep ambiguities regarding the moral status of debt. But contemporary religious and philosophical ethics struggles to articulate, let alone address, this ambiguity due to being wedded to modern conceptions of the autonomous subject. The essay closes by setting out the themes of the three essays, the connections between them, and how they can be a catalyst for further reflection on this vital but under‐researched topic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are broad commonalities between the projects of Donald MacKinnon (1913–1994) and Stanley Cavell (1926–) sufficient to make the claim that they struck an analogous pose in their respective contexts. This is not to discount their manifest differences. In the milieu of 1960s and 1970s Cambridge, MacKinnon argued in support of a qualified language of metaphysics in the service of a renewed catholic humanism and Christian socialism. At Harvard, Cavell articulated commitments that made him more at home in the world of North American secular political liberalism. Where Nietzsche, Hume, Freud, Heidegger, Emerson and Thoreau were Cavell’s inspirations, Butler, Kant, G. E. Moore, Collingwood and the New Testament were MacKinnon’s. For all the stark differences, commonalities abound and the reason for this can be traced to a shared appreciation of Austin’s contribution to the ‘lingusitic turn’ together with Wittgenstein’s later work. They both developed projects obsessed with the problem of scepticism together with a commitment to a creative re-animation of moral discourse in light of it, with MacKinnon defending a qualified ‘moral realism’, and Cavell, ‘moral perfectionism’. Seen together, a distinctive post-Kantian and post-Wittgensteinian therapeutic moral philosophy is in evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is now 49 years since Johan Heyns's Sterwende Christendom? [ Dying Christendom ] was published (1969) in which he traced the history of secularisation and its impact on the theology of his time and 36 years since the publication (1982) of the first volume of his Teologiese etiek [ Theological ethics ] in which he discussed the impact of secularisation on ethics. In this article, the topic of the impact of secularisation on Christian ethics is revisited. Account is taken of research conducted on the secularising impact of modernisation since then. Although empirical research points to the fact that it is not true that modernisation inevitably leads to the complete demise of religious faith and ethics, and also not that there is today absolutely no room for religious influences in the different social orders, it does not mean that it is a case of business as usual for Christian ethics. It cannot be denied that modernisation has a significant effect on the shape of Christian ethics in the contemporary world. And it can also not be denied that in most contemporary liberal democratic societies, including South Africa, the public role of Christian ethics is restricted. Some of the challenges – and opportunities – present-day realities pose to South African churches and their members are identified and discussed. Intradisciplinary and/or interdisciplinary implications: On account of the pluralising and fragilising impact of modernisation on Christian faith, the discipline of Christian ethics should today criticise the absolutising of Christian ethical beliefs and encourage Christians to actively support consensus seeking on moral values in the workplace and in society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Representing a spectrum of intellectual concerns and methodological commitments in religious ethics, the contributors to this focus issue consider and assess the advantages and disadvantages of the shift in recent comparative religious ethics away from a rootedness in moral theory toward a model that privileges the ethnography of moral worlds. In their own way, all of the contributors think through and emphasize the meaning, importance, and place of normativity in recent comparative religious ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the limits of secular philosophy and philosophical reason. It argues that once one abandons God, philosophical reason is unable to establish any particular bioethics or understanding of morality as canonical; that is, as definitively true and binding. Philosophy simply cannot secure the truth of any particular account of the right, the good, the just, or the virtuous. Once one abandons God, all is approached as if it were without ultimate meaning. Throughout, the article explores H. Tristram Engelhardt Jr's arguments in After God: Morality and Bioethics in a Secular Age, which confronts this major intellectual and cultural crisis. As Engelhardt remind us, traditional Christianity is not a life-style choice, much less another meta-narrative that one chooses and writes for oneself. It is an encounter with God, Who changes everything. Christian bioethics must be appreciated in terms of an encounter with and an authentic experience of God, Whose commands will routinely conflict with the moral dictates of secular morality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article, I argue that while Christians should share Engelhardt's disappointment in how bioethics functions in the world, they should not share his exasperation. I begin by outlining the general argument in After God, its understanding of secularism, and of how such secularism has impacted bioethics. Next, I suggest that Englehardt appears to lean toward disengagement or at least an extremely suspicious sectarianism. Rather, I claim that it is possible for Christians to morally engage in a useful way with others and still base their own moral activity on proper life telos. Such cooperation is not to serve a commonly-held ultimate purpose, but shared proximate ends. That said, the moral discourse with those outside the Church may be necessarily limited by shallow moral acquaintanceship. I argue that the concept of "middle axioms" can be used as a mechanism for engagement with others in this society. Importantly, this approach does not require abandoning distinctive Christian commitments and foundational assumptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines Engelhardt's thesis from the standpoint of liturgical theology. Fagerberg's previous work has claimed that liturgy gives birth to theology (lex orandi statuat lex credendi) in such a way that liturgy is the ontological condition for theology, as Schmemann said. If we apply this approach to the question at hand, we will understand liturgy to be the source and foundation also for Christian morality. This is no particular surprise, since the Christian tradition has always integrated liturgy, theology, and asceticism, that last named treating morality as a pathway to deification. Liturgical theology views liturgy as a pneumatic exercise that makes theologian souls, and liturgical asceticism understands such theologian souls to be molded by the doings of the body, and this delivers us to the threshold of liturgical morality, for in liturgy the God's-eye perspective shares its light with us. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article explores the use of the Bible in Christian ethics.