Search

Most studies of the religio-racial constellation begin with the medieval taxonomy of Christians, 'Jews', 'pagans' and 'heretics'. Some scholars examine how this medieval taxonomy functioned as a system of dehumanization in the Middle Ages; others are more interested in how it has been adopted and adapted in modern racist taxonomies; and still others examine how religious images continue to influence the way non-white, non-European, non-Christian, and non-secular bodies are seen and treated today. What is lacking in the literature to date is an in-depth examination of how this fourfold taxonomy came to be. To understand how modern racialized taxonomies incorporated the earlier "religious" categories—a question that is beyond the scope of this article—we also need to better understand the genealogy of these religious categories, their scope, and their implication in processes of unequal power distribution. To that end, we must address the following questions: Where did the distinction between true and false religion come from; how did the figure of the pagan emerge; what about the Jews as anti-Christian? Rather than focusing on contemporary expressions of religio-racialization, or directing our attention to modern or even late medieval expressions of the religio-racial constellation, this article turns to the period of early Christianity when Christian apologists created the key religionized taxonomies that would shape the way Christians imagined, related to, and, in a later stage of history, governed Christianity's others: the Jews, the heretics, and the pagans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Most studies of the religio-racial constellation begin with the medieval taxonomy of Christians, ‘Jews’, ‘pagans’ and ‘heretics’. Some scholars examine how this medieval taxonomy functioned as a system of dehumanization in the Middle Ages; others are more interested in how it has been adopted and adapted in modern racist taxonomies; and still others examine how religious images continue to influence the way non-white, non-European, non-Christian, and non-secular bodies are seen and treated today. What is lacking in the literature to date is an in-depth examination of how this fourfold taxonomy came to be. To understand how modern racialized taxonomies incorporated the earlier “religious” categories—a question that is beyond the scope of this article—we also need to better understand the genealogy of these religious categories, their scope, and their implication in processes of unequal power distribution. To that end, we must address the following questions: Where did the distinction between true and false religion come from; how did the figure of the pagan emerge; what about the Jews as anti-Christian? Rather than focusing on contemporary expressions of religio-racialization, or directing our attention to modern or even late medieval expressions of the religio-racial constellation, this article turns to the period of early Christianity when Christian apologists created the key religionized taxonomies that would shape the way Christians imagined, related to, and, in a later stage of history, governed Christianity’s others: the Jews, the heretics, and the pagans.

Catholic education has a long tradition of engagement with the liberal arts and especially the humanities. The place of the humanities today in the curriculum is under threat for several reasons, one being the predominance of the technocratic mentality. This paper revisits (in three steps) the contested issue of the role of the humanities in education. First, I review arguments about the role of the humanities within education. Second, some of the defects of the technocratic mentality are pointed out. Third, a Christian lens for viewing the humanities is deployed. Here I propose that the humanities play a valuable role in nurturing the imagination, thereby contributing both to a capacity to transcend the technocratic outlook and to the development of the holistic and humanising education that is central to a Catholic worldview.

The aim of the article is to focus on the term “argument from desire”, which is often used by the scholars dealing with C. S. Lewis’s work, in order to answer the question if the term truly reflects the original thinking of the author. The first section briefly introduces the discussion of this topic in Czech and international titles. After that, we are going to describe the theme of Joy as related to Lewis’ notion of the word. The next section gives reasons why we think that the term “argument from desire” does not aptly illustrate the way the theme of desire and Joy is presented in Lewis’ work. Finally, the article discusses these topics from the perspective of fundamental theology and shows that Joy and desire should be rather seen as a part of Lewis’ personal testimony, which complements his rational arguments.

The aim of the article is to focus on the term “argument from desire”, which is often used by the scholars dealing with C. S. Lewis’s work, in order to answer the question if the term truly reflects the original thinking of the author. The first section briefly introduces the discussion of this topic in Czech and international titles. After that, we are going to describe the theme of Joy as related to Lewis’ notion of the word. The next section gives reasons why we think that the term “argument from desire” does not aptly illustrate the way the theme of desire and Joy is presented in Lewis’ work. Finally, the article discusses these topics from the perspective of fundamental theology and shows that Joy and desire should be rather seen as a part of Lewis’ personal testimony, which complements his rational arguments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article I critically engage the Duke theologians of race--Carter, Jennings, and Bantam--devoting attention especially to Jennings. While appreciating and acknowledging the significance of these projects, I critique Jennings's selective historiography and suggest that engaging the Anglo-American early modem supersessionist theologies of culture and race would have benefitted Jennings' project. Then I trace out some implications of Jennings's call to re-engage Israel and examine how his idealized vision of "submersion and in submission to another's cultural realities" affects the notion of conversion theologically. As an Asian-American historical theologian, I argue that race is not and should no longer be looked upon as a black-white binary reality. In conclusion, I call for a historiographical fine-tuning of these theologies of race. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Responding to Professor Hauerwas' essay: “The Church and The Mentally Handicapped,” this paper interacts with several of the points made. Specifically, the notion of Christian community, justification for the existence of persons with disability, and Christian imagination. Christians are exhorted in general terms to be more responsive to individuals with disabilities in their midst. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Catholic education has a long tradition of engagement with the liberal arts and especially the humanities. The place of the humanities today in the curriculum is under threat for several reasons, one being the predominance of the technocratic mentality. This paper revisits (in three steps) the contested issue of the role of the humanities in education. First, I review arguments about the role of the humanities within education. Second, some of the defects of the technocratic mentality are pointed out. Third, a Christian lens for viewing the humanities is deployed. Here I propose that the humanities play a valuable role in nurturing the imagination, thereby contributing both to a capacity to transcend the technocratic outlook and to the development of the holistic and humanising education that is central to a Catholic worldview. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]