Sentences with phrase «christian social ethics»

To control ferocity, to heal the wounds that we inevitably inflict because of life's pressure to be competitive, is the business of civilization, and it is the business of Christian social ethics to remind civilization of its civilizing obligation.

Mainline Christian social ethics are shaped by the ideal of a world without poverty.

Christian social ethics therefore requires a view of human fulfillment and hope that will support young people in concrete ways in the sexual crisis that has engulfed them and the society of which they are a part.

Christian social ethics goes beyond prescriptive behavior of what is essentially right or essentially wrong.

A Christian social ethics should begin with the premise that there can be no perfect community in this aeon, from which follows an enterprise of moral reflection that will be piecemeal, cautious, and open to revision.

The original proclamation of this approach was against the background of a too moralistic or idealistic form of Christian social ethics.

In the case of the relation to socialism of Christian social ethics and Christian church bodies, however, it is probably true that history should be remembered and reflected upon, precisely because the impulses that moved it are not just in the past but very much present still.

«Identification of Christian social ethics with specific partisan proposals that clearly are not the only ones that may be characterized as Christian and as morally acceptable comes close to the original New Testament meaning of heresy.»

Niebuhr had a tremendous impact on the fields of Christian social ethics and modern theology, and many of us who labor in these fields are grateful for it.

Dr. Livezey is assistant professor of Christian social ethics at Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, New Jersey.

As Henry himself recently characterized the situation, evangelicals are increasingly divided «over what program Christian social ethics implies.

To stress love as one's motive for involvement encourages an overvaluation of voluntaristic structures as the key to Christian social ethics, and ultimately aborts rigorous structural involvement in society.

Overall, the entire field of Christian social ethics — liberationist or not — pays scandalously little attention to empirical data and social science, as when Karen Lebacqz cites the Hite Report as though it were a statistically representative sample of sexual attitudes and behaviors, or when Michael Novak draws simplistic comparisons between Japanese and Latin American political economies.

My interest in democratic theory has been an attempt to find some way of getting a handle on the nature of Christian social ethics.

The pervasiveness of this emphasis can now be seen even in Christian social ethics, the field born out of the Social Gospel movement and one which in the name of prophetic spirit and social analysis has been critical of Protestantism's tendency to focus on personal piety.

There have been more obviously religious eras, as in the medieval «age of faith» or the periods of the great revivals under Jonathan Edwards or Dwight L. Moody; it is doubtful that there has ever been a period of such general high Christian intelligence or deep commitment to Christian social ethics as in our own time.

In the name of Christ, modern Christian social ethics points to an eradication of the very poverty that Jesus blessed.

J. Philip Wogaman is professor of Christian social ethics at Wesley Theological Seminary in Washington, D.C.

And that is why Christians are trying to work out a «Christian social ethic» — trying to show, for example, that love is addressed not to a neighbor but to collectivities, etc..

Most fundamentally: how exactly do your eschatological views, particularly in teasing out these details, provide a well - supported basis for a Christian social ethic?

For those in the Reformed tradition, it is not a literalistic imitatio Christi, but a recognition of the ongoing validity of a doctrine of creation that provides the basis for a Christian social ethic.

A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic.

There are three implications of this view which form a prolegomenon to a Christian social ethic.

A Community of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic (Notre Dame, Ind..

He made it possible for me to become a Christian as no other figure before or since has (although I can today find similar inspiration from Hans Kung and David Tracy among the Catholics, and Alvin Plantinga and Nicholas Wolterstorff among Reformed Christians) More, he made the quest for an apologetic, cosmopolitan Christian social ethic imaginable.

Not exact matches

Though seminary faculties like to affirm, in principle, a relationship between Christian theology and the life of the church, academic theology tends to view the ministering congregation as an addendum to the really interesting issues of ethics, philosophical and political theology, or social policy.

Christine Pohl is professor of social ethics at Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky, and author of Making Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition (Eerdmans).

First, a move to negate the communal - denominational approach to educational enterprise and to make intellectual dialogue among concerned teachers and post-graduate students of different religious and secular ideological faiths for exploring a new relevant common anthropology and social ethic in a pluralist India, central to the Christian college.

Stanley Hauerwas has developed Christian approaches to personal and social ethics from this same starting point.

To be a Christian is not just «to serve God,» but it is also a dynamic social ethic, a service to humankind.

A forthright dedication of itself to the social implications of the Christian ethic.

For a Biblical concept of justice has been the real concern of a few of these writers.58 Evidence is of course mixed, but the overwhelming thrust of Scripture's discussion of «social justice» suggests the following Biblical definition: «to each according to his or her needs» Rather than act on the basis of society's most common definitions of «social justice» those of merit or equality - the Christian seeking a Biblically derived social ethic must respond, first and foremost, on the basis of need.

He tried to reconcile an «apparently» mutually exclusive absolute Christian ethic (agape) with a relative social ethic (justice).

The writings of Harold Lindsell, Francis Schaefer, Bernard Ramm, Carl Henry, Clark Pinnock, Dick France, James Packer and others present a range of contradictory theological formulations on such issues as the nature of Biblical inspiration, the place of women in the church and family, the church's role in social ethics, and the Christian's response to homosexuality.

The spectrum of evangelical opinion concerning social ethics which these periodicals define could perhaps be sharpened by further explication of the positions of representative individual Christians.

Evangelicals, all claiming a common Biblical norm, are reaching contradictory theological formulations on many of the major issues they address — the nature of Biblical inspiration, the place of women in the church and family, the church's role in social ethics, and most recently the Christian's response to homosexuality.

Spelled out in a lengthy lead editorial entitled «Evangelicals in the Social Struggle,» as well as in books such as Aspects of Christian Social Ethics, Henry's understanding of Christian social responsibility stressed (a) society's need for the spiritual regeneration of all men and women, (b) an interim social program of humanitarian care, ethical proclamation, and personal, structural application, and (c) a theory of limited government centering on certain «freedom rights,» e. g., the rights to public property, free speech, and so on.18 Though the shape of this social ethic thus closely parallels that of the present editorial position of Moody Monthly, it must be distinguished from its counterpart by the time period involved (it pushed others like Moody Monthly into a more active involvement in the social arena), by the intensity of its commitment to social responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political sSocial Struggle,» as well as in books such as Aspects of Christian Social Ethics, Henry's understanding of Christian social responsibility stressed (a) society's need for the spiritual regeneration of all men and women, (b) an interim social program of humanitarian care, ethical proclamation, and personal, structural application, and (c) a theory of limited government centering on certain «freedom rights,» e. g., the rights to public property, free speech, and so on.18 Though the shape of this social ethic thus closely parallels that of the present editorial position of Moody Monthly, it must be distinguished from its counterpart by the time period involved (it pushed others like Moody Monthly into a more active involvement in the social arena), by the intensity of its commitment to social responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political sSocial Ethics, Henry's understanding of Christian social responsibility stressed (a) society's need for the spiritual regeneration of all men and women, (b) an interim social program of humanitarian care, ethical proclamation, and personal, structural application, and (c) a theory of limited government centering on certain «freedom rights,» e. g., the rights to public property, free speech, and so on.18 Though the shape of this social ethic thus closely parallels that of the present editorial position of Moody Monthly, it must be distinguished from its counterpart by the time period involved (it pushed others like Moody Monthly into a more active involvement in the social arena), by the intensity of its commitment to social responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political ssocial responsibility stressed (a) society's need for the spiritual regeneration of all men and women, (b) an interim social program of humanitarian care, ethical proclamation, and personal, structural application, and (c) a theory of limited government centering on certain «freedom rights,» e. g., the rights to public property, free speech, and so on.18 Though the shape of this social ethic thus closely parallels that of the present editorial position of Moody Monthly, it must be distinguished from its counterpart by the time period involved (it pushed others like Moody Monthly into a more active involvement in the social arena), by the intensity of its commitment to social responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political ssocial program of humanitarian care, ethical proclamation, and personal, structural application, and (c) a theory of limited government centering on certain «freedom rights,» e. g., the rights to public property, free speech, and so on.18 Though the shape of this social ethic thus closely parallels that of the present editorial position of Moody Monthly, it must be distinguished from its counterpart by the time period involved (it pushed others like Moody Monthly into a more active involvement in the social arena), by the intensity of its commitment to social responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political ssocial ethic thus closely parallels that of the present editorial position of Moody Monthly, it must be distinguished from its counterpart by the time period involved (it pushed others like Moody Monthly into a more active involvement in the social arena), by the intensity of its commitment to social responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political ssocial arena), by the intensity of its commitment to social responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political ssocial responsibility, by the sophistication of its insight into political theory and practice, and by its willingness to offer structural critique on the American political system.

It remains to show what this implies for individual ethics, for social ethics, and for the progress toward spiritual maturity of the Christian.

The overall suspicion, in other words, is that somehow Christian faith has lost its «transcendent» element, that It has been «reduced» to «horizontalism» at the expense of «verticalism,» that it has become nothing more than «ethics» (and left - wing ethics at that), that «social analysis» has replaced theology, that revolution has replaced revelation — and that Karl Marx is the source of all the difficulty.

He rightly and ominously warned that if it were, «the Christian ethic of charity and compassion would be a morality dependent on authoritarian social structures.»

But if basic democracy means the attempt to order the common life in such a way that these conditions are met — and I believe that basic democracy can be so defined — then the positive relationship between the Christian ethic and political and social democracy is here affirmed.

Thus sin appears in a Reinhold Niebuhr boomlet as the note of Christian realism needed in social ethics; ignorance receives attention through «the epistemological privilege of the poor» or an action hermeneutics; death is addressed in the issue of nuclear winter.

The importance of the power problem for Christian ethics derives both from the fact that power, whether economic, political, military, or spiritual, means capacity to determine life for good or ill, and from the fact that some fundamental redistribution of power is necessary as a condition of the freedom and dignity of men in their social relations.

The Socialist Decision is also of interest, however, to those not especially oriented toward Marxism, since much of what Tillich has to say is pertinent to any effort to relate Christian theology and ethics to the social problems of our times.

Jesus» teaching was not «social,» in our modern sense of sociological utopianism; but it was something vastly profounder, a religious ethic which involved a social as well as a personal application, but within the framework of the beloved society of the Kingdom of God; and in its relations to the pagan world outside it was determined wholly from within that beloved society — as the rest of the New Testament and most of the other early Christian literature takes for granted.

Following the 1975 Nairobi assembly, at which there were sharp disagreements about the Christian attitude to people of other faiths, the phrase «A Just Participatory and Sustainable Society» provided the framework for discussion of social ethics.

Any adequate discussion of the theme of love of God and neighbor and of its relevance to Church and school requires all the resources of the theological curriculum from study of the Scriptures through systematic theology, the philosophy, psychology and history of religion, Christian and social ethics to pastoral theology, Christian education and homiletics.

It aimed «to ground social and economic ethics on a Christian foundation, in direct accord with the Protestant understanding.»

Christian ethics establishes the family as primary in all social relations based on the explicit teachings of Jesus and their implications that monogamy is the standard, agape the controlling factor, divorce a compromise, and our relation to God the foundation.

They embrace racial and economic justice and creation care; they affirm the full dignity and equality of women; they take for granted that faithful Christians must embrace evangelism and social action; and they hold to a biblical sexual ethic while vigorously opposing mistreatment of LGBT people and defending their appropriate civil rights.