As Conkin says, «In their terms, they would now emphasize
ethics over theology and reflect a «serious scientific spirit.»
Not exact matches
Presumably it's hard to get worked up about
theology and
ethics over a potluck supper.
H. Richard Niebuhr taught us in The Kingdom of God in America that the triune themes of the sovereignty of God
over the whole world, the reign of Christ in the heart and the expectation of a Coming Kingdom in and beyond time were all embedded in the term «kingdom of God,» and that these themes were decisive in the way Christian
theology and
ethics provided — with differing accents in different periods — a spiritual and moral rudder for American civilization, from its founding through the industrial era.
In addition to clashes
over liberation
theology, Vatican authorities have continued to uphold official teaching on sexual
ethics in general (as in a 1986 statement on homosexuality by Cardinal Ratzinger) and have withstood calls even for an open discussion of women's ordination or of ending celibacy as a requirement for the priesthood.
For example, a curriculum that seems to privilege courses having to do with religious experience, worship, spirituality, counseling, and the like
over, say, systematic and philosophical
theology may reveal a commitment to the assumption that God is understood effectively rather than discursively; while a curriculum relatively more rich in offerings in
ethics, sociology of religion, liberation
theology, and the like than in offerings in historical
theology, patristics, liturgics, and mystical traditions may reveal a commitment to the view that God is better understood in action than in contemplation.
Since I know a little something about ethical theory (dual major philosophy and
theology on the island of Malta, followed by
over 8 years of graduate work in literature with a focus on Paradise Lost, Badiou and Zizek) AND because my own views on appropriate author
ethics are brazenly unpopular, I thought I would play devil's advocate.