Sentences with phrase «for social ethics»

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

A concern for social ethics, for example, has seemed to some a forfeiture of the desire to preach to the lost.

In fact, it can be argued (and I will, in what follows below) that the present divergences in social thought throughout contemporary evangelicalism stem largely from this source from differing theological traditions that provide conflicting models for social ethics today.

The sixties ushered in that option for social ethics at the expense ofdeeper theological symbolism.

A dialogue between evangelicals committed to «love» as the basis for a social ethic and those committed to «justice» as its basis can only speed the day when this is recognized.

Not exact matches

Yesterday, at Canadian Business for Social Responsibility's annual Forum, I got the chance to ask keynote speaker Stephen Lewis about the ethics of lobbying.

Shareholders, for example, according to SHARE's Peter Chapman, are and ought to be concerned about the «ESG» (ethics, social and governance) obligations of the companies they invest in.

They willingly cheat and ignore privacy rules and data ethics in order to win,» said social media analyst Jonathan Albright, research director of the Tow Center for Digital Journalism at Columbia University.

I want to thank Brian for his tireless work ethic and sharing his drive campaigning as well as the many mornings, evenings and nights that he spent working toward the growth of social democracy in Alberta.

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.

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..

The situation calls for the search for a new more holistic humanism and a common public ethic for state and social reform developed through dialogue of religions and secular ideologies.

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

This dual focus on reason and ethics similarly explains the close attention religious liberals have paid to the sciences — physics as a source for better cosmologies, and the biological and social sciences as a source for both ethics and philosophies of history.

Still, the case against teleological ethics may here offer this response: Granting the difference between direct and indirect applications, this yields only the familiar distinction between «act - teleology» and «rule - teleology, «3 is problematic for the following reason: Social practices or patterns of social cooperation can not be validated teleologically without a comparative assessment of the good and evil consequences differing possible systems of rules or norms (for instance, differing sets of rights) are likely, if adopted, to prSocial practices or patterns of social cooperation can not be validated teleologically without a comparative assessment of the good and evil consequences differing possible systems of rules or norms (for instance, differing sets of rights) are likely, if adopted, to prsocial cooperation can not be validated teleologically without a comparative assessment of the good and evil consequences differing possible systems of rules or norms (for instance, differing sets of rights) are likely, if adopted, to produce.

Some would reduce theological ethics to good feelings coupled with strategies for social change.

The doing of ethics involves the use of certain presuppositions and procedures for reflecting on moral and social questions in some sort of orderly fashion.

Yet while no excuse can be offered for the biblical ethic at this point, at least the historical and social reasons for it can be understood.

From what has been said thus far, it is obvious that the liberty of individuals to pursue private good is the major moral concern of the new reformers and for this reason their ethical views can fairly be seen as a variety of the contractarian social ethic now increasingly characteristic of political society.

The author shows the significance of this attitude for such fields as ethics, social philosopohy, psychotherapy, and education.

While not downplaying the importance of personal regeneration, the need for radical discipleship, or the call to the building - up of the church, I believe such emphases tend to obfuscate a genuine, Biblically centered social ethic.

But to make individual evangelism the priority for one's social ethics is naive according to Smedes.29 (Changed people don't always change laws.)

Regarding matters of social ethics, it is the interaction between competing traditions that holds out the most promise for helping evangelicals to move beyond their current impasse.

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.

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.

David Hubbard, for example, in his taped remarks on the future of evangelicalism to a colloquium at Conservative Baptist Theological Seminary in Denver in 1977 noted the following areas of tension among evangelicals: women's ordination, the charismatic movement, ecumenical relations, social ethics, strategies of evangelism, Biblical criticism, Biblical infallibility, contextual theology in non-Western cultures, and the churchly applications of the behavioral sciences.2 If such a list is more exhaustive than those topics which this book has pursued, it nevertheless makes it clear that the foci of the preceding chapters have at least been representative.

The problems of social ethics came into focus for him.

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 ethFor 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 ethfor a Christian social ethic.

Johnston spells out the issues — inspiration, women's role in the church and family, social ethics, and homosexuality — and presents his plan for addressing them.

The secular form of liberalism for Niebuhr was a philosophy and social ethic which stemmed from a secularized Social Gospel combined with American optimism, faith in the techniques of natural science, and the idea of inevitable social prosocial ethic which stemmed from a secularized Social Gospel combined with American optimism, faith in the techniques of natural science, and the idea of inevitable social proSocial Gospel combined with American optimism, faith in the techniques of natural science, and the idea of inevitable social prosocial progress.

For the chapter on social ethics, I benefited from the personal reactions of James Daane and of Ronald Nash, gentlemen who come to very different conclusions on the matter.

If space allowed for further delineation of the social ethics of these representative evangelicals, it would prove illuminating.

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.

While Biblical hermeneutics provided the key to an understanding of the role of women in the church and family, dialogue between those whose traditions have heard the Word of God differently in other times and places held the key for the discussion of social ethics, and engagement with the full range of cultural activity (from psychotherapy to radical protest, from personal testimony to scientific statement) was the locus for theological evaluation concerning homosexuality.

«The ethic of Jesus may offer valuable insights to and sources of criticism for a prudential social ethic which deals with present realities; but no such social ethic can be directly derived from a pure religious ethic.

The fourth chapter, on social ethics, was first prepared for the National Institute of Campus Ministries» consultation on evangelical - ecumenical dialogue, held in Memphis in March 1977.

The current impasse in evangelicalism over social ethics provides us a model for exploring how a dialogue between conflicting theological traditions can aid theological formation as evangelicals seek to apply concretely their theoretical commitment to Biblical authority.

There is a need now more than ever to develop a means for doing religious social ethics which emphasizes the goal - orientation aspect of politics as a corrective to stress on the coercive - power factor in determining social policy.

Much as the Study of Theological Education in the United States and Canada, directed by H. Richard Niebuhr in the 1950s, became an influential inquiry into the nature of the church and its ministry, so the Danforth study, ostensibly of campus ministries, became an important resource for exploring the necessary relation of religious faith, social ethics and public - policy formulation.

The meeting began on a Wednesday night at the bucolic campus of the University of Saint Mary of the Lake in Mundelein, Illinois, and the frank discussion quickly moved into a variety of topics including several difficult ones such as the Council of Trent, which is particularly anti-Protestant but still binding for Catholics, and the Catholic doctrine of the church as the prolongation of the incarnation of Christ (presented by Father Thomas A. Baima, the Catholic co-chair of the event), as well as social issues ranging from care for the poor, abortion, and the recent developments in gender and sexual ethics in the West.

Reinhold Niebuhr is less dualistic in that he stresses the relevance of love as an «impossible possibility» to every human situation, but he warns so continually against a sentimental substitution of love for the requirements of justice that the major impact of his thought is a dichotomy in which again justice, and not love, is the determining principle of social ethics.

Here I side with John Howard Yoder against the view prevalent among social ethicists today that the early church found Jesus» sociopolitical ethics, including his teaching on peace, irrelevant and was interested in his life, death, and resurrection only as the basis for justification by faith; that whatever ethics the church taught was drawn from Hellenistic culture, particularly Stoicism.

On the contrary, love as a principle of social ethics implies that distribution and organization of power which can offer the foundation for free and constructive human relations.

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.

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.

The social ethic for family members found in a household rule provides only general guidelines for the ordering of relationships grounded in equality in Christ.

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.

Women who advocated nonviolence as the superior social ethic for dealing with conflict felt the need to defend themselves against the charge of antifeminism by the militants.

This knowledge of love as grace is the real meaning of I Corinthians 13, which ought to be studied more often for the ethics of social action.