Dialog-A Journal of Theology最新文献

In order to refresh scholarly discussions about Luther's Christology, his discourse on Christ is analyzed in the present article with reference to his humanist background and texts, where he attacks scholasticism, philosophy, and logic and seems to promote a new theological methodology and novel ways of speaking about Christ the man-God.

The fact that Martin Luther King, Jr. held a moral philosophy of non-violence is well known. What is less familiar is that he made various exceptions to his prohibitions on violence. Given the absolute language he often used in condemning violent acts, he can give the impression of inconsistency in his ethics. The reality, however, is that his moral framework possesses both consistency and functionality. That is, it holds together logically and has practical usefulness. The key to understanding King is to view his moral philosophy through the lens of Virtue Ethics, not rule-based ethics. This approach to a philosophy of non-violence provides value and utility to adherents of both pacifism and Just War Theory, a difficult feat.

Into the debates about Christ's two natures, divine and human, and how they relate, Martin Luther threw his extended interpretation of the communicatio idiomatum, the communication of the person Christ's attributes. Luther's Christology is incarnational and it is fundamental to him that God can and will be known only as a human being (homo/Mensch), yet Christ's real presence is presented three dimensionally and in bodily intersectionality. Luther's complex understanding of Christ as really human and the Word incarnate is reflected in his intense work with the sacraments as well as with semantics and the art of translation. Luther aims at an inclusive Christology, sacramentology, and language. Hence Christ is human, not male; sacraments are seen as direct exchange between God and humans in the body of Christ; and ministry is reconfigured as a human function of preaching the Word (ministerium verbi), not a substitute representing divine sacredness.

Pope Francis’ encyclical Laudato Si’ encompasses concerns about oppressed groups, the relationship between human beings and nature, and the welfare of the poor, and more importantly, how these issues are viewed in the context of the ecological crisis. This paper offers a Lutheran perspective on the encyclical, examining the intricate interplay between humanity and the natural world, the impoverished, anthropocentrism, and the crucial role of advancing intercultural dialogue. Pope Francis has emphasized the use of science and technology to establish an “integral ecology.” However, this paper argues that authentic faith generates personal awareness of the sinful aspects of the environmental crisis and inspires virtuous behavior. God created nature, therefore we need to care for it. This analysis makes an important contribution to the scholarly exploration of the connections between Christian theology and ecological issues. In addition, it provides a critical assessment of anthropocentrism, which should be more concerned with the value of other created beings.

Are religious communities better advantaged to mobilize for social change than other institutions and communities and other social spaces? If so, how might they do so? What unique resources can religious communities offer to this effort? Even if there is no set formula to generate climate engagement, are there conditions we can recommend? As one of the few social spaces that might systematically compel collective moral engagement, religious communities and organizations hold the potential to play a key role in societal response. Religious teachings, leaders, and communities have provided individuals the moral conviction to do what is right and the courage to act when one is afraid, and they have offered a microcosm of social networks and social norms that supported social engagement. Not only do religious communities provide a rare space for moral vision and call to action, but in many cases religious communities have in fact mobilized significant social movement responses on other issues at both individual and community levels. In this essay, I apply a theory of socially organized denial to specific questions about climate inertia within religious communities posed in this special issue. I also unpack the question of “too little, too late,” pointing to the benefits of a suspension of doubt and engaging in ethics of responsibility in the unfolding present.

Public discourse and political climate policymaking are based on scientific reports and propose technological solutions to solve the crisis, primarily by changing fossil fuels to renewable energy. Rather than questioning growth and the overuse of natural resources—which has been at the core of green concern for decades—green growth is the motor in an economy that aims for continuous economic spin, driven by new technological innovations that will enable us to go on as before, simply by replacing energy sources. It is no surprise that in such a discourse, the alternative voices—such as religious or spiritual responses—are left out, but to go from that and conclude that no such voices exist would be to rush to conclusions. I suggest that if we want to search for enchantment in times of climate change, we must look elsewhere. Searching for these voices means leaving the discourse framed by scientific rationalistic measurements because we can find an enchanted alter-tale beyond this disenchanted tale. In this article, I account for voices from my field and answer the question: What motivates people to turn to spirituality in times of climate change?