JOURNAL OF RELIGIOUS ETHICS最新文献

This essay argues that the book of Ruth's reopening of Israel's history and national mythology functions in such a way as to redeem, as it were, the plight of the subaltern Moabite—a plight begun with the daughters of Lot in Genesis 19. A parallel is then drawn with the 1619 Project, the recent journalistic project which posits the entire historical sweep of African slavery in North America since 1619 as the defining arc of the United States' founding. As theoretical frames, the essay draws on the work of literary critic Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak (including her concept of “moral love”) and political philosopher Arash Abizadeh. In so doing, the essay illustrates how a “functionalist” approach to biblical ethics that balances the content of the biblical narrative with attention to how the text functions in its broader context can provide guidance for contemporary ethical application.

This essay delves into the utilization of a negative hermeneutical approach, focusing on gaps, tensions, and the absence of elements, to enrich our comprehension of reconciliation efforts. It posits that this method aids in discerning more and less appropriate approaches to reconciliation processes. Negative hermeneutics serves as both a technique and an ongoing journey of exploration, self-assessment, and understanding our connection with otherness. By critically engaging with perspectives, it prompts deeper questions and fosters a heightened awareness of the limitations inherent in one's viewpoint. Drawing from examples within the ongoing “Reconciliation and Beyond” initiative of the diocese of British Columbia, specifically Bishop Logan's “Sacred Journey,” the essay illustrates how this approach holds potential. It demonstrates how a focus on negative aspects—those initially resistant to conventional academic scrutiny, like silence and materiality—offers valuable insights into critical practices and academic implications. Furthermore, the essay analyses how a hermeneutical process involving receiving, deconstructing, and recreating can introduce innovative perspectives for understanding reconciliation efforts.

This article sketches an intellectual history of the distinction between Christian theology and Christian ethics. The twists and turns of that history have been obscured by a recent tendency to deny the distinction's usefulness, as part of a wider strategy for reasserting theology's relevance to modern social problems. By contrast, earlier theologians assumed the value of the theology/ethics divide, interpreting it through Aristotelian, neo-Kantian, and finally Marxist categories. The distinction fell into disrepute because theologians struggled to maintain the distinction consistently and disagreed on the concerns implicated by it, variously using it to affirm the moral subject's agency, the divine/human difference, or the complexity of real people's circumstances. Nonetheless, the distinction has persisted as a useful shorthand for recognizing the limitations of Christian theology, qua a conceptual discourse, in fully apprehending its subject matter of the Christian life.

In the middle of 2020, Buddhism in Thailand looked quite different than it had just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. Monasteries had closed their doors to the public, and monastic ordinations ceased. The institution of Thai Buddhism stayed relevant, however, largely by promoting a quite unusual practice. In addition to the typical religious activity of lay followers offering food to monks, and receiving merit from the monks in return, the path that food traveled during the pandemic also turned the other way around. In a curious series of events, monks at monasteries throughout the country began to hand out food to lay Buddhist followers. In a religious landscape with a very codified system of exchange, this was spiritually precarious: if monks give out food, where does the merit lie, and what are the karmic results? To answer this, I examine attitudes about monks’ activities, drawing on interviews conducted in Chiang Mai in 2021, and relationships to textual accounts of nutrients and healing across Buddhist history. Rather than signifying a break from spiritual relationships, I argue that this a-typical movement during the pandemic helps to highlight the continuing importance of monastic hope within interpersonal affective economies of Thai Buddhist practice.

In our emerging climate future, devastation will not land evenly. “Climate apartheid” names a world where the rich insulate themselves from its most catastrophic effects, while the global poor stand increasingly subject to rising seas, failing crops, intensifying weather events (floods, hurricanes, wildfires) and thus to the necessity of movement: some project a billion climate refugees by 2050. Yet analyses often fail to link climate apartheid to the existing systems mobilized to execute it—policing, prisons, borders—and so fail to connect climate politics to enduring racialized projects of carceral control, as well as to Black, Native, and Latinx struggles against them. A key task is to develop capacious conceptual frameworks for understanding how religious actors are addressing the deep entanglements of political ecology and racial violence. This paper pursues that task in four parts. Part 1 introduces climate apartheid and proposes “cross-border solidarity” as an organizing concept for response, while underscoring that solidarity's chief virtue—its being already in use across diverse moral communities—is also what requires rigorous specification. What is the shape of “solidarity” amid climate futures? Parts 2 and 3 critique two frameworks ethicists might employ in facing that question: anthropocene discourse obscures race, while mestizaje discourse addresses race but risks reproducing its deepest logics. Part 4 proposes an alternative I will call cimarronaje. Of Taíno-Arawak and Spanish origin, the word refers to the historical experience, across slaveholding societies of the Americas, whereby enslaved African people fled plantations, escaped to surrounding hills and swamps, and reimagined forms of life with Indigenous communities, forged new ecologies together and, in the shadows of colonial empire, prefigured the theory and practices of cross-border solidarity we need today.

A growing number of lay Buddhist practitioners have sought out alternative ways to incorporate Buddhist teachings in their daily practices and make positive changes in society by “doing good” for others. Sometimes recognized as part of “humanistic Buddhism,” this approach emphasizes general morality and focuses on people who need help as a way to fulfill Buddhist teachings in this world. Some Chinese Buddhist practitioners who follow the Tibetan Buddhist tradition also carry out similar humanistic engagements but use more subtle space-making processes and often “brand” these as Buddhist practices. Drawing on the ethnographic observations of lay Buddhist practitioners in urban China, this article examines how urban practitioners promote (middle-class) morality and well-being lifestyles through what I call “atmospheric Buddhism.” Ultimately, the article argues that an alternative mode of Buddhist practice is emerging in Chinese urban environments in order to cope with politically constrained environments.