FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W636800264> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W636800264 endingPage "160" @default.
• W636800264 startingPage "135" @default.
• W636800264 abstract "I INTRODUCTION The title of symposium is Theological Argument in Law: Engaging with Stanley Hauerwas. When I discussed the project with colleagues specializing in Christian theological ethics, they were interested, even intrigued. Truth be told, however, they were also rather skeptical. Why the skepticism? It is universally acknowledged that Hauerwas is both engaged and engaging, actively involved in wide-ranging conversations with academics, pastors, doctors, and--yes--even lawyers. Furthermore, no one would deny that arguments rooted in the Christian theological tradition have made their way into American law over the years. Indeed, in 1892, a Supreme Court opinion unselfconsciously proclaimed that this is a Christian nation. (1) A Christian nation? Ah-ha! Many Christian theologians would say there is the problem in a nutshell. Throughout his career, Stanley Hauerwas has tirelessly protested all efforts to embed Christianity, as either an intellectual system or social group, into the framework of worldly power. Such efforts, in his view, inevitably corrupt the thought and the practices of Christians, twisting both toward the goal of sustaining the kingdoms of world, rather than building the of God that was inaugurated by the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Unlike the peaceable kingdom of Jesus, earthly kingdoms are inherently built on violence--not only the violence of warfare, but also the threats of coercive force that ultimately and undeniably back any system of positive law. (2) The law, in other words, describes and implements the operating system of the strikingly unpeaceable secular world. Upon what basis could Hauerwas possibly engage it? Like lawyers, theologians are not generally content to raise only one objection to a project or proposal. Those schooled in divinity would also point out that Hauerwas has vociferously articulated additional concerns about Christian involvement in the particular type of secular polity the United States has become since 1892--a modern liberal democracy. Hauerwas maintains that the United States has generated a political discussion that presses all citizens to adopt a first-order moral and political framework that is meant to be neutral among competing worldviews, and then calls upon them to recast their particular religious beliefs in terms of that neutral framework when they enter the public square. According to Hauerwas, playing game saps Christians of the confidence they need to proclaim the good news of the Gospel to all nations in their own, distinctive first-order language. They need to remember that the main purpose of the Christian community is to witness to the distinctive story of God's salvific intervention in history through Jesus Christ. Ultimately--Hauerwas insists--the Christian story judges, it is not judged by, secular standards of epistemology and ethics. To hold otherwise is to sell both the Christian community and the world itself short, for the Christian message is true for the world too, though it knows it not. So the issue many Christian theologians would raise about symposium is this: Is there a way in which the type of theology Stanley Hauerwas finds congenial can engage American law? I would like to explore question in essay. More specifically, my plan is as follows: Drawing primarily upon Hauerwas's Gifford Lectures, part II will explicate his view of the nature and purpose of Christian theology, as well as the dangers he believes it to face in the contemporary American context. The purpose of section is to clarify the theological challenges any adequate Hauerwasian engagement with the American legal system will need to meet. Taking into account these clarifications, part III will sketch a normative framework for the engagement of theology with the secular law that Hauerwas would, I hope, recognize as legitimate. The centerpiece of framework is Karl Barth's account of the relationship of covenant and creation, and the possibilities for ad hoc engagement of theology and secular disciplines that it enables, according to the perceptive interpretations of Barth offered by Hans Frei and William Werphehowski. …" @default.
• W636800264 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W636800264 creator A5044601328 @default.
• W636800264 date "2012-09-22" @default.
• W636800264 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W636800264 title "Hauerwas and the Law: Is there a Basis for Conversation?" @default.
• W636800264 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W636800264 type Work @default.
• W636800264 sameAs 636800264 @default.
• W636800264 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W636800264 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W636800264 hasAuthorship W636800264A5044601328 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C163258240 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C18296254 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C27206212 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C2777200299 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C2778272461 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C551968917 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W636800264 hasConcept C98184364 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C121332964 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C138885662 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C144024400 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C163258240 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C17744445 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C18296254 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C185592680 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C199539241 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C27206212 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C2777200299 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C2778272461 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C41895202 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C551968917 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C55493867 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C62520636 @default.
• W636800264 hasConceptScore W636800264C98184364 @default.
• W636800264 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W636800264 hasLocation W6368002641 @default.
• W636800264 hasOpenAccess W636800264 @default.
• W636800264 hasPrimaryLocation W6368002641 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W1481468437 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W1511222355 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W1839033434 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2008226862 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2181662920 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2208910396 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2330285008 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2405435147 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W250450864 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2505948093 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2549906185 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2891736610 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W3145850741 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W3151428955 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W3180222062 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W360601644 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W363672381 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W632817853 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W653585518 @default.
• W636800264 hasRelatedWork W2418477938 @default.
• W636800264 hasVolume "75" @default.
• W636800264 isParatext "false" @default.
• W636800264 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W636800264 magId "636800264" @default.
• W636800264 workType "article" @default.