The twenty-first century world has radically been defined by multiple crises, including wars and grandiose exploitation of the poor by those with political and economic power. To address these crises, one must turn to virtuous life notions. In doing this, society has to learn from different religious and cultural wisdom. Consequently, a case is being made in this work that African ethical thoughts can enrich Christian notions of the virtuous life. African philosophical and cultural notions of community are relevant to (...) understanding the virtuous life in Christian theology as a constitutive aspect of what it means to be human. (shrink)

This book presents a heuristic and critical study of comparative theology in engagement with phenomenological methodology and sociological inquiry. It elucidates a postcolonial study of religion in the context of multiple modernities.

This article provides a brief background of how Comparative Theology is understood today, to point out features of how it is practiced that are responsive to issues peculiar to contemporary Catholicism, and to suggest how a version of CT might be developed that is more consistent with Islamic traditions of thought on related issues. In order to accomplish this last goal, a brief introduction to the traditional “Islamic sciences” is provided. It will be suggested that an Islamic (...) class='Hi'>Comparative Theology (ICT) can be understood as a multidisciplinary field that draws on several Islamic sciences, as well as research in religious studies. I argue in favor of a blurring of the distinction between Comparative Religion and Comparative Theology, and point out that relevant discussions are to be found across a variety of traditional Islamic sciences, but that it would be advantageous to collect these discussions together and to augment them with information gleaned from both secular and Islamic approaches to the teachings of Muslim thinkers about theological issues, broadly understood, in comparison with what is found in non-Islamic traditions in such a manner to enrich our own understandings of the issues and those with whom we engage in dialogue. (shrink)

A model of interreligious theology that seeks to reconcile the ideal of religious tolerance with an acknowledgement of the extent to which religious communities construct identity on the basis of religious differences.

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Comparative Theology Is Not “Business-as-Usual Theology”:Personal Witness from a Buddhist ChristianPaul F. KnitterThe following reflections find their stimulus and start in a paper prepared for a doctoral seminar on comparative theology led by John Makransky at Boston College. I was asked whether I was a comparative theologian and, if so, what difference it had made in my professional work as a theologian and (...) in my personal life as a Christian. My basic answer was: “Yes, I think so” and “A lot!”In this reworking and expansion of that seminar paper, I hope to unpack that “a lot.” This will enable me not only to carry on the search for clarity (and integrity) that I began in my book Without Buddha I Could Not Be a Christian,1 but also to comment on the promise of comparative theology (CT) and why I fear that this promise all too often goes unfulfilled.What I’m getting at is capsulized in a blurb that John Thatamanil wrote for Michelle Voss Roberts’s Dualities: A Theology of Difference:2 “Comparative theology done well is a dangerous discipline precisely because it raises provocative questions and threatens to put an end to business-as-usual theology.” I fear that some comparative theologians are not taking their job seriously enough—or they are not following through with what they say they want to do. They are carrying on CT as business as usual.moving beyond business-as-usual theologyComparative theology, which two decades ago might have been considered a fade but has become a fixture in Christian theology,3 makes the bold, indeed thoroughly revolutionary, claim that in order to properly carry on the task of Christian theology, the traditional Christian sources—Scripture, tradition, the lex orandi or spiritual practice of the communities—are not enough. A Christian theologian, in order to be a Christian theologian, must also draw on the experience, teachings, scriptures, and insights of other spiritual communities and traditions. CT embodies Raimon Panikkar’s often [End Page 181] cited (at least by me!) dictum: In order to understand who I am, I have to ask who you are. And in order to know my God I have to ask about your God.4If what comparative theologians are here claiming is true, if my understanding of myself is incomplete without my understanding of you, then after I understand you, I can be pretty sure that my understanding of myself is going to be different—really different. Otherwise, I really didn’t need to talk with you in the first place! And this is why Thatamanil can rightly sound his unsettling warning that if CT is another form of business-as-usual theology, if it is not leading to some really new discoveries about oneself and one’s own tradition, then it is not living up to its job description. And that, as I tried to say elsewhere, is what I suspect might be the case.As I survey the output of comparative theologians over the past fifteen years, I sense that, with some promising exceptions among younger scholars, they are strong on comparing but soft on concluding. More pointedly, comparative theology, so far, has been more comparison than theology. There have been intricate comparisons of Christian texts with Hindu texts and of Christian theologians/mystics with Buddhist scholars/mystics. Striking similarities and stark differences have been noted and examined, sometime meticulously. But, where are the clear, creative, courageous conclusions as to what Christians can learn from these comparisons? What might need to be clarified or changed or discarded in traditional Christian doctrine? Especially on the neuralgic and politically dangerous (for Catholics) issue of the uniqueness of Christ, I am not aware of any comparativists who have learned anything new. I would be delighted to be proved wrong.5I suspect that the reason why some comparative theologians are caught in business-as-usual theology is that they are also still lingering under the influence of postmodernism’s and postliberal theology’s insistence on the dominance of diversity. In their concern to respect and defend differences, postmodernists and postliberals conclude that cultures and religions are more different than they... (shrink)

The twenty-first century world has radically been defined by multiple crises, including wars and grandiose exploitation of the poor by those with political and economic power. To address these crises, one must turn to virtuous life notions. In doing this, society has to learn from different religious and cultural wisdom. Consequently, a case is being made in this work that African ethical thoughts can enrich Christian notions of the virtuous life. African philosophical and cultural notions of community are relevant to (...) understanding the virtuous life in Christian theology as a constitutive aspect of what it means to be human. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Buddhists and Christians Through Comparative Theology and SolidarityPaul O. IngramBuddhists and Christians Through Comparative Theology and Solidarity. By James L. Fredericks. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2004. xiv + 134 pp.This elegantly written book is not only a call to Christians to act in solidarity with persons of other faith traditions as well as persons professing no religious identity inmatters of social, economic, and ecological (...) injustice. It is also a challenge posed directly to Christians to create new forms of interreligious solidarity that can empower political and social solidarity with other religious communities. Of course, interreligious solidarity requires interreligious dialogue, but Fredericks seeks to [End Page 223] deepen the Christian theological underpinnings of interreligious dialogue by delineating a model of theology of religions that moves beyond the usual exclusivist, inclusivist, and pluralist models. He calls this model "comparative theology of religions."Given the fact of religious pluralism that necessitates living out one's own particular faith tradition surrounded by faithful persons who religiously dwell in other faith traditions, and given the emerging realities of globalization, no religious tradition can remain in isolation from any other religious tradition nor from the growing secularization that challenges persons of faith wherever persons of faith are found on this planet. The issue is not the emergence of a new global religion that will supercede Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, or Hinduism. Fredericks argues that the contrary is the case: as globalization and secularization erodes national, civic, and religious identity everywhere, interreligious solidarity that does not wash over the diversity of religious traditions becomes more important as a source of personal and communal identity, meaning, and purpose.Since the meaning of "solidarity" depends on how one understands the practice of interreligious dialogue and the theological models through which interreligious dialogue is practiced, Fredericks expends much effort describing and critiquing the exclusivist, inclusivist, and pluralist models of theology of religions. Strictly speaking, as Fredericks notes, "theology of religions" is not an issue for other religious traditions. Appropriating the words of Martin Luther, "this is most certainly true." Given the universal claims of Christian theology about the significance of the Incarnation and the notion that Christ is the only way to salvation, non-Christian traditions do not face the same exclusivist or inclusivist issues in their dialogues with other religious persons. This traditional Christian claim makes theology of religions a distinctively Christian problem.Fredericks's main criticism of exclusivist and inclusivist theologies are that both models are "replacement theologies" because (1) they either argue for the "replacement" of all non-Christian traditions with a form of Christian tradition, either Catholic or some form of Protestant tradition, or (2) they replace non-Christian traditions by assuming that what is good and true in these traditions is found most completely in Christian tradition. Much Protestant theology is exclusivist, and the current theological stance of Roman Catholicism is inclusivist. Both approaches are thoroughly nondialogical and thereby incapable of promoting Christian solidarity with non-Christians, and Fredericks's arguments in this regard are exceptionally cogent.But the trouble with pluralist theologies of religion, Fredericks argues, is that they "require Christians to recognize that Jesus is not the full revelation of God to the World. God is always more. Christians need to pay attention to other religious traditions in order to learn more of God" (p. 9). The idea of the incompleteness of God's revelation in Jesus doesn't make this revelation less true. But theological pluralism does make it difficult for Christians to be faithful to the depth and fullness of Christian faith and experience. In so doing, it fosters a debilitating theological relativism that often falsifies both Christian traditions and the non-Christian traditions with which one is engaged in dialogue. Given the relativist theology inherent in pluralist [End Page 224] theologies, it is difficult to see, Fredericks concludes, how theological pluralism can promote interreligious solidarity.So how should Christians understand the nature of religious pluralism and thereby enter into dialogue with faithful non-Christians in order to create religious solidarity, a sort of unity in diversity that aids all religious persons in confronting issues of injustice that are not religion-specific and haunt all religious human... (shrink)

Abstractabstract:This article explores the specific profiles of the understanding of ultimate reality in Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism to ask whether there are points of contact between the Christian-Muslim and the Christian-Buddhist conception of divine reality. Thereby, the soteriological interest of Christian trinitarian thinking and the differences to the apophatic thinking in Islam but also the personal understanding of divine reality and the transnumeric unity of God come into view. Moreover, there are Muslim positions that assign the instances of divine Word (...) and divine Spirit as eternal prestige and attributive to the essence of God, whereby a new basis for discussion could be gained. On the other hand, the differences between Buddhist thinking of emptiness and Christian apophatism boil down to the question of whether nirvāṇa as the unconditioned (asaṃskṛta) of transcendent reality (lokottara) as a notborn (ajātaṁ), a not-brought-to-being (abhūtaṁ), a not-conditioned (asaṇkhataṁ) may be understood as a reality that is not separate from, but distinct from saṃsāra. Then emptiness or "śūnyatā is non-śūnyatā (aśūnyatā); therefore, it is ultimate śūnyatā (atyanta-śūnyatā)" (Abe). In this way, Buddhist thinking of emptiness can come into conversation with Christian thinking of self-emptying (kenosis). Muslim and Buddhist thinking on the subject of transcendence invite Christians to accentuate the apophatic side of the divine, and to locate the Trinitarian differentiation both within the divine and in the history of salvation in a cataphatic movement. With these indications, the difference between the Christian, Islamic, and Buddhist galaxies of thinking ultimate reality is not abolished, but points of contact and possible mutual suggestions become visible, which allow a further and deepening conversation. (shrink)

The process of determining a topic for comparison or a tertium comparationis forms one of the most crucial steps in the disciplines of comparative religion (Religionswissenschaft) and comparative theology. Though the two disciplines have much in common in terms of their methodologies, they differ in terms of their ultimate goals. While comparative religion is oriented toward advancing the understanding of religion and religious phenomena, comparative theology aims at deepening and advancing religious truth. This affects (...) the ways in which each discipline addresses critical questions of idiosyncrasy and hegemony in selecting the tertium comparationis. (shrink)

Moral Struggle and Religious Ethics offers a comparative discussion of the challenges of living a moral religious life. This is illustrated with a study of two key thinkers, Bonaventure and Buddhaghosa, who influenced the development of moral thinking in Christianity and Buddhism respectively. Provides an important and original contribution to the comparative study and practice of religious ethics Moves away from a comparison of theories by discussing the shared human problem of moral weakness Offers an fresh approach with (...) a comparison of the understanding of the problem of moral weakness between the two key thinkers, Bonaventure and Buddhaghosa Written by a highly respected academic in the dynamic and fast-growing field of comparative religious ethics. (shrink)

Abstractabstract:Adopting a cross-cultural perspective on hierophanies, this article not only explores the fundamental patterns of prophet Muhammad and Buddhas as expositors of cosmic light as interpreted in the Islamic and Buddhist traditions, but it also engages in comparative theological reflection on how Islam and Buddhism use the symbol of light in describing the cosmological and practical dimension of Muhammad's prophetic nature and the revelatory role of the Buddha. Examples are Nūr Muḥammadī, Muhammadan light, and Shin Buddhism's understanding of Amitābha/Amida (...) Buddha as the Buddha of Infinite Light with Śākyamuni, Siddhārtha Gautama, as the narrator of the Pure Land Sutras. This essay considers the role and perception of the Muslim prophet in relation to the role of the Buddhas as a shared motif for building appreciation between Islam and Shin-Buddhism. (shrink)

In his 2000 Religious Studies article 'Ineffability', John Hick calls upon the Dionysian corpus to bear witness to the 'transcategorality' of God and thereby corroborate his comparative theology of pluralism. Hick's Dionysius avows God's transcendence of categories by negating God's names, while at the same time maintaining that such names are metaphorically useful means of uplifting humans to God. But herein reside three common misunderstandings of the Dionysian corpus: (1) the divine names are mere metaphors; (2) the divine (...) names are therefore negated of God; and (3) the negation of divine names is the means by which humans return to and unite with God. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Moral Traditions: An Introduction to World Religious Ethics, and: Understanding Religious Ethics, and: Moral Struggle and Religious Ethics: On the Person as Classic in Comparative Theological ContextsBrian D. BerryMoral Traditions: An Introduction to World Religious Ethics Mari Rapela Heidt Winona, Minn.: Anselm Academic, 2010. 138 pp. $22.95.Understanding Religious Ethics Charles Mathewes Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010. 277 pp. $41.95.Moral Struggle and Religious Ethics: On the Person as Classic (...) in Comparative Theological Contexts David A. Clairmont Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. 245 pp. $99.95These three texts each make significant contributions to comparative religious ethics, a relatively recent discipline that reflects the rise of religious pluralism and globalization. Taken together, these books raise questions about what comparative religious ethics is, how it should be done, and why it should be done. What makes comparative religious ethics “comparative” and to what extent can comparative religious ethics be made genuinely “theological”?Mari Rapela Heidt, who holds a PhD in theological ethics from Marquette University and currently lectures in the religious studies department at the University of Dayton, has written a well-organized and highly accessible introduction to the ethics of the world religions for beginning undergraduate students. Each of the main chapters in her book surveys a major world religion (Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and the Chinese moral tradition) through four lenses: a brief review of the tradition; the moral world of the religion; values, principles, or virtues in the tradition; and the religious tradition on a particular moral issue (e.g., Hinduism on abortion, Buddhism on wealth and poverty, Judaism on the environment, Christianity on war and peace, Islam on men and women, and China’s one-child [End Page 202] policy). The book also includes opening chapters that introduce students to the study of ethics and religious ethics; a final chapter on additional religious moral traditions (Sikhism, Jainism, Bahá’í, and Shinto); sidebars highlighting major religious figures, texts, or events (e.g., Gandhi, Thich Nhat Hanh, Elie Wiesel, the Charter of Medina, and the Cultural Revolution); and discussion questions, bibliography (including visual media), footnotes, a glossary, and an index.Although this book briefly discusses the discipline of comparative religious ethics and some of its descriptive and conceptual methods in its opening chapters, its broad scope and concise treatment mean that the actual task of comparing the similarities and differences in the ethics of the world religions is kept to a minimum. The few detailed comparisons that are made focus largely on Hindu, Buddhist, and Christian understandings of the concepts of reincarnation (29, 34, 64), dharma (18–19, 23–24, 34–35, 64), karma (18–19, 21–23, 35–36, 64), and ahimsa (25–27, 38, 70–71). While the main chapters are organized in a way that facilitates comparison, and discussion questions are included that invite students to observe similarities and differences, the book would be strengthened by giving greater attention to comparison throughout and adding a concluding chapter that summarizes its comparative content. It ends somewhat abruptly with a discussion of the Shinto moral tradition.Charles Mathewes, associate professor of religious studies at the University of Virginia, has written a book that, while limited to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, achieves much greater comparative sophistication. The text is based on a course he has taught for more than ten years called “Religious Ethics and Moral Problems,” and it bears the marks of a seasoned teacher whose primary audience is advanced undergraduate students, both religious and secular. Mathewes writes from a Protestant Christian perspective “having a strong apocalyptic dimension which is focused on the next life,” acknowledging that Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox may find his views “odd or confused” (53). Part 1 discusses the relationship between God and morality and provides an overview of the ethics of each of the three Abrahamic religions. Parts 2 and 3 then examine not only the moral positions but “the arguments animating the traditions” (3) on a wide range of personal and social matters (e.g., friendship, sexuality, marriage and family, lying, forgiveness, capital punishment, war, and the environment). Part 4 turns to the even more ordinary topics of labor, leisure, and life and the more... (shrink)

Approaching comparison through attention to stories of gods rather than through explicit doctrines, and in particular to stories of gods in their infancy and childhood, is an arresting proposal in comparative theology. It was this unusual character which first drew my attention to Kristin Johnston Largen’s Baby Krishna, Infant Christ. Largen’s prose is fluid and clear, and the structure of the argument is also readily apparent. And thus the work held my attention and convinced me that it is (...) deserving of review here.An introduction and first chapter offer a description of and an apology for comparative theology. Part I, comprising chapters two and three, is focused on ‘Baby Krishna,’ first recounting some of the main stories of Krishna from the Bhāgavata Purāṇa, before reflecting on the significance of those stories from the perspective of understanding how salvation is conceived and experienced in those Hindu traditions for which Krishna bhakti is crucial.The fourth and fifth chapters, .. (shrink)

How can different religions be compared? Which religions are true? To raise such questions univocally of all religions there first needs to be some objective grounds of comparison. Neville's book develops and empirically tests a speculative hypothesis that provides these grounds. This hypothesis has two parts--the ontological and cosmological. Neville maps out these parts along with his primary concept of divinity explicated in terms of creation ex nihilo. He then uses his hypothesis to compare the multiple-layered concept of divinity--masks of (...) God--found in various religions, especially the Christian and Chinese. (shrink)

This article strives to explain the methods of the two sciences of Islamic Theology and Islamic Philosophy and subsequently study the methodical relation between them. These two sciences, as two independent sciences, have intersected with each other like other Islamic sciences over time; one such intersection is in terms of method. Islamic sciences (Qurʼānic exegesis, Jurisprudence, Theology, Philosophy etc.) are interconnected networks which have a great effect over each other. Regardless of the extreme views in this area, it (...) can be said that from the beginning up until the present, there has been intersection between these two like, for example in the following areas: historical intersection, overlap in issues, methodical intersection etc. Considering the topic of this article, in analyzing the methods of these two sciences, we arrive at the conclusion that there has been a harmony and relation between theological methods which has undergone changes and evolutions from the beginning till now i.e. from the beginning of the initial polemic method and has ultimately changed into a philosophical and dialectical method, and between Islamic philosophical methods that have also undergone changes, i.e. from an absolutely rational method – in the manner of Greek Peripatetic Philosophy method – till the development of the various Islamic methods like: Peripatetic (localization of Islamic Peripatetic method), Islamic Illuminationism and Sadra's Transcendental Philosophy. (shrink)

This thesis explores the epistemology and theology of a Sufi theorist Ibn al-ʿ Arabī (d. 1240) and one of the most controversial Muslim scholars Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328) comparatively. Although scholars have long emphasized the differences between these two influential and significant figures, the purpose of this thesis is to focus on their potential similarities. The present work at the outset shows that both Ibn al-ʿ Arabī and Ibn Taymiyya regard revelation, the human intellect, and inspiration – unveiling (ilhām (...) – kashf) to be the main epistemological means for acquiring religious knowledge. However, they differ over the relative value of these means or tools. Both Ibn al-ʿ Arabī and Ibn Taymiyya place revelation at the top of the hierarchy, but after that Ibn al-ʿ Arabī places inspiration – unveiling ahead of reason while Ibn Taymiyya reverses the order. The other main subject elaborated in this thesis is the theological issue of the divine names and attributes. This subject is connected to many other theological problems, and both Ibn al-ʿ Arabī and Ibn Taymiyya pay considerable attention to it. Just as many similar approaches, ideas, and interpretations may be seen concerning their epistemological stances, it is possible to see similarities in their theological positions although there are crucial distinctions as well. The unique way of finding out this similarity is to keep in mind the existence of the duality found in the thought and expression of Ibn al-ʿ Arabī. Briefly, the main finding of the thesis is that Ibn al-ʿ Arabī and Ibn Taymiyya are more similar in their epistemologies and theologies than many scholars have thought. They are benefitting from the same epistemological means while putting them in different order. Also, they share similar theological points concerning the divine names and attributes, creation, the divine will, and the incomparability of God while expressing them through different conceptions and styles. (shrink)

In this paper, the attributes of Jesus as the second person of Trinity in Christianity and Muhammadan Reality in Islamic Theosophy were compared. The term ''Muhammadan Reality'' in Islamic Theosophy refers to transcendental and divine being of Muhammad rather than his human and historic existence. According to this research, both Jesus and Muhammadan Realities have divine attributes. They are lights of God, the Word or the Pen of God, the creators of the word, omniscience, omnipotent, omnibenevolent as well as the (...) intermediaries between God and humans. In this study, it is demonstrated that what happened to Jesus in Christianity, it has also happened to Muhammad in Islamic theosophy with some differences. The influence of Greek philosophy, especially Platonic, in ascribing these attributes to Jesus in Christianity and Muhammad in Islamic theosophy is undeniable. There is a strong temptation among the scholars of both religions, Islam and Christianity, to extend Jesus and Muhammad to the level of divinity and godhead. (shrink)

The man or woman of faith living in today's pluralist world must have a theology that will do justice to his or her own faith, and also to the neighbours' - and to the differences between them. Similarly, humanists must have a theory that does justice to their own vision and also to the fact that for most of their fellows on earth the proper way of being human has been one or another of various `religious' ways. Any interpretation (...) of human history, both past and present, must take into serious account the self-consciousness of each major part, as well as the diversity and the dynamic of the whole. This exciting book, first published in 1981 and now also available in paperback, is perhaps our world's first serious endeavour towards a theology in global perspective. Here is a wrestling with the demands of an authentic theology of the comparative history of religion. (shrink)

In the study of American law, originalism is primarily a theory about the meaning of the Constitution-that its meaning can only change when its words change. Originalism also appears in biblical theology as a theory on the meaning of the Biblethat its meaning is that intended by the original authors. Originalism in Theology and Law: Comparing Perspectives on the Bible and the Constitution offers a study of originalism in both the Bible and the Constitution. While there are significant (...) connections between originalism as a theory of biblical interpretation and as Constitutional interpretation, there are also differences in the type of text as well as its purpose, function, origins, or authority, which may affect which nuanced version of originalism best fits a particular text, or the best method of interpreting it. (shrink)

In the midst of the earth’s pressing climate catastrophe, the nexus between ecology and religion merits further investigation. In this article, I attempt to illuminate certain important aspects of this nexus by analyzing various Hindu eco-theological motifs, with a particular focus on those of the Hindu religious tradition known as Caitanya Vaiṣṇavism. I will compare and contrast the eco-theological motifs of Caitanya Vaiṣṇavism with those of other notable Hindu religious traditions and texts. Ultimately, I attempt to demonstrate that certain Caitanya (...) Vaiṣṇava eco-theological motifs can, when properly interpreted and applied, serve as valuable environmentally oriented conceptual resources. I also argue that these eco-theological motifs can offset some of the conceptual pitfalls that limit the effectiveness of various pan-Hindu eco-theological motifs as conceptual resources for environmental amelioration. Although the Caitanya Vaiṣṇava eco-theological framework is not without conceptual hurdles, I nevertheless maintain that Caitanya Vaiṣṇava eco-theological motifs are worthy of further reflection. (shrink)

Increasingly in today’s world we are experiencing intensifying antagonisms around religious and ethno-cultural differences. The confrontation between political Islam and the so-called ‘West’ has replaced the rhetoric of the Cold War against communism. This new constellation has not only challenged the hypothesis that ‘secularization’ inevitably accompanied modernity but has also placed on the agenda political theology as a potent force in many societies. This article analyzes the contemporary revival of political theology by focusing on the headscarf debate in (...) comparative constitutional perspective. It compares the well-known decision of the French Parliament banning the wearing of the headscarf in public schools (2004) with the decision of the German Constitutional Court concerning whether Fereshta Ludin, an Afghani-German teacher wearing the hijab, could teach in German schools (2003) and with the more recent judgment of the Turkish Constitutional Court (summer 2008) upholding the ban on the wearing of the scarf or the turban in institutions of higher learning. At stake in these debates is not only the meaning of fundamental human rights but also why women and their bodies become the object of disciplinary conflicts in culture, law and religion. (shrink)

This article leverages the theme of friendship in Oliver O’Donovan's Entering into Rest as a locus of comparison between his earlier Resurrection and Moral Order and the Ethics as Theology trilogy. It does so by using demonstrable methodological differences between the two moral-theological projects to illumine a fundamental theological coherence. The article pursues this task in five sections. The first expounds O’Donovan's reflection on friendship in Entering into Rest. The second articulates the triadic approach adopted in these reflections. The (...) third examines a similar triad articulated by O’Donovan in Resurrection and Moral Order. The fourth uses this triadic connection to demonstrate theological coherence between Resurrection and Moral Order and the Ethics as Theology trilogy. The fifth concludes by raising a critical query about the arbitrariness of the triadic methodology employed by O’Donovan. The article’s conclusion considers more generally—in light of O’Donovan's pursuit of ethics as theology—the inherent contingency and incompleteness of theological ethics. (shrink)

As the scope of innovative technologies is expanding, their implications and applications are increasingly intersecting with various facets of society, including the deeply rooted traditions of religion. This paper embarks on an exploratory journey to bridge the perceived divide between advancements in technology and faith, aiming to catalyze a dialogue between the religious and scientific communities. The former often views technological progress through a lens of conflict rather than compatibility. By utilizing a technology-centric perspective, we draw metaphorical parallels between the (...) functionalities of new technologies and some theological concepts of Islam. The purpose is not to reinterpret religious concepts but to illustrate how these two domains can coexist harmoniously. This comparative analysis serves as a conversation starter with an intention to mitigate any apprehensions towards technology by highlighting its potential to align with religious concepts. By fostering an environment where technological innovations are seen as tools for enhancement rather than threats to tradition, we contribute to a more inclusive discourse that encourages the religious community to engage with and potentially embrace contemporary technological advancements. (shrink)

These studies in religion, which include comparisons of Hindu, Buddhist and Christian themes, examine the spiritual insights and philosophical reflections of prominent thinkers from different religious traditions.