Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract. This essay appropriates creedal tradition of Christian theology in order to propose doctrinal framework for ethic. This task is pursued in three stages: first, by situating present argument with respect to nonviolent perspective within contemporary Anabaptism; second, by outlining doctrinal framework of Christian theology that coheres with orthodox tradition of ecumenical creeds; and, most important, by demonstrating that such doctrinal framework, far from inevitably accommodating violent ethic, is not only fully compatible with ethic but also contains cogent rationale for such an ethic. INTRODUCTION In taking up task of constructing doctrinal framework for ethic, and thereby demonstrating compatibility of Christian creedal tradition with ethics of nonviolence, I am conscious of two concerns raised by late Mennonite theologian A. James Reimer. First, echoing Canadian philosopher George Grant, Reimer observed that contemporary theology needs to reclaim classical ontology as foundation of Christian ethics. In modern paradigm of technological reason and historical time, he argued, contemporary theology lacks capacity to believe any longer in an eternal God whose transcendent reality provides metaphysical ground for ethical imperatives.(1) Second, having examined anti-ontological bias of Mennonite theology in twentieth century, (2) and having diagnosed the central crisis of modern age as the loss of accountability to transcendent reality,(3) Reimer stated: The Anabaptist-Mennonite emphasis on an ethic of nonresistant love formulated simply in terms of historicist view of time and reality is just not adequate to meet present crisis. It must be rooted in an affirmation of Jesus as somehow transcendentally and metaphysically grounded--the way classical trinitarian and christological formulations attempted to do so--so that our faithfulness to normativity of Jesus is not one of pragmatism or legitimizing of modern project but one of obedience to Jesus as Cosmic Lord, because what he is, does and teaches is eternally true or intrinsically right.(4) Reimer thus proposed neo-classicist project, new articulation of doctrinal tradition--the trinitarian and christological affirmations of early church--that could provide an adequate ground for that distinctive trait of tradition, the normative claim of Jesus' ethic of love.(5) By seeking to make constructive contribution to Reimer's proposal, my aim is to be a scribe trained for kingdom . . . who brings out of his treasure what is new and what is old (Mt. 13:52).(6) Some readers may be concerned at outset that this project implies an agenda to re-orthodize Mennonite theology, in opposition to non-creedal orientation of tradition. Such suspicion is warranted, at least this much: I do intend to directly challenge what has become prevailing presupposition in Mennonite theology. In pursuing this project I am cognizant, as contemporary Mennonite writers sometimes are not, that Mennonite theology today is not without its own orthodoxy, an assumed way of correct thinking. Although it is almost de rigueur for many Mennonite writers to dismiss doctrinal orthodoxy, Mennonite writers often embrace new form of orthodoxy--ethical orthodoxy--even if it is not named as such. Mennonite thinking has come to be driven by orthodoxy of nonviolence: in effect, nonviolence is new creed. This emergent orthodoxy, which privileges ethics over doctrine and ensconces nonviolence as prime imperative of ethics, has developed over several stages. The first stage was inaugurated by Harold S. Bender's Anabaptist Vision (1944), which made ethics essence of discipleship.(7) The middle stage was galvanized by John H. Yoder's Politics of Jesus (1972), which established nonviolence as both ethical norm for Christian discipleship and hermeneutical norm for interpreting New Testament. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,010 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».