Confronting Confucian Understandings of the Christian Doctrine of Salvation : A systematic theological analysis of the basic problems in the Confucian-Christian dialogue

The aim of the present study is to analyze Confucian understandings of the Christian doctrine of salvation in order to find the basic problems in the Confucian-Christian dialogue. I will approach the task via a systematic theological analysis of four issues in order to limit the thesis to an appropriate size. They are analyzed in three chapters as follows: 1. The Confucian concept concerning the existence of God. Here I discuss mainly the issue of assimilation of the Christian concept of God to the concepts of Sovereign on High (Shangdi) and Heaven (Tian) in Confucianism. 2. The Confucian understanding of the object of salvation and its status in Christianity. 3. The Confucian understanding of the means of salvation in Christianity. Before beginning this analysis it is necessary to clarify the vast variety of controversies, arguments, ideas, opinions and comments expressed in the name of Confucianism; thus, clear distinctions among different schools of Confucianism are given in chapter 2. In the last chapter I will discuss the results of my research in this study by pointing out the basic problems that will appear in the analysis. The results of the present study provide conclusions in three related areas: the tacit differences in the ways of thinking between Confucians and Christians, the basic problems of the Confucian-Christian dialogue, and the affirmative elements in the dialogue. In addition to a summary, a bibliography and an index, there are also eight appendices, where I have introduced important background information for readers to understand the present study.

Theological Exegesis in the Canonical Context : Brevard S. Childs' Methodology of Biblical Theology

Modern Christian theology has been at pain with the schism between the Bible and theology, and between biblical studies and systematic theology. Brevard Springs Childs is one of biblical scholars who attempt to dismiss this “iron curtain” separating the two disciplines. The present thesis aims at analyzing Childs’ concept of theological exegesis in the canonical context. In the present study I employ the method of systematic analysis. The thesis consists of seven chapters. Introduction is the first chapter. The second chapter attempts to find out the most important elements which exercise influence on Childs’ methodology of biblical theology by sketching his academic development during his career. The third chapter attempts to deal with the crucial question why and how the concept of the canon is so important for Childs’ methodology of biblical theology. In chapter four I analyze why and how Childs is dissatisfied with historical-critical scholarship and I point out the differences and similarities between his canonical approach and historical criticism. The fifth chapter attempts at discussing Childs’ central concepts of theological exegesis by investigating whether a Christocentric approach is an appropriate way of creating a unified biblical theology. In the sixth chapter I present a critical evaluation and methodological reflection of Childs’ theological exegesis in the canonical context. The final chapter sums up the key points of Childs’ methodology of biblical theology. The basic results of this thesis are as follows: First, the fundamental elements of Childs’ theological thinking are rooted in Reformed theological tradition and in modern theological neo-orthodoxy and in its most prominent theologian, Karl Barth. The American Biblical Theological Movement and the controversy between Protestant liberalism and conservatism in the modern American context cultivate his theological sensitivity and position. Second, Childs attempts to dismiss negative influences of the historical-critical method by establishing canon-based theological exegesis leading into confessional biblical theology. Childs employs terminology such as canonical intentionality, the wholeness of the canon, the canon as the most appropriate context for doing a biblical theology, and the continuity of the two Testaments, in order to put into effect his canonical program. Childs demonstrates forcefully the inadequacies of the historical-critical method in creating biblical theology in biblical hermeneutics, doctrinal theology, and pastoral practice. His canonical approach endeavors to establish and create post-critical Christian biblical theology, and works within the traditional framework of faith seeking understanding. Third, Childs’ biblical theology has a double task: descriptive and constructive, the former connects biblical theology with exegesis, the later with dogmatic theology. He attempts to use a comprehensive model, which combines a thematic investigation of the essential theological contents of the Bible with a systematic analysis of the contents of the Christian faith. Childs also attempts to unite Old Testament theology and New Testament theology into one unified biblical theology. Fourth, some problematic points of Childs’ thinking need to be mentioned. For instance, his emphasis on the final form of the text of the biblical canon is highly controversial, yet Childs firmly believes in it, he even regards it as the corner stone of his biblical theology. The relationship between the canon and the doctrine of biblical inspiration is weak. He does not clearly define whether Scripture is God’s word or whether it only “witnesses” to it. Childs’ concepts of “the word of God” and “divine revelation” remain unclear, and their ontological status is ambiguous. Childs’ theological exegesis in the canonical context is a new attempt in the modern history of Christian theology. It expresses his sincere effort to create a path for doing biblical theology. Certainly, it was just a modest beginning of a long process.

Aspects of Arminian Soteriology in Methodist-Lutheran Ecumenical Dialogues in 20th and 21st Century

The aim of this thesis is to analyse the key ecumenical dialogues between Methodists and Lutherans from the perspective of Arminian soteriology and Methodist theology in general. The primary research question is defined as: "To what extent do the dialogues under analysis relate to Arminian soteriology?" By seeking an answer to this question, new knowledge is sought on the current soteriological position of the Methodist-Lutheran dialogues, the contemporary Methodist theology and the commonalities between the Lutheran and Arminian understanding of soteriology. This way the soteriological picture of the Methodist-Lutheran discussions is clarified. The dialogues under analysis were selected on the basis of versatility. Firstly, the sole world organisation level dialogue was chosen: The Church – Community of Grace. Additionally, the document World Methodist Council and the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification is analysed as a supporting document. Secondly, a document concerning the discussions between two main-line churches in the United States of America was selected: Confessing Our Faith Together. Thirdly, two dialogues between non-main-line Methodist churches and main-line Lutheran national churches in Europe were chosen: Fellowship of Grace from Norway and Kristuksesta osalliset from Finland. The theoretical approach to the research conducted in this thesis is systematic analysis. The Remonstrant articles of Arminian soteriology are utilised as an analysis tool to examine the soteriological positions of the dialogues. New knowledge is sought by analysing the stances of the dialogues concerning the doctrines of partial depravity, conditional election, universal atonement, resistible grace and conditional perseverance of saints. This way information is also provided for approaching the Calvinist-Arminian controversy from new perspectives. The results of this thesis show that the current soteriological position of the Methodist-Lutheran dialogues is closer to Arminianism than Calvinism. The dialogues relate to Arminian soteriology especially concerning the doctrines of universal atonement, resistible grace and conditional perseverance of saints. The commonalities between the Lutheran and Arminian understanding of soteriology exist mainly in these three doctrines as they are uniformly favoured in the dialogues. The most discussed area of soteriology is human depravity, in which the largest diversity of stances occurs as well. On the other hand, divine election is the least discussed topic. The overall perspective, which the results of the analysis provide, indicates that the Lutherans could approach the Calvinist churches together with the Methodists with a wider theological perspective and understanding when the soteriological issues are considered as principal. Human depravity is discovered as the area of soteriology which requires most work in future ecumenical dialogues. However, the detected Lutheran hybrid notion on depravity (a Calvinist-Arminian mixture) appears to provide a useful new perspective for Calvinist-Arminian ecumenism and offers potentially fruitful considerations to future ecumenical dialogues.

Beyond Words : The European Court of Justice and Legal Certainty in Multilingual EU Law

This study addresses the issue of multilingualism in EU law. More specifically, it explores the implications of multilingualism for conceptualising legal certainty, a central principle of law both in domestic and EU legal systems. The main question addressed is how multilingualism and legal certainty may be reconciled in the EU legal system. The study begins with a discussion on the role of translation in drafting EU legislation and its implications for interpreting EU law at the European Court of Justice (ECJ). Uncertainty regarding the meaning of multilingual EU law and the interrelationship between multilingualism and ECJ methods of interpretation are explored. This analysis leads to questioning the importance of linguistic-semantic methods of interpretation, especially the role of comparing language versions for clarifying meaning and the ordinary meaning thesis, and to placing emphasis on other, especially the teleological, purpose-oriented method of interpretation. As regards the principle of legal certainty, the starting-point is a two-dimensional concept consisting of both formal and substantive elements; of predictability and acceptability. Formal legal certainty implies that laws and adjudication, in particular, must be predictable. Substantive legal certainty is related to rational acceptability of judicial decision-making placing emphasis on its acceptability to the legal community in question. Contrary to predictability that one might intuitively relate to linguistic-semantic methods of interpretation, the study suggests a new conception of legal certainty where purpose, telos, and other dynamic methods of interpretation are of particular significance for meaning construction in multilingual EU law. Accordingly, the importance of purposive, teleological interpretation as the standard doctrine of interpretation in a multilingual legal system is highlighted. The focus on rational, substantive acceptability results in emphasising discourse among legal actors among the EU legal community and stressing the need to give reasons in favour of proposed meaning in accordance with dynamic methods of interpretation including considerations related to purposes, aims, objectives and consequences. In this context, the role of ideal discourse situations and communicative action taking the form of interaction among the EU legal community in an ongoing dialogue especially in the preliminary ruling procedure is brought into focus. In order for this dialogue to function, it requires that the ECJ gives persuasive, convincing and acceptable reasons in justifying its decisions. This necessitates transparency, sincerity, and dialogue with the relevant audience.

Leibniz on Rational Decision-Making

In this study I discuss G. W. Leibniz's (1646-1716) views on rational decision-making from the standpoint of both God and man. The Divine decision takes place within creation, as God freely chooses the best from an infinite number of possible worlds. While God's choice is based on absolutely certain knowledge, human decisions on practical matters are mostly based on uncertain knowledge. However, in many respects they could be regarded as analogous in more complicated situations. In addition to giving an overview of the divine decision-making and discussing critically the criteria God favours in his choice, I provide an account of Leibniz's views on human deliberation, which includes some new ideas. One of these concerns is the importance of estimating probabilities in making decisions one estimates both the goodness of the act itself and its consequences as far as the desired good is concerned. Another idea is related to the plurality of goods in complicated decisions and the competition this may provoke. Thirdly, heuristic models are used to sketch situations under deliberation in order to help in making the decision. Combining the views of Marcelo Dascal, Jaakko Hintikka and Simo Knuuttila, I argue that Leibniz applied two kinds of models of rational decision-making to practical controversies, often without explicating the details. The more simple, traditional pair of scales model is best suited to cases in which one has to decide for or against some option, or to distribute goods among parties and strive for a compromise. What may be of more help in more complicated deliberations is the novel vectorial model, which is an instance of the general mathematical doctrine of the calculus of variations. To illustrate this distinction, I discuss some cases in which he apparently applied these models in different kinds of situation. These examples support the view that the models had a systematic value in his theory of practical rationality.

Voiko sota olla oikeutettu? : Kirkkojen maailmanneuvoston yleiskokousten kannanotot sotaan kriisien ratkaisuna

Can war be justified? Expressions of opinions by the general assemblies of the World Council of Churches on the question of war as a method of settling conflicts. The purpose of this study is to describe and analyse the expressions of opinions recorded in the documents of the general assemblies of the WCC during the Cold War period from 1948 to 1983 on the use of war as a method of settling international and national conflicts. The main sources are the official reports of the WCC´s assemblies during the years 1948 to 1983. This study divides the discussions into three periods. The first period (1949-1968) is dominated by the pressures arising from the Second World War. Experiences of the war led the assemblies of the WCC to the conclusion that modern warfare as a method of settling conflicts should be rejected. Modern war was contrary to God´s purposes and the whole meaning of creation, said the assembly. Although the WCC rejected modern war, it left open the possibility of conflict where principles of just war may be practised. The question of war was also linked to the state and its function, which led to the need to create a politically neutral doctrine for the socio-ethical thinking of churches and of the WCC itself. The doctrine was formulated using the words "responsible society". The question of war and socio-ethical thinking were on the WCC`s agenda throughout the first period. Another issue that had an influence on the first period was the increasing role of Third World countries. This new dimension also brought new aspects to the question of war and violence. The second period (1968-1975) presented greater challenges to the WCC, especially in traditional western countries. The Third World, political activity in the socialist world and ideas of revolution were discussed. The WCC`s fourth Assembly in Uppsala was challenged by these new ideas of revolution. The old doctrine of "responsible society" was seen by many participants as unsuitable in the modern world, especially for Third World countries. The situation of a world governed by armaments, causing social and economic disruption, was felt by churches to be problematic. The peace movement gathered pace and attention. There was pressure to see armed forces as an option on the way to a new world order. The idea of a just war was challenged by that of just revolution. These ideas of revolution did not receive support from the Uppsala Assembly, but they pressured the WCC to reconsider its socio-ethical thinking. Revolution was seen as a possibility, but only when it could be peaceful. In the Nairobi Assembly the theme of just, participatory and sustainable society provided yet another viewpoint, dealing with the life of the world and its problems as a whole. The third period (1975-1983) introduced a new, alternative doctrine the "JPIC Process", justice, peace and the integrity of creation for social thinking in the WCC. The WCC no longer wanted to discuss war or poverty as separate questions, but wanted to combine all aspects of life to see the impact of an arms-governed world on humankind. Thus, during the last period, discussions focused on socio-ethical questions, where war and violence were only parts of a larger problem. Through the new JPIC Process, the WCC`s Assembly in Vancouver looked for a new world, one without violence, in all aspects of life. Despite differing opinions in socio-ethical thinking, the churches in the WCC agreed that modern warfare cannot be regarded as acceptable or just. The old idea of a "just war" still had a place, but it was not seen by all as a valid principle. As a result the WCC viewed war as a final solution to be employed when all other methods had failed. Such a war would have to secure peace and justice for all. In the discussions there was a strong political east-west divide, and, during the last two decades, a north-south divide as well. The effect of the Cold War was obvious. In the background to the theological positions were two main concepts namely the idea of God´s activity in man´s history through the so-called regiments and, the concept of the Kingdom of God on Earth.

Vedestä vai Hengestä? : Uuras Saarnivaaran kasteteologia

Of water or the Spirit? Uuras Saarnivaara s theology of baptism The aim of the study was to investigate PhD and ThD Uuras Saarnivaara s views on baptism as well as their possible changes and the reasons for them. Dr Saarnivaara said himself that he searched for the truth about the relationship between baptism and faith for decades, and had faltered in his views. The method of this research is systematic analysis. A close study of the source material shows that Dr Saarnivaara s views on baptism have most likely changed several times. Therefore, special attention was paid to the time periods defined by when his literary works were published. This resulted in revealing the different perspectives he had on baptism. The fact that Dr Saarnivaara worked on two continents Europe and North America added a challenge to the research process. At the beginning of the research, I described Dr Saarnivaara s phases of life and mapped out his vast literary production as well as presented his theological basis. Saarnivaara s theological view on the means of grace and their interrelation in the church was influenced by the Laestadian movement, which caused him to adopt the view that the Holy Spirit does not dwell in the means of grace, but in the believers. Thus the real presence of Christ in the means of grace is denied. God s word is divided into Biblical revelation and proclamation by believers through the means of grace. Also, the sacraments are overshadowed by the preached word. Because grace is received through the word of the gospel preached publicly or privately by a believer, the preacher s status gains importance at the expense of the actual means of grace. Saarnivaara was intrigued by the content of baptism from the time he was a student until the end of his life. As a young theologian, he would adopt the opinions of his teachers as well as the view of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, which at the time was dominated by the pietistic movement and the teachings of J. T. Beck. After Saarnivaara had converted to the Laestadian movement, moved to the United States and started his Luther research, he adopted a view on baptism which was to a great extent in accordance with Luther and the Lutheran Symbolical Books. Saarnivaara considered his former views on baptism unbiblical and publicly apologised for them. In the 1950s, after starting his ministry within the Finnish neopietistic movements, Saarnivaara adopted a Laestadian-neopietistic doctrine of baptism. During his Beckian-pietistic era, Saarnivaara based his baptism theology on the event of the disciples of Jesus being baptised by John the Baptist, the revival of Samaria in the Book of Acts and the conversion of Cornelius and his family, all cases where the receiving of the Holy Spirit and the baptism were two separate events in time. In order to defend the theological unity of the Bible, Saarnivaara had to interpret Jesus teachings on baptism in the Gospels and the teachings of the Apostles in the New Testament letters from a viewpoint based on the three events mentioned above. During his Beckian-pietistic era, the abovementioned basic hermeneutic choice caused Saarnivaara to separate baptism by water and baptism by the Holy Spirit in his salvation theology. Simultaneously, the faith of a small child is denied, and rebirth is divided into two parts, the objective and the subjective, the latter being moved from the moment of baptism to a possible spiritual break-through at an age when the person possesses a more mature understanding. During his Laestadian-Lutheran era, Saarnivaara s theology of baptism was biblically consistent and the same for all people regardless of the person s age. Small children receive faith in baptism through the presence of Christ. The task of other people s faith is limited to the act of bringing the child to the baptism so that the child may receive his/her own faith from Christ and be born again as a child of God. The doctrine of baptism during Saarnivaara s Laestadian-neopietistic era represents in many aspects the emphases he presented during his first era, although they were now partly more radical. Baptism offers grace; it is not a means of grace. Justification, rebirth and salvation would take place later on when a person had reached an age with a more mature understanding through the word of God. A small child cannot be born again in baptism because being born again requires personal faith, which is received through hearing and understanding the law and the gospel. Saarnivaara s views on baptism during his first and third era are, unlike during his second era, quite controversial. The question of the salvation of a small child goes unanswered, or it is even denied. The central question during both eras is the demand of conversion and personal faith at a mature age. The background for this demand is in Saarnivaara s anthropology, which accentuates man s relationship to God as an intellectual and mental matter requiring understanding, and which needs no material instruments. The two first theological eras regarding Saarnivaara s doctrine of baptism lasted around ten years. The third era lasted over 40 years until his death.

Avioliiton teologia Englannin kirkossa ja Suomen evankelis-luterilaisessa kirkossa vuosina 1963-2006

The theology of marriage in the Church of England(CofE) and in the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland(ELCF)1963–2006 The method of the study is a systematic analysis of the sources. In the CofE marriage stems from creation, but it is also sacramental, grounded in the theology of love and redemption. Man and woman have a connection between them that is a mystical union in character because of the one between Christ and the Church; therefore every marriage is sacramental. The purposes of marriage have been expressed in a different order than earlier. A caring relationship and sexuality are set before childbirth as the causes of marriage. The remedial cause of marriage is also moved to the background and it cannot be found in the recent wedding formulas. A personal relationship and marriage as a school of faith and love have a central place in the theology of marriage. The theology of love unites the love of God and marriage. In the CofE the understanding of divorce and co-habiting has changed, too. Co-habiting can now be understood as a stage towards marriage. Divorce has been understood as a phenomenon that must be taken as a fact after an irretrievable breakdown of marriage. Thus the church must concentrate on pastoral care after divorce. Similarly, the ELCF also maintains that the order of creation is the origin of marriage as a lifelong institution. This is also an argument for the solemnization of marriage in the church. Faith and grace are not needed for real marriage because marriage is the culmination of reason and natural law. The society defines marriage and the church gives its blessing to the married couples if so requested. Luther’s view of marriage is different from this because he saw marriage as a school of love and faith, similar to CofE. He saw faith as essential to enable the fullfillment of natural law. Marriage in the ELCF is mostly a matter of natural ethics. An ideal form of life is sought through the Golden Rule. This interpretation of marriage means that it does not presuppose Christian education for children to follow. The doctrine of the two kingdoms is definitely essential as background. It has been impugned by scholars, however, as a permanent foundation of marriage. There is a difference between the marriage formulas and the other sources concerning the purposes of marriage in the ELCF. The formulas do not include sexuality, childbirth or children and their education as purposes of marriage. The formulas include less theological vocabulary than in the CofE. The liturgy indicates the doctrine in CofE. In the Lutheran churches there is not any need to express the doctrine in the wedding formulas. This has resulted in less theology of marriage in the formulas. The theology of Luther is no longer any ruling principle in the theology of marriage. The process of continuing change in society refines the terms for marriage more than the theological arguments do.

Kansanterveysongelman synty : Tuberkuloosi ja terveyden hallinta Suomessa ennen toista maailmansotaa

The study focuses on the emergence of tuberculosis as a public health problem and the development of the various methods to counteract it in Finland before the introduction of efficient methods of treatment in the 1940s and 50s. It covers a time period from year 1882 when the tuberculosis bacterium was identified to the 1930s when the early formation of tuberculosis work became established in Finland. During this time there occurred important changes in medicine, public health thinking and methods of personal health care that have been referred to as the bacteriological revolution. The study places tuberculosis prevention in this context and shows how the tuberculosis problem affected the government of health on all these three dimensions. The study is based on foucauldian analytics of government, which is supplemented with perspectives from contemporary science and technology studies. In addition, it utilises a broad array of work in medical history. The central research materials consist of medical journals, official programs and documents on tuberculosis policy, and health education texts. The general conclusions of the study are twofold. Firstly, the ensemble of tuberculosis work was formed from historically diverse and often conflicting elements. The identification of the pathogen was only the first step in the establishment of tuberculosis as a major public health problem. Important were also the attention of the science of hygiene and statistical reasoning that dominated public health thinking in the late 19th century. Furthermore, the adoption of the bacteriological tuberculosis doctrine in medicine, public health work and health education was profoundly influenced by previous understanding of the nature of the illness, of medical work, of the prevention of contagious diseases, and of personal health care. Also the two central institutions of tuberculosis work, sanatorium and dispensary, have heterogeneous origins and multifarious functions. Secondly, bacteriology represented in this study by tuberculosis remodelled medical knowledge and practices, the targets and methods of public health policy, and the doctrine of personal health care. Tuberculosis provided a strong argument for specific causes (if not cures) as well as laboratory methods in medicine. Tuberculosis prevention contributed substantially to the development whereby a comprehensive responsibility for the health of the population and public health work was added to the agenda of the state. Health advice on tuberculosis and other contagious diseases used dangerous bacteria to motivate personal health care and redefined it as protecting oneself from the attacks of external pathogens and strengthening oneself against their effects. Thus, tuberculosis work is one important root for the contemporary public concern for the health of the population and the imperative of personal health care.

From Francovich to Köbler and beyond : The evolution of a State liability regime for the EC

The aim of this paper is to present the evolution of the Francovich doctrine within the European legal order. The first part deals with the gradual development of the ECJ's case law on State liability in damages for breach of EC law. Starting from the seminal Francovich and Brasserie du Pêcheur, the clarification of the criteria set by the Court is attempted with reference to subsequent case law, whereas issues concerning the extent and form of the compensation owned are also mentioned. The second part concerns one of the more recent developments in the field, namely State liability for breaches of Community law attributed to national judiciary. The Court's ruling in Köbler is examined in connection with two other recent judgments, namely Commission v. Italy of 2003 and Kühne & Heitz, as an attempt of the ECJ to reframe its relationships with national supreme courts and appropriate for itself the position of the Supreme Court in the European legal order. The implications on State liability claims by the ruling in Commission v. France of 1997 constitute the theme of the third part, where it is submitted that Member States can also be held liable for disregard of Community law by private individuals within their respected territories. To this extent, Schmidberger is viewed as a manifestation of this opinion, with fundamental rights acquiring a new dimension, being invoked by the States, contra the individuals as a shield to liability claims. Finally, the third part examines the relationship between the Francovich doctrine and the principle of legal certainty and concludes that the solutions employed by the ECJ have been both predictable and acceptable by the national legal orders. Keywords: State liability, damages, Francovich, Köbler, Schmidberger

Agreeable Agreement : An Examination into the Quest for a Solid Consensus in Light of Bilateral Doctrinal Dialogues among Anglicans, Lutherans and Roman Catholics

The purpose of this study is to analyse the development and understanding of the idea of consensus in bilateral dialogues among Anglicans, Lutherans and Roman Catholics. The source material consists of representative dialogue documents from the international, regional and national dialogues from the 1960s until 2006. In general, the dialogue documents argue for agreement/consensus based on commonality or compatibility. Each of the three dialogue processes has specific characteristics and formulates its argument in a unique way. The Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue has a particular interest in hermeneutical questions. In the early phases, the documents endeavoured to describe the interpretative principles that would allow the churches to together proclaim the Gospel and to identify the foundation on which the agreement in the church is based. This investigation ended up proposing a notion of basic consensus , which later developed into a form of consensus that seeks to embrace, not to dismiss differences (so-called differentiated consensus ). The Lutheran-Roman Catholic agreement is based on a perspectival understanding of doctrine. The Anglican-Roman Catholic dialogue emphasises the correctness of interpretations. The documents consciously look towards a common future , not the separated past. The dialogue s primary interpretative concept is koinonia. The texts develop a hermeneutics of authoritative teaching that has been described as the rule of communion . The Anglican-Lutheran dialogue is characterised by an instrumental understanding of doctrine. Doctrinal agreement is facilitated by the ideas of coherence, continuity and substantial emphasis in doctrine. The Anglican-Lutheran dialogue proposes a form of sufficient consensus that considers a wide set of doctrinal statements and liturgical practices to determine whether an agreement has been reached to the degree that, although not complete , is sufficient for concrete steps towards unity. Chapter V discusses the current challenges of consensus as an ecumenically viable concept. In this part, I argue that the acceptability of consensus as an ecumenical goal is based not only the understanding of the church but more importantly on the understanding of the nature and function of the doctrine. The understanding of doctrine has undergone significant changes during the time of the ecumenical dialogues. The major shift has been from a modern paradigm towards a postmodern paradigm. I conclude with proposals towards a way to construct a form of consensus that would survive philosophical criticism, would be theologically valid and ecumenically acceptable.

Conrad Summenhart's theory of individual rights and its medieval background

This study focuses on the theory of individual rights that the German theologian Conrad Summenhart (1455-1502) explicated in his massive work Opus septipartitum de contractibus pro foro conscientiae et theologico. The central question to be studied is: How does Summenhart understand the concept of an individual right and its immediate implications? The basic premiss of this study is that in Opus septipartitum Summenhart composed a comprehensive theory of individual rights as a contribution to the on-going medieval discourse on rights. With this rationale, the first part of the study concentrates on earlier discussions on rights as the background for Summenhart s theory. Special attention is paid to language in which right was defined in terms of power . In the fourteenth century writers like Hervaeus Natalis and William Ockham maintained that right signifies power by which the right-holder can to use material things licitly. It will also be shown how the attempts to describe what is meant by the term right became more specified and cultivated. Gerson followed the implications that the term power had in natural philosophy and attributed rights to animals and other creatures. To secure right as a normative concept, Gerson utilized the ancient ius suum cuique-principle of justice and introduced a definition in which right was seen as derived from justice. The latter part of this study makes effort to reconstructing Summenhart s theory of individual rights in three sections. The first section clarifies Summenhart s discussion of the right of the individual or the concept of an individual right. Summenhart specified Gerson s description of right as power, taking further use of the language of natural philosophy. In this respect, Summenhart s theory managed to bring an end to a particular continuity of thought that was centered upon a view in which right was understood to signify power to licit action. Perhaps the most significant feature of Summenhart s discussion was the way he explicated the implication of liberty that was present in Gerson s language of rights. Summenhart assimilated libertas with the self-mastery or dominion that in the economic context of discussion took the form of (a moderate) self-ownership. Summenhart discussion also introduced two apparent extensions to Gerson s terminology. First, Summenhart classified right as relation, and second, he equated right with dominion. It is distinctive of Summenhart s view that he took action as the primary determinant of right: Everyone has as much rights or dominion in regard to a thing, as much actions it is licit for him to exercise in regard to the thing. The second section elaborates Summenhart s discussion of the species dominion, which delivered an answer to the question of what kind of rights exist, and clarified thereby the implications of the concept of an individual right. The central feature in Summenhart s discussion was his conscious effort to systematize Gerson s language by combining classifications of dominion into a coherent whole. In this respect, his treatement of the natural dominion is emblematic. Summenhart constructed the concept of natural dominion by making use of the concepts of foundation (founded on a natural gift) and law (according to the natural law). In defining natural dominion as dominion founded on a natural gift, Summenhart attributed natural dominion to animals and even to heavenly bodies. In discussing man s natural dominion, Summenhart pointed out that the natural dominion is not sufficiently identified by its foundation, but requires further specification, which Summenhart finds in the idea that natural dominion is appropriate to the subject according to the natural law. This characterization lead him to treat God s dominion as natural dominion. Partly, this was due to Summenhart s specific understanding of the natural law, which made reasonableness as the primary criterion for the natural dominion at the expense of any metaphysical considerations. The third section clarifies Summenhart s discussion of the property rights defined by the positive human law. By delivering an account on juridical property rights Summenhart connected his philosophical and theological theory on rights to the juridical language of his times, and demonstrated that his own language of rights was compatible with current juridical terminology. Summenhart prepared his discussion of property rights with an account of the justification for private property, which gave private property a direct and strong natural law-based justification. Summenhart s discussion of the four property rights usus, usufructus, proprietas, and possession aimed at delivering a detailed report of the usage of these concepts in juridical discourse. His discussion was characterized by extensive use of the juridical source texts, which was more direct and verbal the more his discussion became entangled with the details of juridical doctrine. At the same time he promoted his own language on rights, especially by applying the idea of right as relation. He also showed recognizable effort towards systematizing juridical language related to property rights.

The Home of Hearing : George Lindbeck's understanding of community

The aim of this thesis was to examine the understanding of community in George Lindbeck s The Nature of Doctrine. Intrinsic to this question was also examining how Lindbeck understands the relation between the text and the world which both meet in a Christian community. Thirdly this study also aimed at understanding what the persuasiveness of this understanding depends on. The method applied for this task was systematic analysis. The study was conducted by first providing an orientation into the nontheological substance of the ND which was assumed useful with respect to the aim of this study. The study then went on to explore Lindbeck in his own context of postliberal theology in order to see how the ND was received. It also attempted to provide a picture of how the ND relates to Lindbeck as a theologian. The third chapter was a descriptive analysis into the cultural-linguistic perspective, which is understood as being directly proportional to his understanding of community. The fourth chapter was an analysis into how the cultural-linguistic perspective sees the relation between the text and the world. When religion is understood from a cultural-linguistic perspective, it presents itself as a cultural-linguistic entity, which Lindbeck understands as a comprehensive interpretive scheme which structures human experience and understanding of oneself and the world in which one lives. When one exists in this entity, it is the entity which shapes the subjectivities of all those who are at home in this entity which makes participation in the life of a cultural linguistic entity a condition for understanding it. Religion is above all an external word that moulds and shapes our religious existence and experience. Understanding faith then as coming from hearing, is something that correlates with the cultural-linguistic depiction of reality. Religion informs us of a religious reality, it does not originate in any way from ourselves. This externality linked to the axiomatic nature of religion is also something that distinguishes Lindbeck sharply from liberalist tendencies, which understand religion as ultimately expressing the prereflective depths of the inner self. Language is the central analogy to understanding the medium in which one moves when inhabiting a cultural-linguistic system because language is the transmitting medium in which the cultural-linguistic system is embodied. The realism entailed in Lindbeck s understanding of a community is that we are fundamentally on the receiving end when it comes to our identities whether cultural or religious. We always witness to something. Its persuasiveness rests on the fact that we never exist in an unpersuaded reality. The language of Christ is a self-sustaining and irreducible cultural-linguistic entity, which is ontologically founded upon Christ. It transmits the reality of a new being. The basic relation to the world for a Christian is that of witnessing salvation in Christ: witnessing Christ as the home of hearing the message of salvation, which is the God-willed way. Following this logic, the relation of the world and the text is one of relating to the world from the text, i.e. In Christ through the word (text) for the world, because it assumes it s logic from the way Christ ontologically relates to us.