DOCSLIB.ORG

A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman”

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman” The Martin Luther King, Jr. Papers Project “A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman” In the winter of 1953 King chose his dissertation topic and enrolled in the required course Directed Study in Thesis and Dissertation Writing taught by Jannette E. Newhall. I Working with Newhall and DeWolf, King developed a bibliography, a preliminary organizational outline, and a short introduction.2 During the summer of I953 King contacted Wieman and Tillich to ask if thqi knew of any similar comparisons of their thought.Y Beyond these exploratory letters, though, the newly married King did not work on the dissertation while serving as pastor in charge of Ebenezer during the summer. After studying during the fall and winter, King passed his final comprehensive examination in February 1954 and began working extensively on the dissertation.4 On 9 April, just a few days after he accepted the call to Dexter, King’s outline was approved by the Graduate School. In the first chapter, after explaining his choice of the topic, King reviewed his sources. In the second chapter he explored the methodologies of the two theologians. By using a “method of correlation” Tillich soughtfirst to describe the questions generated by the human condition and then to examine the specifically Christian symbols used to answer those questions. Wieman appealed to the scientific method, using “sensory observation, experimental behavior, and rational inference” to analyze Christian beliefs. In chapters 3 and 4 King described Tillich’s and Wieman’s conceptions of God. In the fifth chapter he compared and criticized their ideas.5 King’s initial drafts of the dissertation were marked by the flawed citation practices that characterized his other academic essays and the final version of the dissertation. King appropriated virtually all of his first draft of the introduction I. Jannette E. Newhall (1898-1979) studied at Radcliffe and Columbia and received her Ph.D. from Boston University in 193 I. After teaching at Wheaton College in Norton, Massachu- setts, she worked at Andover-Harvard Theological Library and other libraries in Massachusetts. Newhall was librarian and professor of research methods, as well as Brightman’s longtime assis- tant, at Boston University’s School of Theology from 1949 until her retirement in 1962. Her course on research methods covered, among other things, correct citation practices and ethical use of sources. See Newhall, Syllabus, Thesis and Dissertation Writing, 4 February-nn May 1953, MLKP-MBU: Box I 15. 2. See King, Draft of table of contents, 4 February-nn May 1953, MLKP-MBU: Box 114; also drafts in MLKP-MBU: Boxes 96 and 107. 3. King’s letters to Wieman and Tillich, probably written in early August, are not extant. For their replies, see Wieman to King, 14 August 1953, pp. 202-203 in this volume; and Tillich to King, 22 September 1953, pp. 203-no4 in this volume. 4. See King, Qualifying examination answers, Theology of the Bible, 2 November 1953; His- tory of Doctrine, 20 November 1953; Systematic Theology, 17 December 1953; and History of Philosophy, 24 February 1954; all published in this volume, pp. 204-210, zi2--218, 228-233, and 242-247, respectively. 5. For a longer analysis of the dissertation’s content, see the Introduction, pp. 23-26 in this volume. 339 The Martin Luther King, Jr. Papers Project 15 APT verbatim from an article by Walter Marshall Horton.=Newhall noted that in one ’955 of King’s footnotes he cited a source not listed in the bibliography.’ King corrected the error in later versions, but the introduction still contained several plagiarized passages. King’s faulty citation practices were rooted in the notecards he created while conducting research on Tillich and Wieman.8 Large sections of the expository chapters are verbatim transcriptions of these notecards, in which errors he had made while creating his notes are perpetuated. In one case, although King properly quoted Tillich on the notecard, he used a section of the quotation in the dissertation without quotation marks.9 Some of the notecards were adequately paraphrased from Tillich and Wieman, but many others were nearly identical to the source. King rarely noted down proper citations as he took notes, particularly from secondary sources. After reading an author’s interpretation of a Tillich quotation, for example, King would transcribe the interpretation, the Tillich quotation, and the footnote to Tillich’s writings but would neglect to mention the secondary source. One of his most important uncredited sources was a Boston University dissertation on Tillich that DeWolfhad readjust three years before. In the introduction King noted his reliance on “valuable secondary sources” and acknowledgedJack Boozer’s “veryfine” dissertation; thereafter, however, King obscured the extent to which he utilized this secondary source by citing it only twice.1° He also relied heavily on a review of Tillich’s Systematic Theology by Raphael Demos, King’s professor at Haruard, and on several essays in a collection entitled The Theology of Paul Tillich, underreporting these sources in his citations. I’ King completed his draft of the dissertation while serving as the full-time pastor of Dexter. “I rose every morning at five-thirty and spent three hours writing the 6. Walter Marshall Horton, “Tillich’sRole in Contemporary Theology,” in The Theology of Paul Tzllzch, ed. Charles W. Kegley and Robert W. Bretall (New York: Macmillan, 1952). pp. 36-37. 7. King, “Draft of chapter 1,” 4 February-a2 May 1953, MLKP-MBU: Box 107. 8. It is unclear when King created these notecards. He probably wrote the bulk of them in Boston the summer of 1954 before moving to Montgomery, since many of his materials, particu- larly articles in scholarly journals, would not be available in Montgomery. He did, however, con- tinue to check out library books from Boston University’s library while in Montgomery. See Flor- ence Mitchell to King, 15 October 1954, MLKP-MBU: Box 117. 9. See King, Notecard on “Freedom,” 1948- 1955, CSKC. io. See Jack Stewart Boozer, “The Place of Reason in Paul Tillich’s Concept of God” (Ph.D. diss., Boston University, 1952). Boozer (1918- 1989) received both his bachelor’s degree in phi- losophy (1940) and B.D. (1942) from Emory University. He entered graduate school at Boston University in 1942, but interrupted his studies to serve as an Army chaplain in Europe from 1944 to 1947. He returned to Boston in 1948 and received his Ph.D. in 1952. Boozer taught at Emory from 1950 until his retirement in 1987, serving as professor of religion and chair of the depart- ment of religion. His publications include Faith to Act (1967), coauthored with William Beardslee, and Rudolf Otto. Aufsatze zur Ethik (i98i), which he edited. 11. Horton, “Tillich’s Role in Contemporary Theology,” pp. 26-47; George F. Thomas, “The Method and Structure of Tillich’s Theology,” pp. 86- 105; David E. Roberts, “Tillich’s Doctrine of Man,” pp. 108- 130;John Herman Randall, Jr., “The Ontology of Paul Tillich,” pp. 132- 161; all in Kegley and Bretall, eds., Theology of Paul Tillich. Although King’s dissertation topic was similar to Charles Hartshorne’s essay “Tillich’s Doctrine of God” (in ibid., pp. 164-195). he did not utilize the essay extensively. See also Raphael Demos, Book Review of Systematic Theology by Paul Tillich, Journal of Philosophy 49 (23 October 1952): 692-708. A signed copy of this review with King’s marginal comments is in MLKP-MBU: Box 107. 340 The Martin Luther King, Jr. Papers Project thesis,” he later wrote, “returning to it late at night for another three hours.”12 In ‘5 *Pr November 1954, several month after leaving Boston, King returned to that city ‘955 for consultations with DeWolf and Schilling. DeWolf and Schilling had mostly praise for King5 draft, pointing out only minor changes necessary for their approval. In characteristically brief fashion, DeWolfreturned King’s draft with very few comections or marginal comments, praising King for succeeding “with broad learning, impressive ability and convincing mastery of the works immediately involved. ’’ Schilling, evaluating one of his first dissertations as a professor, provided more extensive comments than DeWolf. In two instances Schilling noticed that King had improperly cited his sources by “inaccurately” quoting a Tillich text and omitting quotation marks around another paragraph. Acknowledging that the first draft was “competently done, . carefully organized and systematically developed,” Schilling promised to approve the dissertation after the appropriate changes were made.I3 King incorporated many of these corrections, but made few other changes as he revised the dissertation. After submitting the final draft sometime before the 15 April deadline, King returned to Boston to defend his work before an examining committee. Chaired by Schilling, the committee included DeWolf, Peter A. Bertocci, John H. Lavely, Richard M. Millard, and Newhall.I4 On 31 May the graduate school faculty of Boston University oficially voted to confer the doctorate on King at the university’s commencement on 5 June. Unable to be present for the service, King received the Ph.D. in systematic theology in absentia. Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION 1. Statement of problem 2. Sources of data 3. Review of the work of other investigators 4. Methods of investigation 5. The structure of the dissertation 11. THE METHODOLOGIES OF TILLICH AND WIEMAN 1. Tillich’s method of correlation i. The negative meaning of correlation (1) Supernaturalism (2) Naturalism (3) Dualism 12. King, Stride Toward Freedom (New York: Harper, 1958), p. 26. 13. See L. Harold DeWolf, First Reader’s Report, 26 February 1955, p. 333-334 in this vol- ume; King, Draft of chapter 3, 1954- 1955, MLKP-MBU: Box 96A; and S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Invention Of
    How Did God Get Started? COLIN WELLS the usual suspects One day in the Middle East about four thousand years ago, an elderly but still rather astonishingly spry gentleman took his son for a walk up a hill. The young man carried on his back some wood that his father had told him they would use at the top to make an altar, upon which they would then perform the ritual sacrifice of a burnt offering. Unbeknownst to the son, however, the father had another sort of sacrifice in mind altogether. Abraham, the father, had been commanded, by the God he worshipped as supreme above all others, to sacrifice the young man himself, his beloved and only legitimate son, Isaac. We all know how things turned out, of course. An angel appeared, together with a ram, letting Abraham know that God didn’t really want him to kill his son, that he should sacrifice the ram instead, and that the whole thing had merely been a test. And to modern observers, at least, it’s abundantly clear what exactly was being tested. Should we pose the question to most people familiar with one of the three “Abrahamic” religious traditions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), all of which trace their origins to this misty figure, and which together claim half the world’s population, the answer would come without hesitation. God was testing Abraham’s faith. If we could ask someone from a much earlier time, however, a time closer to that of Abraham himself, the answer might be different. The usual story we tell ourselves about faith and reason says that faith was invented by the ancient Jews, whose monotheistic tradition goes back to Abraham.
    [Show full text]
  • Kant's Theoretical Conception Of
    KANT’S THEORETICAL CONCEPTION OF GOD Yaron Noam Hoffer Submitted to the faculty of the University Graduate School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Philosophy, September 2017 Accepted by the Graduate Faculty, Indiana University, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Doctoral Committee _________________________________________ Allen W. Wood, Ph.D. (Chair) _________________________________________ Sandra L. Shapshay, Ph.D. _________________________________________ Timothy O'Connor, Ph.D. _________________________________________ Michel Chaouli, Ph.D 15 September, 2017 ii Copyright © 2017 Yaron Noam Hoffer iii To Mor, who let me make her ends mine and made my ends hers iv Acknowledgments God has never been an important part of my life, growing up in a secular environment. Ironically, only through Kant, the ‘all-destroyer’ of rational theology and champion of enlightenment, I developed an interest in God. I was drawn to Kant’s philosophy since the beginning of my undergraduate studies, thinking that he got something right in many topics, or at least introduced fruitful ways of dealing with them. Early in my Graduate studies I was struck by Kant’s moral argument justifying belief in God’s existence. While I can’t say I was convinced, it somehow resonated with my cautious but inextricable optimism. My appreciation for this argument led me to have a closer look at Kant’s discussion of rational theology and especially his pre-critical writings. From there it was a short step to rediscover early modern metaphysics in general and embark upon the current project. This journey could not have been completed without the intellectual, emotional, and material support I was very fortunate to receive from my teachers, colleagues, friends, and family.
    [Show full text]
  • Process Theology 1 Process Theology
    Process theology 1 Process theology Process theology is a school of thought influenced by the metaphysical process philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead (1861–1947) and further developed by Charles Hartshorne (1897–2000). While there are process theologies that are similar, but unrelated to the work of Whitehead (such as Pierre Teilhard de Chardin) the term is generally applied to the Whiteheadian/Hartshornean school. Process theology is unrelated to the Process Church. History The original ideas of process thought are found in the philosophy of Alfred North Whitehead. Various theological and philosophical aspects have been expanded and developed by Charles Hartshorne (1897–2000), John B. Cobb, Jr., and David Ray Griffin. A characteristic of process theology each of these thinkers shared was a rejection of metaphysics that privilege "being" over "becoming," particularly those of Aristotle and Thomas Aquinas. Hartshorne was deeply influenced by French philosopher Jules Lequier and by Swiss philosopher Charles Secrétan who were probably the first ones to claim that in God liberty of becoming is above his substantiality. Process theology soon influenced a number of Jewish theologians including Rabbis Max Kadushin, Milton Steinberg and Levi A. Olan, Harry Slominsky and, to a lesser degree, Abraham Joshua Heschel. Today some rabbis who advocate some form of process theology include Bradley Shavit Artson, Lawrence A. Englander, William E. Kaufman, Harold Kushner, Anton Laytner, Michael Lerner, Gilbert S. Rosenthal, Lawrence Troster, Donald B. Rossoff, Burton Mindick, and Nahum Ward. Alan Anderson and Deb Whitehouse have attempted to integrate process theology with the New Thought variant of Christianity. The work of Richard Stadelmann has been to preserve the uniqueness of Jesus in process theology.
    [Show full text]
  • I. the Word of God Is Everything We Need II. God Has Given Us
    What people need to understand today is that the truth is important. What you beLieve to be true is important, because it wiLL determine how you see Life and how you Live your Life. It wiLL determine your abiLity to understand Life and obey God. Truth exists because God is trustworthy. The biblical understanding of truth is that all truth comes from God. God has breathed life into all of Scripture. It is useful for teaching us The entirety of Your word is truth, and every one of Your what is true. It is useful for correcting our mistakes. It is useful for righteous judgments endures forever. PsaLm 119:160 making our lives whole again. It is useful for training us to do what is right. By using Scripture, a man of God can be completely prepared Truth is a gift that God gives to mankind. As we honor that to do every good thing. 2 Timothy 3:16-17 NIRV truth by believing in it and living by it we are blessed and preserved because of it. I. The Word of God is Everything We Need 4. God’s Word is to be obeyed as God directLy telling us what to do. It has been written, Man shall not live and be upheld and sustained by bread alone, but by every word that comes forth from the mouth of When God commands, we are to obey. When he asserts, we are God. Matthew 4:4 (AMP) to believe Him. When he promises, we are to embrace and trust those promises; thus, we respond to the sheer authority of For the Christian, the Bible is the measuring rod, and final word God’s word.
    [Show full text]
  • Experiencing God: God Speaks by the Holy Spirit Through Bible and Prayer
    • OCTOBER 5 • EXPERIENCING GOD: GOD SPEAKS BY THE HOLY SPIRIT THROUGH BIBLE AND PRAYER Reality #4: God speaks by the Holy Spirit through the Bible, prayer, circumstances, and the church to reveal Himself, His purposes, and His ways. Hebrews 1:1, “Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke to our fathers by the prophets…” When God spoke: 1. It was usually unique to that individual 2. He gave enough specific directions to do something now (Exodus 3:16-22) God speaks by the Holy Spirit 1 Corinthians 3:16, “Do you not know that you are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit dwells in you?” John 14:26, “But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.” John 16:13-14, “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.” 1. God reveals Himself - because He wants you to have faith to believe He can do what He says. Leviticus 19:1-2, “And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, ‘Speak to all the congregation of the people of Israel and say to them, You shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy.’” 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Brahman, Atman and Maya
    Sanatana Dharma The Eternal Way of Life (Hinduism) Brahman, Atman and Maya The Hindu Way of Comprehending Reality and Life Brahman, Atman and Maya u These three terms are essential in understanding the Hindu view of reality. v Brahman—that which gives rise to maya v Atman—what each maya truly is v Maya—appearances of Brahman (all the phenomena in the cosmos) Early Vedic Deities u The Aryan people worship many deities through sacrificial rituals: v Agni—the god of fire v Indra—the god of thunder, a warrior god v Varuna—the god of cosmic order (rita) v Surya—the sun god v Ushas—the goddess of dawn v Rudra—the storm god v Yama—the first mortal to die and become the ruler of the afterworld The Meaning of Sacrificial Rituals u Why worship deities? u During the period of Upanishads, Hindus began to search for the deeper meaning of sacrificial rituals. u Hindus came to realize that presenting offerings to deities and asking favors in return are self-serving. u The focus gradually shifted to the offerings (the sacrificed). u The sacrificed symbolizes forgoing one’s well-being for the sake of the well- being of others. This understanding became the foundation of Hindu spirituality. In the old rites, the patron had passed the burden of death on to others. By accepting his invitation to the sacrificial banquet, the guests had to take responsibility for the death of the animal victim. In the new rite, the sacrificer made himself accountable for the death of the beast.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Fundamentalism in Eight Muslim‐
    JOURNAL for the SCIENTIFIC STUDY of RELIGION Religious Fundamentalism in Eight Muslim-Majority Countries: Reconceptualization and Assessment MANSOOR MOADDEL STUART A. KARABENICK Department of Sociology Combined Program in Education and Psychology University of Maryland University of Michigan To capture the common features of diverse fundamentalist movements, overcome etymological variability, and assess predictors, religious fundamentalism is conceptualized as a set of beliefs about and attitudes toward religion, expressed in a disciplinarian deity, literalism, exclusivity, and intolerance. Evidence from representative samples of over 23,000 adults in Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, and Turkey supports the conclusion that fundamentalism is stronger in countries where religious liberty is lower, religion less fractionalized, state structure less fragmented, regulation of religion greater, and the national context less globalized. Among individuals within countries, fundamentalism is linked to religiosity, confidence in religious institutions, belief in religious modernity, belief in conspiracies, xenophobia, fatalism, weaker liberal values, trust in family and friends, reliance on less diverse information sources, lower socioeconomic status, and membership in an ethnic majority or dominant religion/sect. We discuss implications of these findings for understanding fundamentalism and the need for further research. Keywords: fundamentalism, Islam, Christianity, Sunni, Shia, Muslim-majority countries. INTRODUCTION
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptualizations of God by Lutheran Laypeople Ashley Burgess Leininger Iowa State University
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2009 Conceptualizations of God by Lutheran laypeople Ashley Burgess Leininger Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the Sociology Commons Recommended Citation Leininger, Ashley Burgess, "Conceptualizations of God by Lutheran laypeople" (2009). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 10805. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/10805 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Conceptualizations of God by Lutheran laypeople by Ashley Burgess Leininger A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Sociology Program of Study Committee: David Schweingruber, Major Professor Gloria Jones-Johnson Carl Roberts Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2009 Copyright © Ashley Burgess Leininger, 2009. All rights reserved. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. iv ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................ v INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Theism in Christianity, Islam and Sikhism: a Comparative Analysis
    THEISM IN CHRISTIANITY, ISLAM AND SIKHISM: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Ekpenyong Obo Ekpenyong and Emmanuel Williams Udoh Department of Religious and Cultural Studies, University of Calabar, Calabar, Nigeria Email: [email protected]; [email protected] ABSTRACT God is usually taken to be a necessarily existing being who is unsurpassably powerful, knowledgeable and good. Theism is conceptualized in a single being that is monotheism in some religions and polytheism that is more than one being in some others. Yet some others see theism in everything of human concern that is pantheism. The doctrine of God is strong-minded by means of the religious experiences of men and evident in the conduct of such religious persons. This work intends to show here, the points of similarities and dissimilarities between the concept of theism in Christianity, Islam and Sikhism. This work exposed among others that their major point of way out is that in Christianity, there is a distinctive and central teaching concerning Jesus Christ as unique incarnations, the word of God, pre-eminently manifested in a historic person, on the ground that his moral character perfectly represents the character and purpose of the invisible holy God. While Islam, and Sikhism, have no such doctrine, or theory of incarnation. INTRODUCTION Theism stems from the Greek word Theos meaning God or from the Latin word dues meaning Deity or God. But we are concerned here with the idea of God that is sacred power or different conceptions of God or deity in different world religions. Theism in some religions is conceptualized in a single being that is monotheism.
    [Show full text]
  • 4.NAPTS Bulletin 44.1 Copy
    B ulletin The North American Paul Tillich Society Volume XLIV, Number 1 Winter 2018 Editor: Frederick J. Parrella, Secretary-Treasurer Religious Studies Department, Santa Clara University Kenna Hall, Suite 300, Room H, Santa Clara, California 95053 Associate Editor: Jonathan Rothchild, Loyola Marymount University Assistant to the Editor: Vicky Gonzalez, Santa Clara University Telephone: 408.554.4714 or 408.554.4547 FAX: 408.554.2387 Email: [email protected] Web: www.NAPTS.org/Webmeister: Michael Burch, San Rafael, California ___________________________________________________________________________ In this issue: ❏ A Note from the Editor ❏ Renewal al of NAPTS RSO Status ❏ Call for Papers NAPS 2018 November 16-17, 2018, Denver, Colorado ❏ “State Philosophy, Micro-Fascism, and New Materiality; Paul Tillich’s contribution to Recent Political Philosophy” by Jari Ristiniemi ❏ “’A Tender Care That Nothing Be Lost’: Whitehead, Tillich, and the Eternal Life of the Ecosystem” by Janna Gonwa ❏ “The Tillichian Dispensability of the World to God” by Kirk R. MacGregor ❏ “Bernard Loomer as a Bridge Between Whitehead and Tillich: Towards a Ground-of- Being Process Theology” by Demian Wheeler A Personal Note from the Editor to complete work on the bulletin until this time I sin- cerely promise, if my health continues stable and solid, y sincere apologies for the lateness of the Winter to have the spring bulletin to you at the end of June. M Bulletin. Due to illness in December and January Thank you for your understanding. as well is a very busy academic schedule, I was unable Renewal of NAPTS RSO Status Tillich Society as a Related Scholarly Organization. Congratulations! [Editor’s Note: This is very good news for the fu- The AAR expects all of our partners- including ture of the NAPTS.
    [Show full text]
  • Religious Naturalism
    Religious Naturalism Michael BarreƩ wonders whether religious naturalism might be ‘a beƩer mouse- trap’. What does ‘religious naturalism’ Rather than trace the burgeoning of modern religious naturalism all through the enlightenment mean? era, it is more useful to focus on the development of this way of thinking in late 19th and early 20th The nineteenth century American thinker Emerson, century USA and Britain. Around that time seen by some as a precursor of modern religious religious naturalism diverged down two parallel naturalism, wrote: ‘If a man builds a better mouse- paths: a non-theistic mainstream approach, trap, the world will beat a path to his door.’ expressed for example by agnostic pragmatist However, if religious naturalism is an example, as I George Santayana, and a theistic approach in which, suggest, of his ‘better mousetrap’, why aren’t more as suggested earlier, Emerson is often cited as an people beating a path to that door? Why isn’t important influence. Some of Emerson’s religious naturalism more widely known? transcendentalist ideas, such as his notion of a ‘universal soul’ within or behind life, would today The term ‘religious’ is used here not to refer to a rule him out as a mainstream religious naturalist. cultural system or to any particular faith or philosophy, but to suggest the kind of affective In the mid-20th century modern religious experience – emotional or ‘spiritual’ feeling – of naturalism flourished among thinkers in the United awe, wonder, at-one-ness, respect, and reverence, States. Henry Nelson Wieman, professor of which can be evoked by nature. philosophy of religion at Chicago University in the 1930s-40s, adopted what he called ‘a theistic stance, ‘Naturalism’ is a view of the world and man’s but without a supernatural God’.
    [Show full text]
  • Visions of Justice, the Question of Imrnortality: a Study of the Nature Of
    Visions of Justice, the Question of Imrnortality: A Study of the Nature of Oppression and Liberation in the work of Rosemary Radford Ruether and Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki BY Anne Marie Martin, B.A., M.A. A Thesis Subrnitted to the School of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirernents for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy McMaster University (c) Copyright by Anw Marie Martin, July 1997 National Library BiMithèque nationale du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services seMcas bibliographiques 395 Wdiingtori Street 395, nie Wdlingtori O(tawa0N K1AW -ON K1AûN4 Canada canada The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive licence allowing the exclusive permettant a la National Library of Canada to Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/fb, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique. The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or otherwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ROSEMARY RADFORD RUETHER MARJORIE HEWITT SUCHOCKI Doctor of Philosopby (1997) McMaster University (Religious St udies) (Hamilton, Ontario) TITLE: Visions of Justice, the Question of Immortality: A Shidy of the Nature of Oppression and Liberation in the Work of Rosemary Radford Ruether and Marjorie Hewitt Suchocki AUTHOR: Anne Marie Martin, B.A.
    [Show full text]