In this paper, I assess Peter Dabrock's “Drawing distinctions responsibly and concretely: A European Protestant perspective on foundational theological bioethics.” I explore the ways in which Dabrock announces nontraditional Christian assumptions to guide Christian bioethics, engages the secular bioethical agenda on the very terms set by and congenial to the field of secular bioethics, and searches for insights from philosophy and science through which to recast Christian moral judgments. For example, he cites approvingly, as if they were expressive of Christian (...) moral concerns: human rights, democracy, and state-based social redistribution of resources to satisfy welfare entitlements. In this short essay, I argue that Dabrock has unduly limited the role of Traditional Christian theology to guide bioethics and, consequently, has also wrongly characterized the Christian moral life and Christian social/political obligations. (shrink)

Peter Dabrock argues that western Christian roots have shaped the western European mindset, that of believers and secular thinkers alike, such that (1) western Europeans hold the concept of human dignity as a central moral category and believe that respect for human dignity should frame social and political decisions and respect for human dignity is the foundation of bioethics, (2) Christians and secular thinkers can engage each other on secular terms using the shared language and focus on human dignity, and (...) (3) such engagement using a common moral focus/lens facilitates dialogue and convergence on issues in bioethics. Dabrock's analysis and conclusions raise a number of important points for discussion. This essay examines three elements of his analysis that are particularly important for assessing his overall claim about a common Christian and secular morality in western Europe and for understanding the relationship between such a vision and Christian bioethics. (shrink)

This essay pursues two goals: First, the appropriateness of Dabrock's point of departure is highlighted; his emphasis on God's address of man appropriately defines the axiological core of any societal or bioethical judgment. Secondly, this essay argues that Dabrock has not sufficiently exploited the potential offered by this point of departure and that he disregards its social policy and bioethical potential. The further criterion introduced by Dabrock (incarnate reason) is shown to be not sufficiently helpful because of its vagueness and (...) problematic implications. The essay concludes that Dabrock's goals could be better realized by focusing more thoroughly on his language- and communication-theology approach, namely God's address to man. Here, after all, bioethical conclusions can be derived that would allow Dabrock's account to offer the needed societal and bioethical orientation. (shrink)

Digital technologies have become an integrated part of everyday life, and this development has not left relationships untouched. A need exists for theological reflection on the interaction between the dynamic contexts of the digital age and Christian marital relationships. The relational implications of the digital age are quite vast; therefore the focus of the article will be limited to online identity formation as a particular challenge of the digital age. Employing the method of a literature study within the scientific field (...) of practical theology, this article explores the interplay between online identity formation and Christian marriage. It suggests that online identity formation exists around a reciprocal interaction with two prominent qualities of Christian marriages: The expansion of the self and one-ness. When considering the interplay between online identity formation and Christian marriage, awareness can be created regarding the marital implications of spouses' online engagements, which may enhance contextual pastoral care with a relational focus within the digital age. CONTRIBUTION: The article contributes to practical theological reflection on challenges posed to Christian marriages by the digital age. It is aimed at stimulating pastoral thinking regarding online identity formation and its adverse effects on so-called one-ness in Christian marriages that can enhance pastoral care with a view on the flourishing of couples in the digital age. (shrink)