To develop this theory, Karl Löwith—beginning with the more accessible philosophies of history in the nineteenth and eighteenth centuries and working back to the Bible—analyzes the writings of outstanding historians both in antiquity ...

Next SectionPublic discourse in continental Europe gives a uniquely prominent place to human dignity. The European Christianities have always taken this notion to be an outgrowth of their theological commitments. This sense of a conceptual continuity between Christianity and secular morality contributes to the way in which these Christianities, especially (but not exclusively) in Germany, have perceived their public role. In an exemplary manner, this essay engages the secularized societal environment. In meeting the secular discourse on its own home ground, (...) it seeks to recapture the theological roots of that discourse's defining value commitments. The challenges that modern societies present for Christians are seen not as a threat that would destroy a presumed original societas Christiana. Instead, these challenges create an opportunity to transform the Gospel's message so as to have it conform to, but also allow it to criticize, contemporary scientific knowledge about the world and man. Bonhoeffer's rendering of the Lutheran doctrine of the two kingdoms here makes it possible to link the Christian understanding of man as “in the image of God” with the secular affirmation of human dignity. As an intermediate concept, “incarnate reason” allows the bioethical discourse to preserve crucial aspects of the Christian tradition, while at the same time giving space to a constructive as well as critical exchange with secular discourse partners. (shrink)

In order to secure ethical relevance for phenomenology, Peter Dabrock proposes a synthesis with a Kantian rational ethic. The theological question thus arises concerning the tenability of such a synthesis and the acceptability of the corresponding translation of Protestant anthropology into the language of philosophy. Dabrock argues that man's character as an image of god, understood in the context of a theology of justification, can be translated into the philosophical concept of incarnate reason. Even if the concept of incarnate reason (...) sounds plausible in view of foundational theology and anthropology, its contribution to a foundation for material ethics is very limited because the body itself however has no normative impact when it comes to deciding about the ethical acceptability of concrete medical interventions. Thus, the constitutive significance of our being embodied becomes ethically relevant only insofar as that significance is integrated into a moral philosophical or theological ethical framework theory. (shrink)

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)

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)

In the Catholic understanding of grace perfecting nature, revelation must protect the truths reason might know when reason is in its healthy state, lest reason lose those truths if it lapses into an unhealthy state. For this reason, the supernatural is always part of the definition of the natural, and not just for Christians but for all human beings.

“Incarnate reason” names, in Peter Dabrock's essay, both the task of utilizing natural reason in ethical and political discourse, and an answer to the ontological question about human persons, “What are we?” In this essay, I investigate the significance of this construal for questions about the metaphysical, moral, and political status of the human embryo.