The villain who confused moral theology

Heythrop Journal 51 (2):268-287 (2010)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The call of the Second Vatican Council for the renewal of moral theology has received very divergent responses. This article identifies and compares three such proposals. The underlying presupposition for this analysis is that each proposal begins with a divergent understanding of where the tradition went awry. Hence, the proposed cures ended up irreconcilable. This article seeks to describe ‘as precisely as possible the nature of the confusion and its sources, showing where attention must be directed if a solution is to be discovered.’1.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,197

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

How Can Theology Be Moral?Oliver O'Donovan - 1989 - Journal of Religious Ethics 17 (2):81 - 94.
Confused thought and modes of presentation.Krista Lawlor - 2005 - Philosophical Quarterly 55 (218):21-36.
A notional worlds approach to confusion.Krista Lawlor - 2007 - Mind and Language 22 (2):150–172.
The Concept as Villain.J. A. McWilliams - 1964 - New Scholasticism 38 (4):445-452.
Spraying color.David R. Hilbert - 2009 - In Katharina Grosse: Atoms Inside Balloons. Chicago, USA: The Renaissance Society at the University of Chicago. pp. 240-251.
The Finite Supernatural: Theological Perspectives.Charles Stinson - 1973 - Religious Studies 9 (3):325 - 337.
Christian ethics: moral theology in the light of Vatican II.Karl H. Peschke - 1986 - Alcester, Warwickshire: C. Goodliffe Neale.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-14

Downloads
20 (#770,916)

6 months
1 (#1,477,342)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references