The Dynamic between Love and Justice: A Confucian Engagement with Reinhold Niebuhr in the Chinese Context
The dynamic between love and justice raised by Reinhold Niebuhr points to the possibility of transforming justice by love while acknowledging the distance between the two. This position has recently been challenged by Nicholas Wolterstorff’s idea of “love incorporating justice.” This article reexami...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de documento: | Recurso Electrónico Artigo |
| Idioma: | Inglês |
| Verificar disponibilidade: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Carregar...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Publicado em: |
Sage Publ.
[2020]
|
| Em: |
Theology today
Ano: 2020, Volume: 77, Número: 3, Páginas: 269-284 |
| Classificações IxTheo: | BM Universismo chinês KAJ Época contemporânea KBA Europa ocidental KBM Ásia NCA Ética |
| Outras palavras-chave: | B
Justice
B China B Love B Confucianism B Reinhold Niebuhr |
| Acesso em linha: |
Volltext (Resolving-System) |
| Resumo: | The dynamic between love and justice raised by Reinhold Niebuhr points to the possibility of transforming justice by love while acknowledging the distance between the two. This position has recently been challenged by Nicholas Wolterstorff’s idea of “love incorporating justice.” This article reexamines this dynamic between love and justice in the Chinese context, introducing Confucian alternatives to Western-style political order (in the version of the “Confucian constitutionalism” of Qing Jiang) to the Western theory of justice (in the version of the “Chinse theory of justice” of Yushun Huang), and to avoid the conflict between love and justice (in terms of the “Confucian love with distinction” of Yong Huang). This article argues that to explore social justice in China the concepts of love—both Confucian ren and Christian agape—can make their own contributions, demanding just institutions while revealing human limitations. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2044-2556 |
| Obras secundárias: | Enthalten in: Theology today
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1177/0040573620947048 |