The legacy of the Shoah invades christology as one of its most basic postfoundationalist challenges in the demise of modernity. Fackenheim heuristically amplifies the rupture of the metaphysical narratives of soteriology by the radical evil and sufferings in Auschwitz. As a representative instance of reorienting theological discourse through exposure to the trauma of the Shoah and the testimony of its Jewish survivors, Metz grounds practical christology in the biblical memory of suffering and an eschatological delimitation of time. Lévinas' phenomenology of the self counters residual issues in Metz and mediates a postfoundationalist framework for re-visioning christology after the Shoah. The phenomenological transposition of the notion of substitution to the ethical order rehabilitates Metz's practical christology and articulates the messianic significance of human agency as a sociopolitical responsibility for the sufferings of the broken and the dead.

This article is an effort toward practical, pastoral, theological correlation, an effort to bring together the American cultural tradition and the Christian theological tradition. Its argument develops in four cumulative theses to be explicated: (1) there is a crisis of family in the United States today; (2) what is said of family in both First and Second biblical Testaments is of no direct help in that crisis; (3) what makes a family Christian is not the slavish following of some biblical saying about family but the following of Jesus confessed as the Christ; (4) the Christian family has an important contribution to make in the contemporary crisis of family in the United States. Each thesis is developed in turn.

The experience of the many poor and of the many religions in today's world are two issues which this study addresses, from the perspective of human rights. Its thesis is that concern for the poor is not unique to Judaism and Christianity, but that all religions examined here contain an affirmation of the value of the individual person, as well as a compassion for the poor, which can lead to a universal concern for the rights of the poor and marginalized. Viewing human rights as a concept which expresses the aspirations of many religions, it examines their perceptions of human rights language and their concerns for the poor. In doing so, it rejects the postmodernist claim that all religions are incommensurable and cannot be compared on issues such as justice, human rights and concern for the poor, and argues for continuing efforts toward a global ethic.

Albert Camus' initial visceral hostility to the Christian faith was submitted to the test by his personal acquaintance with Christians in the underground Resistance to the Nazis. As a result, though never tempted to become a Christian himself, Camus' appraisal of Christianity underwent a profound transformation. As the re-evaluation of his Christian faith, though exceptionally detailed and perceptive, found only novelistic form, it has not been the object of the careful critical analysis it richly deserves. The present article explores what may justly be called Camus' meditation on the Christian faith in The Plague.

Theologies dedicated to radical social change require an understanding of how social change is possible. Gregory Baum has developed such a theory based on Max Weber's notion of charismatic leadership. This article analyzes Baum's understanding of the nature and dynamics of social change, the role of symbols therein, and shows how Baum corrects certain weaknesses in Weber's thought. Baum's theory could be strengthened by drawing upon Christian symbols of eschatological hope and the doctrine of the Trinity. This would help the church relate its faith to social movements and countervailing trends in terms of its own symbol system.

Based on a reading of James Cone's and Avery Dulles' analyses of revelation, this article raises questions about the adequacy of the American Catholic theology of revelation. In A Black Theology of Liberation, Cone criticizes contemporary American theology's understanding of revelation for not including the category of liberation from oppression in its definition of revelation. Systematic Theology: Roman Catholic Perspectives defines revelation as symbolic communication, but does not include the category of liberation from oppression. Dulles' omission, in light of Cone's criticism, suggests the possibility of and the need for revising the American Catholic theology of revelation. In pursuing this question, the article begins with an examination of Cone's notion of revelation and the challenge which it presents to American Catholic theology. This is followed by an investigation of some of Dulles' other writings to consider if such a revision would be compatible with his thought. In the final section, drawing upon the works of Dulles, Mark Kline Taylor, Cone, and other black theologians, suggestions for a revision are made.

In a University of San Francisco course on Building Christian Community videotapes of weekly sessions were exchanged with students in Taiwan and students communicated over the internet. Students learned how to report on the content, critique the process, and to apply principles. They grew more and more comfortable in class discussions, interrupting and contradicting each other and the teacher. Their discussions via e-mail grew in breadth of interest and in depth of content. Goals, strategies, and results of the course are critically assessed. Several advantages of distance learning via the internet emerged.

Johann Baptist Metz has exhorted Christian theologians to discard “system concepts” in favor of “subject concepts” in their theologizing. This revisioning of Christian theology recovers the primacy of the uniqueness and irreplaceability of the individual from totalizing doctrinal formulations and systems that function, for Metz, without reference to the subject. In short, a revisionist Christian theology in light of the Holocaust recovers the preeminence of the inviolability of individual human life.

How can such a revisioning be accomplished in the realm of Christian spirituality? This article will utilize the thought of Emmanuel Levinas to assert the primacy of ethics as “first philosophy” replacing ontology, and by implication the ontological foundations undergirding Christian spirituality, with the ethical relation. Such a relation is the basis for a new Christian spirituality that posits the primacy of merciful and compasionate action in the face of conditions of life in extremity.

The essay argues that resources in Scripture, tradition, and social theory are important but insufficient to the task of teaching social ethics. Liberation ethics promotes not only diverse epistemologies to evaluate the structures that mediate social relations, but also moral courage to execute social responsibility. Given this agenda, teaching social ethics also requires community-based learning experiences, democratic classrooms, and the social commitment of the academy. Drawing on student writing and the example of the author's own academic institution, the essay argues that multiple resources and sites are needed to educate students in ethical theory and moral courage.

An important but little-noticed debate is quietly going on between some theologians of the religions and some comparative theologians. The former, without negating the need for comparative theology, insist on the need for a theology of the religions; the latter call for a moratorium on construction of theologies of religion and a focus instead on comparative work. This essay sides with the theologians of religion and argues that contrary to the one-sided position of the comparativists and the premature judgments of some theologians of the religions, there is a need for both a theology of the religions and comparative analysis and synthesis because the two are the distinct but inseparable and integral a priori and a posteriori moments of a single theological project which aims at bringing Christianity into fruitful engagement with the non-Christian traditions. Because this engagement is essential to Christianity, the present debate is an important one even though it goes on in a field little tended, unfortunately, but many theologians.