Search Results

This chapter focusses on the two principal Reformed responses to Bull's work, the Oxford lectures of Thomas Barlow and the Iustificatio Paulina of Thomas Tully. It notes that those opposing Bull's theology enjoyed the patronage of Bishop Morley of Winchester, as well as significant support within the University of Oxford, and were the spokesmen of a strong current of Anglican opposition to Arminian thinking. Advancing a traditionally Reformed and solifidian conception of justification, these writers argued that works played no part in the process of justification, but were nonetheless necessary as the way to salvation. In this way, they hoped to defend Reformed theology from the charge, levelled by Bull, that it ultimately led to antinomianism. The chapter underlines that Barlow and Tully's views were widely echoed amongst conforming churchmen into the 18th century.

This chapter traces the controversy surrounding the publication, in 1669, of George Bull's work on justification. It notes that Bull had the explicit support of Archbishop Sheldon and that his work should be seen as a public challenge to the Reformed theologians of the later Stuart period. Arguing that Bull's work has been misrepresented in earlier studies, the chapter offers a more complete picture of his thought on justification, his definition of faith, and his understanding of the relationships between good works and human salvation. The chapter notes that Bull's theology, though hotly contested, gained wide acceptance within the church, and that, Archbishop Tillotson, amongst others, adopted postions virtually identical to Bull's. The chapter traces the origin of Bull's thought to the continental writer, Simon Episcopius, and notes that many of the propositions found in Episcopius on this subject were close to those of the Socinian writers.

Argues that the parable of the Servant's Reward, which may seem harsh and may offend modern Western sensibilities, is corrective, rather than expository: the image of a master and his “unprofitable servants” complements that of a father and his beloved children. While highlighting the value of human effort in God's eyes, the parable warns against thinking that one can earn one's reward from God, that is, against a way of thinking that can be represented as follows:

I have done some good things

God has to do some good things for me because of this

Bypassing complex and culture‐specific concepts like “reward,” “merit,” “claim,” and “good works,” the chapter articulates the parable's message about God as follows:

God wants to do good things for me

not because I have done some good things

not because I can do some good things

This chapter examines the ideals of charity and the realities of welfare under the Byzantine Empire by focusing on the philanthropic activity of the Byzantine church. While ecclesiastical philanthropy grew and changed over centuries, the earliest Christian experience remained an important model that was often reasserted in an effort to imitate the direct charitable activity of Christ and the Apostles. This duty to assist has two outstanding features, love and charity, summed up by Jesus' instructions to his followers to love one another and to sell all they had and give to the poor. The chapter considers two aspects of the development of Byzantine charitable institutions: the mechanisms by which welfare was administered, and the underlying theory of good works. It shows that the theory of good works provided a major impetus to the practice of all Byzantine philanthropy.

If conversion was the task of the preacher, God himself was at work in the world chastising men and women through war, sickness, and other hardships to drive them from self‐centredness and unto him. Conscience also had its role to play, not as an independent entity, but as an internalization of the teaching of the Bible. This chapter relates the conversion stories of three different women who wrestle with the darkness of sin. Puritanism might call people to a sense of assurance of salvation but it also cautioned against ‘security,’ which might actually be a sense of false confidence, and so it encouraged an internal agitation that might drive some people toward suicide. Divines did, however, offer some signs of election, notably good works and love of true piety, by which the psychological distress might be quietened.

This chapter is the text of an unpublished 1980 college Evensong sermon on what kind of heaven is the subject of Christian hope, in response to Robert Mugabe's claim that in Christianity material things don't matter. The sermon founds on what happened to be the text for a reading at Evensong that day, linked to verses in the same Pauline epistle that are foundational for the teaching of the Second Vatican Council on the relation between good works in this world and their transfigured existence in Christ's completed kingdom.

Amsdorf was one of Martin Luther's closest friends over many years and taught with Luther on the university faculty in Wittenberg. Although he served briefly as the bishop of Naumburg and played an important role in the reform of the city of Goslar, he is remembered primarily as a leader of the Gnesio‐Lutherans, who opposed Melanchthon on the role of good works in justification and the usefulness of philosophy in theology. He also opposed the acceptance of the Leipzig Interim by the adiaphorists, Melanchthon and Bugenhagen.

Pulling the narrative strands together, this chapter describes first the Eliots' evolving perceptions of life after death, from a literal heaven of family reunions to an ongoing mystical life of spirits who visit and counsel the living, to memories and good works that live on through subsequent generations, to the natural process of human atoms being returned to the universe to recombine in new forms and to take on new missions. More central, the chapter looks at the ways the Eliots manage the distance between the living and dead by preserving mementoes, creating memorials, writing their loved one's biographies, recording their histories on tape, and embracing the pain and struggle of separation.

The third chapter argues that medieval theology, struggling with the biblical insights of Augustine and Damascene, eventually finds a way to uphold the strengths of both Fathers’ approaches—but without resolving the tension between their approaches. Eriugena advances a position similar to that of John of Damascus, while Aquinas develops Augustine's position in a systematic manner. Ockham argues that predestination generally depends upon God's foreknowledge of good works, but he does not say how this can be squared with the biblical teaching about God's utterly gracious election. Catherine insists that God causes our goodness and permits some to rebel permanently, and that from eternity God loves each and every rational creature without any deficiency in God's love.

Americans have viewed heaven and its entrance requirements in many different ways. Their views of the afterlife have been significantly shaped by their interpretation of sacred scriptures, especially the Bible. However, because the Bible says relatively little about heaven and its description is largely metaphorical, people's desires and life experiences have significantly influenced their understanding of heaven. At various times, Americans have pictured heaven as an unparalleled paradise, an unending banquet, a celestial city, a refuge of the redeemed, a glorious kingdom, a magnificent home, a haven from the world's ills, a posh vacation resort, a perpetual playground, and a therapeutic center. While most Christians have argued that individuals will be admitted to heaven only if they accept Jesus Christ as their savior and Lord, many others, including numerous Catholics and Jews, have contended that people's upright conduct and good works play a major role in getting them into heaven.

This chapter traces the growing concern with health issues at work and examines the argument that work is good for health. It reviews trends in health and the self-reporting of limiting illnesses. A summary is provided of the developments in public policy for managing health at work in the context of an ageing population, high levels of people on incapacity benefits and the government's case that work is the best form of welfare. The chapter argues that a bio-psychosocial model of the ‘illness experience’ derived from a multi-disciplinary approach is needed to understand how people and organisations can better manage health conditions at work.

This chapter looks at employment from the perspective of employers. It talks about their attempts to improve the lives of workers, and their frustrations that workers don't seem to behave as they want. It says that many employers are concerned about the supposed immoral behavior of employees as employers wanted hard-workers with what they called a “good work ethic.” The chapter talks about the phrase “hard-worker,” how it is used to describe the ideal worker, and how causes the myriad other possible reasons for behaviors that seemed like laziness to be overlooked. It discusses how relying on the laziness myth has left employers without feasible explanations for their workers' behavior.

How might colleges and universities point students toward lives of meaning and purpose? Traditional-age college students are now termed “emerging adults,” individuals who are transitioning from adolescence to adulthood through an extended exploratory time that often lasts into the late twenties or beyond. The college years are a critical juncture, and social realities like alcohol abuse can derail the maturation process. Many colleges and universities are renewing attention to matters related to character development. New and expanded campus honor codes are being written, new classes on ethics are being added, and many schools are providing new opportunities for students to reflect on the spiritual dimensions of their life choices. The personal quest for meaning appears in three forms: the well-planned life, the authentic life, and the summoned life.

This chapter critiques three categories of institutions that are basic to personal and collective well-being: epistemic or knowledge-producing institutions, educational or personally formative institutions, and workplaces as institutional settings in which personal qualities are expressed in activity that is more or less characteristic of living well. It addresses the ways in which these institutions should ideally contribute to the creation and sustaining of opportunities to live well, and it goes on to consider how these institutions actually do function in increasingly complex contemporary societies. Joseph Tainter’s model of growing social complexity and declining marginal return on investments in complexity is examined and discussed in connection with equal opportunity, credential inflation, academic specialization, and the structure of educational systems. This extends and deepens a critique of existing institutions that runs through the entire book. The chapter ends with proposals for reforming selected institutions to make them more conducive to sustainability. Ideals of flourishing, transparency, social reciprocity, the inherent satisfactions of good work, and problem-focussed collaborative research play important roles.

This chapter continues to complicate the optimistic embrace of creative livelihoods and practices as a mode of transitioning away from criminality by attending to Budhan Theater’s gender politics and performance. Competing constructions of good work and good women rest on complex intersections and negotiations of histories of stigma based on criminality alongside histories of stigma attached to women performing onstage. The chapter argues that performance enables uneven class mobility and intense affective experiences of cross-dressing men. Ultimately although Budhan Theater leaders optimistically promote artistic practice and creative livelihoods their plays are also a tribute to the economic value, embodied strength, and moral meaning of illegal livelihoods of Chhara women offstage. Ultimately, this shows that Budhan Theater’s embrace of creative economy is hardly absolute.

This chapter talks about what people may learn from social work controversies, focusing on three general topics: the essential limits of science in social work, the misuses of science, and the principles and practices that help foster good social work research. In the process of evaluating if a particular example of social work research is good or not, one is likely to assume the question is about whether intelligent decisions were made about the study design, the methodology, the analysis and interpretation of the data, and so on. The direct research experience the majority of social workers have of carrying out research may be related to small projects linked to time on qualifying programmes, but it is precisely these criteria by which their work will be assessed.

This chapter explains how Ussher conceived of sanctification as flowing inevitably out of union with Christ as one of the benefits of that union. It examines Ussher’s distinction between habitual righteousness, in which the heart is renewed by the Holy Spirit, and actual righteousness, manifest in believers’ lives as they seek to live under the kingship of Christ, who rules his people through his word. Ussher was realistic about the demands made by God’s law, recognising the impossibility of perfect obedience. However, he drew encouragement from God’s intent to see his people conformed to the likeness of his Son through the work of the Holy Spirit in their own active and passive obedience. This was the basis for Ussher’s exhortations to holiness. This chapter also considers Ussher’s use of the word ‘Puritan’ and contains an extended discussion on the subject of good works, merit, and reward in the next life.

The new character of the life in union with Christ and formed in the worship of the Church nourishes the fundamental virtues of faith and love. Having established the theological underpinnings of the Christian character and the community setting in which it comes into existence and grows, this chapter considers the virtues of this Christian character and argues for a particular understanding of virtue in view of Luther’s teaching on virtue and good works. Although Luther’s criticism of Aristotelian philosophy was so strong that he rarely even used the term “virtue,” he speaks of “good works” as inclinations that grow out of faith and love. Faith inclines a person toward worship, thanks, and praise of God. Love inclines Christians to see themselves in the place of their neighbors in accordance with the Golden Rule and to act according to the neighbor’s benefit.