Stanley Hauerwas: from The Peacable Kingdom

1.) We are unable to stand outside our histories in midair, as it were; we are destined to discover ourselves only within God’s history, for God is our beginning and our end (29).

2.) Christian ethics is specifically formed by a very definite story with determinative content (29).

3.) We do not come to see merely by looking, but must develop disciplined skills through initiation into that community that attempts to live faithful to the story of God (29-30).

4.) The Christian story trains us to see that in most of our life we act as if this is not God’s world and therein lies our fundamental sin.

5.) Sin is not some universal tendency of humankind to be inhuman or immoral, though sin may involve inhumanity and immorality. We are not sinful because we participate in some general human condition, but because we deceive ourselves about the nature of reality and so would crucify the very one who calls us to God’s kingdom (31).

Hauerwas defines what sin is and how sin is prevalent in mankind. In addition he refutes other notions about sin such as Niebuhr’s position of classically defining sin, which ultimately contradicts itself. It is a contradiction because it is classically regarded as an essential part of human nature, while at the same time an inherited evil which is inevitable ( Sanctify Them in Truth 64). He states sin to be a matter of unbelief, a turning away from the transcendent, by failing to acknowledge our own dependency. Thus the notion we try and be the master of our own destiny. The refusal to acknowledge this dependency and to live in communion with the transcendent, leads the self to a desire finite goods (66). If it is necessary to acknowledge this dependency, humility becomes a virtue required by Christians. The humility exemplified by the cross of Christ (67).

“His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which to put to death their hostility…” (70). What does this say about our duty to non-Christians? Our “obligation to be witnesses means we cannot safeguard ourselves from new challenges”. What challenges does this present in our interaction with non-Christian religions?

Taking into consideration our last class discussion, would Hauerwas claim that Christianity is the only way to locate ourselves and put us on the path to perfection? Would he say that the habits and practices within Christianity is the most effective way to find happiness?