2004
Volume 73, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 0165-2346
  • E-ISSN: 2773-1847

Abstract

Abstract

In western society the unequal division of goods is justified to a substantial degree with an appeal to the meritocratic ideal. This ideal has several problematic aspects. This article explores an alternative basis for the division of goods based on the works of two fathers of the early church: Ambrose of Milan and Gregory of Nyssa. Both authors emphasize the common nature all humans share from an incarnational perspective and its implications for a just handling of wealth and property. The resulting approach to the division of goods centered around human connectedness contributes to the common good of society.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/KT2022.3.003.AGTE
2022-08-01
2022-09-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ambrosius (1975). De Nabuthae (M. G.Mara, Ed. & Transl.). L’Aquila: L.U. Japadre.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Ambrosius (2002). De Officiis (I. J.Davidson, Ed. & Transl.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Allen, P. (2011). Challenges in Approaching Patristic Texts from the Perspective of Contemporary Catholic Social Teaching. In B. J.Matz, & J.Leemans (Eds.), Reading Patristic Texts on Social Ethics: Issues and Challenges for the Twenty-First Century (pp. 30-42). Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bieringer, R. (2011). Texts that Create a Future. In B. J.Matz, & J.Leemans (Eds.), Reading Patristic Texts on Social Ethics: Issues and Challenges for the Twenty-First Century (pp. 3-29). Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown, P. (2012). Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD.Princeton: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Gregorius vanNyssa (1964). De Pauperibus Amandis (A.Van Heck, Ed.). Leiden: Brill.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Holman, S. R. (2001). The Hungry are Dying: Beggars and Bishops in Roman Cappadocia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Lampert, K. (2013). Meritocratic Education and Social Worthlessness.London: Palgrave Pivot.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Leemans, J., & Verstraeten, J. (2011). The (Im)possible Dialogue between Patristics and Catholic Social Thought. In B. J.Matz, & J.Leemans (Eds.), Reading Patristic Texts on Social Ethics: Issues and Challenges for the Twenty-First Century (pp. 222-231). Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Mulligan, T. (2017). What’s Wrong with Libertarianism: A Meritocratic Diagnosis. In J.Brannon, B.Van der Vossen & D.Schmidtz (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Libertarianism (pp. 77-91). Abingdon: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Otten, W. (2007). Het Aanzicht der Barmhartigheid in de Vroegchristelijke Traditie van het Westen: Diaconale Theologie en Praktijk bij Cyprianus, Ambrosius en Augustinus. In W.Otten, M.Schrama & J.Smit, Wanneer Hebben Wij U Hongerig Gezien? Het Aanzien van de Onaanzienlijken bij Matteüs en Augustinus (pp. 31-52). Utrechtse Theologische Reeks 58. Utrecht: Universiteit Utrecht.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Ramsey, B. (1982). Almsgiving in the Latin Church. Theological Studies, 43(2), 226-259.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Sandel, M. J. (2020). The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good?New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Sen, A. (2000). Merit and Justice. In K.Arrow, S.Bowles & S.Durlaf (Eds.), Meritocracy and Economic Inequality (pp. 5-16). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Utrecht: Universiteit Utrecht.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Woodruff, P. (2018). Growing Toward Justice. In M.LeBar (Ed.), Justice (pp. 13-38). New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Young, M. (2017). The Rise of the Meritocracy, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/KT2022.3.003.AGTE
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error