A relatively small but intellectually robust strand in the Christian religion is the Reformed tradition. Especially, its Calvinist sensibilities inform this Protestant stance towards human culture in general and vocations in particular. Correspondingly, there are some small but robust contributions to academic discourse in nursing ethics. So far there has been no attempt to bring those together as a distinct approach. This article suggests such a Reformed Christian, especially Calvinist, account of nursing ethics. Central to the Reformed perspective is the notion that God is sovereign over all of creation and culture and hence that there can be no religiously or morally neutral area in human life. Consequently, nursing is not seen as professional to the extent it is based on research evidence or theoretical models, but to the extent it serves the ultimate purpose of the practice of care. In the Reformed view, this purpose is fostering the well-being of human beings in need as intrinsically valuable. Nurses are professionals who accept this responsibility, that is, the whole of expectations holding for personal qualities, conduct and outcomes, required to serve the purpose of care. As this is a moral purpose, succeeding or failing to live up to these expectations is the source of moral issues in nursing.
Missiology has always been inspired by soteriology, that is, Christian views of salvation. However, little is known about the actual soteriological beliefs of missionary practitioners. This article is an explorative qualitative study of soteriological beliefs among Dutch Protestant ministers who work in pioneer settings (N=20) and established churches (N=40). Our research shows that, contrary to what might be expected, these two groups (termed ‘pioneers’ and ‘pastors’) are very much alike with regard to their soteriological beliefs. The majority are convinced of the uniqueness of Jesus, and the connection of salvation with God and/or Jesus – even if this salvation is often expressed in immanent terms. Only two differences have been found between pastors and pioneers. Pioneers experience more challenges in communicating the uniqueness of Christianity and they are more likely to have traditional views of ‘eternal lostness’.
What if religion was taken more seriously during the Iranian revolution in 1979? There are scholars who argue that it would have made a difference in international relations. These so-called ‘religionists’ argue that religion has unfortunately been neglected by International Relations. In their view, religion has never disappeared and it could even be argued that religion has seen a resurgence since the late 1960s. Why, therefore, has religion not been incorporated into theories of international relations? This book provides a critical reconstruction of the position of these religionists. It investigates how Hans Morgenthau’s classical realism and Kenneth Waltz’s neorealism deal with religion. Do these theories indeed ignore religion? Do they ignore it for the reasons put forward by the religionists? The conclusion is that the religionists quite convincingly argue for the importance and relevance of religion in international relations. However, the reasons given do not do justice to Morgenthau's classical realism and Waltz's neorealism, as they overlook the theological inspiration (Augustine and Niebuhr) of political realism and the importance of theorizing. As a result of an evaluation of both positions, this book presents an alternative approach inspired by the Amsterdam School of Philosophy, called a new Christian political realism. It incorporates the theological inspiration of political realism and the necessity of theorizing while doing justice to the relevance and manifold manifestations of religion in international relations.
