Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:00:22.269Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Golden Rule: Exegetical and Theological Perplexities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Paul Ricoeur
Paul Ricoeur
Affiliation:
Chatenay, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The problem which I offer for your discussion may be raised in the following terms: if one assumes that the Golden Rule constitutes the basic moral rule about which the wisest may agree, what happens to this rule when it is put within a religious perspective, more precisely, within the perspective delineated by the symbolic network characteristic of the Jewish-Christian scriptures?

Type
Articles
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 36 , Issue 3 , July 1990 , pp. 392 - 397
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* Main paper presented on 26 July, 1989 at the 44th General Meeting of SNTS in Dublin. This paper is the last part of the Frederick Neumann Lecture which I read at Princeton Theological Seminary, November 7, 1988. In the first part, I try to show that the Golden Rule may be rightly held as the basic rule of morality. I do this in connection with Kan's categorical imperative. In the second part, I explain what I mean by religious perspective by introducing the concepts kof gift and economy of gift as the supra-ethical referent of the ‘religious’ as such.

1 On the exegetical plane the controversy has taken technical turns. How is Lk 6.31 to be read? As a positive assessment of the Golden Rule or as a mere quotation submitted to further refutation? Some exegetes notice that the first part of the sentence uses an indicative mood: ‘And as you wish that men would do to you, do so to them.’ But what aboutthe imperative mood of the second half? Some have suspected a corrupted text and join 6.31 with 6.32–5 by reading: ‘And if, as you wish that men would do to you, and do so to them (31) and if you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? For even sinners love those who love them. (32)’ See Merkelbach, Reinhold, ‘Über eine Stelle im Evangelium des Lukas’, Grazer Beiträge 1 (1970) 171–5Google Scholar. But then a wide gulf separates Luke from Matthew, who quot s the Golden Rule with apparent approval. In order to narrow this gap, the sentence in Mt 7.12, we are told, should not be held as a central element of Jesus' preaching, but should be ascribed to an earlier common tradition (ibid.). The difficulties pertaining to these interconnected attempts would be eliminated if we assumed a more positive assessment of th Golden Rule, as I will suggest later.

2 I owe this remark to Wolbert, Werner, ‘Die Goldene Regel und das jus talionis’, TT 7 (1986) 169–81.Google Scholar