Reinhold Niebuhr During the Time of the White Compromise

The story of how the theological ethicist, Reinhold Niebuhr, dealt with race during the “white compromise” (from after Reconstruction to the Civil Rights Movement) gives us a good picture of what will work and not work in re-directing American Prosperity toward a sustainable future. In his early years, Niebuhr argued against the Ku Klux Klan in Detroit, and supported sharecropper cooperatives in Arkansas. He guided his later ethical analysis of national and international groups by what he called “Christian realism,” which assumed that groups had limited capacity for doing good. At the height of his national status, he wrote books as though American history was the same as white history. He suggested caution in applying the Brown v. Board of Education decision to white families and after the civil rights movement had disrupted the “white compromise,” Niebuhr moved somewhat closer to Martin Luther King Jr.’s view of the “beloved community.”

Исторический процесс в свете христианской антропологии Ф. М. Достоевского

Based on the fundamental concepts of the "mystery of man" and Christian realism, the "law of the Ego" and the "law of love" for Dostoevsky's creative consciousness, the article examines the one-sidedness of biologizing and socializing concepts of human nature since the Enlightenment and their connection with entropic processes in the spiritual and moral world of people and declining trends in the course of history. It is shown how the spiritual laws of life, which are leaving the field of view of rationalistic and pragmatic consciousness, transform social-progressive design and planning, and introduce nihilistic elements into them. It is emphasized that the methodology of Christian realism is universal, that it connects the "mystery of man" with the mystery of history, and becomes one of the main principles for assessing the hierarchy of values in various ideological and social systems.

For Christ and Country

The Second World War marked a landmark moment of transition for both ecumenical and evangelical Protestants in the United States. The arrival of war in December 1941 emboldened both groups of Protestants to make the case not only for armed intervention abroad but also for spiritual intercession. The pacifist isolationism of Protestant ecumenists faded as they embraced the Christian realism of Reinhold Niebuhr and called for a new “American Century” of Protestant and democratic values. Meanwhile, fueled by an apocalyptic militarism, American fundmenatlists sought to use the war to reclaim a more prominent role in American politics and foreign affairs. As both groups of American Protestants mobilized “for Christ and country,” they also began to outline competing missions to remake the world, and above all Germany, out of the ruins of war.

Feminism

This chapter examines three feminist responses to Reinhold Niebuhr’s thought and contemporary Christian Realism—conflict, integration, and conversation. The chapter emphasizes the need for future conversation between feminists, realists, and ethicists across a wide variety of fields with people living in the most vulnerable and precarious economic circumstances in the US and around the world. More attention and exploration of Christian concepts of sin and redemption relevant within the contemporary context are worthy of attention. Fostering more intentional conversation across established disciplinary boundaries and with the world’s most vulnerable people will chart a new course in Christian ethics and nurture a more authentic American moral conscience in light of the greatest moral and theological problems of the twenty-first century.

International Relations Theory

The study of international relations is dominated by the school of Realism, articulated in its classical form by Hans Morgenthau. It teaches that great powers are focused on enhancing their national interest defined in terms of power: military, political, and economic. Reinhold Niebuhr became known as the father of Christian Realism, adding his own biblical and Augustinian insights about human nature and its effects on the evil uses of power. Traditionally, both forms of Realism incorporated ethical judgement within their analysis. After Niebuhr’s death, Realism became neorealism, a value-free social science which eschews ethical judgement as any part of international relations study, as did the other major schools—except for the English School. This chapter argues that the English School represents the modern paradigm closest to Niebuhr’s perspective.

Violence, Pacifism, and the Use of Force

This chapter lays out the historical development of Niebuhr’s thought on war and peace in the context of American history and religious thought. It argues that in his early thought he accepts the received wisdom concerning early Christian non-violence, a position that led him to join the “Fellowship of Reconciliation” in 1928. With the Japanese incursions into China in the early 1930s, however, his position began to shift in ways captured in his early exchange with his brother, H. Richard Niebuhr. By the time he delivered the Gifford Lectures, at the very beginning of the Second World War, he has rejected pacifism and begun to develop the positions associated with ‘Christian Realism’. This extended into the early period of nuclear deterrence, though with increasing qualification. By the early 1960s, the perceived lack of restraint led Paul Ramsey to turn to the Catholic just war tradition to articulate a Reformation doctrine of principled love that could clarify which uses of force were acceptable and which had to be rejected. The tradition of Niebuhr persists, however, in such thinkers as John Carlson, whose Christian realist account of war and peace draws directly from Niebuhr and his legacy.

Democracy

This chapter examines Reinhold Niebuhr’s anti-utopian defence of democracy, conceived primarily as a political arrangement marked by balance of power, rule by the governed, and a liberal constitutional order. Niebuhr’s democracy, however, is both a procedural form of government and a substantial ethical commitment. His essayistic style traversed disciplines in search of a pragmatic public philosophy that might navigate between hope and despair given inevitable conflict in democratic life. Pregnant with broader claims of morality and theology, his dialectical method crystallizes deep patterns of thought in what came to be known as his Christian Realism. The chapter places these views in historical context and notes their critical reception, highlighting debts to Augustinian, Marxist, Calvinist, and Kantian traditions. But the focus is normative and contemporary. Renewed questions about the uncertain prospects of democracy and its challenges suggest an opportunity to assess what is living and what is dead in Niebuhr’s influential account.

Love

Reinhold Niebuhr regarded love as the law of human nature. He interpreted that love as agape, identified it with God’s love, and claimed that Jesus revealed it as universal, self-transcending, forgiving, non-resistant, and sacrificial. According to Niebuhr such love produces harmony yet humans inevitably succumb to something less. This inveterate shortcoming grounded Niebuhr’s Christian Realism and concentrated his social ethics on justice, which he related to love dialectically. It also shaped Niebuhr’s exposition of the Christian Gospel as primarily disclosure of God’s forgiveness, which enables human beings to love self-transcendently and thus fulfil their nature by freeing them from their failure to do so. Niebuhr’s account of love stimulated widespread interest in the topic and extensive criticism of his proposals. Nonetheless, Niebuhr argued that the paradoxical relationship of sacrificial and mutual love in history validated that account and the social ethics and soteriology he connected to it.