PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Religious Approach”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 973 records · Page 54Linked to original sources
PubMed2004

Spirituality and medicine: idiot-proofing the discourse.

The field of spirituality and medicine has seen explosive growth in recent years, due in part to significant private support for the development of curricula in more than half of all U.S. medical schools, and for related residency training programs and research centers. While there is no single definition of "spirituality" in use across these initiatives, this article examines the definitions and learning objectives relevant to spirituality that are addressed in a 1999 report of the Medical School Objectives Project (MSOP), with special attention to their ethical implications. It concludes with several "diagnostic" case studies of religious consciousness from the medical literature and in literary texts, again with attention to ethical concerns.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2004

Sexual modification therapies: ethical controversies, philosophical disputes, and theological reflections.

Knowing, either by the light of natural reason or by the light of Christian revelation, that homosexuality is a disordered condition is not sufficient for its being ethically permissible to direct self-identified homosexual persons toward just any treatment that aims to modify sexual orientation. For example, such an undertaking would be morally impermissible in cases where the available "treatments" are known to be both futile and potentially damaging to persons undertaking them. I, therefore, introduce this edition of Christian Bioethics by reflecting on (a) the position of homosexuality in our current psychiatric nosology, (b) problems with drawing causal inferences from the outcomes of psychotherapy studies, and (c) the advantages and disadvantages of appealing to traditional categories of sexual orientation in this discussion, all with an eye toward more deeply elucidating core ethical concerns involving the intentional psychotherapeutic modification of sexual orientation.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2004

Sexual reorientation therapy: an orthodox perspective.

This article evaluates the phenomenon of sexual reorientation therapy from the standpoint of Orthodox Christian theology. It is argued that homosexual desire is the product of the fall of mankind and cannot be considered "normal." At the same time, however, reorientation therapies, whether secular or Christian, are inherently reductionistic and fail to address the underlying spiritual pathologies involved in homosexual desire (or any other deep-seated passion). The purpose of therapeia in the Orthodox Church is the psycho-somatic transfiguration of the whole person into the image of Christ, not merely the cessation of homosexual activity or the "reidentification" of one's "lifestyle."

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2004

The Catholic Church, the American military, and homosexual reorientation therapy.

Homosexual activist groups have targeted the Catholic Church and the American military as institutions especially in need of transformation. Associations of healthcare professionals are also under assault from homosexual activists. It is, nevertheless, appropriate for the Church and the military to defend themselves against this assault, to affirm that homosexuality is incompatible with Christian ethics and military service, and to help homosexuals free themselves from the vice of homosexuality. Arguments that homosexual reorientation therapy is unethical are unsound. Such therapy is consistent with the Christian virtue of charity.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2004

Are we ready for sexual reorientation therapy in the U.S. military? A response to David W. Lutz.

In his paper "The Catholic Church, the American Military, and Homosexual Reorientation Therapy," David W. Lutz ultimately concludes that it is "appropriate, and highly ethical" for the American military to offer reorientation therapy to help homosexuals overcome "the vice of sodomy." The major thrust of his paper, however, is to call for abandonment of the "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" policy currently in place in the military. Lutz's paper covers much ground, and this review begins by examining whether such a wide view is necessary for the ultimate conclusions. It goes on to ask whether Lutz has omitted to mention important considerations bearing on this issue, and whether Lutz's call for the introduction of reorientation therapy is a serious call or a symbolic response to homosexual activities. Lutz fails to address essential issues such as the actual experiences of other nations having homosexuals in the military, and issues regarding what constitutes "reorientation therapy," the latter leading to questions about how such a therapy would actually be implemented.

Behavior Therapy↗
PubMed2005

Between morality and repentance: recapturing "sin" for bioethics.

Distinguishing within "sin" the dimensions of anomia, hamartia, and asthenia makes it possible to analyze in greater detail the contrary manners in which traditional and post-traditional Christianities in this issue of Christian Bioethics endeavor to recapture what was lost when secular bioethics reconstructed the specifically spiritual-context-oriented normative commitments of Christianity in one-dimensionally moral terms. Various post-traditional attempts at securing moral orientation and resources for forgiveness, both of which secular bioethics finds increasingly difficult to provide, are critically reviewed. Their engagement of secular moral concepts and concerns, and even their adoption of an academically philosophical posture and language, is presented as responsible for their failure to adequately preserve what in traditional Christianity would count as prohibited vs. permitted, and advisable vs. non-advisable, or what would allow to resolve "tragic conflicts." The deeper reason for this failure lies in post-traditional Christianity's restricting the Christian life (with its central tension between love and the law) to what can be captured by cognitive categories. As the survey of several traditionally Christian accounts of sin in bioethics makes clear, both moral orientation (along with the resolution of "tragic" conflicts) and the sources of forgiveness are available, once that Christian life is framed in terms of persons' spirit-supported practical involvement in ascesis and liturgy, and once bioethical reflections are situated in the experiential context of such involvement.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2005

Sin and bioethics.

The essay starts out with defining the biblical concept of sin in the Old and the New Testaments. The literal knowledge of divine truth is distinguished from its truthful and spiritual interpretation. A further distinction should be made between the Creator of life (God) and the medium or "intermediary creator" (man) of life. I argue for the "single wholeness" of the human race and for the unity of human responsibility in bioethics. In delineating the teaching of the Church on abortion and family planning, I show that the healing of all human diseases, from traditional interventions to genetic ones, is a Christian duty and is in accordance with Christ's mission on earth as long as one has not been directly or indirectly involved in "reproducing" or "designing" one's descendants or destroying or damaging human life even at its very beginnings.

Abortion, Induced↗
PubMed2005

Freedom in responsibility: on the relevance of "sin" as a hermeneutic guiding principle in bioethical decision making.

This essay deals with questions of responsibility concerning technology, in particular, gene technology and the special problem of research on embryos. I raise issues concerning the extent of humans' authority to act and the limits of human freedom. In what way is that freedom given, and what kind of responsibility results from it? By discussing various concepts of human freedom in the tradition of European philosophy, as juxtaposed to the Protestant understanding of freedom, this essay discusses the restricting limits, and the obligation to take responsibility. It will turn out that the question concerning freedom cannot be answered without understanding what being human involves. From a Christian perspective, this implies that the foundational relationship between human freedom and sin will be central to an assessment of the human ability to take responsibility. By obliterating the limits of human freedom, sin jeopardizes the very essence of that freedom. The project of taking into account the sinful state of the human condition thus aims at developing a realistic picture of the authority of humans in action, even in view of the human tasks of promoting science and research.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2005

Freedom in responsibility: a response.

This paper is a critical response to Elisabeth Gräb-Schmidt's article "Freedom in responsibility: On the relevance of 'sin' as hermeneutic guiding principle in bioethical decision making." Gräb-Schmidt's chief contention is that ethics begins with anthropology, and that moral responsibility is thereby grounded within a set of given limits. Freedom is distorted into sin when these limits are transgressed. My principal complaint is that her account of the relationship between freedom and sin is grounded in a tragic ontology. Alternatively, I contend that anthropology is grounded in Christology in which freedom is a gift of the Spirit. Consequently, sin is not so much tragic as it marks a refusal of humans to accept their divine election. The issues of human cloning and embryonic stem-cell research are used to exemplify what difference these respective differences might make in a process of moral deliberation.

Bioethics↗
PubMed2005

Bioethics and sin.

On the basis of a historical reconstruction of the stages through which the Christian notion of sin took shape in Protestantism, the significance of this term for modern bioethics is derived from its opposition to a holiness of God and his creatures, which in turn translates into the secular moral concept of dignity. This dignity imposes obligations to respect and to relationships that are sustained by faithfulness and trust. In being based on the gratuitousness of God's grace, such relationships preclude attempts at instrumentalization, denial of singularity, and subjection to market forces. Accordingly, reproductive cloning as well as exposing medicine to economical considerations can be classified as sinful. The difference between sinful acts and humans' sinful state furthermore permits to address the problems of evil and misfortune in the world, and to acknowledge humans' responsibility for the threats to humanity entailed by those ills. While the Christian faith relies on God's mercy, it also imposes the task of following Christ by fighting against evil and misfortune.

Bioethics↗