Perdono, pentimento, riparazione. Ebraismo e cristianesimo a confronto
This contribution intends to critically rethink the secular prejudice that opposes the unlimited practice of forgiveness in Christianity, against the Jewish reservation of an indiscriminate absolution of guilt. In fact, the phenomenology of forgiving and the ritual practices in the two religions app...
| Published in: | Nuovo giornale di filosofia della religione |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | Italian |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Università degli Studi di Urbino
2020
|
| In: |
Nuovo giornale di filosofia della religione
Year: 2020, Volume: 13/14, Pages: 129-133 |
| Further subjects: | B
Fede
B Ontology B Monoteismo B Reason B Phenomenology B Religious philosophy B Filosofia della Religione B Religione B Filosofia B Essere B Ebraismo B God B Ontologia B philosophy of religion B Cristianesimo B Religion B Faith B Metaphysics B Christianity B Dio B Ermeneutica B Ragione B Hebraism B Metafisica B Fenomenologia B Philosophy |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | This contribution intends to critically rethink the secular prejudice that opposes the unlimited practice of forgiveness in Christianity, against the Jewish reservation of an indiscriminate absolution of guilt. In fact, the phenomenology of forgiving and the ritual practices in the two religions appear to be much more complex, both adverse to placing evil and forgiveness on the same level. In fact, this relationship, surprisingly placing in an indiscriminate succession of wickedness and forgetfulness, only opens up the abyss between the absolute of the law of mercy and the absolute of evil freedom. And again: between the unheard-of power of forgiveness and the profound lacerations inflicted by evil, indicating that forgetting and indifference, moral amnesia and easy forgiveness on behalf of third parties risk, even today, anesthetizing the guilt and deresponsible the guilty. This question, which crosses personal conscience and also the social, ethical-juridical and political dimension (how can we not think of the heartfelt appeals of Vladimir Jankèlèvitch, in the aftermath of the feared prescription of Nazi crimes in Perdonner?) Was enriched in 900 by numerous reflections, among which, those of Emil Fackenheim and Riccardo Di Segni on one side, of Lytta Basset and Paul Ricoeur on the other.The deepening of the relationship between evil, repentance, forgiveness and atonement can thus become a fruitful terrain for dialogue, able to provide the tools of an ethics of reparation, corresponding to the Restaurative Justice, proper to criminal law. Reconverting the offense and the harm inflicted through the repair of the damage caused, can represent a possible path of common clarification on the subject of forgiveness, capable of correcting some indiscriminate misunderstandings and certain secular misunderstandings between the two religions. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2532-1676 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Nuovo giornale di filosofia della religione
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.14276/2532-1676/3080 |