EnCOUMTER SERIESnRichard John Neuhaus, General EditornThe Encounter Series presents the dialogue of a diverse groupnof theologians, ethicists, philosophers, and public policy expertsnfrom across the politicaland religious spectrum, on issues involvingnthe relationship of religion and public affairs. Eachnvolume includes four major essays on the subject under considerationnas well as a lively narrative of the subsequent discussion.n”The Encounter Series will contribute greatly to our understandingnof the part that faith plays in the continuing Americannexperiment.” -George Gallup, Jr.nipMSiBEteiiiiiiinllHlEllKKElffllli^;naiylKfKISiSilllnBI’:â„¢&RM2(i«ffllillnKaisGONFEKeNGEwiii;nMifilBLEA^RCWtiRGHBinilcraRiiSffiflnlifeMEUIiAUillnVolume 10nAMERICAN APOSTASYnWhat does it mean to talk about apostasy innan age when Christians do not agree on ansingle gospel from which to be apostate?nThe contributors to this volume agree thatnit is important that we discover what apostasyncould mean in our time. If the churchncannot agree on a single gospel, perhaps thentime is at hand for a new Reformation. Thenessays are by Peter L. Bergcr, JamesnTurner, Avery Dulles, S.J., and Robert W.nJenson.nPaper, $8.95n34/CHRONICLESnVolume 9nBIBLICAL INTERPRETA­nTION IN CRISISnFeaturing a major address by Joseph CardinalnRatzinger of the Vatican, this volumenlooks at ways in which all Christians cannapproach a consensus on methods of biblicalninterpretation. Only with such a consensusncan we talk together as believers andncan theology make meaningful truthclaimsnin contemporary culture. The essaysnare by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, RaymondnE. Brown, William H. Lazareth, andnGeorge Lindbeck.nPaper, $9.95na AWERKANnPOSTASYJnTI1EnfllUMPln* or “OTHER”nGOSPELSnAT YOUR BOOKSTORE, OR CALL800-633-9326nIN MICHIGAN, CALL COLLECT 6l6r459.4591 FAX 616-459-6540nWM. B. EERDMANS PUBLISHING CO.n255 JKFFERSON AVE. S.K. / GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN 49503nnnmother’s feminism. That was a legacynshe did not regret, but with which shencame to disagree — while continuingnto revere both her parents and Shelley.nIn her journal in 1838 Mary made ancomplete explanation of her position,nthe. most interesting parts of whichnSunstein does not quote. I will givensome of it here:nIn the first place, with regard ton”the good cause” — the cause ofnthe advancement of freedomnand knowledge, of the rights ofnwomen, &c. — I am not anperson of opinions. I have saidnelsewhere that human beingsndiffer greatly in this. Some havena passion for reforming thenworld; others do not cling tonparticular opinions. That mynparents and Shelley were of thenformer class, makes me respectnit. I respect such when joined tonreal disinterestedness, toleration,nand a clear understanding. . . .nFor myself, I earnestly desire thengood and enlightenment of mynfellow-creatures, and see all, innthe present course, tending tonthe same, and rejoice; but I amnnot for violent extremes, whichnonly bring on an injuriousnreaction. . . . Besides, I feel thencounter-arguments too strongly.nI do not feel that I could saynaught to support the causenefficiently; besides that, on somentopics (especially with regard tonmy own sex), I am far fromnmaking up my mind. … If Inhave never written to vindicatenthe rights of women, I have evernbefriended women whennoppressed. At every risk I havenbefriended and supportednvictims to the social system; butnI make no boast, for in truth itnis simple justice I perform.nCarol Gilligan has observed that there isna difference between male and femalenmorality. In discussing Gandhi shenmakes the point that a male liberal oftennmeans someone who professes to lovenmen in the abstract, but who has antendency to mistreat them in the particular.nWilliam Godwin and Shelley arenperfect examples of this kind of humanitarian.nMary Shelley, to her credit, isnnot. n