A Community Of Character: Toward a Constructive Christian Social Ethic

by Stanley Hauerwas

Stanley Hauerwas, a leading theological ethicist, shows how discussions of Christology and the authority of scripture involve questions about what kind of community the church must be to rightly tell the stories of God. He challenges the dominant assumption of contemporary Christian social ethics that there is a special relation between Christianity and some form of liberal democratic social system.

Genres: Theology, Philosophy, Christianity, Nonfiction, Christian, Church, Spirituality

312 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1981

About the author

Stanley Hauerwas (PhD, Yale University) is the Gilbert T. Rowe Professor of Theological Ethics at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina. He is the author of numerous books, including Cross-Shattered Christ, A Cross-Shattered Church, War and the American Difference, and Matthew in the Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible.

America's Best Theologian according to Time Magazine (2001), though he rejected the title saying, "Best is not a theological category."

Reviews

[J.R. Woodward · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hauerwas states his thesis well in the introduction when he says, “Though this book touches on many issues it is dominated by one concern: to reassert the social significance of the church as a distinct society with an integrity peculiar to itself. My wish is that this book might help Christians rediscover that their most important social task is nothing less than to be a community capable of hearing the story of God we find in the scripture and living in a manner that is faithful to that story.”(1)

Hauerwas develops his thesis in three interdependent parts. In the first part, he not only demonstrates the necessity of narrative in the formation of any community or polity, but also describes the kind of narrative in which Christian communities are to be shaped. He states that our narrative finds its center in the story of Jesus, not the state, and that our understanding of the authority of the canon is crucial. He says, canon “is not an accomplishment but a task… (68) and the issue is not just one of interpretation but of what kind of people can remember the past and yet know how to go on in a changed world” (67). In part two, he helps the reader understand the necessary interrelation of narrative and character and how the virtues are “finally dependent on our character for direction, not vice versa” (143). Hauerwas makes it extremely clear that if the theoretical arguments posed in the first two parts are to be taken seriously, it must be reflected in a praxis that is faithful to God, and so he makes his theology practical by applying his theory to the areas of family, sex and abortion.

While reading Hauerwas is a task - it takes an enormous amount of concentration to follow his complex arguments and there isn’t always a clear sense of direction - it is a task that I found worthy of my time and energy.

Through reading Hauerwas, I have been able to see more clearly how the presuppositions that we hold, knowingly or unknowingly, are based on the dominant narrative by which we live. I was reminded again how much I have been shaped by the American story. I was also reminded of how our understanding of character and narrative deeply influence our ability to develop the virtues necessary to live a life that is faithful to God’s story. As Hauerwas so aptly puts it, “The kind of character the Christian seeks to develop is a correlative of a narrative that trains the self to be sufficient to negotiate existence without illusion or deception” (132).

[Makiah · Rating 5 out of 5]

I want to peddle this book outside of big-box stores like an aggressive girl scout.

Too many quotes to quote, but this one stood out this morning:

“Cynicism leaves us only with the consolation that because we recognize our own deception we are not hypocrites or fools. Of course, there is no deeper deceit than the assumption that we are among those free from deception.”

[Jason Evans · Rating 4 out of 5]

When I ran construction crews, I once hired a young man fresh out of prison. He came to the U.S. as an infant. While serving his nine-year sentence, he had an encounter with Jesus. Raised Buddhist, he knew little of Christianity. He asked a prison ministry to send him a Bible. For five years this was all he read.

One day, he informed me that he was being deported. I was devastated to lose him. Astonished I asked, “What will you do!? How will you survive?!”

He looked at me puzzled, “What do you mean?”

“What do you mean, ‘What do I mean?!’” I said, “You’re being sent to a land where you don’t know the language or people, with a criminal record!”

He scrunched his forehead up looking at me surprised, “Jason, if God took care of Moses, he’ll take care of me.”

I think this young man got what Stanley Hauerwas is aiming for in A Community of Character. He looked at the world through the lens of Scripture. Every experience was first calculated through his understanding of the Story of Scripture. Hauerwas’ vision for the church is not so different. He hopes that the church will process each experience as my friend did, “What do we know of this circumstance through our own History?”

My friend could’ve hidden. As so many do, he could have bought a Social Security number, moved and gone by another name and lived as many undocumented residents do. A little risky, but potentially much more comfortable than going back to an unknown homeland. But the narrative drove him towards the adventure... with hope. When we process Scripture in our communities as knowledge and lose an imagination for how we are to live into it, we grow safe. Nurturing a narrative role of Scripture sweeps us into a story that requires risk and loss yet brings hope and excitement to our experiences.

If you haven’t read Stanley Hauerwas you should. His writing has had a significant impact on the missional church conversation in general and certainly me in particular. He is an ecclesiologically eclectic Christian theologian. His influences pull from several streams. He frequently credits impact on his work by philosophers such as Ludwig Wittgenstein and Alasdair MacIntyre as well as theologians such as Karl Barth and John Howard Yoder. As he states in the introduction of this book, he is a Methodist that appreciates high church worship yet finds Anabaptism to be one of the most faithful Christian forms. He is a professor of theology and ethics at Duke Divinity School, having previously taught at University of Notre Dame.

In his introduction to A Community of Character, Hauerwas states that his thesis is “to reassert the social significance of the church as a distinct society with an integrity peculiar to itself.” In other words, Hauerwas argues that Christian ethics begin not through our cultural lense, but Christ. Through Christ, we understand our relationship to each other as the Church, God, and Scripture. Through this lense we see how we are to engage the world.

I admit that Hauerwas has made a significant impact on my thinking but it is interesting that he often makes clear that he chose to be a theologian, not a pastor. Yet his writing deals with how theology is worked out within the church. He touches on subjects that are often the most difficult to lead on. It's easier for him to say some of this from the towers of the academy than pastor people in this way in the real world. But as I read this book I was reminded that I increasingly view a great part the Christian leaders role to be the story-tellers of the Grand Story as well as the histories of our own communities. This reminds me that I love the way Jerry at First Pres’ has ended sermons sometimes, “The is your Story. Live it.”

[Connor Mooneyhan · Rating 4 out of 5]

PHEW this was a tough book to figure out how to read. The first chapter (essay, more accurately) is a long illustration of what Hauerwas means when he says that communities are formed by narratives. It uses as its backbone the story of Watership Down, which I have not read, so even though he gives the information, story points, and dialogue necessary, it was a real struggle and I'm still not sure I got much out of it. The next couple essays were also difficult to read, but not like the first. I want to be clear: this book is worth reading! I think one of the reasons it got so much easier for me as I continued (besides finding tools to help me focus) was that I got used to his style and the way his arguments flow. There's some really worthwhile stuff in here; push through and I think it will be worth it.

[Jeff · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is comprised of twelve essays written around the theme of the narrative character of Christian ethics. My main takeaway is that the development of character happens in community and that just sticking to principles for principles sake is not sufficiently formative to aid us in living in an ever-changing world. Rather, we must inhabit a narrative to develop the skill and wisdom necessary to live faithfully. Hauerwas tells a personal story in chapter seven that just floored me and upon which I’ve been dwelling for several days. Not an easy read but you won’t find this level of thought or insight in very many places.

[William Bowers · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good book, and I think for those studying Christian ethics it is a helpful read. Good content, but several downsides (writing style, general argumentative flow, lack of quality Scriptural engagement) weighed it down for me. However, if you can trudge through some of the downsides, there are plenty of gems in Hauerwas’ writing.

Update August 31, 2024: reread first two (out of three) sections again for school. More palatable and beneficial on the second time through. (3.5 stars).

[Russell · Rating 4 out of 5]

i will go a long way with Hauerwas, esp regarding the importance he gives to Aristotelian/ virtue ethics, but for all the words in this book, i don't feel like i ever got an argument for the link between narrative and character formation...

[Bernise Laurent · Rating 4 out of 5]

Overall interesting book, and I feel like it provides a lot of things to really chew on... but I also feel like the latter application of his theological viewpoints on the last part leads something to be desired.

In the first part, I feel like he takes the bull by the horns himself, and engages with the view that religious self-recognition is the recognition of the Bible as a narrative authority, not a moral authority. That narrative comes in the context of the tradition and community that came before it, and the determinations are for genuine interaction. To this extent, the idea of biblical morality was deconstructed in a way which I find fascinating. The 10 Commandments aren't some merely tepid rules to follow, like a checkbook of ethics, rather it is an expression of a historical and narrative respectability in regards to the relationship of the Nation of Israel and God, and eventually God and His Church. He's more in favor of viewing Christianity as something that needs to follow these laws as narrative expressions, with minor expressions of faith being potentially prophecies for great and beautiful things. The importance of "you shall not kill" isn't to argue about what could be construed as killing, but what has the essence of killing, and what lacks the radical turn that Christ gave.

Part of his concern with the way that Liberal democracy is organized is that it is designed upon the sort of post-Hobbesian/Lockean perspective of creating a republic of distrusting individuals, where collective community action is considered to be less beneficial than a distrusting polity. Simultaneously, this de-emphasizes the sin and contempt of the human body of citizens, but also prioritizes self-satisfaction and happiness over full eudaimonic satisfaction. To Hauerwas, the Christian Church should be the first polity that the Christian belongs to, and the ethical action is the expression of "trying to make a world a better place". To him, if we were to make this place on earth the best, then we would be immortal. However, since we are not, there is a emphasis on the spiritual, not in a gnostic sense but in the sense that deaths are currently part of the plan, part of the narrative nature of the church.

This moves into part II: The underlying ethical structures that underlie Christianity some of which that are in some ways incompatible with the basis of liberalism and liberal ethics. Particularly that the only ethics that is justifiable is a universal one, that relies on Kantian frameworks in order to facilitate the considered ethical justifications. Specifically he draws the apparent tension between relativism and deontology, or the idea that there are ethical frameworks upon which the framework of society should be focused on the interactions of duty with individual and collective human behavior. In this way, the ethical frameworks of both relativism and deontology need to make way for a more nuanced eudaimonic perspective. Particularly, Hauerwas isn't entirely convinced but intrigued by MacIntyre's argument that the ethical frameworks for self-sacrifice, for a transcendent rather than a logical good, was only possible under a Christian framework, so it is entirely understandable that Kant was understandably concerned with an ethical framework that is relient on a Classical Theist (read: Ancient Greek philosopher) beliefs.

There is something revolutionary about the way in which the church should interact with ht society, particularly the elements in which the view that the formulation of a universal ethic should sidestep the much greater need for the development of universal community. War and violence, even in the most structured of just-war theories, constitute a view of the society that is pertaining to a certain understanding that the separations of states breaks apart universal human community, community facilitated through the metaphysical church.

To extend the discussion about ethical frameworks, Hauerwas kind of actually tries to revive classical Greek virtue, and particularly the argument that a Christian form of ethics should be most interested in a care-virtue eudaimonic ethic. Morality is a self-feeding process, and the act of being moral induces moral behavior among it's members. The law was given to teach and to guide, not to merely judge even though it became a witness against our sin. Jesus's law came to continue and twist the narrative, not merely be an encouragement.

Finally in Part III he attempts to apply this to modern ethical debates: The family, sex, and abortion.

The ethical and moral construction about society is the facilitation of a consistent ethic surrounding the family. Rather than viewing there to be "permissible" and "impermissible" relationships, the modern culture de-emphasizes social interactions into such a framework that prioritizes autonomy, rather than the moral encouragement, of children. Even the mentality that children are raised to "make good decisions" in life is in fact kind of bizarre. The tendency to flatten the entirety of the ethical discussion into an aspirational of a particular view of what relationships should look like. To this extent, he desires to shift the view of marriage as a virtuous relationship, one to encourage the moral unfolding of all people.

For an ethic of sex, he argues that a cut-and-dry answer of whether or not sexual activity in certain circumstances is allowed or not allowed is too rigid and unhelpful, not taking into account the true needs of the Church or of individuals. To this point, the sexual ethic needs to take into considerations both the "realist" and "romantic" perspective of sexual activity, incorporating both the narrative but also the recognition of the need for communal continuity in marriage.

Finally, a consideration from the perspective of abortion, which he addresses both directly but also using contraception as a consideration. He identifies that there are two avenues in which the arguments surrounding abortion form: First from the perspective of whether or not the fetus should be considered personal or not, and secondly identifying the role of a good parent in the context of abortion. To this point, both camps seem problematic when applying to these two considerations, usually devolving into a more "ritualistic" argument for either side with either the sacredness of parenthood or the freedom of individuals becoming a smokescreen. To this end, he argues that the Christian still needs to start from the perspective that there is a genuine good in the expectation of life but that doesn't justify legislative action, so the christian should advocate for the preservation of fetuses while addressing the concerns.

There's a lot that can be said, but overall: I find the idea of a communitarian-narrative theological approach to ethics rather interesting. I'm still not entirely convinced that he provides a sufficient basis in which to re-establish a sort of narrative virtue ethics, not to mention the question of whether or not a narrative ethical framework is too nominal, meaning that since it only exists as a theoretical construct and thereby may water down the import of such constructions. Given that, I do think that a more 'ecclesiological' approach to ethics is an interesting and helpful approach. That being said, I feel like his attempt to apply it to the various political debates are... less nuanced than desired. I feel like the chapter on sex was ok, but I feel like there's a lack of nuance in both the chapters on family and the discussion surrounding abortion, which I will address the latter first.

The chapter on abortion I feel like had problems, predominantly because I feel like he fell into a dichotomy that there's pro-abortion and anti-abortion views, instead of it being a wider spectrum. Many Christians are pro-life, but there's also many Christian who are pro-choice, and sometimes the same epistemic justification on the basis of hermeneutics is used by both. I wouldn't argue that the addition of a broader addressing of the hermeneutics would undercut his argument, and I do think that his positioning of advocating against abortion while providing the communal support for doing otherwise is a valid theological position, although must also take into consideration the social tensions that may arise in a community of pro-life and pro-choice Christians.

The discussion on family lacks the nuance to address the different forms of family, and how family relationships are complicated, and what constitutes family isn't merely the raising of children in a community. While he recognizes that community involves people who aren't married... It's kind of reductive in its approach, as I would argue there's forms of family which don't conform to a nuclear or extended families, some of which may or may not have children. I feel like the ethics of familial structure changes once you allow for queer-platonic relationships, spiritual friendships, joint families, or a variety of other relationship structures. Direct considerations from queer theology would have benefited this section, even if he disagreed with it.

All in all, I feel like the book was good, and I have a lot to chew on in regards to it, but I do wish he could have addressed the application in a little more detail.

[Neil Saltmarsh · Rating 4 out of 5]

As many have pointed out before this is a collection of essays. I think that many of the points that the author makes in relation to Abortion are still relevant to our time particularly in the debate of same sex marriage (Last 2 chapters in particular). I think the author coherently sets out the arguments in a well considered way. This book is not of particular interest to me but I certainly can appreciate this book.

[Alex Connell · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have to think about this book in parts. Chapter 1 was a total dud for me.

Chapters 2-4 were 5 stars, easily. Each of them were fantastic ways of looking at and interacting with the world.

The rest of the book was fine.

Those 3 chapters at the beginning really sold the entire book for me, though. They were fantastic.

[Eric Parsons · Rating 4 out of 5]

A speed read for grad school. For greater insight, I will have to read it again, but Hauerwas' statement that the Church IS a social ethic and does not HAVE a social ethic is provocative. Worth reading for sure, particularly those interested in ethical behavior.

[Matthew Webb · Rating 5 out of 5]

Family

I like that the central focus of a healthy community must be a healthy family that maintains a consistent reflection of the narrative of God’s people in a way that their life also reflects the same.

[Joel Hicks · Rating 4 out of 5]

I don’t recommend binging this over a sleepless night three days before a book review is due, but Hauerwas’ scope and vision for this project is very thought provoking. What does it mean to “be the church?” Take a deep dive w Stan the Man and come & see.

[Jake Doberenz · Rating 5 out of 5]

impactful, Thought-Provoking, Life-Changing

Hauerwas does an excellent job rooting Christian ethics in character and story, which solves so many ethical conundrums. Love, love, love.

[Amin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Still holds up.

[Kenneth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Saw Stanley Hauerwas lecture in an Episcopal church. He is the embodiment of a certain type of Protestant in the American Style with a tremendous stage presence.

The lecture was on the way in which Americans are Americans more so than Christians.

The radical demands of the Christian religion often take second seat to the demands of American culture.

Hauerwas is a political radical who advocates a Christian version of Socialism with a high level of philosophical complexity. I enjoyed reading this book even when I disagree with some fundamental points.

Hauerwas has taught at Duke for much of his career while also other schools such as Notre Dame. He seems to see a natural alliance with Catholic theologians who likewise see the contradictions with Christianity inherent in American culture.

This book covers a depth of issues ranging from the more practical side of social policy to the more abstract elements of theological foundations.

An interesting man who appears to be from my experience the type of professor that I have enjoyed studying with while in graduate school.

The director of my master's thesis recommended this book to me for my research several years back. His doctoral dissertation was written on Huaerwas so he knew his teaching well. I have not spent nearly so much time on learning the ins and outs of Huaerwas' thought.

Hauerwas will likely be remembered for being one of the more significant protestant theologians with regards to social issues (along the lines of Reinhold Niebuhr perhaps) in the later half of the twentieth-century.

[Larry Yurk · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hauerwas, professor of ethics at Duke Divinity School, will challenge you down to your socks. For Hauerwas, the basic question of Christian ethics is, "What kind of people ought we to be?" Applied to issues such as abortion, the reader comes away from the book with a deeper and more sensible perspective than she ever thought possible. Hauerwas says that the basic issue confronting us about abortion is not the question, "At what point does life begin?" He says that, if we allow ourselves to fight the battle on that front, we have already given in to the enemy. On this, we can always disagree. Instead, he says that the question Christians should be asking is, "What kind of people ought we to be?" Hauerwas goes back to the first Christian communities in which Christians took exposed children. This was a common pagan practice in the First Century. Unwanted children were thrown away. They would generally either be eaten by wild animals or picked up by the owners of brothels and raised for a life of prostitution. Christians took these children and raise them as their own. They were a people who were always ready to receive children, no matter what the circumstance. For Hauerwas, the primary reason this was true was because they had hope, and he believes that the reason people do not want children, or have abortions is because of a lack of hope. It is a amazing book on the ethics of what it means to be a community of faith, hope, and love.

[Nathanael Booth · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hauerwas argues that narrative is central to human ethical thought, and that the kind of stories Christians tell about themselves and their God are crucial to understanding the kind of ethics to which they hold. Hauerwas is, as always, insightful as he draws out the implications of the Christian story for the kind of community it needs to be. Fully a third of the book is pretty dryly theoretical, dealing with virtue ethics etc—interesting in its own way, and important for developing a practical understanding of Christian ethics, but pretty tough going all the same—but the rest is remarkable as Hauerwas calls for the Christian community to more fully embrace its founding narrative and its subsequent role as a prophetic voice to its surrounding culture (whatever form that culture takes). His words on history and tradition are also helpful, and coincide with much that I have lately been thinking about the role of history in the Christian faith (namely, that we are an historical faith and so bound to tradition whether we admit it or no). In all, an interesting book with parallels to Fish and Chesterton.

[Nick Klagge · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book covers a lot of the same ground as "Truthfulness and Tragedy", Hauerwas's slightly earlier book of essays that I read late last year and loved. If I had read this book first, I'm sure I would have given it five stars as well. The most fun essay to read was the extended reflection on the role of narrative "scripture" in "Watership Down", which I managed to read between "Truthfulness and Tragedy" and this volume. It was also interesting to re-expose myself to Hauerwas's arguments after having read MacIntyre's "After Virtue", and to see how strong his influence on Hauerwas's thought is.

[Brett · Rating 3 out of 5]

Though I agree with much, Stanley is just not that good of a writer. It is unecessarily difficult to read. He takes aim at liberal democracy (not the democracy of democrats, but the democracy of our great experiment) as a philosophical system which not only cannot produce people of virtue, but actually undermines it. It is a philosophy with no story, which has freedom as its highest good. Such a philosophy gives no resource or reason to live virtuously. The church therefore, must learn to tell and order their lives around the true story of God's kingdom in Christ.

[Mark]

Great book. Very challenging!

[Stephen · Rating 5 out of 5]

READ FEB 2013

Excellent approach to developing an ethical community. Loved the focus on history and tradition framed as story.

[Michelle Murray · Rating 3 out of 5]

I used this book for research for my capstone project - it is good but a bit dated

[Hélène Lou · Rating 5 out of 5]

blew through this for comps, but good food for thought—worth returning to for a more in-depth read!