In part one of this four-part series, Matthew outlines the problem that exists with pluralism in Christianity.

In part two of this four-part lecture, Matthew examines the "We all worhip the same Jesus" theory and shows why it is a fallacy.

In part three of four, Matthew shows the contradictions between various interpretations of Christ, thereby tearing down the notion of pluralism.

In the final part of this series, Matthew shows how unity is not only possible, but already exists.

One of the challenges of our present spiritual situation is that our society has settled for something less than truth. This affects the quality of our opinions, policies, and judgments and undermines our ability to live and spread the Gospel. An indicator of the seriousness of this is our growing inability to listen to, learn from, and love people who think differently than we do. In this presentation, I frame the situation as a problem of discernment, compare scientific and Orthodox methods of knowing, and describe how polarization keeps us from using either well. I conclude with a discussion of the critical role diversity plays in discerning truth, and how the Gospel can transform the (Babelic) divisions that deafen us to the truth into a (Pentecostal) harmony that proclaims and celebrates it. Emulating the academic forum the paper was written for (the 2020 Institute for Studies in Eastern Theology), Dn. Timothy Kelleher then offers his thoughts on the presentation and subject. Enjoy the show!

Social welfare, or the good society, is of central concern to the Academy of Management. In this paper, we review the concept of social welfare, suggesting that regardless of discipline, social welfare is defined as a multi-dimensional phenomenon. We then review the literature on the corporate objective within a market economy, where the dominant view is that of a single-objective function. Analyzing this view, we argue for a multi-dimensional objective for organizations in order to meet social welfare objectives: where decision making within a market economy better utilizes the benefits of markets. We suggest that improvements in social welfare are possible where markets are better-enabled to operate among stakeholders unconstrained by some single-valued objective. In doing so, we respond to the critics of stakeholder theory who argue that it is an untenable theory due to its inability to specify how stakeholder objectives are to be prioritized.

London : Hurst & Company, 2019.

Online Resource

Online Resource

Dewey Library - JK1726.G35 2018

Online Resource

Rotch Library - KMU54.E55 2016

Rotch Library - NA6010.7.B56 2018

Rotch Library - NA6010.7.B56 2018