ABSTRACT
Paul Ramsey was a casuist who worked from a particular tradition, but who did not have any institutional practices to sustain that tradition. Casuistry prevented a mere deductive rationality because the principles served the purpose of defining and clarifying the moral terrain. The fullest account of Ramsey’s casuistry is found in “The Case of the Curious Exception.” In “The Case of the Curious Exception,” Ramsey defends both exceptionless principles and his casuistical method. In challenging the notion that casuistry was a deductive process where a system of principles entailed the production of a particular action, Ramsey challenges the freedom-legalism distinction. The casuistical use of just war for pastoral responsibility is a wonderful help for Christian ethical reflection, but the casuistical use of just war for political responsibility where tragedy defines the political rejects Christian ethical reflection.
