Abstract

In Christian ethics the Gospel story of the encounter of a rich young ruler with Jesus has been interpreted in two major ways: one that treats Jesus’ directive to the ruler as a counsel that goes beyond the commandments the ruler claims to have kept, and another that treats the directive as contained in the commandments and exposing his failure to keep them. I reconstruct Calvin’s version of the second interpretation, contrast it with Aquinas’s version of the first, and point out some problems with it. I then formulate a revised version that avoids the problems and amounts to a promising alternative for Christian ethics.