tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3752793.post7537980611779008830..comments2023-05-07T07:41:56.700-05:00Comments on Safe Haven: Jasonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05095369621205684858noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3752793.post-20445067280510280162011-06-17T01:38:29.181-05:002011-06-17T01:38:29.181-05:00Tim,
I'm not in the relativistic soup, as it ...Tim,<br /><br />I'm not in the relativistic soup, as it were, if I surrender my confessional position, and the presumptive ground upon which it is based. There is no objective means to discover the Church within a particular confessional stance, where the hermeneutical process and tools are similar if not identical. THAT reality, not a doubt about the accesibility of truth, caused a reconsideration of the premise(s) of perpiscuity and Sola Scriptura. If they can be reasonably held, one should be able to discern a "Mere Christianity" in all of it that is not provisional like ecclesiastical authority is in the Protestant view.<br />Still, I've said nothing about Catholicism. That was a simple matter. I was friendly enough to the Reformers to believe what they had always said: that their contentions more faithfully recapitulated the early Church than the 16th century Catholic Church; as it happened, I saw a radical discontinuity there. Faced with the claims of the Catholic Church, I asked, "Is it reasonable to believe that the early Church's faith and practice, extended out over many centuries, could produce what the Catholic Church believes and teaches today? Further, is the claim reasonable (to be the Church) if the answer is 'yes'?" The first question got an affirmative answer; the second involved applying the Catholic Church's claimed means of discerning truth to the data. Did the Fathers use the same method? And could it produce what we see today? Yes.<br />It is not a subjectivity problem per se that drove this; it is a subjectivity feedback loop inherent in the Protestant hermeneutical process and ecclesiology which made it unreasonable to believe doctrines contrary to the data and Catholic claims (which appeared to match). I needed, as it turned out, very strong evidence to reject what I saw both doctrinally and ecclesiologically to be an organic whole. It wasn't there. Because a few of the creeds, as you know, are the basis of the limited unity we have in evidence today, I inquired as to the nature of that authority, again finding it consistent in context, and acting accordingly. ONCE I HAD DONE ALL THAT, I submitted to Rome's authority as a consequence of those discoveries. Wow, that was long. And I've no idea if you asked me any of that. Sorry!Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05095369621205684858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3752793.post-8333726486135224352011-06-15T10:16:47.251-05:002011-06-15T10:16:47.251-05:00Jason,
No, I'm not saying it can't be the...Jason, <br />No, I'm not saying it can't be the Church because of this. What I mean is that if the lack of unity leads necessarily to relativism, then when one is part of that disunity, how could one come to an objective conclusion? And, if one *can* come to an objective viewpoint and join the Catholic Church as a result, is it not true that it is possible to be objective outside of that community's authority and therefore disunity does not lead to relativism necessarily?<br /><br />I.e. you came to what you feel is an objective choice. Since the authority of the Catholic Church was not assumed at the beginning of your search (as you've said), then you must have some how come to make an objective choice outside of the community.<br /><br />(I'm pretty sure Hauerwas does not think this is possible.)Timothy R. Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09697871768109472900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3752793.post-23855956148975535042011-06-14T16:43:36.095-05:002011-06-14T16:43:36.095-05:00Furthermore, Tim, Lumen Gentium explains this all ...Furthermore, Tim, Lumen Gentium explains this all pretty well; you seem to be confusedly saying that since I found Christian truth outside the Catholic Church that it can't be the Church, but I don't see how this follows.Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05095369621205684858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3752793.post-49691664158415466102011-06-14T16:33:58.192-05:002011-06-14T16:33:58.192-05:00Tim,
I'm not agreeing with Hauerwas; it is bo...Tim,<br /><br />I'm not agreeing with Hauerwas; it is both objective, AND tied to a community. That truth is tied to a community does not make it objective in itself. What did I miss? (Though I like Hauerwas on tons of things.)Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05095369621205684858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3752793.post-44357554389270814262011-06-14T14:21:40.894-05:002011-06-14T14:21:40.894-05:00Or is it? Is the truth we are discussing subjectiv...Or is it? Is the truth we are discussing subjective and tied to a community or is it objective and timeless? If God and truth are inseparable, the lack of authority is not equivalent to the absence of objective truth. <br /><br />Consider: if what you say is true, then there is no way to convince me (or anyone else) that what you claim is truth is actually true. The fact that you can claim to have found truth leading you to a given community while outside of that community is a case in my point.<br /><br />The view you are taking follows the thinking espoused by Stanley Hauerwas, who argues that the Christian story is only objective within the community. However, that view necessarily leads to a greater level of relativism and makes it impossible to offer judgment. Hauerwas is a key figure in the neo-liberal movement in the Church.Timothy R. Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09697871768109472900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3752793.post-85362914572995777772011-06-13T23:51:59.072-05:002011-06-13T23:51:59.072-05:00Tim,
The fact that the best Catholics were ex-Ref...Tim,<br /><br />The fact that the best Catholics were ex-Reformed (if true) is not germane; it does mean we learned solid principles of hermeneutics, maybe. The point is that when liberalism does come, what is going to beat it back? There is no "Mere Christianity" because the same spirit which says "councils may err" is the same one that says, "You're wrong, and you can't tell me what to do." What constitutes "Christianity" itself is now up for debate. "Orthodoxy" and "heresy" is as relative as the borders of the 'Church.'Jasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05095369621205684858noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3752793.post-62870909135000680552011-06-13T22:33:47.284-05:002011-06-13T22:33:47.284-05:00If ecclesial relativism breeds doctrinal relativis...If ecclesial relativism breeds doctrinal relativism, why is it that -- to go back to my well worn statement -- the best Catholics seem to have come from the Reformed camp? Why is it decidedly so that the strongest voices against relativism, I'd wager, are Reformed? Luther, for that matter, seemed to have a much more fixed moral compass than those who sought to kill him...<br /><br />The biggest problem I see with your argument is it isn't tied to the fruit we actually see. I see moral and doctrinal relativism in Protestants and Catholics...Timothy R. Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09697871768109472900noreply@blogger.com