Bad Modern Theology

  • Thread starter Thread starter HagiaSophia
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HagiaSophia

Guest
While the excerpt below may appear to be more theological than “news” – in expressing their Catholicism, I have seen a great many of these ideas expressed here by posters ous parts of the CA forums.

I thought it might lead to some interesting comments:

'…Among the signers who were able to agree on the protest with surprising alacrity were Jesuit theologian Avery Dulles, Eastern Orthodox Seminary dean Alexander Schmemann, Lutheran theologians George Forell and George Lindbeck, Yale Chaplain William Sloan Coffin Jr., a Presbyterian, and Evangelical theologian Lewis Smedes of Fuller Theological Seminary.

In 1,150 words, their statement took issue with some of the most popular liberal fashions of the past decade that have carried over into ours, including secular Christian, political eschatology and the human potential movement. The specific theses that the churchmen condemned as “false and debilitating”:
  1. Modern thought is superior to all past forms of understanding reality, and is therefore normative for Christian faith and life.
  2. Religious statements are totally independent of reasonable discourse.
  3. Religious language refers to human experience and nothing else, God being humanity’s noblest creation.
  4. Jesus can only be understood in terms of contemporary models of humanity.
  5. All religions are equally valid; the choice among them is not a matter of conviction about truth but only of personal preference or lifestyle.
6.To realize one’s potential and to be true to oneself is the whole meaning of salvation.

7.Since what is human is good, evil can adequately be understood as failure to realize human potential.
  1. The sole purpose of worship is to promote individual self-realization and human community.
  2. Institutions and historical traditions are oppressive and inimical to our being truly human; liberation from them is required for authentic existence and authentic religion.
  3. The world must set the agenda for the Church. Social, political and economic programs to improve the quality of life are ultimately normative for the Church’s mission in the world.
  4. An emphasis on God’s transcendence is at least a hindrance to, and perhaps incompatible with, Christian social concern and action.
  5. The struggle for a better humanity will bring about the Kingdom of God.
  6. The question of hope beyond death is irrelevant or at least marginal to the Christian understanding of human fulfillment.
    After each of these assertions the statement added a qualifying paragraph explaining why the idea is wrong, even though it might sound beguiling and contain an element of truth. The statement nowhere mentions the people who have promulgated these false theses, but the discussions at Hartford included references to Harvey Cox (The Secular City), Situation Ethicist Joseph Fletcher and Britain’s Bishop John Robinson (Honest to God). As for the pervasiveness of the thinking exemplified in the theses, Jesuit Dulles, now Cardinal, affirmed that the ideas were widespread in the Roman Catholic Church, particularly among popularizers of the late Teilhard de Chardin and liberation theologians who give the Bible a Marxist interpretation. A professor from Manhattan’s Union Theological Seminary, an influential Protestant school, said that these theses summarized general belief there.
Rev. Richard Neuhaus, now editor of First Things, asserted that even the World Council of Churches had become “a gargantuan exercise in such cultural capitulation.” Neuhaus and Lutheran Peter Berger, author and sociologist at Rutgers, were the originators of the Hartford protest. Exasperated by what they considered a church sellout to such man-made ideologies as scientific rationalism and socialism, they wrote the original draft of the statement in 1974, mailed it to 50 churchmen for their reactions and summoned the Hartford meeting to prepare the final declaration.

ignatiusinsight.com/features/jnavone_badtheology1.asp
 
  1. The struggle for a better humanity will bring about the Kingdom of God.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what is meant by this one, so I’ll just throw out some of my thoughts on it…

On one hand-- the Kingdom of God is already at hand because Jesus is, was, and will be.

On the other hand, the Kingdom of God is (hopefully) our eternal life in Heaven. Only God will ultimately bring that about if we are able to accept and/or submit to His providence.

Our prayers and suffering have redemptive value-- but that still relies on God’s grace and providence.

Or-- is this the
“as long as I’m a decent person, I don’t need to worry” myth?

help me out.

Thanks for the new link 🙂

Peace.
 
shannon e:
Or-- is this the
“as long as I’m a decent person, I don’t need to worry” myth?

help me out.
Click to expand...
I took it to be a remark on the new definition of “charity” - we used to do charity as a result of our being Christian - now people use social justice as their Christianity. The spiritual element is missing, making heaven on earth as the focus of some. IOW being a secular humanist has become the new “faith”.

And I too am anxious to hear from others how they see these “theological errors”.
shannon e:
Thanks for the new link 🙂
Click to expand...
It’s a good site.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top