You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
This is what I have been saying all along.
People want and are attracted to logic and consistency.
Also, as Dave Cullen notes “a moral absolutist will always defeat a moral relativist”.
People want and are attracted to logic and consistency.
Also, as Dave Cullen notes “a moral absolutist will always defeat a moral relativist”.
A
ATraveller
Guest
Like Mainline versus Evangelical/Conservative Protestantism in the Anglosphere, in terms of attendance, membership and seminary enrollment?In follow up comments to the Register, he said watering down doctrine is “not helpful to anyone” but rather “creates confusion” and causes the Church to “become insignificant and dims the light of Christ.” He said “empirically based” evidence from Protestants shows this.
The Five Solae has been replaced by one sola in a number of Mainline denominations and look at the state of them, Sola Feels, a term created by an Evangelical satirist, where feeling good is *all *that matters. It hasn’t help them. Catholics obviously don’t care much about the Five Solae but without a doubt, they’re better than ‘Sola Feels’ and there’s actual substance in them. Most of the denominations or ‘networks’ (aka denominations) that haven’t diluted Christian teachings are stable at best and at worst shrinking at a much slower rate .
A First Things essay I read a few months ago noted that a number of Mainline denominations have merged or forged closer relations. It’s not only a matter of ecumenism but a necessity. They lack clergy, they lack finances. The author wrote he wouldn’t surprised if by mid-century there will just be one Mainline Protestant denomination in the US formed by the merger of the remnants of its predecessors if nothing changes.
I’ve noticed some interesting developments in the Church of England. The London diocese has seen some growth but it’s attributed to the work of an Evangelical parish. Oddly enough, the more ‘enlightened’ wing of the CofE cheer this growth but then attack the parish’s leadership for its unwillingness to abandon Christian teachings on a whole host of issues.
A
abucs
Guest
Christians as far as i know, have never supported the stoning of kids in the street.
The Bishop is right in his analysis.
The idea there is no God leads to thinking morals are relative.
From this point of view Christians have never been moral relatives.
Ultimate goodness (from our perspective) can be ambiguous, complex, unknown or misunderstood on occasions, but not relative.
Denying ultimate goodness and viewing morality as only humanly or culturally constructed leads to insanity in my opinion.
I support the Bishops call that the church’s responsibility is to fight against that insanity.
The Bishop is right in his analysis.
The idea there is no God leads to thinking morals are relative.
From this point of view Christians have never been moral relatives.
Ultimate goodness (from our perspective) can be ambiguous, complex, unknown or misunderstood on occasions, but not relative.
Denying ultimate goodness and viewing morality as only humanly or culturally constructed leads to insanity in my opinion.
I support the Bishops call that the church’s responsibility is to fight against that insanity.
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
Holy Scriptures have always been intended to be used in the sense of the meaning that is handed down in parallel with them.… moral relativists.
And so has the Judeo-Christian God.
Did they/he not once believe it was moral to stone a child to death at the center of town if he/she had disobeyed the parents?
Yes. It’s in the bible. God said it was okay.
…
In Jesus’ day for example elders would only stone a woman caught in adultery if it suited their political machinations.
God knows what people are like. It had a deeper spiritual meaning and it suits authorities in any age to pretend that it has to be taken literally.
Many Protestants make the mistake of pretending that they don’t want Tradition then surreptitiously admit it when they think no-one notices.
Hence the fault is not in Scriptures but in various people - not necessarily the exact ones you have in mind.
V
Vic_Taltrees_UK
Guest
The Church in the UK closed the door to lay ministry in 1980 when the four good chapters of “Easter People” were abolished.
The faithful must at best bank their talent at interest since trading with each other is “bound on earth”.
It’s not clear from the articles references what the Bishop quoted means by “apostolic”.
Once several generations have lost the vision, there is less and less to involve each other in, and less and less sense to anything.
In my (as it happens, multi-national, multi-racial, multi-denominational) family history the light evidently started going out the moment my grandparents expressed an interest in the Church, 101 years ago, as we have had virtually no catechesis since then and not for lack of asking. But I took to asking God and He has helped me self-teach with much help from random strangers.
The faithful must at best bank their talent at interest since trading with each other is “bound on earth”.
It’s not clear from the articles references what the Bishop quoted means by “apostolic”.
Once several generations have lost the vision, there is less and less to involve each other in, and less and less sense to anything.
In my (as it happens, multi-national, multi-racial, multi-denominational) family history the light evidently started going out the moment my grandparents expressed an interest in the Church, 101 years ago, as we have had virtually no catechesis since then and not for lack of asking. But I took to asking God and He has helped me self-teach with much help from random strangers.
R
reggieM
Guest
Diluting doctrine is a means of manipulating people - it’s dishonest.
It’s the belief that people cannot be expected to handle the teachings of Christ and that various church leaders have to reinterpret it so that it is acceptable.
But when the same people discover that the teachings have been diluted, then they wonder why it is worth following them at all. Why not dilute every doctrine, or even just get rid of what you don’t like?
That’s exactly what we see today.
The only answer is what the good bishop says - we have to teach with integrity and stand up for what was given to us in the Catholic Faith. People may hate us for that, but we have that obligation and being deceptive to people is not going to help.
It’s the belief that people cannot be expected to handle the teachings of Christ and that various church leaders have to reinterpret it so that it is acceptable.
But when the same people discover that the teachings have been diluted, then they wonder why it is worth following them at all. Why not dilute every doctrine, or even just get rid of what you don’t like?
That’s exactly what we see today.
The only answer is what the good bishop says - we have to teach with integrity and stand up for what was given to us in the Catholic Faith. People may hate us for that, but we have that obligation and being deceptive to people is not going to help.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.