Lets not talk past each other back and forth and lets try to understand each other.
My argument against what you say is that there is no Christ without doctrine.
Now it seems that you have this notion that we can love what we do not know. That is a logical impossibility as St. Thomas Aquinas put elegantly in his Summa (which I did quote to you or someone else on this thread earlier).
So this is my problem with your argument. Now can you help me better understand what problems you have with what I am saying here?
OK, let’s try it from a different angle. Read the Gospels; take for example where Christ says “The Father and I are one”. That was about as short and pithy a statement as could be made; out of that vast volumes have been written. Reflection on that is not wrong’ but reflection on that does not impel you to be in sacrificial love with your spouse. Reflect on the Gospel reading a couple of weeks ago, about the Pharisee and the tax collector in the temple in prayer. Volumes have been written about justification; but Christ did not write a book about it; he told a short story, with an even shorter summation, and that is sufficient to call you and me to examine how we approach God - with pride in all we have done, or in recognition of our sinfulness and our need for God’s mercy. One does not have to study any doctrine to hear what Christ is saying there.
Look back to Sirach 2’s quote from St Paul (one I was thinking of this afternoon while driving home). One can have all knowledge; without love, it is nothing. But St. Paul did not say that to have great live, you had to have great knowledge of doctrine. Neither did Christ; He said the two great commandments are to love God with your whole heart, and your neighbor as your self. One long sentence.
St. Paul did not say “Put on theology”; he said “Put on Christ”. Christ did not say “Study about Me”; He said “Follow Me” (which includes Calvary).
I am not, anywhere, in any way, saying doctrine has no importance; but its importance is only a tool. It is not an end in itself; if it is, one is as a Pharisee; knowing the Law, and failing to understand it. Doctrine is not the peak of the summit; it is a means to the peak or the summit - which I Christ.
I will say it again; unless you have a personal, intimate relationship with Christ, you are missing what the whole message is about. Knowing all the doctrine in the world, parsing it down to its finest detail, will not get you salvation if you do not follow, imitate, and put on Christ.
If you know just a little doctrine, but you follow Christ passionately, you are far, far more likely to achieve salvation - and that is Why Christ came - to save us, not to educate us.
I was in the seminary for a while, long ago. I still like to read theology, and discuss theology. But I will tell you that last Sunday night I had a far more challenging task than any book of theology has ever presented. I was at a dinner our parish puts on for the homeless, and listening kindly and with attention to an individual who was missing several teeth, had lived a bit too long in the same set of clothes, and was prone to a very wandering dialogue and likely suffered from some mental issues, was a far greater challenge to me personally than sitting in a comfortable chair reading some treatise. I can’t say I did so well; I would not want to face judgment on that as my only, single issue.
I have read, and will continue to read, my share of theology. But theology is not where, to put in the vernacular, the rubber meet the road. The rubber meets the road when I deal with my coworkers; when I deal with others my work bring me in contact with; when I deal with my children; when I deal with my aging mother;’ when I deal with my siblings.
Mother Theresa was a very wise women. I suspect she read some theology now and then; but from everything I have read, she spent far more time in prayer than in theology texts; she spent more time in the Gospels than in theology texts, and she spent more time meeting Christ in others, and bringing Christ to others, when she tended to dying Hindus, dying agnostics, dying atheists, and the various priests and laity (not to mention her group of sisters) who were around her because of her holiness. aka her Christ like demeanor. Not her erudition (although she could come up with some absolute zingers); not her vast knowledge of theology; but her vast knowledge of Christ. And she did not get that knowledge from lectures and theological tomes. She got it from Mass, community and personal prayer, the Gospels, and from that emptying of herself for the needs of others.
So, no. I do not agree that one has to know all sorts of theology to know Christ. For 20 centuries, people have known Christ by hearing the Gospels, attending the sacraments, and practicing the self-abnegation which is true love of others. And not much more.
I am not saying that one does not need some elementary doctrinal issues; but they are rather minor when it gets right down to it. Christ did not go to the educated and the erudite; he went to some terribly uneducated fishermen. Out of the four Gospel writers, one was a theologian; the others simply told the story of what they saw and experienced. They experienced Christ, and they did not spin out treatises on the theological underpinnings of the Trinity, or Transubstantiation. They told us the Good News. Does one need some minimal theology to not go down the path of treating Christ as just another guru? Yes, of course. But after that, what is needed, what is critical to salvation, is to follow Him, not study Him.
Obviously, you are obsessed with your own ideas and have a closed mind with regard to listening to others. Your version of truth trumps all – even the Church. Enough of this futile dickering and proselytizing. Good day.
