The Eastern Schism - Causes and Characters

[guanophore]

Neither have you proved the argument from scripture. You have merely asserted that two passages are related, but I don’t believe you’ve proved that from scripture alone.

We have simply been so distracted by this ridiculous fool’s errand of “proving” things from scripture alone…

As much as I love Randy’s strident posts (I save them to disk so I will have them for reference) I cringe every time I open a post and it starts “______ proved from scripture”.

For one thing, it smacks of the Protestant practice of “proving” theology by Scripture. It has become clear over the course of the last 500 years that one can “prove” all manner of doctrines using scripture. It is really more a matter of the lens through which one interprets scripture. For example, reading it through the lens of the Fathers.

The other thing is that I don’t believe matters of faith are subject to “proof” of scientific method or even human reason. I am not saying that these methods should not be applied to theology, but in the end, it boils down to a matter of faith, not of “proof”.

I do appreciate "demonstrating’ a point using Scripture, and this is how I usually read Randy’s posts, but as you have pointed out, how one perceives what is there depends upon how one approaches the text.

 

[Randy_Carson]

As much as I love Randy’s strident posts (I save them to disk so I will have them for reference) I cringe every time I open a post and it starts “______ proved from scripture”.

For one thing, it smacks of the Protestant practice of “proving” theology by Scripture. It has become clear over the course of the last 500 years that one can “prove” all manner of doctrines using scripture. It is really more a matter of the lens through which one interprets scripture. For example, reading it through the lens of the Fathers.

The other thing is that I don’t believe matters of faith are subject to “proof” of scientific method or even human reason. I am not saying that these methods should not be applied to theology, but in the end, it boils down to a matter of faith, not of “proof”.

I do appreciate "demonstrating’ a point using Scripture, and this is how I usually read Randy’s posts, but as you have pointed out, how one perceives what is there depends upon how one approaches the text.

Strident?

Well, you know we spend MOST of our time in the apologetics forum, playground of our Bible Christian guests. So yeah, a lot of my posts are geared toward “proving” things from Scripture. We can argue about interpretations, but they have to admit that at least Catholics know their scriptures and have verses to back up their beliefs.

But just try asking an EO for some biblical references, G.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

I feel that tension myself. Many a day I think I should just log off, and pursue the Lord as the doctors of the Church such as Therese, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross and others have done.

But then I’m reminded of how many people thank me for my work here both publicly and by PM, and I consider how much benefit comes from that. So, I’m torn.

Just bein’ honest.

Interesting… I was reading the 3 ways of humility from Ignatian Spirituality… Coincidence? Hmm

The First Degree of Humility

The first way is fundamental. You love Jesus Christ so much that nothing and no one on earth could persuade you to do what you know would cut you off from him.

The Second Degree of Humility

Or you can be another kind of lover and live humbly in a second way. You love Jesus Christ so much that you want to remain loyal even to his great redemptive vision. You want to understand what Christ hopes for in the world and particularly in the church. You find real meaning in the Beatitudes.

The Third Degree of Humility

The third way to live humility in Ignatian spirituality begins with a prayer to the Father that he will grant you the grace to live in the way of Jesus, who “emptied himself to assume the condition of a slave” (Philippians 2:7). It leads to choosing things that your life world despises.

Take, Lord, and receive all my liberty,
my memory, my understanding,
and my entire will,
All I have and call my own.

You have given all to me.
To you, Lord, I return it.

Everything is yours; do with it what you will.
Give me only your love and your grace,
that is enough for me.

Amen



Christ is with us, **now **and forever.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

As much as I love Randy’s strident posts (I save them to disk so I will have them for reference) I cringe every time I open a post and it starts “______ proved from scripture”.

For one thing, it smacks of the Protestant practice of “proving” theology by Scripture. It has become clear over the course of the last 500 years that one can “prove” all manner of doctrines using scripture. It is really more a matter of the lens through which one interprets scripture. For example, reading it through the lens of the Fathers.

The other thing is that I don’t believe matters of faith are subject to “proof” of scientific method or even human reason. I am not saying that these methods should not be applied to theology, but in the end, it boils down to a matter of faith, not of “proof”.

I do appreciate "demonstrating’ a point using Scripture, and this is how I usually read Randy’s posts, but as you have pointed out, how one perceives what is there depends upon how one approaches the text.

:sad_yes:

Not until now, have I noticed how Protestant Catholicism has become.

Maybe the Traditionalists have a point.