A
a_priori
Guest
I agree with what you say here. I was a very active evangelical for over 30 years. It is a safe cocoon but it is too rigid to be the only answer. From my personal frame of reference, evangelicalism is tantamount to Newtonian physics. Things are tied up in a neat little bow. It gives us what we need. If you do this, then God will do that. It is full of quid pro quo with the Almighty. But then cracks appear. What about the Sacramental nature of historical Christianity? What about the rest of the world? How is it that two well-intentioned people can sit on a log, armed with Sola Scriptura, and arrive at mutually-exclusive truths? Is truth derived from the best intellectual argument when a Calvinist and an Arminian go toe-to-toe? Etc., etc.I’ve studied some Orthodoxy, and have some Orthodox friends online… and I can definitely feel the appeal to that. I’m more mystically inclined anyways. A mystical understanding of faith is about the opposite from your average Evangelical, where it’s all about the hard facts, the nuts and bolts… and heaven forbid there’s any grey areas about anything.
As an Anglican… Evangelicals make my skin crawl sometimes, which is one reason being in the Anglican Communion/movement concerns me, because Evangelicals are on the resurgence in Anglicanism, especially in the Global South (and in the UK, though to a lesser extent in the US). The triumphalism and sometimes, fundamentalism, in it all can be creepy.
I asked an Anglican from New Zealand one time, an Evangelical pastor that said that those who don’t believe in Jesus go straight to Hell after they die (and if I questioned this absolute truth, I must be a heretic), what he’d do for a hypothetical mother that he encountered, if she had a son that had died, and they were irreligious… what would he tell her? Would he pray for her and her dead son? He said he honestly hadn’t thought about it. I told him and I wouldn’t have a problem praying for them, that I found nothing unbiblical or heretical about it. He had issues with the idea of praying for the dead in the first place, something that seems more common among Evangelical Anglicans. It’s actually part of the 1979 liturgy here in the US, and sometimes part of the 1928 liturgy. So there’s sometimes an anti-sacramental/anti-catholic tone there.
On my road to Orthodoxy and then to Catholicism, I began thinking differently. For me, just as it turns out that Newton’s time and space are mutable after all and Quantum Mechanics has thrown causality out the window, it became necessary think differently. Perhaps General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have a philosophical analog that might inform a worldview that is consistent with Christianity? Or, more appropriately, since God created all things, perhaps GR/QM point to something spiritual?
Since in the Quantum world there is no certainty but merely areas of higher probability and areas of lower probability, perhaps faith is like that. I am Catholic solely because, for me, it is an area of higher probability in a sea of competing dogmas. I believe there is truth everywhere but that Christianity in general and Catholicism specifically contain the highest concentration of truth and that God’s ultimate revelation came in the fullness of Christ. This doesn’t presuppose that the Hindu is completely devoid of any truth. This view also does not militate against the notion that God is personal.
It turns out that there is a great contiguity between the Greek concept of Logos and the Chinese Tao. The diehard religious fundamentalist views the world as if he were standing two inches away from a Monet and claiming to understand the painting. It doesn’t work that way. As with a Monet, one has to “step back a few feet” in life in order to see the from the proper angle.
Plato saw truth as well within his frame of reference with his realm of the Forms. To him, man was once in a high place and ended up in a low place. Now his mission is to get back to the high place. This is the Judeo-Christian skeletal system.
Anyway, thank you for your comments.