Stay Tuned
Well, I hope you have enjoyed the E discussion, which will hopefully continue for a while. Please continue to engage this discussion b/c I would like to hear your respective thoughts on the matter. We are attracting new patrons at the secondchance by the day so make sure you check the comment threads for new additions. There was quite a bit of commenting activity last night (even some in the "Welcome" thread) so check it out.
Now, as for new constructive posts, I'm too tired to write one tonight but it will come soon. I'm getting pressure from some quarters to stop blogging and to continue working on my novel (in progress), but I will not neglect the secondchance, I assure you. I've got a couple of posts in mind: one dealing with sex and romance, the other dealing with Bonhoeffer and Christian language. Bonhoeffer would likely tell me to write about sex, simply b/c it's more stimulating (in every respect), but we'll see. I'm not sure the two posts wouldn't eventually converge anyway...
posted by thewalrus at 3:21 AM
17 Comments:
I think the only significant thing about this post is that it was actually posted at 3:21 a.m. I guess timing really is everything.
4:28 AM, February 23, 2005
Did you wait until exactly 3:21 to post? How about all of your posts happen at this time, I would be impressed.
11:27 AM, February 23, 2005
if you wanted, you could change the time stamp on all your posts to be 3:21.
12:32 PM, February 23, 2005
Thanks for the prize, dante. -the system
12:34 PM, February 23, 2005
leighbotts,
Don't think I'll be able to pull that off. But, system, I did see that you could manipulate that so I don't know.
3:01 PM, February 23, 2005
I'm looking foward to your posts on sex and romance, and Bonhoeffer and Christian language. There's no hurry though, take your time.
Also, did I get a chance to mention? I got accepted to Columbia. I'm happy about that, I can't wait to go to school there.
8:19 PM, February 23, 2005
leigh botts,
That's fantastic! I eagerly await your success in your pursuits. I will be there every step of the way (in spirit if not in body...or perhaps both? :)) cheering you on. Your life makes me proud to have been a teacher. So, go kick some ass and teach them what it really means to write and compose music.
3:11 AM, February 24, 2005
Thanks Dante. I'm looking foward to your response. I wasn't sure what the Kotsko reference was about, but I'm glad it was a compliment, and somewhat curious.
2:02 PM, February 24, 2005
Dante,
Before I make any comments on your response, can I re-state what I think you were saying? I'd like to do this for my own clarity, and so you may correct any wrong conclusions I have made concerning what you wrote.
You defined sins as "venial" and "mortal." We are not perfect, such is evident because of our venial sins, but we must react to mortal sins (judge and correct them) as disciples. Mortal sins are the ones the Church should be concerned with. You then said how the Church "has no effect at all" concerning this for several reasons. There is the problem of "a language of theological understanding that prevents them from naming these sins" and if the sins were called out, political and economic aspects of our lives are problematic as well. You used the example of the Pope's address toward Christian economic responsibility, but the problem that the Church wouldn't be able to sustain such a call if it were followed. Then there is the problem of a central solution, due to Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox views.
Then you presented a solution to the aforementioned problem with the church and sin. It must recognize the situation, offer a renewed Church discipline, and construct Christian lives which are possible in a fallen world(do not follow the logic of economic or political idolatry for example).
Let me first say I appreciate you have included what you think is the appropriate response to the situation. I find myself too easily finding a problem, yet never constructing a solution.
Secondly, I'd be interested to hear an example of a venial sin. You gave a few mortal examples, yet I wonder what you could give for venial sins.
I didn't quite understand what you were referring to when you said, "Christians live according to a language of theological understanding that prevents them from naming these sins." If you mean what I think, then this is the reason for the contradiction I was referring to in my questions to you previously. The church can't respond to sin, in a sound way. It contradicts itself. What it says isn't possible.
Then in response to the latter portion of what you wrote... What is the right way to judge and correct mortals sins? If mortals sins cannot be corrected due to economics in our world today, wouldn't they rather be venial sins? What I mean is, what sins are venial and mortal is debatable.
You said if we really recognized the situation, then it would signal the end of Christianity. That's a strong statement. What would the end of Christianity be? Would it be the end of God?
It seems that the Church over the centuries has been too tolerant and allowed a world to cultivate, in which ultimately it could not exist in.
Unless...I am looking about it all wrong?
11:22 AM, February 25, 2005
This weekend our church is going to have a march at the capital protesting usury.
11:27 AM, February 25, 2005
Dante-
I agree with much of what you say, and think the appraisal is very accurate...I have a couple of questions, and a lament which goes like this:
How long has the church been confused about the authority issue? Why did we shatter ourselves on our own desires and stubbornness! Why is this still going on instead of healing!
Now questions:
How much depends on there being a unified answer to where church authority comes from.
Second: I wonder (chasten me, brother, my view may be too myopic because of my home) is this too big picture? You are talking about a worldwide view of discipleship and the church that is, on face, congregation-less. obviously you're not giving us your whole system in one post (though it may not be long before you or hobbes one does!) but am I wrong is suggesting that your ecclesiology ,is primarily universal, not local?
Third, when you speak of the end of christianity, what do you mean? Is this a reality you are describing as already comleted, an imminent threat we're in danger of or something we are in need of? Content wise, do you mean the end of discipleship? the end of public churches? Or do you mean something like when my computer gets all confused and I have to reboot it?
I appreciate that the role of church discipline and tradition in what you say. Really, here we speak more from where we differ, but I want to say that I am really amazed at what we have in common, given the dfferent roads. It is so good for my soul to be able to have these types of conversation with you again, brother.
11:59 AM, February 25, 2005
Dante,
sorry, amigo, but my protest comment really was only satire on the narrow moral scope of the church. I'd bet 95% of our church doesn't even know what usury is. who am I kidding? 99%.
I agree with 1 above, and 3 as well.
on 2, you haven't co-opted me on crap just because you agree with me. Because what I hear you saying is that the parish church is currently the only possibilty for solution, although it sure would be nice if there was a universal body that could provide discipline. so in lieu of that, we are back at the place of churches independently recommitting to discipleship.
just as a matter of personal clarification, but one that has an impact on the authority discussion, where do you see yourself church wise? above you say you are more Catholic than COC, but elsewhere you've identified yourself as Protestant. Can a person be mostly catholic? In my reading of Lumen Gentium,it seems like Rome would prefer someone to be either accepting of their authority structure or completely ignorant of it. (of course I'm only provoking you here, but it would be more fun if you bit. I feel like a rabit gnawing on the lip of a sleeping bear. Oh crap, it's looking at me!)
2:07 PM, February 28, 2005
Dante,
You said the Church is no positition to effectively correct sins, but that it should at least attempt to. I want to point out, not that your statement is a contradiction, but that the Christian goal is sometimes so absurd to me. It's like running in circles, living means to no end, at least no end by our means.
You're right, Protestant churches don't require certain behavior toward sin, because of the idea that sins are between God and the individual and it is their responsibility to make amends, on their own terms.
I think your analogy of the resurrection is very interesting. I'd like to hear more on that, and I'd like to discuss all of this further, but I have to go.
4:24 PM, March 01, 2005
It is interesting you talk about refusing communion, etc. The timing, in my Western Civilization class here at Greenville College, has placed me in a chapter about Medieval culture, especially the Medieval Church. It was only a few days ago I was reading about excommunication, the very thing you are talking about. I therefore presume when you said, "whereby it can take it up again" you were speaking of the historical practice of excommunication.
It seems the pope had great authority at that time, which eventually led to the Crusades (according to my textbook).
I agree with you, that there is a sense in which this is impossible. Who really wants to "cast the first stone", and begin weeding people out of the Church?
10:55 AM, March 02, 2005
Nice site!
[url=http://msbrithh.com/vafz/tjie.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://yskchsyo.com/htzv/uqpm.html]Cool site[/url]
8:16 AM, July 20, 2006
Nice site!
My homepage | Please visit
8:17 AM, July 20, 2006
Great work!
http://msbrithh.com/vafz/tjie.html | http://xkmpysna.com/gmqt/mtll.html
8:17 AM, July 20, 2006
Post a Comment
<< Home