This is made of 13 essays on various topics about "One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic Church" and "Roman Catholic Theology Today" and "Evangelical and Catholic Cooperation in the Public Arena" and so on.
"Roman Catholic Theology Today" asserts that after Vatican II much of Catholic theology went rapidly in the modernist direction as "a consciously post-Enlightenment theology, the basic presuppositions and concerns of which are the same as those that have motivated Protestant theology in modern times." If true it certainly helps explain some of the things I’ve been hearing about Catholic universities.
Many authors complain that many Protestants churches have become terribly sloppy with doctrine, to the point of Pelagianism or worse: "therapeutic Christianity."
Much of the rest is fairly well summarized by "We agree on a lot of things, and can and should do a lot of things together, but Trent is still in the way."
In other words justification is either a "forensic" imputation with no human effort or a process that in the end depends on human effort and compliance. The latter is officially tied in to support Purgatory, and in popular theology (as opposed to the magisterium's version) became and still becomes a "salvation by works" doctrine.
Balance is difficult, and while I'd hope it is possible to think of justification with a little human cooperation without getting tied up in works-and-merits, it isn't clear that this works out very well in practice. In any event, Rome doesn't seem too eager to ditch the merits of the saints though I gather they've decided to be a little fuzzier about Purgatory.
I tend to a somewhat different view, though I haven't worked out the implications. Justification, sanctification, glorification, etc. look one way from a human time-based perspective, and must look quite different from the eternal Now. It is therefore risky to rely on time-based distinctions when talking about God's action. Likewise it is difficult to include both Divine knowledge and human choice in the same model. So rather than try to build a conceptual framework that handles both, look instead at what is required of us in one model, and look at what happens to us in another one. Requirements: 1) trust Jesus for salvation, and 2) try to obey God's rules to be fruitful in His world, and 3) when you sin review point 1. What this looks like from the eternal perspective is more like God turning vermin into gods.
1 comment:
I have always found it difficult to separate out, even theoretically, whether the theology of a denomination is A) what the official bodies say it is, or B) what most of the adherents believe. If we went to Mars and watched them engage in their religious practices and got to know them for a year and drew conclusions, wouldn't we find it pettifogging nonsense if a small group insisted that what we saw wasn't really the theology, but something else they had recorded somewhere was more official?
And yet...fashions come and go, and it does pay to write things down and try to stay close to it.
Post a Comment