A Word About Orthodox Apologetics

Orthodox Christian Network ^ | Fr. Brendan Pelphrey

[don-o]

A small snip from a long piece that may be of interest to someone seeking, if any such peruse this forum.

[Joe 6-pack]

Bump for later. I’m particularly drawn to the works of Chesterton and Lewis, and both men seem to pretty astute in reconciling matters of faith, logic and reason. Will be interested in exploring this later when I have more time.

Thanks!

[don-o]

You’re welcome Joe. Exploring is good. I am interested in thoughtful comments from those who will take the time to read the piece.

[CynicalBear]

>>Today in America, many Protestant and Catholic theologians and missionaries continue to believe that Christian apologetics should rely upon the use of sound reason or logic.<<

There, fixed it for ya.

[Alex Murphy]

Today in America, many Protestant theologians and missionaries continue to believe that Christian apologetics should rely upon the use of sound reason or logic. A Protestant Christian radio program about apologetics even took the name, “Sound Reason.” But Orthodox apologetics is not based upon reason, because Christian faith is actually unreasonable.

PFL. I assume Mrs. Don-O is Orthodox, too?

[don-o]

Does every single thread HAVE to involve Roman Catholicism? Why not come at this from your own beliefs?

[don-o]

You know how to read profile pages, now don’t you? And that is as far as the personal will go.

[Big Red Badger]

same here,,,

[Alex Murphy]

Does every single thread HAVE to involve Roman Catholicism?

Does every single Catholic / Orthodox thread have to disparage Protestantism?

[Hegewisch Dupa]

"Why not come at this from your own beliefs?"

Lot of assumption in those last three words....

[defconw]

"An important part of the art of apologetics is knowing when to speak, and when not to speak".

I need to write this on my forhead.

[don-o]

Point out the disparagement in the article.

[CynicalBear]

>>Does every single thread HAVE to involve Roman Catholicism?<<

O come now Don. The very first line of your post flatly states that it’s the Protestants who use logic or reason. Now I went to the source and the first paragraph you posted is not the first paragraph of the article. You had to go to the 13th paragraph in that article to get the first sentence to read as if it’s only the Protestants. Then you have the temerity to ask that question?

>>Why not come at this from your own beliefs?<<

You would not have liked that at all. I found it astonishing that a Catholic of all people would accuse others of including things in their beliefs that can’t be found in scripture. As for my personal beliefs. If it wasn’t taught by the apostles don’t expect me to add my “logic” or “reason” to add something to it.

[BlueDragon]

[sauron]

I've heard it said that we, as Christians, ought to act in such a manner that others, at a distance, should be able to infer that we are Christian from our actions alone.

If we did this, stoic and quiet testimony such as was advocated in the article (i.e., witness by quiet example) would indeed be more powerful as it would be supported by our actions.

Btw, the article may have a good point, but it DOES go against my very nature of reasoning that Christianity is logical and natural.

I was raised Protestant, but became Orthodox through our apologetics discussion group. We only meant to "kick the tires," but it just kinda worked out that way.

Btw, I would caution both Protestants and Orthodox to be very careful in dialogue with each other. You will unwittingly talk past each other with your different vocabularies. You may not realize it, but you ARE NOT light years apart, you are *very* close, philosophically.

Much closer than you would think. ;)

[CynicalBear]

And he had to go to the 13th paragraph of the article to get the first sentence of what he posted to read “Protestant”.

[don-o]

O come now Don. The very first line of your post flatly states that it’s the Protestants who use logic or reason.

I chose the excerpt that I did because I thought it summarized the author's thesis better than the initial paragraphs.

The sentences says "rely on" not "use" logic. There is a difference.

I found it astonishing that a Catholic of all people

You lost me there. What Catholic are you talking about?

[don-o]

For clarity’s sake, Orthodox would say that Roman Catholics were the first Protestants.

[Alex Murphy]

For clarity’s sake, Orthodox would say that Roman Catholics were the first Protestants.

I can understand that POV.

[Seraphicaviary]

And I always heard it said that nobody ever believed in anything they did not first think was rational. I think it was John Cardinal Newman who said that.

Maybe you cannot noodle out every detail, but nobody just submits to irrationality. Assurance of things not known is not the same as embracing the irrational. It just means you don’t have everything you need for a syllogistic proof. Even the simplest person who is not trained in ordering his thoughts still thinks, and he may not know all the why, but if he is to act upon his beliefs and spread it to others, it must be intelligible.