Thanks for your reply. I may continue later, it may be that we just disagree.
I didn’t mean to slight Augustine but to juxtapose the doctors least like the scholastics as a balance to St. Thomas.
I think the view of God between Calvinism and Lutheranism is at least an order of magnitude greater than the differences between the East and West in Catholicism.
Theology unavoidably involves reason, we are both using reason here to prove the validity of our theology. Any use of reason in theology to discount the use of reason in theology contradicts itself.
In Catholicism, particularly in Pope Benedict’s appeals, reason and faith are not opposed. Our God transcends reason, does not contradict reason. What we fight together today is the false choice of reason or faith - the false choice of science or faith, reason or superstition. This is the challenge for the Church in the modern world.
Reason have their proper place in knowledge. This is the subject of Pope John Paul II’s “Faith and Reason.” I don’t expect you to read, I’m merely telling you its context.
Pope Benedict, as I mentioned earlier, emphasizes the combined value of scholasticism and monasticism, which I believe contradicts your assertion of reason as elevated or Acquinas as the default today.
FInally, a personal request: “Romanist” sounds like an attempt to denigrate my Church. It also can make Catholics resist your arguments just to resist, so it lessens effectiveness. I’ll do my best to not denigrate your church. Hopefully I get better with practice.
I don’t mean I won’t passionately disagree, but I promise to try not to be disagreeable when doing so. You can slap me if I do.
I appreciate your discussion very much.
Thanks again,
A few short responses.
As to the view of God between Lutherans and the Reformed, I would be interested to know how you think they differ so significantly. I find the platonic God of the East where man must climb the chain of being and the split-level reconstruction of Aquinas to be a significant reorientation.
I’ll make a deal with you. I’ll read JPII if you read Cornelius Van Til.
As to the term Romanists: I use the term because it’s a nice shorthand for Roman Catholic Church. I’m pretty conservative so I’m not into political correctness or politically correct speech. I also use it as a ministry tool to Romanists to make clear to those of that church that I consider their church as merely another denomination within Christdom. I don’t want to lead those congregants into the false belief that I accept their own false designation of their denomination.