tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1938983304459855111.post7394668047181341361..comments2023-04-02T07:03:21.099-05:00Comments on Principium Unitatis: One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Non-Entity?Bryan Crosshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13269970389157868131noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1938983304459855111.post-7058481051008709642007-08-15T08:57:00.000-05:002007-08-15T08:57:00.000-05:00Mark,Thanks for your comments. I do support the id...Mark,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your comments. I do support the idea of Christians of all denominations working together for social causes and goals. Helping the poor is one of those goals. In this respect I applaud and support the ecumenical movement for its efforts to effect unity in social action.<BR/><BR/>But in my opinion, that sort of unity falls <B>far</B> short of the unity that Christ prays in John 17 for His followers to have. We are supposed to be one in faith (i.e. in doctrine, see Eph 4:5), one in sacraments ("one baptism", Eph 4:5), and one regarding who are the rightful authorities in the Church (Heb 13:17; Acts 15:24). As long as we are divided over doctrine, worship (i.e. sacraments), and leadership, we are not as unified as Christ prays that we would be.<BR/><BR/>As for your comment about the eschatological Church, I would put it this way. When God looks at the Church on earth, He is not blind to our present divisions. I think He is more aware of them than most of us are. His will, revealed clearly in John 17, is that we all be one, even as the Father and Son are one. So that supreme unity is what we must pursue, even now. We see in Revelation 19:7 that the bride "makes herself ready" for Christ's return. Surely restoring unity to the Church and healing the wounds of schism are part of making the Church ready for Christ's return. So I believe that the unity of the "eschatological Church" is something we must pursue now.<BR/><BR/>Thanks again for your comments. I'm glad to share with you the vision and task of uniting all Christians in true unity.<BR/><BR/>- BryanBryan Crosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13269970389157868131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1938983304459855111.post-27696132927128048222007-08-15T02:51:00.000-05:002007-08-15T02:51:00.000-05:00You have to distinguish between the Church which i...You have to distinguish between the Church which is visible in Heaven and the Church which is visible on Earth.<BR/><BR/>The way we see the Church on Earth has to come inot alignment with the way the Church is seen in Heaven - that is an Eschatological certainty.<BR/><BR/>Moves in this direction have already begun in the UK with http://www.hope08.com/ - when virtually ALL the Christian Denominations in the UK will come together for Christian Mission and to drive forward the Re-Evangelisation of the UK.Mark Downhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10683574581686269966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1938983304459855111.post-70297530286010723612007-08-05T23:27:00.000-05:002007-08-05T23:27:00.000-05:00Jon,Interesting comment. As you know, the things/e...Jon,<BR/><BR/>Interesting comment. As you know, the things/events/persons referred to in a story are (ordinarily) distinct from the story itself. (The only exception would be if the story is self-referential, i.e. refers to itself.) A story cannot impose unity upon reality. A true story (well, at least a good one) <B>shows</B> the causal relations between persons and objects and events. A story cannot impose any reality (causal or ontological) upon reality. The story itself is conceptual. The events/persons/objects referred to by the story are actual (assuming that the story is true). The [good] true story shows the causal relations between those events/persons/objects.<BR/><BR/>When two things are causally related, they are more unified than if they were not causally related. But they are still two, not one. The fact of causal relations between persons/objects/events does not entail those persons/objects/events are an ontological unity. So what I think you mean by "narrative unity" is actually the sort of unity things have by being causally related. But being causally related is not ontological unity. So "narrative unity" is not ontological unity.<BR/><BR/>All the things on my desk came to be on my desk because of choices I made. That is true. But that does not mean that all the things on my desk compose an ontological unity. It means rather that they all have in common the proximate cause of their being in the general location of my desk.<BR/><BR/>How does that apply to the Church? When I am talking about the unity of the visible Church, I am talking about ontological unity. I'm not talking about causal relations. Even every Christian heresy is causally related to the Apostles, since every Christian heresy (e.g. Nestorianism or Docetism) derives from Christianity which derives from the Apostles. So these heresies all have what you are calling "narrative unity" with the events of the Apostolic era. That shows that "narrative unity" isn't helpful here, because it does not distinguish heresy from orthodoxy, or schism from non-schism. Every excommunicated person would have "narrative unity" with the Apostles. But we agree that [lawfully] excommunicated persons are not part of the visible Church. Therefore narrative unity is not the sort of unity that can distinguish the visible Church from that which is not the visible Church. Even the devil is part of the "narrative" involving the visible Church. But obviously the devil is not part of the visible Church. Of course I'm pushing the point to absurdity! I'm doing so only to show that "narrative unity" is not the sort of unity that can make the visible Church *one*; nor can "narrative unity" explain the composition of the visible Church (e.g. why the devil is not a member of the visible Church).<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your comment.<BR/><BR/>- BryanBryan Crosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13269970389157868131noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1938983304459855111.post-76162929501034287462007-08-04T11:43:00.000-05:002007-08-04T11:43:00.000-05:00What about narrative, though? I mean, all the par...What about narrative, though? I mean, all the parts of my identity as a person cohere via a narrative about my life, just as all the things on your desk come together because of the narrative of your choices and what makes those things valuable to you. I don't see how narrative can be reduced to something conceptual. Narrative is about real things that happen in history that join things together. Rome has organic unity through time via bishops, and Protestantism has a kind of narrative unity through time as well. Stepping back, all baptized Christians have the narrative unity of passing through the waters of the red sea and of being buried with Christ.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com