I do like the metaphor. I can imagine people in Arianism, Montanism, etc to be kind loving people that are sincere and want to be Christ followers….. drip, drip, drip. But I no longer believe in eternal conscious torment which is not particularly palatable to the majority. Two of my children have been damaged psychologically by my wife and I dragging them through charismatic/pentecostal spaces when they were young. Therefore I have a bias. We still have faith (our children don’t) and I think what is important is faith expressing itself through love.
alternately, you might consider what kind of problems in the plumbing those environments had. "eternal conscious torment" is not a view I would hold, either.
several hundred dollar questions here. Being affirming requires a decision regarding what marriage is and what sexuality is for. If you judge that both are ordered to children, you will need to either find another additional meaning for marriage ("procreation OR companionship" is one option), or place children as subsidiary and secondary good to the overrarching purpose of What Marriage Is For; whatever you decide that is.
if "being affirming" becomes a means to avoid conflict or insult, or a means to expand or alter the category of sexuality, than yes i would say its bad plumbing.
I'm also thinking back to the "settled vs. open bits" here.
Kinda perplexed at how certain things are even determined to be settled or open. (*yes, I realize this is one favorite Catholic accusation of Protestants*)
Do you know the joke from Thomas Oden I think: I don't know if the Catholic church will ever have female priests but if they ever do I know the statement will begin with "as the Catholic church has always taught....."
Interesting. I would have connected it less to what marriage is for but the logic of being affirming. I think following Lindbeck the idea that 'love is love' is a dead end because the word 'love' is functioning abstract from 'love' understood within the Christian language game. Similar the language of 'rights. I wonder if following the plumbing analogy, it also seems at times we've hooked up the hot water and cold water backwards. You can live in that house if you are aware of it but its still not done correctly. It also means that it is dangerous for children and visitors. People who don't know that it is backwards.
This is the way that I've sort of always thought about theology, but have always had to be pretty private about it because I work within a space where it can get you fired. In Protestant denominations, your agreement with the "accepted" theology helps people trust you. The denomination might argue this is because they have the best plumbing, but I think it's also hard to change perspectives on theology in an institution.
That makes it hard to treat heresy this way, and pushes a lot of conversations about theology to whispered exchanges in private rooms. I still find your view enormously helpful, but I think it would be a tough change to bring about.
“However, if a person is not saved on behalf of what they believe about God, but due to the finished work of Christ, the stakes are reassessed.” I’m not sure that this is a proper dichotomy. It’s the plumber who fixes your pipes, but if you don’t think they need fixing, or that he can do so, they will remain unfixed (I had plumbers on my mind after reading your post. I know that’s not the analogy you were making!)
While I agree fully with your emphasis on salvation being due to the finished work of Christ (my favorite expression of this was Mark Galli’s column “Already Friends with God” https://www.christianitytoday.com/2014/10/already-friends-of-god/ ), when it’s juxtaposed with belief it sometimes implies a sort of universalism that I don’t think squares with scripture.
I do like the metaphor. I can imagine people in Arianism, Montanism, etc to be kind loving people that are sincere and want to be Christ followers….. drip, drip, drip. But I no longer believe in eternal conscious torment which is not particularly palatable to the majority. Two of my children have been damaged psychologically by my wife and I dragging them through charismatic/pentecostal spaces when they were young. Therefore I have a bias. We still have faith (our children don’t) and I think what is important is faith expressing itself through love.
alternately, you might consider what kind of problems in the plumbing those environments had. "eternal conscious torment" is not a view I would hold, either.
Indeed!
Could you tease out if being affirming is an instance of bad plumbing and what theologically the plumber might say is wrong?
several hundred dollar questions here. Being affirming requires a decision regarding what marriage is and what sexuality is for. If you judge that both are ordered to children, you will need to either find another additional meaning for marriage ("procreation OR companionship" is one option), or place children as subsidiary and secondary good to the overrarching purpose of What Marriage Is For; whatever you decide that is.
if "being affirming" becomes a means to avoid conflict or insult, or a means to expand or alter the category of sexuality, than yes i would say its bad plumbing.
I'm also thinking back to the "settled vs. open bits" here.
Kinda perplexed at how certain things are even determined to be settled or open. (*yes, I realize this is one favorite Catholic accusation of Protestants*)
Do you know the joke from Thomas Oden I think: I don't know if the Catholic church will ever have female priests but if they ever do I know the statement will begin with "as the Catholic church has always taught....."
That’s a low blow but a funny one
Interesting. I would have connected it less to what marriage is for but the logic of being affirming. I think following Lindbeck the idea that 'love is love' is a dead end because the word 'love' is functioning abstract from 'love' understood within the Christian language game. Similar the language of 'rights. I wonder if following the plumbing analogy, it also seems at times we've hooked up the hot water and cold water backwards. You can live in that house if you are aware of it but its still not done correctly. It also means that it is dangerous for children and visitors. People who don't know that it is backwards.
How bad must your theological plumbing get before you lack water and die?
It’s definitely possible.
(theologians as plumbers is something I can get behind with GUSTO)
how are you always the first person to read whatever i write? you should get a medal.
it also helps that I'm up up up in the afternoon when your notes drop.
hahah - but it took me 8 days to see this??
I owe you a hello - it's gonna take time. I have been chewing on our Dec conversation a lot and hope the Kelsey reading group is going well!
This is the way that I've sort of always thought about theology, but have always had to be pretty private about it because I work within a space where it can get you fired. In Protestant denominations, your agreement with the "accepted" theology helps people trust you. The denomination might argue this is because they have the best plumbing, but I think it's also hard to change perspectives on theology in an institution.
That makes it hard to treat heresy this way, and pushes a lot of conversations about theology to whispered exchanges in private rooms. I still find your view enormously helpful, but I think it would be a tough change to bring about.
“However, if a person is not saved on behalf of what they believe about God, but due to the finished work of Christ, the stakes are reassessed.” I’m not sure that this is a proper dichotomy. It’s the plumber who fixes your pipes, but if you don’t think they need fixing, or that he can do so, they will remain unfixed (I had plumbers on my mind after reading your post. I know that’s not the analogy you were making!)
Can you say more about the improper dichotomy in the quote? I’m not sure I follow
While I agree fully with your emphasis on salvation being due to the finished work of Christ (my favorite expression of this was Mark Galli’s column “Already Friends with God” https://www.christianitytoday.com/2014/10/already-friends-of-god/ ), when it’s juxtaposed with belief it sometimes implies a sort of universalism that I don’t think squares with scripture.
in plumbing terms, the settled bits are that all who are saved are saved through Christ alone. The open bits are how extensive that *all* is.