Skip to main content

Catholic/Protestant : present/future sense of justification, purification, etc

This is not a big discovery for others, and I probably heard it before somewhere.  But the Catholic sense of salvation is of being right with the Lord here and now.  And that sort of being-saved naturally gives rise to a process of growth that goes on throughout a lifetime.  And that process can, unfortunately, be terminated: one can get un-saved.  But one can also joyfully give the Lord the glory here and now while entrusting the future to Him.

Certain flavors of Protestantism, however, seem to me to understand being saved as meaning one knows that one will go to heaven when one dies.  This meaning is more like the turning on of a switch, whereas the former was more like conception or the so-called animation of a seed.

Note that the former is consistent with an ontological view of justification, while the second is consistent with a juridical view.  And that contrast parallels nicely the contrast between the natural law and the divine command approach to morality.  And the latter approach is by nature restricted to understanding good and evil in instrumental terms, i.e., in terms of future rewards and punishments, while the former in terms of intrinsic value and dignity.

It's getting late as I'm writing this, but it's worth noting that different takes on the question of purgatory follow the same contrast.  The ontological understanding of morality/justification would lead one to think that the psyche has to be purified to be able to enjoy the presence of the Lord.  Even juridical talk of purgatory would easily be translated by such into "ontological" terms: i.e., as being ultimately about repairing a relationship.  The Protestant with the juridical approach to justification, however, would see no need for a growth/purgation processes, as justification already turns "on" the switch via imputation.  Such a person would understand purgatory as a denial that the switch of justification had been turned on.

More later...

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

P F Strawson's Freedom and Resentment: the argument laid out

Here is a summary and comments on the essay Freedom and Resentment by PF Strawson.  He makes some great points, and when he is wrong, it is in such a way as to clarify things a great deal.  My non-deterministic position is much better thanks to having read this.  I’ll summarize it in this post and respond in a later one. In a nutshell: PFS first argues that personal resentment that we may feel toward another for having failed to show goodwill toward us would have no problem coexisting with the conviction that determinism is true.  Moral disapprobation, as an analog to resentment, is likewise capable of coexisting with deterministic convictions. In fact, it would seem nearly impossible for a normally-constituted person (i.e., a non-sociopath) to leave behind the web of moral convictions, even if that person is a determinist.  In this way, by arguing that moral and determinist convictions can coexist in the same person, PFS undermines the libertarian argument ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Daniel Dennett, disqualifying qualia, softening up the hard problem, fullness of vacuity, dysfunctional functionalism

Around track 2 of disc 9 of Intuition Pumps , Dennett offers what I would call an argument from vacuity.  He argues that David Chalmers unwittingly plays a magic trick on himself and others by placing a set of issues under the one umbrella called the "hard problem of consciousness." None of these issues is really , in Dennett's opinion, a hard problem.  But in naming them thus, Chalmers (says Dennett) is like a magician who seems to be playing the same card trick over and over again, but is really playing several different ones.  In this analogy, expert magicians watch what they think is the same trick played over and over again.  They find it unusually difficult to determine which trick he is playing because they take these performances as iterations of the same trick when each is  in fact different from the one that came before.  Furthermore, each of the tricks that he plays is actually an easy one, so it is precisely because they are looki...
Post a Comment
Read more

naturalism (or rather, anti-supernaturalism) and preternaturalism

I will use the term "preternaturalism" to designate a willingness to posit causes that are less than divine but which stand above and beyond those observable ones we see operating within the laws of nature. A naturalist might oppose theistic arguments from miracles or design by arguing for the possibility of preternatural causes.  Such an argument, however, would bring us back to Zeus and Hera, tree nymphs and  the like: a supernatural explanation would, by contrast, be more conducive toward a scientific approach to nature (i.e., positing only laws that are falsifiable when doing science).
Post a Comment
Read more