This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Sorry I assumed your denomination! What you say about Whelton's take on ecclesiology is intriguing, and I'll have to look further into it. I don't remember anything he said on the matter striking me as potentially incorrect, but then I come out of the OCA which tends to follow St. Vladimir's Seminary and thus the tradition of the Paris school that was a big part of the ressourcement you, I think correctly, identify.
I agree that Augustine is unnecessarily vilified. He is a great saint of the church (in my parish he is one of the great hierarchs depicted on the apse). With some nuance, I think Orthodox and Catholic ideas about original sin could be reconciled. There are unhelpful polemics by both sides, and the Orthodox often end up attacking something more like the Calvinist understanding. I was recently reading this piece which definitely "problematizes" a simplistic view of things.
I am not a big fan of what I know of Romanides, and I have always had a view of Heaven and Hell that is very C.S. Lewis (though maybe something like The Great Divorce is not juridical enough for you?). I definitely believe that Christ will return as Judge, and I am not a Universalist (we can hope, perhaps, but I reject certainty on this question). In general, I tend to be fairly apophatic about the next life and can tolerate ambiguity on the details. How far does that put me from the central Orthodox belief? I am not sure. I don't know if you ever had the stomach for Lord of Spirits (I have to listen on 2x speed), but the content of their episode on Hell/Universalism (What in Tarnation) is pretty good, and my beliefs would fit within their framework.
I agree that some Orthodox thinkers (polemicists?) are too negative when it comes to "Western reason", but the idea that the Eastern fathers were against reason or that modern Orthodox theologians and thinkers are not philosophically sophisticated can also be a caricature of the East. You may or may not have heard of Dr. Nathan Jacobs, but I've recently been following his exploration of the philosophy of the Eastern Fathers. My take would be that the East is skeptical of systematic theologies that are Rationalist/Cartesian projects, but this is probably unfair to nuanced Western thought (I love me some Paschal, for instance).
Enjoyed hearing about your story and your general thoughts! I'm glad I finally have something I am an "expert" in (my own theological thoughts and opinions) that I can share with The Motte by responding to you.
More options
Context Copy link