ya dunderhead.  

 

Arguments via proxy doesn't seem like a very good idea.

 

 

Gimme some books recommendations on presentism if you have the inclination.

---

 

Post Edited (ThatDarnCat) : 7/26/2005 8:59:39 AM (GMT-5)

 

Thank you for the concern in my balancing open theism and catholicism. I made the mistake of not explaining my background. Briefly, I grew up catholic, until at the age of 12ish when my parents had a divorce and my sister almost died. I had improper theodicy(for a 12 yr old) and felt it was God doing all of it and I fell away from faith. At the age of 17 I started an e-mail conversation with Dr. Boyd and Tyler (that is inconsistant but continues to this day) that brought me back to faith, and programed me for apologetics. I am in school right now originally for Systematic theodicy, but early last year I felt a strong calling into ecumenism. I was studying patristics for a class and It started a journey of mine back into catholic thought.(I go to a protestant school, so officials there were not pleased) I have always considered myself a "christian" but my worldview is open theism, and my theology is catholic. As an ecumenism student (going for a phd in systematic theology with a focus in eclesiology) I do alot of interdenominational dialogue. When I first started my journey to catholicism I was told by a handful of catholic prof's that Open theism "was not a stance of the church, but was not against it's teaching" The problem came about when "Ott" declared it a heresy(as spoken in another post) the problem with Ott is that it is from a thomas background, and does not have a complete understanding of open theism. (it remined me of anti-catholic books that say catholics worship mary)

 

So my dialogue was to find if the church would allow open theism, right now it is at odds with Thomasim, but they are a school of thought within the church.

Now about your post

 

as a catholic my belief is that "the church" that is, the magistrium as a whole has correct teaching. In that if a teaching that I believe goes against there teaching, i believe they know better. I do not do this blindly, I challenge and dialogue extremly with this. It has happened with 2 different issues, and with 1 I found that I was just misinformed and when I understood the meaning behind it I found I was compatable. The second issue I found I was wrong, but I put faith within the understanding of the church. The way that works with my conscience is that I assume that my conscience and ability to reason is not perfect, but fallen and has flaws. think of a teenage arguing against a parent. it is a workable analogy. But I want to clear 1 misconception. The church holds autonomy and authority in tension. We do not have a autonomy of protestants, but we are not mindless followers either, we determine our faithwalk within the guidlines of the church that is why there are different "schools of thought" molinism, thomism, jesuits, those are examples.

 

I completely agree, and Im actually supposed to meet with a bishop about this either later this week or early in august.

 

the angle of molinism is how I am debating it right now. I think a major intial problem was that the theologians I was discussing with all came from a Thomism background (thus dont like molinism much) I spoke a small bit with my priest today about it and he has no issue with open theism, but I will need to study and debate more. Right now the issues are "experiencing emotion vs immutability" and the whole "time" thing, which is a fun argument. the whole "divine simplicity" thing was a bogus call, because that doctrine has no place in this debate(Dr. sent me an e-mail about that)

 

This response is getting long, I will reply more tommorow on ecumenism and the difference between heresy and "unpopular"

 

---

Yes, Im a catholic open theist...