{"id":25885,"date":"2017-08-07T07:57:49","date_gmt":"2017-08-07T11:57:49","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.cccc.org\/news_blogs\/?p=25885"},"modified":"2022-08-17T13:58:52","modified_gmt":"2022-08-17T17:58:52","slug":"update-3-from-oxford-university","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.cccc.org\/news_blogs\/john\/2017\/08\/07\/update-3-from-oxford-university\/","title":{"rendered":"Update #3 from Oxford University"},"content":{"rendered":"
This entry is part 3 of 4 in the series Oxford University<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n

Here’s an update on Wednesday to Friday last week for both courses: The church always needs reform<\/em> and No faith in religion?<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I’m sharing selected points of interest from the courses. I look forward to having time to reflect on both the readings and the classes to draw some conclusions, which I will then work into future blog posts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Church Always Needs Reform<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

This course was taught by Father Henry Wansbrough<\/a>, a Benedictine monk and impressive scholar who has served on papal commissions and was the general editor of the New Jerusalem Bible<\/em>. He is a great example of a humble man. With his intellect and experience (he worked at Vatican II), his answers to challenging questions were always restrained and reasonable. He also surprised me with opinions that were not what I expected. For instance, he agreed with many of Luther’s critiques. He also modelled receptive ecumenism <\/em>quite well,<\/em> which I’ll explain right away.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Receptive Ecumenism<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Receptive ecumenism<\/em> is the willingness to listen to others to see what you might have missed, to correct where needed, to learn from others, and to enrich your faith.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We may not agree with everything the other person asserts, but we should be humble and accept the possibility that we ourselves may not have everything right either. Shouldn’t we want to be as true to Christ as possible? If we can be better Christ-followers by picking the good out of someone else’s ideas, shouldn’t we? For instance, we may be so focussed on one part of our faith that we’ve missed out on another.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Original Sin<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

The Eastern church has a much more optimistic view of humanity than the Western church. We both see humanity as made in the image of God, but in the East the Fall was more of a stumble than a fall. When toddlers stumble while learning to stand and walk, we know that the stumbling is a natural part of growing up, and we encourage them to try again. We don’t punish them for stumbling. In the same way, the East sees the Fall as humanity’s natural stumble. As another professor once said, Eastern Christians believe the image of God in us is still whole, but is covered in mud. It has been marred, not broken. They have no concept of original sin because Augustine was not read in the East. The Orthodox believe we are still fundamentally good people beneath the dirt. Christ cleans off the mud and restores our goodness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Western church has a much more pessimistic view of humanity. The image of God has been broken<\/em> by the Fall and needs to be made whole again. The Fall was a willful rebellion, not a stumble. Now we are fundamentally bad, born in sin, and under condemnation. Christ rescues us from our badness and makes us new and whole again through his atonement for our sins.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Papal Infallibility<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Papal Infallibility was confirmed in 1870 at Vatican I. It has only been invoked twice, but both times it related to doctrines of Mary and both uses had the effect of making rapproachement<\/em> with the Protestant church more difficult. The two doctrines are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

  1. The Immaculate Conception of Mary – 1854, before Vatican I, but the concept of papal infallibility had been around for a long time: This doctrine states that Mary herself was born without sin.<\/li>
  2. The Assumption of Mary – 1950: The doctrine that when Mary died, her physical body was taken to heaven.<\/li><\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    To speak infallibly, the pope must explicitly state that he is speaking ex cathedra<\/em>. Otherwise, he speaks with an authority that should be given both weight and deference. However, and this was surprising, there is no requirement for Roman Catholics to obey him. He can be disobeyed if conscience demands it, but Father Henry says anyone doing so should feel uneasy about it. Disobedience should not be lightly done.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Vatican II<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

    Vatican I was all about power<\/em>, specifically the pope’s power. Vatican II was quite different. It was all about service<\/em>. Some of the new thinking that came out of Vatican II includes:<\/p>\n\n\n\n