Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Post Reply
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
Switch to Forum Live View Scripture Tradition Reason
9 years ago  ::  Jan 17, 2009 - 9:24AM #21
pio_child
Posts: 43
I love that explanation as well.
Quick Reply
Cancel
9 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2009 - 5:32PM #22
Brobrooz1
Posts: 847

Dec 30, 2008 -- 10:30PM, Brobrooz1 wrote:

PilgrimTim112 wrote:

Not quite, but I am guilty of carrying a law license. Thanks for the welcome, Dutch. I have some questions, though, for the original post-er, Brobrooz1. I see on some other threads that you perceive yourself to be conservative, but willing to and trying to engage in meaningful conversation with progressive Episcopalians. I, for one, appreciate your candor and your willingness to engage in discussion. So, did you find the responses to your question here to be helpful? And, do you think conservative Anglicans reject or differ with the "three-legged stool" concept? I do perceive an argument from conservative E/A's I've read in the debate for which Bp. Robinson is a personification that at least one purpose of their objection is to strengthen the scripture leg of the stool -- that progressives have the stool a-kilter by overemphasizing the reason leg. But, as I've reflected upon this S-T-R thread, I began wondering whether conservatives perhaps find the three-legged stool concept itself to be erroneous. What do you think? Tim


Good evening Tim and everyone! Sorry that I have been so long gatting back to you. I tend to understand S, T, R in a sort of 'chain of command', as it informs our Spiritual walk. The Scriptures, imho, should be the final authoruty, but informed by tradition (ie church fathers,scholars,commentaries, etc),in turn these inform our reasoning -iow- we should be willing tro change our reasoning to be in line with God's purposes. On still another hand... reasoning is what puts Scriopture and tradition togther for us.... Too many times, I have had conversations that goe something like this: 'Yes I know what the Bible says, what the church has taught-but Ithink it should be this way....' imho, that could be a problem...



Don't know if it is good or bad, or just is... I'm currently enrolled in CDSPs online course in Anglican Theology. Maybe all the libs are rubbing off on me!... anyway, rather than a 'chain of command', prehaps 3 umbrellas, each larger and overarching the other...Scripture, reason,tradition: abit broader?


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Jul 08, 2009 - 12:45AM #23
Roodog
Posts: 10,168

I believe that reason is not just based on life experience but it wisely brings the other two elements of this triad together with itself to be in harmony with each other.


Our Savior reproved His Jewish opponents for exercising Tradition at the expense of Scripture.


I use a lot of tradition to help me interpret Scripture and apply it? (ie. What is the Classic view on this passage or issue in the Bible?) I draw heavily from the Reformation and the Great Awakening. This is my History and Tradition.


Those of you who are familiar with me know that I try to use your history, tradition as well as the Bible  to try to reasonably dialogue with you.

For those who have faith, no explanation is neccessary.
For those who have no faith, no explanation is possible.

St. Thomas Aquinas

If one turns his ear from hearing the Law, even his prayer is an abomination. Proverbs 28:9
Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Oct 22, 2009 - 1:50PM #24
BBarton
Posts: 1,670

I liked Dutch's definition on page two, but that also seems how it was 20 years ago.  I think now that we're deep into the "age of reason" in the West, this too is reflected in our religion's leadership.  I think the leg of reason is far longer and fatter than that of scripture or tradition, in fact the later two seem to be dangling in the air.


   

Quick Reply
Cancel
8 years ago  ::  Oct 27, 2009 - 12:22PM #25
RJMcElwain
Posts: 3,013

Oct 22, 2009 -- 1:50PM, BBarton wrote:


I liked Dutch's definition on page two, but that also seems how it was 20 years ago.  I think now that we're deep into the "age of reason" in the West, this too is reflected in our religion's leadership.  I think the leg of reason is far longer and fatter than that of scripture or tradition, in fact the later two seem to be dangling in the air.


   




I tend to agree. But I'm not sure if it's a good or bad thing. Also, I wonder if it's cyclical. Historical Jesus investigation started a little over 200 years ago and I think that may have been the beginning of the extraordinary overgrowth of the reason leg. I think it has waxed and waned since then, but I doubt that it will ever get back in balance with Scripture and Tradition. Just musings on a quiet day.  Embarassed  

Robert J. McElwain

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." (Supposedly)Thomas Jefferson

"He who is not angry when there is just cause for anger is immoral."
St. Thomas Aquinas

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. Plato
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 3 of 3  •  Prev 1 2 3
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook