tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-896636951695032019.post7662362826443959598..comments2023-10-15T03:20:52.852-04:00Comments on John McNeill Spiritual Transformation: The Theology of Fallibility Part IVjohnmcneill-spiritualtransformationhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04373030623039716423noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-896636951695032019.post-8621074185185592742010-05-07T00:58:41.393-04:002010-05-07T00:58:41.393-04:00John,
I read your reply to me with great interest...John,<br /><br />I read your reply to me with great interest and I can see that you are very clever with words and seem to use them like Pollack rather than Vermeer (both of whom are great painters). I certainly have no problem with your assertion that I may have misunderstood your article; so yes, perhaps a dialogue would be helpful.<br /><br />I posit that the “us” is a “both/and” while you seem to posit that it’s an “either/or.” <br /><br />Lastly, your choice of words - political institution of the hierarchy – is really interesting especially when one considers that human beings use words to identify something to someone. <br /><br />I will write to you as soon as I can.<br /><br />Pax,<br /><br />HenryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-896636951695032019.post-51353064596110438592010-05-06T14:16:45.814-04:002010-05-06T14:16:45.814-04:00Henry,
I read your comments with great interest. I...Henry,<br />I read your comments with great interest. I have the feeling you seriously misunderstood my article. I absolutely deny that I substitute a Christianity of values for a belief in the divinity of Christ! Secondly, in no way do I "pit the Holy Spirit against Christ and his body." I merely assert the fundamental teaching of Christianity that Christ sent his Spirit who dwells in our hearts. Finally, I agree with you that Christ promised to be with us always but that 'us' signifies every baptized Christian. I gather that for you it means the political institution of the hierarchy and not the individual baptized person.<br />I would like to talk to you personally! You can reach me at jjmcneill@aol.comjohnmcneill-spiritualtransformationhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04373030623039716423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-896636951695032019.post-34598030440736808122010-05-04T16:33:57.335-04:002010-05-04T16:33:57.335-04:00John,
Jayden posted a comment on the other blog t...John,<br /><br />Jayden posted a comment on the other blog that I'd like to also post here because Jayden's comment highlighted that one of my statements needs clarification:<br /><br />Jayden,<br /><br />You are correct that a condemnation "in and of itself" can change with time but as of now that hasn't happened to Joachim of Fiore and so I believe it's best not to cite him because it muddies the water. Of course if someone cited Arius I would also tell them that it's probably not a good idea to do so. However, I wasn’t asserting that John’s proposal should be dismissed because he cited him, I was merely saying that it’s not a good idea and I thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify that!<br /><br />However, I do think there are serious problems with John’s premise and I have posted a comment on his blog so that I can have a conversation with him, if he so desires, because I’d like to understand why he promotes this unusual (and in my opinion erroneous) ecclesiology.<br /><br />BTW John, I went to the actual blog and sownloaded some of your other posts so that I have a context for this one.<br /><br />HenryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-896636951695032019.post-44729760288544039962010-05-04T15:37:08.085-04:002010-05-04T15:37:08.085-04:00John,
I’ve come here from a friend’s blog because...John,<br /><br />I’ve come here from a friend’s blog because he cited your creative article. <br /><br />If the sole purpose of the Church was to promote a “Christianity of Values” then I would agree with you, but since it’s not, then, of course I don’t. As it stands now, both inside and outside the Church, we breathe the air of the reduction of faith to a certain vision of the world and life, to a morality or a set of values that, as such, can be admired or fought against. There are those, like Christians and some from the secular world, who uphold them, and others who fight against them in the name of the principle of the radical self-determination of the individual. But they all attempt to build a “Christianity without Christ.” It seems to me that you want to do the same thing, the only difference being that you pit the Holy Spirit against Christ and His body. Moreover, if what you assert is true, then Christ lied when He said I will be without you always, until the end of the world. <br /><br />Remember, the Tripersonal God is always the protagonist and He has a method.<br /><br />Moreover, it does not help your cause to cite a person whose writings were condemned and refuted by St. Thomas Aquinas and others. <br /><br />I agree that the Church needs reform but I do not think that your creative plan is a good model for reform. Christ will reform His Church as He sees fit.<br /><br />I agree with Jayden that your creative story needs to be widely read but I would add that the errouneous premises in it need to be vigorously refuted.<br /><br />HenryAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-896636951695032019.post-75517519807804686152010-04-27T01:56:39.987-04:002010-04-27T01:56:39.987-04:00An extraordinary statement, John, which I've l...An extraordinary statement, John, which I've linked at Open Tabernacle. This needs to be widely read and disseminated. You have articulated so much more cogently and powerfully what many of us are fumbling to express. Thank you for this.Richard Demmahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17116799651068476195noreply@blogger.com