Someone may say that it is only because of my poor understanding, but that leads us nonCatholics towards looking for our own popes to settle things for us. The is of course the option that the one who are “really” saved will agree on everything.

When it really comes down to it, the issue of abortion is really a question of having those who are against it being forced to fund them. If it is cut and dry murder we should be pushing for the death penelty for the mothers and doctors.

I do think that polygamy is just like smoking. You can’t really show clearly from scripture that either one is a sin, but in general the consequences of either one are unpleasant enough to steer me away.

“In Catholic moral theology husbands and wives must share the remote control. This is called “remote material cooperation.”"

True slavery to the Law arises from an obligation to the Law without an interior understanding of the Law. To paraphrase Chesterton, it can help us learn the big rules to avoid becoming a slave to the little rules.

The Jewish legal tradition, the halakha, as well as the Christian, has this aim, although the Jewish legal framework is the Torah, whereas Christians are bound by nothing but the natural law, accessible by reason and guided by revelation.

You are exactly right. I apologize. In rereading, I realize that your ‘duh’ sentence was expressing what you see as the standard evangelical view, not necessarily your own. And the Ex. 21:22 came up in comments on your posting.

I am frustrated that my pro-life friends say something like what you described: “Isn’t it obvious that Scripture shows that abortion is murder?” It is not obvious to me. As a Bible-believing Christian, I intuitively believe that abortion is not God’s will. But that is as far as I can get.

I really appreciate your blog. Keep up the good work!

Dennis Veith

Thanks

If you are talking to me, I took neither of those positions. I never even discussed the second one.

Please clarify who you are speaking to.

ms

Where is abortion “so plainly condemned in scripture”? I don’t find it. I have friends who are very strongly against abortion (and legal choice for abortion) and yet they cannot give me a case from scripture for their view. I have searched for such a case and not found one. Not “so plainly condemned” to this Christian.

As for your belief that the baby in Exodus 21:22 survived: BIG assumption on your part, Michael. The only translations that do not characterize it as miscarriage are those that are slanted (such as ‘virgin’ in Isaiah) to sell to evangelicals. As a grandfather of two children who were born prematurely, I can safely say that children born prematurely 3000 years ago did not survive. I guess that is just my belief contrary to yours, and we can’t prove it either way.

Dennis Veith

But taking Paul’s epistles, part of them is rapping the young congregations over the knuckles. Fine, you’re all believers. But you guys over there – stop acting like pigs with your snouts in the trough. And you lot over there? Can stop laughing up your sleeve at them, because you’re no better with your factionalism.

And you lot who think you can do whatever you like now because Law is gone and we live under Grace? Just wait till I get finished with you.

I wouldn’t say St. Paul’s Epistles are the last word on how to solve church conflicts, but I think that part of the reason they were written is because he’s certainly telling them “Yes, Christians should behave like this and not like that.” The fruits of the new life in us are … and not …

But I think I’m wandering off the point now, which was how do we settle disagreements with our brethren in a Christ-like manner; how do we reconcile our different emphases on what are the defining struggles of the day without either anathemising each other or letting it all melt into a gloopy pool of tepid “as long as we all really, really wuv each other, it’s all good”?

Ethical consistency is difficult to find in part because ethics is where the rubber meets the road. Theology helps us pull together the different parts of Scripture and Holy Tradition [yes, yes, I know Protestants do not use Holy Tradition] into a coherent non-self-contradictory whole. Even the principle that a particular Scripture passage must never be interpreted in such a way that it contradicts another Scripture passage is itself a theological conclusion from the evidence in Scripture and Tradition. In one sense, theology helps us look to what is eternal.

However, ethics is where the dogmatic and doctrinal conclusions of theology are applied to the actual behavior of the Church and of individuals. If theology leads to orthodoxy, ethics leads to orthopraxy. But, this is a messy world, and it is rare that two situations are completely alike. As some have pointed out, there are clearcut issues. But, much of ethics works with the non-clearcut and the times when ethical principles conflict. It is often not the least surprising that two similar situations may lead to two different conclusions. So one reason for lack of consistency is simply the difference in the makeups of real life situations, even similar ones.

There are also two additional things that contribute to ethical lack of consistency between Christians. Since ethics applies theology, then people with different theologies will inevitably find situations in which their ethics have reached different conclusions. To say it more philosophically, different a priori may lead to different conclusions.

But the second thing that contributes to lack of consistency is human sin. The desire to fit in, or the desire to spite someone, or . . . [fill in the blank] can easily lead to a deliberately twisted ethical conclusion which allows one to do what one wants despite the lack of either logical or pastoral foundations.

Finally, the Orthodox use the concept of economia to make ethical judgments. But, some other time for that discussion. Google the term if you are interested.