tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2072442072596130744.post6276893211819680227..comments2023-10-28T10:40:30.921-05:00Comments on the horizon affair: testing it outhrobinshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05045236102992543055noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2072442072596130744.post-22578958714774926842008-10-02T07:21:00.000-05:002008-10-02T07:21:00.000-05:00Thank you for responding to this, Matt. It is goo...Thank you for responding to this, Matt. It is good to be reminded of the importance of clarity, and I agree with you that EO and RCC are certainly "friendly" to women in the ways that they see fit. I was responding to a phantom argument that I imagined would come back at me from the community in which this post (actually a comment on Jesus Creed) was first read. However, I'm not entirely proud of the language of this and other of my arguments in this post. Perhaps someday soon I will refine it.<BR/><BR/>Scot McKnight posted again on EO and RCC yesterday and I am planning to respond in extended form here, but I'm not sure when that's going to happen! Check back soon.<BR/><BR/>Peacehrobinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05045236102992543055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2072442072596130744.post-82191120430990345832008-09-28T22:40:00.000-05:002008-09-28T22:40:00.000-05:00In your post, you write "that hierarchy is not fri...In your post, you write "that hierarchy is not friendly to women." While you may disagree with the EO and the RCC on the role(s) of women in the Church, that does by no means signify that the EO and RCC are unfriendly to women - from their perspective, they are attempting to be as "friendly" to women as they see fit - if we take "friendly" to mean placing in appropriate roles, looking out for best interest(s), etc. Thus, to present an equal case, it would be far more agreeable to assert that you may take issue with the EO and the RCC view(s) on the role(s) of women - which may be unfriendly to your conception of what those roles should be, but certainly not unfriendly from the EO and RCC point of view. The reason I exhort you to take them on their own terms is that the post very much takes Protestantism on its own terms - if we look at Protestantism from the EO and/or RCC perspective, it becomes more like a picture of a bunch of crazy, selfish renegades rather than individualistic protectors of truth trying to co-exist in the shadow of The Man.<BR/><BR/>All that said, I think you make solid points in synthesizing the reasons presented for Protestants exploring the EO and/or RCC - structure, unity, hierarchy, etc. - I just want to make sure we clarify terms!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com