I've noticed that hardly anyone believes in devils and demons, or even THE Devil, anymore. People must find the doctrine to be an embarrassing holdover from our ancestry of pre-enlightenment superstition. It is akin to the Tom Wolfe doctors cited at Titusonenine. They quest around with microscopes, looking for a soul, and not finding one they conclude that there are no such things.
With devils, the enlightenment mind thinks that it has found a conceptual apparatus in modern psychology to account for what are traditionally thought to be effects of the Accuser in the life of the faithful. The problem is that the conceptual apparatus of modern psychology cannot account for certain stories that are a part of the tradition, especially from hagiography. The question becomes why we, as Christians, ought to accept the conceptual apparatus of modern psychology over the conceptual apparatus of the premodern Church. The former can account for certain bad behavior, but the latter can account for that and more....
2 comments:
True. Evil and sin aren't a part of most peoples vocabulary, unless you occupy the presidency. At least Texas names evil. I can't remember the last time I heard evil or the devil used in a sermon. The devil makes it into the scriptures, but most priest don't want to talk about the devil's presence in society. Why? Is it fear, neglect, or disbelief?
True. Evil and sin aren't a part of most peoples vocabulary, unless you occupy the presidency. At least Texas names evil. I can't remember the last time I heard evil or the devil used in a sermon. The devil makes it into the scriptures, but most priest don't want to talk about the devil's presence in society. Why? Is it fear, neglect, or disbelief?
Post a Comment