No coherent system of goods?

[Hans Deventer]

Reading Miroslav Volf's Exclusion & Embrace I found the following quote on p 210.

We cannot help but live "betwixt and between" and keep using "a variety of tradition-generated resources of thought and action" (MacIntyre) precisely because we cannot avoid living in overlapping and rapidly changing social spaces. In contemporary societies it is impossible to pursue a coherent system of goods. Instead, we must rest satisfied with holding on to basic commitments. The early Christians lived and thrived without the secure closure of a system; there is no reason why we cannot do the same. (italics his')

Food for reflection, as this seems indeed to be increasingly the situation Christians live in.

[Marsha Lynn]

The quote looks good but I think I missed 210 pages of definitions. What exactly is a "coherent system of goods." What does it mean to hold on to basic commitments? What is the difference between living without a securely closed system and having one?

If the explanation would require too much effort, that's all right. Just thought I would let you know that I, for one, am interested but clueless as to the actual meaning of the quote you posted. Is it something I could easily understand if I read the first 210 pages of the book?

Marsha

Reading Miroslav Volf's Exclusion & Embrace I found the following quote on p 210.

We cannot help but live "betwixt and between" and keep using "a variety of tradition-generated resources of thought and action" (MacIntyre) precisely because we cannot avoid living in overlapping and rapidly changing social spaces. In contemporary societies it is impossible to pursue a coherent system of goods. Instead, we must rest satisfied with holding on to basic commitments. The early Christians lived and thrived without the secure closure of a system; there is no reason why we cannot do the same. (italics his')

Food for reflection, as this seems indeed to be increasingly the situation Christians live in.

[Barbara Moulton]

Just thought I would let you know that I, for one, am interested but clueless as to the actual meaning of the quote you posted. Is it something I could easily understand if I read the first 210 pages of the book?

Marsha

Ditto :)

[Hans Deventer]

The quote looks good but I think I missed 210 pages of definitions. What exactly is a "coherent system of goods."

A coherent system is a system that is logically connected; consistent.
A "system of goods" is, as I understand him, is system of values that are regarded as good.

What does it mean to hold on to basic commitments?

I would describe that as a jigsaw puzzle with pieces missing. You have a few that give you some idea of what it would look like if you had them all, but that's all you have. So as Christians, we have a few "essentials" that we hold on to, no matter what the world around us says or thinks. And they do not constitute a complete and logically coherent system.

What is the difference between living without a securely closed system and having one?

If you have one, it means that the basic values of good and bad are shared between both Christians and non Christians. And they are unchallenged.
If you don't have one, well, that's kind of the situation we are in right now, especially in Western Europe but increasingly also in North America.

Does that help some?

[David Parker]

OK, I know I'm on medication....but we really need a smilie that shows something going over it's head. Maybe this will have to do: :gen07

I've read this thread three times, and I have no idea what you are talking about.

[Hans Deventer]

OK, I know I'm on medication....but we really need a smilie that shows something going over it's head. Maybe this will have to do: :gen07

I've read this thread three times, and I have no idea what you are talking about.

Well, perhaps the discussion on guns is a great example after all. There is no coherent system of goods in the CotN on this topic. Like society at large, we're fragmented. The good one Nazarene recognizes, isn't good in another Nazarene's view. Which has to do with nationality, but not only that, also with social groups within a nation. That's why he wrote: "we cannot avoid living in overlapping and rapidly changing social spaces".

Now how to maintain unity as a church considering these differences? The very thing I've been proposing: focus on our essentials. But we need clarity on what those essentials are. Volf argues that this is what the early Christians did as well.

[Ken Pell]

Well, perhaps the discussion on guns is a great example after all. There is no coherent system of goods in the CotN on this topic. Like society at large, we're fragmented. The good one Nazarene recognizes, isn't good in another Nazarene's view. Which has to do with nationality, but not only that, also with social groups within a nation. That's why he wrote: "we cannot avoid living in overlapping and rapidly changing social spaces".

Now how to maintain unity as a church considering these differences? The very thing I've been proposing: focus on our essentials. But we need clarity on what those essentials are. Volf argues that this is what the early Christians did as well.

Finally! The light has come on for me because I wasn't getting it either ... I too have read this a few times.

With that in mind:
In contemporary societies it is impossible to pursue a coherent system of goods. Instead, we must rest satisfied with holding on to basic commitments. The early Christians lived and thrived without the secure closure of a system; there is no reason why we cannot do the same.
Is a very powerful statement. And an admirable ideal. It shows the maturity of the early church.

[Susan Unger]

Well, perhaps the discussion on guns is a great example after all. There is no coherent system of goods in the CotN on this topic. Like society at large, we're fragmented. The good one Nazarene recognizes, isn't good in another Nazarene's view. Which has to do with nationality, but not only that, also with social groups within a nation. That's why he wrote: "we cannot avoid living in overlapping and rapidly changing social spaces".

Now how to maintain unity as a church considering these differences? The very thing I've been proposing: focus on our essentials. But we need clarity on what those essentials are. Volf argues that this is what the early Christians did as well.

How would the need to give love and be loved fit into this? I am thinking mainly of what non-christians and christians have in common.

[Hans Deventer]

How would the need to give love and be loved fit into this?

Well, we probably would agree on the principle. And be miles apart on the application.

[Susan Unger]

Well, we probably would agree on the principle. And be miles apart on the application.

The reason why I suggested it was because if I had heard more about holiness meaning more about God's love in us, I might have enjoyed my church more. And I reflect on that, I think isn't that just a basic human need? I remember in pschology class learning that unless the basic needs are met [food, drink, sleep, clothes], one can't concentrate on other things.

Don't know if I made sense - got a migraine which leads to insomnia...and no migraine meds in the house.