<\/p>\n
This from Fr. Tobias Haller<\/a>:<\/p>\n No New Revelation<\/p>\n When addressing controverted subjects, we are called to look back on the Scriptural text for guidance in dealing with things about which those texts are themselves silent. The issue is not, “What would they have said?” on a topic about which they did not speak; but rather, “What do we say based on what those texts say about other things, using natural reason and knowledge gained since their writing to interpret old texts for new principles.” <\/p>\n This is not about any new revelation. As one important story from rabbinic history shows: Revelation is now closed, but interpretation is open — even a voice from heaven, even from God, cannot contravene the findings of the living interpretative community because, “It [i.e., the Law] is not in heaven” — that is, God has given the Scripture to the people of God and it is up to us to wrestle with it. <\/p>\n People may well disagree about the outcomes of the wrestling match. And the question, “What Would Jesus Do?” is not entirely out of place, but has to be asked by positing Jesus not of his time, but as he is with us in our time — as I believe he is, in his church, through his Spirit, which is now engaged in addressing challenges he did not address in those earlier days. There is no new revelation, but there is always new understanding.<\/p>\n Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n I truly like the way he put this.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" This from Fr. Tobias Haller: No New Revelation When addressing controverted subjects, we are called to look back on the Scriptural text for guidance in dealing with things about which those texts are themselves silent. The issue is not, “What … Continue reading \n