Thomas Merton on Newman and Chesterton

Comments

One response to “Thomas Merton on Newman and Chesterton”

1. 

   Elliott

   January 14, 2024

   Bill,
   The thread you cited was long and substantive. Hard to believe it was nearly nine months ago. It seems like a few weeks ago!
   You wrote:
   “I affirm the existence of moral evil. But I deny both that the existence of moral evil is a fact one can see in the street, and that the existence of sin is a fact that one can see in the street…It is perfectly plain that sin presupposes the existence of God. It is not perfectly plain that objective moral evil presupposes the existence of God.”
   I agree. It seems clear that neither moral evil nor sin are seeable or otherwise experienceable via the sense organs. One can see the fist of an assailant hitting his victim’s face, the victim’s wincing, the dripping of blood from the victim’s battered nose, etc. But the evil of such an event is not seeable.
   In my last comment in the thread, I suggested that moral evil is possible in a world without divine commands. I ended with the question:
   “Is there any good reason to think that a world with moral evil and no divine commands is inconceivable?”

   Reply