A good question was raised by a reader regarding the definition of "standard" I offered in my first post.
A standard is indeed a measure of some kind set by an authority (Websters 3rd and 4th definitions of "n. standard"). There is an important distinction between standard as measure of something concrete and measure of human quality, behavior or qualification. In terms of physical characteristics (weight, distance, etc.) a standard is a numerically quantifiable standard.
Standards of behavior or expectation are set not by absolute measure but by custom and they are gauged qualitatively rather than quantifyably. For example, is it possible to measure faith in Jesus Christ in quantifiable terms the way a pound of sugar or a foot of rope can be measured?
Standards, when applied to human behavior or activity or knowledge are necessarily qualitative rather than quantifiable.
Additionally, a Reformed understanding of total human depravity makes any standard necessarily aspirational. To say that standards of ordained office are purely quantifiable matters rather than aspirational models and examples requires a non-Reformed understanding of ordination as setting above or apart from normal human sinfulness and depravity. Our inability to escape our sinfulness is not abated by ordination.
The understanding of human standards as aspirational is rooted firmly in Augustine's City of God as well as the Confessions and affirmed in Calvin's Institutes. To what degree that aspirational nature plays out is certainly up for debate as is the degree of variance from the aspirtional norm is to be allowed.
That standards of human behavior are indeed aspirational in nature is Reformed both theologically and ecclesiologically.
No comments:
Post a Comment