I had another shower thought about early Christianity, perhaps colored by my own affiliation but take it as you will. Perhaps it's more a question of relative distance than positioning on a fixed scale, or just one element of the philosophy of either. I do think there is a "tell" in the consequences of how each Church engages with the world around them (activist vs process-keeper)
Catholicism as the "Unconstrained" (Utopian) Vision:
The unconstrained vision relies on decision-makers or experts who use reason to solve human problems.
The Church has technical, legalistic language to define exactly how grace works, how sins are categorized, and how merit is earned. It is administered by a body of experts in a centralized, top-down way and developed through (admittedly constrained) reasoning.
Catholicism views human nature as a "problem" that can be systematically addressed. Through the right canon and sacraments a person can theoretically be moved toward a state of perfection.
This mirrors the Unconstrained Vision’s belief that we can engineer a better outcome if we just have the right data administered by the right authority.
Orthodoxy as the "Constrained" (Tragic) Vision
Sowell’s constrained vision views human nature as fixed and flawed, preferring processes like common law or tradition over deliberate engineering.
In Orthodoxy, truth is not decided by a central expert but preserved by the collective life of the Church. This is decentralized and slow. There is no single "expert" who can change the liturgy or dogmatize a new idea overnight.
Orthodoxy doesn't expect to fix the human condition through decree. Instead, it provides a process (Theosis) that is essentially a hospital for the soul.
One wonders if the unconstrained view even existed pre-enlightenment.
Perfect humanity through rationality and out redeem the ultimate redeemer.
I had another shower thought about early Christianity, perhaps colored by my own affiliation but take it as you will. Perhaps it's more a question of relative distance than positioning on a fixed scale, or just one element of the philosophy of either. I do think there is a "tell" in the consequences of how each Church engages with the world around them (activist vs process-keeper)
Catholicism as the "Unconstrained" (Utopian) Vision:
The unconstrained vision relies on decision-makers or experts who use reason to solve human problems.
The Church has technical, legalistic language to define exactly how grace works, how sins are categorized, and how merit is earned. It is administered by a body of experts in a centralized, top-down way and developed through (admittedly constrained) reasoning.
Catholicism views human nature as a "problem" that can be systematically addressed. Through the right canon and sacraments a person can theoretically be moved toward a state of perfection.
This mirrors the Unconstrained Vision’s belief that we can engineer a better outcome if we just have the right data administered by the right authority.
Orthodoxy as the "Constrained" (Tragic) Vision
Sowell’s constrained vision views human nature as fixed and flawed, preferring processes like common law or tradition over deliberate engineering.
In Orthodoxy, truth is not decided by a central expert but preserved by the collective life of the Church. This is decentralized and slow. There is no single "expert" who can change the liturgy or dogmatize a new idea overnight.
Orthodoxy doesn't expect to fix the human condition through decree. Instead, it provides a process (Theosis) that is essentially a hospital for the soul.