By Schubert Ogden
...
The particular necessarily implies the universal. But the universal does not necessarily imply the particular. The universal may indeed be said to anticipate the particular necessarily, in that it necessarily implies at least some particular(s) or other. But it may not be said to imply the particular necessarily in the vvay way in which the particular necessarily implies it, i.e., presupposes it.
This is to state the general rule or principle that explains why talk of "implicit Christianity," in the second sense of the phrase, as I have distingushed it
(dcf. Notebooks, 13 December 2002; rev. 9 December 2008; also, 11 December 2004), may well need to be avoided. Such talk is problematic because it appears to violate this rule or principle --– namely, by tacitly claiming that, if being a Christian necessarily implies having a certain self-understanding/understanding of existence, having this same self-understanding/understanding of existence necessarily implies being (at least implicitly) a Christian. According to the above stated rule or principle, being a Christian is precisely not implied in having a certain self-understanding/understanding of existence, unless by "implied" is meant "anticipated," rather than "presupposed."
26 December 2002