Friday, November 23, 2007


Infallibility: My reaction to the reaction to John Lipscomb’s plan to convert to Rome. Can one issue, infallibility, explain why something with the creeds, a claim to the historic episcopate, a high view of the sacraments, a liturgy and even ceremonial is not Catholicism? Not necessarily papal infallibility, church infallibility. Came across a hint of this more than a year ago when a new friend of the blog (aloha, Fr Mark) with the best intentions to defend his position on one Controversial Issue™ answered this:
...not my words but the words of God through His Church.
A Catholic statement. With these:
The commenter says these aren’t his words, but God’s. I’ve been looking in the Bible...
Catholics don’t believe in sola scriptura.
Ordination as a whole is a human invention.
Fr Mark doesn’t believe in that sola either but I think what’s implied is ‘nor is there an infallible church’. More on these conversions. Still more. (On ‘welcome home’ as ‘spiking the ball’.)
To do religion in general and Christianity in particular correctly you can’t do it 1) alone or 2) based on your whims. There are both teachings and communities that must be negotiated. Or, to borrow other language, the Dharma and the Sangha... (What? You mean it’s not just those Christians?!)
Derek Olsen

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment