Thursday, April 17, 2008

Ecclesiastical bibs and bobs
First two commonly misunderstood Catholic teachings:
  • Hasn’t the church invented new doctrines throughout its history? No.
  • Don’t you believe that all non-Catholics are going to hell? No. That’s a horrible but allowable opinion not doctrine! The gate Jesus built is the (one true) church as the visible means of salvation, not only our sacramental mater but infallible magistra; assenting to it is not arrogance but its opposite. Invisibly God saves who he will (they’re in the church but don’t know it). And of course there’s the terrifying possibility that some in the visible church might not make it to heaven. So no smugness here. One can hope there are no people in hell. Ref’s fairly even-handed here: I think the underlying assumption is Protestant but his implied criticism applies to those who believe in double predestination/limited atonement, once common currency in Protestantism. Moral teachings ≠ purity cult.
And:

Mawidge
Besides the correct criticism of liberal Protestant (in this case ELCA Lutheran) revisionism what struck me here is you can blame Luther for handing marriage to the state from the church although I hold that non-Catholics have the right to marry as they wish. (That’s right: I’m a liberal, a classical one.)

Quotation
The left is aging and has no young followers to push its agenda. The young either become apathetic about a faith emptied of its truth and power through the progressive agenda, or they become orthodox. I describe the heterodox liberals as spiritual geldings and spays; they have removed the essentials of their faith and cannot reproduce, bringing in neither converts nor vocations. The best they can do is make geldings and spays of those who do possess the faith: this is not an appealing prospect for most people.
— Fr Mitch Pacwa

If you believe in the larger church why look back at Anglicanism?
I don’t believe in Anglican comprehensiveness. (Nooooo!) The ‘Reformation’ was a mistake. So why, other than an accident of birth, is much of my liturgical English from two heretical bishops, Coverdale and even some Cranmer?

Joe Sobran, never an Anglican, gets it.

Not only is that half-timbered language beautiful and orthodox but it stands for
... a homespun gentility shared by every sort of Protestant, an ethos of simple friendliness... that peculiar sincerity. Protestants are supposed to be humorless, but there is a very definite Protestant humor, dry and subtle, and the world could use more of it. If only Osama bin Laden had been raised in Indiana!

A Protestant might almost be defined as a man who has to be warned against his own virtues. He is nothing if not tolerant.
I’d say much of this is simply culturally English, present even when dressed in Italian finery and dearly missed when it’s not there.

The same thing this blog’s classical liberalism comes from.

Speaking of England:
Fr Timothy Kroh on facing east at St Paul’s, Chester

No comments:

Post a comment

Leave comment