Skip to main content

A P.S. To The Last

I wanted to openly say in my last post that the part about Jesus wanting to perpetuate the sacrifice of the Cross really does trip the Reformation antennae that I still have, and God-willing, will never lose. When I stated the objection previously, I don't do it for the easy pickings; I want you to understand that I think the "once for all" objection to the theology of our Eucharistic faith is a good objection, one that I myself made. Let me belabor the point: I'm sympathetic to that objection; frankly, I'm sympathetic to the whole bloody Reformed faith, if you will pardon the pun. I do not consider myself to have renounced having been Reformed, insofar as it is true. In fact, if you are Reformed, everything we could disagree about is in that "insofar." You are talking to a man who loved and still loves everything about it...insofar. I'm sure Bouyer was the same way. Are you kidding me? I've loved so deeply, it's a wonder that I haven't died. If you didn't know, then I failed you, and I ask your forgiveness.

I really like Dr. Peter Leithart's insights (and those of others) as they endeavor to create (or recover) a more rooted, richer non-Catholicism. But that's just it: You're going to find Britain, to borrow a phrase from Uncle Gilbert. Maybe you don't even want to; I totally get that. But you will. It's not cheap apologetics, or manipulation; it's just the truth. And it's rooted in the reality of the one God in three Persons, and uniquely Him who became incarnate as our Savior. We are inevitably moving either toward doubt, alienation, fragmentation, atheism, and death, or toward Christ and His Church. As we enter more deeply into the work of recovery, we are actively opposing--doubtless unwittingly at first--the individualist principle intrinsic to the Protestant revolt.

I find it highly appealing, mind you. If I have sharply criticized any of its leading lights on these pages, it is not because I harbor animus, but rather the reverse. I do not want those who have greatly helped me to be like the man who has slammed right into the spiritual house of the Catholic Church--his own house--but continues to insist against all evidence that he has done so. He may well be a brilliant mind, a great ecclesial and theological John Nash, if I may, but he is alone, alienated by his idiosyncrasy, and charmed by his own cleverness.

I know this: Everything the Church calls "the motives of credibility"--the reasons to believe--is charged with the love of the Incarnate Word, who walked, lived, and died for us. Indeed, He ever lives! This is why I can say in full honesty that moving from Reformed to Catholic is not, and never will be, outright rejection of the former. Just call us Calvin's Catholics, for that is what we are.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
My wheelchair was nearly destroyed by a car last night. That's a bit melodramatic, I suppose, because it is intact and undamaged. But we'd left my power chair ("Red Sam" in the official designation) in-between the maze of cars parked out front of Chris Yee's house for Bible Study. [Isn't that a Protestant Bible study?--ed.] They are good friends, and it is not under any official auspices. [Not BSF?--ed.] They're BSF guys, but it's not a BSF study. Anyway, I wasn't worried; I made a joke about calling the vendor the next day: "What seems to be the problem, sir?" 'Well, it was destroyed by a car.' As it happened, a guy bumped into it at slow speed. His car got the worst of it. And this only reinforces what I've said for a solid 13 years [Quickie commercial coming] If you want a power wheelchair that lasts, get a Quickie. They're fast, obviously, and they're tanks. Heck, my old one still would work, but the batteries ar