Translate

Thursday, May 21, 2015

LOL: "Entering The Catholic Church Will Solve All Your Problems!"

Buahaha. Buahaha. Seriously, that's hilarious. Has anyone ever actually said this? If you enter the Catholic Church, you're going to be crucified. "It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me." If you don't know this, now you do. Is it worth it?

YES.

I love some of these Reformed guys; they sit around telling themselves that we converts have some deep-seated primal need for, well, anything that can be used to ignore the important questions that naturally arise. You want to know what's deep-seated? Our obligation to find the truth. Obligation. It's not like a desire for chicken wings, or sex, or Coca-Cola; reality demands that we live in accord with it, as the "is" that God created, whether it's morality, or dogma, or social ethics.

If Jesus Christ came into the world, then He is the Truth to which creation must conform. He has instructed, he has taught, and we must believe only that.

The trouble is, a great many Christians think that a new way of knowing what Christ taught us could be introduced, whilst leaving carefully selected bits in place. To those of us who find all that a tad arbitrary, well, we're just asking the wrong questions. Or so they say.

It'd be more than slightly odd for God to change what he has revealed in response to human moral failings, especially because God has been contending with human moral failings from the start. Here's the upshot, friends: If Luther was right, Augustine is in Hell. And Cyprian? He's good for a slogan, but he's in Hell, too. Not what you're intending to say? That's what your principles do say. There was only one deluge, and that was the Flood. The gospel cannot be lost, hidden, or otherwise corrupted. Why? Because Jesus gave it as the message and mission of His Church, and he promised us the Church wasn't going anywhere.

Reality does not care that I find Catholics creepy, provincial, or impious. I either live in accord with it, or face the consequences of not doing so. Some of those can be eternal. I do my best not to deny reality. I was never on a quest to find the pristine Church. We all know the pristine Church exists only in Peter Leithart's head.

We find as sinners that we do not love the truth that we know, but somewhere along the line, someone decided that we can't know the truth that God revealed completely. That dead Anglican leader sure wrote a lot of books, for a guy saying we can't be certain of these things.

Anyway.


5 comments:

Nathan Hall said...

Indeed we have an obligation to find the truth. But is it true that the gospel cannot be lost, hidden, or otherwise corrupted by religious organizations? How would you explain Momons, Jehovah's Witnesses, or (on your account) Protestants? Of course, the gospel cannot be destroyed, which is why I need not believe Augustine is necessarily condemned. Even in an age of false teaching God will have his elect. But was John wrong when he wrote that "no one who is born of God practices sin?" (1 John. 3:9) It is hard to believe that some of the popes were among the elect. And how could one not among the elect be the authentic head of God's church?

Jason said...

Dear Nathan,

It is actually likely that some of the popes are not among the elect. I would also grant that it is very possible for a religious organization to be corrupted, but not *dogmatically*, if in fact that organization is the Church that Christ established. Which leads to the dilemma: If the Reformation was a moral protest, then the distinct doctrines which emerged from it are not necessary. If it is a theological one, then the very means which established various points of commonality between us must be rejected. The holiness or not of a pontiff has no bearing on his jurisdiction. If Christ put him there, no wickedness can invalidate it. If Christ did not, then he could be the holiest who ever lived, and being subject to him even provisionally would be a monstrous sin. In either case, there we are.

Nathan Hall said...

I agree that the authority of Christ trumps all isi le works, but didn't Christ himself tell us that we shall know false teachers by their fruit? If the question is whether I can reject Christ's chosen because I think him unrighteous,I accept that the answer is no. But I think the depravity of some popes argues that Christ never did choose them.

Jason said...

You're equivocating on the word "choose." I agree with you that a person who sins with impunity and without repentance will not inherit the Kingdom, no matter who they are. But if Chairman Mao tells me God is one God in three divine Persons, I don't get a second opinion. If the successor of Peter is holding the keys of the Kingdom, then he is, and in that respect, nothing else matters. The dilemma mentioned earlier remains in force.

Jason said...

Pope Mao?