Skip to main content
Dangerous Jamie is at it again. Seriously, stop waiting around to read Bryan's essay on ecclesial deism; No, I don't care if you don't think Catholics are saved. You're wrong, anyway. The ecclesial infalliability claim bothers me too, but alas, I haven't read through Newman, so I reserve judgment at this time. This is THE question of the new decade: Is it time to go home? Co-belligerence is a failure; I'm telling you, non-Christians see right through it, and they wonder if it's just a ploy for a political program to "save America from the heathen" [read: Democrats, socialists, gays, peaceniks, and college professors. Yes, I know I repeat myself. Granted, in all seriousness, the only group I'd have no gripe with is the peaceniks, but the point is, "How's licking the boots of the GOP working out for you?" But I digress.]. The giant elephant in the room is: Can we sustain a protest on points of doctrine which we cannot verify, even among ourselves? The elephant's name is Unfalsifiable. The other elephant in the room, the Catholic one, is named Unfalsifiable (By Reason Of Undue Deference). In other words, what I'm still saying to the friendly neighborhood Catholic apologist re: papal and ecclesial infalliability is, "Prove it, Sparky." Since I have experienced Jesus Christ personally, the agnostic option isn't available in response to all this unfalsifiability. No, I don't care that this is not a word. If 'W' and Woodrow Wilson can make up words, so can I, by golly. Note to my readers: "Normalcy" is not a word; it wasn't until 1915, and I will not recognize it as such. What are you going to do, Woodrow, invade my house? Ha! I digress. I punt for right now, until such time as I can give due consideration to Newman's essay on doctrinal development, with the attendant ability (allegedly) to tell an accretion from organic development in a Catholic context. In case anybody wants my opinion, I don't think justification would be the only hurdle to reunion. A Protestant Reformer transplanted to the late 19th-early 20th century might well view (the good ones, Luther or Calvin) the papal definitions as simply convenient means to codify some fairly controversial Marian doctrine. (No offense "Mom," in case I am completely wrong, and you can hear me.) Ahem. Anyway, Jamie, you are crazy in a good way. You know, you don't have to follow me down the path of complete lunacy. I am enjoying the side benefit along with Jamie of helping to cure God's people of their neo-Gnostic anti-sacramentalism and anti-materialism...in our position as men with profound physical disabilities. Poetic, ain't it?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...
Post a Comment
Read more

My Thoughts On The Harrison Butker Commencement Speech

Update: I read the whole thing. I’m sorry, but what a weirdo. I thought you [Tom Darrow, of Denver, CO] made a trenchant case for why lockdowns are bad, and I definitely appreciated it. But a graduation speech is *not* the place for that. Secondly, this is an august event. It always is. I would never address the President of the United States in this manner. Never. Even the previous president, though he deserves it, if anyone does. Thirdly, the affirmations of Catholic identity should be more general. He has no authority to propound with specificity on all matters of great consequence. It has all the hallmarks of a culture war broadside, and again, a layman shouldn’t speak like this. The respect and reverence due the clergy is *always due,* even if they are weak, and outright wrong. We just don’t brush them aside like corrupt Mafia dons, to make a point. Fourthly, I don’t know where anyone gets the idea that the TLM is how God demands to be worshipped. The Church doesn’t teach that. ...
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more