Skip to main content
Let me preface this by saying that in all this time of theological exploration, I have never felt pressured or disrespected in any way. I think that's a two-way street; my new friends have seen I hope, that I have inquisited in an open-hearted way, and so have they. It doesn't have to be that way, and it often isn't. But I thought to myself, "What would it sound like, the same questions translated into Snark?" Yes, I invented that lingual designation. So, here are some pro-Catholic observations I have made, with snarky comments attached. They are as much things I have said to myself as anything.



5 Truths, Seconded By Snark



5. "I'll say this for Catholic sexual ethics: they are remarkably consistent." [Jesus is logical and coherent, no way! Never would have guessed!--ed.]


4. "Protestantism is seemingly hermeneutical chaos." [Duh! Why do you think we got off the sinking ship there, Sherlock?--ed.]


3. "I'm not sure Scripture is perspicuous." [We've been saying that for nearly 500 years; thanks for paying attention.--ed.]


2. "I have a sneaking suspicion that the Protestant formulations of the Lord's Supper are incorrect." [Yeah, it's called, 'History,' look into it.--ed.]

1. "The phrase, 'invisible church' just doesn't make sense." [I'm not even going to dignify this with a response.--ed.]

Comments

Unknown said…
4. So is Catholicism. So is every system. Nietzsche was peachy, but Satre was smarter.

2. Calvin does a better job than most.

1. Augustine might disagree with you.
6:32 PM
Jason said…
Tim,

You have work to do to prove what you say in (4). I asked the Romish interlocutors if they thought their system simply moved the locality of the hermeneutical battle. They said it seemed reasonably clear actually, and when it wasn't, all the better to have a living Magisterium. In short, most dissent is traceable to sin. This is abundantly clear, they say, with Vatican II and Humanum Vitae.
12:32 AM
Unknown said…
Very well. When we talk in person, I shall break apart the last semblances of ordered reality for you with my friend Jacques Derrida.
12:39 AM
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
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...
17 comments
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