To follow up on a point I was making on Facebook, we don't realize the scandal as Christians we've created by all our denominations. The principled way to be in one is only this: "My other choices are so wrong on doctrinal point X that we have to separate." In today's evangelical world, to suggest that someone might be wrong enough to be in danger of Hell is, to say the least, uncool. Even when it's absolutely true. Door-to-door Arians, liberal Protestants, etc. looking in your direction. We say completely stupid things like, "Well, as long as so-and-so believes the gospel" WITHOUT EVER SAYING WHAT IT IS, and apparently not caring that we all are telling a slightly different story on that point. It simply doesn't bother us that we receive the Body and Blood of our Lord (variously understood) but that we don't share it in common, largely. We share common rites (baptism, Eucharist) but we understand them differently. We even deny them to each other based on that disagreement. And if you don't think sinners use those various opinions as an excuse to keep on sinning, well, I have a beach house in Arizona I can sell you. Stop me if you've heard this one: "You're more sinful than you'd ever dare believe, but you can be more loved and accepted in Christ than you'd dare to dream by faith; this is the gospel." Problem is, that affirmation, however true it may be, is personal and soteriological; it is no more the gospel in its entirety than the fact that Saul (called Paul) is from Tarsus. Not to mention the fact that it's a distinctly American Protestant way of stating things. You or I have no way of questioning, clarifying, or explaining it without sounding gravely suspicious. Welcome to Mindless Evangelicalism 2010! Feel free to look around, but it won't take long.
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. ...
Comments