Skip to main content

It's Back


Let's talk about this. I've never been a free-wheeling evangelical. I believed in Christ at the age of 18. I spent some time in Churches of Christ; I found my way to the Reformed. I can even say that I was the theologian before I was a Christian. In my senior year of high school I studied European history. One cannot help but note that the disputes between Protestants and Catholics form a large part of what drove that history forward. Simply out of curiosity and intellectual honesty I delved into those issues as best I could at the time, because if it mattered to people, then it should matter to me as someone who aims to chronicle the lives of people. All that is to say that at no point in the last 15 years have I been casual about doctrine. After college, I spent six years at a Reformed seminary learning intently something that purports to be the very historic Protestantism that is the antidote to allegedly becoming Catholic. There's only one problem: I'm Catholic. I wonder if this author would care to revise her thesis?

Frankly, you can blame the Westminster Confession of Faith, chapters XI and XV, and Heidelberg Catechism question 78 for me being Catholic. To be confessionally anything only invites the questions of historical continuity and authority that we (former) Protestants would have liked to avoid.

It seems to me that in the absence of some objective criteria that establishes theological continuity to be measured in any century, we would have to arbitrarily assume that some confessional document, some monument to an allegedly historic Protestantism, was synonymous with the word of God. In a real sense,--you must forgive me--there is nothing "historic" about those documents at all. There is a presupposition that the Fathers gradually erred in their holding of gospel truth, depending on who we ask. Somewhere, as the story goes, the courageous reformers recovered the gospel from the clutches of the Pelagian medieval Roman Catholic Church. Pick a reformer; it doesn't matter. The story is the same. Except that in the mercy of God, I saw this story to be a lie. In fact, taking the reformers at their best and boldest to claim that they had better recapitulated the Church of the Fathers, the lie is demonstrated even faster. To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant, to paraphrase John Henry Newman, and it's true as far as I can tell.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

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...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...