The honesty is refreshing. And he's right, you know. Leithart is the biggest Reformed "heretic" there is, but for the fact that the word is meaningless in the hands of a visible body with no binding authority by its own admission and confession. The only reason he didn't get convicted--and I mean the only one--is that the relationship between that visible body and the church catholic (conceived of as fundamentally invisible) has never been established. He's the perfect Neo to The Matrix that is this whole Protestant paradigm. As long as he can say, "Prove it from the Bible that I'm wrong!" no court could chain him. Let me translate: "Prove it from the Bible (according to me) that I'm wrong!" Good luck with that.
Speaking of the Reformers, Dr. Clark said: "They accused Rome of becoming a sect because she, for the first time in the history of the church, in council, anathematized the holy gospel. In so doing, she cut herself off from the broad stream of the church universal (which is all catholic means)."
If I may, could not the Arians say the same thing after that Council? Couldn't anyone anywhere say this, having arrogated to themselves the right to define "Church" and "holy gospel"? Why I'm Catholic, in two sentences.
By the way, did he not read Origen's commentary on Romans? Doesn't seem like Trent's soteriology was terribly innovative. Hmmm.
Speaking of the Reformers, Dr. Clark said: "They accused Rome of becoming a sect because she, for the first time in the history of the church, in council, anathematized the holy gospel. In so doing, she cut herself off from the broad stream of the church universal (which is all catholic means)."
If I may, could not the Arians say the same thing after that Council? Couldn't anyone anywhere say this, having arrogated to themselves the right to define "Church" and "holy gospel"? Why I'm Catholic, in two sentences.
By the way, did he not read Origen's commentary on Romans? Doesn't seem like Trent's soteriology was terribly innovative. Hmmm.
Comments