Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Enamored but looking for home

The Pirate had a post which in his usual style happens to be brutally frank and viciously honest to which I refer here for reflection. He said
I think I understand rather well the mindset that leads otherwise intelligent people to believe that the pope really can apply merits from the heavenly treasury to your purgatorial debt upon fulfilling some rather arbitrary condition like visiting a shrine or kissing a talisman. I read enough blogs and theological literature to get a general picture of the psychological profile of the Catholic intellectual. It's the psychological disposition that can and will justify anything and everything for the sake of vindicating an institution with which one is rather enamored. It is quite a folly to imagine that theology is a dispassionate rational pursuit. In my experience, theologians of every church and tradition are generally motivated by something that runs much deeper than a simple commitment to intellectual integrity and that which can be certified as true. Quite often, the intellectual language of theology is simply a mask for the blind love of the institution, insatiable desire for academic respectability, desperate need for an identity within a certain traditional telling of history, unbridled self-importance, or disenchanted cynicism. To make a long argument short, Catholic intellectuals defend indulgences because they need to do so in order to validate both the institution and their identities within it. If Vatican II had declared the article in Trent concerning indulgences to be merely outdated pastoral advice rather than infallible dogma, or if Trent had never dogmatized them in the first place, indulgences would be today rotting on the ash-heap of theological history.
Yours Truly: I have noted that ex-RCs who become Prots specially from Hispanic origins are quite skeptical of Mother Church. I mean they seem to have an attitude "we are not easily impressed". Just about most you encounter now-a-days who are enamored with Rome Sweet Home happens to be from Anglo-Saxon background. Now you say, what is the point of that? Here is the point...

Our hommie, Past Elder said this in his comments to a Weedon post:
I was raised in the pre-conciliar RC church, and believed it to be the "true" church and faith. As I watched it dismantled and the new Catholicism put in its place, I could not see it as RC at all, and if the "true" church and faith were now lost, there was no reason to accept anything else, Christianity is false in any form


Yours Truly: Now again, the above comment is not for the easily bruised, OK? Just understand he is trying to honestly express a heart felt disenchantment, if I may say so. Here are my thoughts...

So you might be enamored with Rome Sweet Home, so you hiked the mountains,and hills, crossed rivers and plains and if Past Elder is correct, you get to Rome and find that home has left and changed as well. In other words, if his observation is accurate, Home Sweet Rome, is not there anymore. Where you went back isn't home as you supposed. From a human experience point of view, it does makes sense. Have you left your home and lived in some far away land for many years? Notice when you get back you find yourself a stranger in your own land. The truth is that just as much as you aged and changed, home also aged and changed ( unless home has always been with you, all along, of course).

If I may rephrase P.E. All roads lead to Rome, but where is it?

12 comments:

Augustinian Successor said...

For me, why the Roman Church when she is not even true to her own AUGUSTINIAN tradition? The true successor to the Augustinian tradition are the Reformation Churches (with the Lutheran inheriting Augustine's understanding of the Sacrament of Baptism and the Reformed inheriting Augustine's understanding of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper) sharing the same convergence on the bondage of the will and gracious predestination.

L P Cruz said...

A.S.

Indeed, in fact the logic should like this; If Mother Church has sufficiently reformed and has become like us in doctrine and practice, then she has come home to us. So we have become one. So who needs to leave?

But experts in RC such as those who were ex-priests are quite skeptical, one time I heard that Mother Church is a chameleon, now that is quite strong but what the person meant was that she can change her spots to accomodate whoever.


LPC

Augustinian Successor said...

Dear Bro. Lito,

I have high respect for Mother Church. How can we not have, when she WAS Mother Church? But not the type of respect that NEW converts have, but respect for her Augustinian tradition. Trouble is from "Semi-Pelagianism" (for that is what she is despite her avowed denial) she has transformed herself into a near universalist, thanks to the Jesuits, with Muhammedans and Jews of today worshipping the same God and equal path of salvation, invicible ignorance, etc. I mean this is the GOSPEL???

How can I as a traditionalist, (and I'm not just talking about the Tridentine Mass - what a joke some of these so-called Lutherans are, hankering after the Latin Mass as if that makes them "catholic") who believes in the Augustinian Succession as the substance with the Mass as the epitome of the doctrinal embodiment, how can I accept the universalism inherent and incipient and implicit or even tacit in Vatican 2 Roman Church?

How can I accept papal claims of Vatican 1??? Many archbishops, bishops, theologians, historians rejected the claim in the first place. How can I accept Immaculate Conception and Heavenly Assumption as de fide? How can I accept Transubstantion as de fide? How can I accept Purgatory as de fide?

How can I as a Traditionalist accept the pronouncements of Bishop of Rome together with Magisterium when these conflict with Tradition??? Does not Tradition override the Magisterium, that is, is not the Magisterium supposed to venerate Tradition? The only way the Magisterium can be Living Tradition if it safeguard and witness to Tradition, not distort it. The Voice of Tradition is the Catholic Faith. The Catholic Faith is the sensus fidelium, the conciliar decisions, consensus patri (or something like that), etc. This voice the Bishop of Rome MUST listen and NOT the other way round. That is to say, he must listen to voice of his predecessors, and and not the other way round. Such a breach of the "eschatological limits" distorts the sensus fidelium and corrupts the Catholic Faith.

The Reformation Churches, particularly the Lutheran Churches are the true heirs of the Catholic Faith. I LONG FOR THE DAY WHEN THE ROMAN CHURCH WOULD REFORMED ITSELF AND RETURN TO HER AUGUSTINIAN ROOTS. I LONG FOR THE DAY WHEN THE OLD CATHOLIC AND INDEPENDENT CATHOLIC AND TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC CHURCHES REDISCOVER THEIR AUGUSTINIAN ROOTS.

Then we CON-celebrate Mass together in unity and peace.

There is no confusion here. There is only one stream of authentic Catholicism and confessional Lutheranism, the Lutheranism of Luther (doctrine and practice), the BoC, etc. represents that authentic stream.

L P Cruz said...

Well said Bro. Jason,

I respect my mom, but honestly my mom is not always correct and sometimes need correction herself.

Well said, the Pope instead of listening to tradition, invents one. The Pope does exactly what he is not supposed to do - he should not rule over the faith but be examples to the flock.

what a joke some of these so-called Lutherans are, hankering after the Latin Mass as if that makes them "catholic"

It is an absolute joke!! I think some of these guys have tears in their eyes when they mention Latin Mass. I think Dr. Ichabod sometimes has a point.

LPC

Augustinian Successor said...

Ooops ... Correction: Mass as the epitome of the LITURGICAL and SACRAMENTAL embodiment, ...

Augustinian Successor said...

Dear Bro. Lito,

This is what I left on Weedon's blog ...

Why on earth, why the heck would I want to convert to EO when it does not confess justification by faith alone? That is to say, EO does not believe in the Gospel? I want to be able to hold to monopatrism, "veneration" of icons as a cultural expression of the essentials of the faith, participate in the Liturgy of the Faithful, etc. whilst confessing the Gospel of Jesus Christ. If am not allowed to do that, I'd rather let go of the local, regional, cultural, etc. praxis of the EO than to hang on to what amounts to a "disembodied" Christianity, i.e. form without substance, the inverse of the Platonism of puritan evangelicals, etc. ("substance" without form, even the substance is deficient, corrupted, etc. in some ways and in some of the traditions).

Justification solely by the effective Word of God which declares righteousness and non-imputation of sin on the basis of the Cross is what makes the Gospel. All else is PHILOSOPHY.

L P Cruz said...

Yep, I read your comment.

I will paraphrase Dr. Marquart on the subject of people going on so much on traditionalism/orthodoxism/historicism. He says they get so hanged up on the t-extra, rather than the text. And I think before long, the t-extra (the additions in the guise of exalting the gospel) takes over and the text sophistically explained away, in the end no more gospel just smoke.


LPC

Augustinian Successor said...

Thanks Bro. Lito ... the late Rev. Dr. Marquart is a true-blue confessional Lutheran and true-blue Missourian! Like the late Rev. Dr. Preus, he breathes the Reformation spirit and ethos. i have just ordered Robert Preus's Inspiration and This is My Body from CPH!

Dr. Marquart's views on EO is an absolute must for LCMS ministers. He could be heard at Issues, etc. on the Faculty of CTSFW website.

Classical Protestant said...

Dear Bro. Lito,

Thank you for your e-mails! I'm sorry, I don't usually check my Gmail so often as I should. My main e-mail is yahoo and my University of Malaya account. Thanks for sharing with me about Father Hollywood's blog. Am glad that we have been VINDICATED in our concerns! Thanks be to God.

I have also left some comments. Sad but true that there is no blind person who is so willingly blind or something like that. Even physically blind people can see that the Church of Rome is Antichrist!

Augustinian Successor said...

Dear Bro. Lito,

Here's my latest posting on Hollywood's blog ... can you imagine a Lutheran minister saying that the bread and wine is CHANGED into the Body and Blood of Jesus??? WHY the heck did he say that in the first place?


Augustinian Successor said...
"when the pastor consecrates the bread and wine, they are truly changed into the body and blood of Jesus."

Now that's not the Lutheran understanding of the "Real Presence" of Jesus IN, WITH and UNDER the species of bread and wine. The bread and wine does not change into Jesus's Body and Blood, rather Jesus becomes FOR US bread and wine. There is a sacramental union approaching a hypostatic union though not identical but in which the bread and wine no longer remains ordinary bread and wine but "divinised" and "exalted" as symbols of the here and now presence of Jesus. In other words, the sign remains, not annihilated or transformed but in union with the reality not somewhere in heaven but here and now FOR US. Jesus is not hidden from us but hidden in the bread and wine FOR US. That is how Jesus can be really and truly present, substantially in His Body and Blood for us at Communion. Jesus presence according to Lutheranism is His "definitive" presence unlike circumscriptive and repletive though *grounded* in the latter but *not* equivalent. Anything else is UNLutheran, and frankly RISIBLE.

Jeff Tan said...

> But experts in RC such as
> those who were ex-priests

He he.. that's not necessarily accurate. Disbarred lawyers and doctors whose licenses are revoked are not usually seen as experts as such. :-)

> she can change her spots
> to accomodate whoever.

To be fair, this is not true. Just think about the division that remains between Catholics and X (where X can be quite a few groups).

> she is not even true
> to her own AUGUSTINIAN
> tradition

I don't see how this tradition should be seen as the end-all of Catholicism. St. Augustine is, of course, one of our greatest teachers, but this reminds me of the whole "I am for Apollos, I am for Paul" thing that St. Paul complained about. Catholicism is, well, universal.

> equal path of salvation

This has been clarified already, and quite recently. There are many universalists in the Church, including some sadly misguided bishops, but AFAIK, universalism is condemned, not sanctioned.

There was a time when most of the Church was Arian, too, and it can take some time for such errors to be corrected. But they do get corrected because the Spirit of Truth continues to guide the Church as promised.

L P Cruz said...

Jeff,

> But experts in RC such as
> those who were ex-priests

He he.. that's not necessarily accurate. Disbarred lawyers and doctors whose licenses are revoked are not usually seen as experts as such. :-)


Fr Luigi DeSanctis was not barred, he purposely left. That is a different matter altogether.

Not all those ex-Priest were disbarred. A person who purposely resigns is not the same in standing as a person who is sacked for malpractice.

Upto now Jeff, no one has challenged DeSanctis or has casted doubts about his allegations. He does not seem to be like Fr. Rivera of Chick publications.


There was a time when most of the Church was Arian, too, and it can take some time for such errors to be corrected. But they do get corrected because the Spirit of Truth continues to guide the Church as promised

Well in a way that is right, that is why there is the Reformation ;-)

LPC