“Where Peter is, there is the Church - Where the Church is, there is Jesus Christ.
Good articles here from Church Militant and from Gavin Ashenden.
First from Church Militant:
"Divine truth is communicated to man through human language. Words convey meaning, without which they are simply empty utterances — symbols pointing to nothing. The word of God, therefore, needs definitive and authoritative interpretation; and this is especially true given the darkening of the human intellect after the loss of original justice (Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae I, II, q. 85, a. 3).
"To come to the true meaning of any message, one must know the intention of the communicator. To know the true meaning of the rock anthem "American Pie," for example, one would have to learn the mind of Don McLean himself. By the same logic, only God can interpret the true meaning of His message to mankind. "No one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God" (1 Corinthians 2:11).
"Here we must consider two problems. First, human error is certain if we're left to our own devices to interpret divine revelation. Anyone who's ever played the telephone game as a child knows how quickly a simple message becomes distorted after several people hear it and pass it on. Second, experience shows that when baptized individuals attempt to interpret God's word, the result is thousands of Protestant denominations.
"Hence, we arrive at the following logical sequence. If the word of God contains what's necessary for salvation, and God is love and wants all men to be saved (1 Timothy 2:4), it follows that Christ must have established a teaching authority guided by the Holy Spirit to interpret the truths of salvation. He would not leave the meaning of His salvific word vulnerable to human error.
"The mandate to safeguard the deposit of faith and teach it without error is given to the pillars of the Church, Peter and the apostles, and to their legitimate successors (the pope and the bishops). This official teaching authority is known as the Magisterium, Latin for "magister" or teacher (Luke 18:18). This idea is explicated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ" (¶85).
"The Vatican II constitution Dei Verbum makes clear that the Magisterium is integral to knowing the true meaning of Scripture and Tradition: "Sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the teaching authority of the Church, in accord with God's most wise design, are so linked and joined together that one cannot stand without the others" (§10).
"It is important that God offers both His word and its meaning to all those who, with the rich young man in the gospels, seek to know with clarity and without doubt "what is necessary to inherit eternal life" (Luke 18:18). The Son communicates "the words of eternal life" (John 6:68), the Spirit ensures we have access to their true meaning (Luke 24:31), and the living Magisterium formulates and authentically teaches all truths pertaining to salvation. Details on how this works can be found in Lumen Gentium §25, Mysterium Ecclesiae, and other postconciliar documents."
And from Gavin Ashenden (referring primarily to the scandal of abuse but also relevant concerning dissent, heterodoxy and heresy in the Catholic Church):
"How is it possible to believe in an organisation which aspires for the highest possible standards in terms of sexual and moral probity and at the same time appears to fail them so spectacularly?
Nothing can be said in defence of the moral failure of those clergy who had the responsibility for the vulnerable and young and allowed their lower appetites to overcome them and prey on those who should have been protecting.
"But something can be said about the probity of the Church as an institution and the way we evaluate spiritual authenticity on the one hand and failure on the other.
"Liberal secularism, the default world view of our culture, has smuggled into the public mind an over-optimistic view about human nature that is neither Christian nor realistic. It flatters the secular ego by assuming that people are essentially good and capable of achieving their moral aspiration if they choose to. From a Christian understanding this view has two serious flaws: it is based on an over-inflated view of human moral capacity and perhaps ever more significant, an underplaying or a disbelief in the reality and corrosive power of evil.
"This ignorance of evil is an essential component in the unrealistic and almost infantile optimism about human nature. It is fuelled, in fact it is only possible, with an ignorance of history and literature, and religious or spiritual illiteracy …
"The Christian view is more realistic and congruent with history and politics than this liberal secular optimism (which provides the foundation for all utopian exercises in totalitarianism). It is that humanity is created in the image of God but is undermined by a deadly flaw; and that this flaw (original sin) is exacerbated by a constant pressure of spiritual perversion and temptation …
"The Church has never ceased to be a place where both achievement and failure happen. It’s an amphitheatre of moral and spiritual struggle. But in assessing how we weigh its virtues and its vices much depends on what expectations we carry with us when we judge it ...
"Sin and failure is not all that happens in the Church. It is also gives birth to holiness. In fact the phenomenon of the saints is a tribute to this perpetual effervescent of the Spirit and heroic self-sacrifice in the presence of an encounter with divine Love …
"Critics of the Church take some pleasure in pointing out the peccadilloes and immoral enormity of religious figures who have crashed, but they make no calculation and offer no explanation about the relationship of astonishing holiness as a counter-balance to the corruption.
"But this is not a zero-sum game. There is no calculation to be made, and perhaps that’s the point? The sexual abusers, manipulators, addicts, hypocrites, are not the monopoly of the Church. They are to be found in even greater numbers in families, government, charities, Non-profit agencies, political parties, secular youth organisations, sports clubs… in fact everywhere.
"The critics of the Catholic Church are right to be disgusted and disturbed by the moral failures they point to. But they are mistaken to respond by saying that this provides a reason for disbelieving in the Church of God. The more pressing question is not one to do with the universality of moral corruption, but with the constant, unstoppable, heart-warming, inspirational, self-sacrificial, astonishing outbreaks of holiness the Catholic Church gives birth to in every generation without fail. They should be perpetually astonished by the phenomena of saints in every generation.
"The prevalence of moral failure ought to disturb the complacent secular optimism in their assumptions about human nature. It ought to open the windows of speculative thought about the existence of good and evil. It ought to provoke a re-evaluation of the role of evil in human affairs, both corporate and personal. And when that is done, that would be the moment to be astonished at the power and prevalence of holiness in an organisation where such things cannot be created or configured by any human managerial or strategic intervention, but only be explained by the existence of God and the effect of his love.
"The intelligent, unbiased and informed response to the abuse crisis, would be to take the danger of evil more seriously in our own lives, and to be ready to be astonished and inspired by an organisation, a church, a community perpetually irradiated with forgiveness, love, self-sacrifice and above all, holiness. A reason to not disbelieve, but believe."
Interesting articles, particularly Gavin Ashenden's. I've long been of the opinion that most critics of the Church on the issue of child sexual abuse really don't care a rap about the victims -- I hate the word "survivor" in these contexts -- but are only interested in a stick to beat the Church with. Outside the clerical context, very few of them could care less. Below is a link to an interview with Fr Paul Sullins, recently retired professor of sociology and that rarest of beasts, a married Catholic priest (he was a convert from Anglicanism). His thoughts on the correlation between the levels of sexual abuse and the numbers of homosexual men in the priesthood are fascinating.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/fr-paul-sullins
The abuse by clerics has been weaponised by all sides, both in and outside of the Church.
DeleteIt's interesting that increasingly many of the articles HJ finds helpful are written by priests who have joined the Catholic Church from Anglicanism.
Maybe because you're obsessed about arguing with Protestants..?
DeleteThis article's logical pathway appears to be:
1) Humans need God to interpret His Word.
2) The Magisterium performs that function on God's behalf.
3) The Catholic church has the Magisterium.
4) Therefore do what you're told, ye miserable Protestants. And don't accise us of being being riddled with error and child abuse, because charities and sports clubs are just as bad.
1) to 3) are correct.
DeleteDon't go all 'good disagreement' on me. I came here for an argument...
DeleteThen present a coherent point for HJ to argue against as 4) is nonsense.
DeleteI think we agree that the Anglican church is the least Christian church in all the world, unless you include the Mormons and JWs. Even against them it's by far the most worldly and compromised. But nonconformist is where it's at, Jack. Sola scriptura is the only foundation that won't lead you astray. Put your trust in man, in any form, and you'll be led into error.
DeleteAs the protestants were when they trusted Martin Luther to throw out seven books of the Bible.
Delete@ Chef
DeleteBut Sola Scriptura itself rests on the interpretations of men as no one comes to the bible without some sort of 'tradition' based on a favoured theologian or school of thought.
@Bell,
Delete'Protestants' don't necessarily follow Luther - indeed, some were persecuted by his church also.
Gav is right about many things, but you don't even have to consult those horrible questing protestants about the relevance of the Bishop of Rome and the Magisterium, as the Eastern Orthodox - also The One True Church - feel rather similarly on those issues. Yours in prayer.
ReplyDeleteYou mean the fourteen true churches🤣
Delete@ Gadjo
DeleteThe gulf between Protestantism with its Sola Scriptura and the Catholic and Orthodox Churches is far greater than the gulf between the latter Churches.
Yep, you're pretty much indistinguishable from the Latter Day Saints.
DeleteHow you keeping Chef? HJ noticed you've been quiet on Disgus of late. Guess we're all still missing Cranmer.
DeleteI have been well, thank you. Had a big deal at work going down which required more than the usual 10% effort. But I am always well. What of your oft infirmities?
Delete@Jack,
DeleteConceptually, yes. My comment was not particularly well formed for Jack's blog - I was still in Cranmer mode!
... the Eastern Orthodox - also The One True Church - feel rather similarly on those issues.
DeleteThis is simply untrue. The Orthodox Church recognises the primacy of Peter, but disputes the papal claim to have sole and immediate jurisdiction over the universal church; the pope has this authority only over the Roman patriarchate. Thus the pre-schism Church would look to Rome to mediate disputes between bishops, as Rome holds the first place of honour. This is the position the Orthodox would return to. The OC believes that the authority conferred by Matt 16:18 is exercised over the universal Church by all bishops in union, not the pope alone; thus doctrine can only be determined by oecumenical councils.
Protestantism, on the other hand, doesn't even believe in bishops, except sometimes, when they're either middle managers, elders, or sacerdotal inheritors of the apostolic succession. Take your pick. Our positions are nothing alike, which is why the OC rejected the advances of Luther et al.
There is not more than one 'one true Church': there is but one true Church that shares the true mysteries but which is currently divided against itself, to our ongoing shame. And then there are myriad breakaway communities who choose to do their own thing, such as ordain women and bless sin.
This article summarises the divisions between the Eastern and Western Churches.).
DeleteIt starts:
One of the most tragic divisions within Christianity is the one between the Catholic Church and the Orthodox churches. Both have valid holy orders and apostolic succession through the episcopacy, both celebrate the same sacraments, both believe almost exactly the same theology, and both proclaim the same faith in Christ. So, why the division? What caused the division?
And concludes:
While Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are separate for the moment, over the last several decades, there has been a marked lessening of tensions and overcoming of long-standing hostilities. In 1965, Pope Paul VI and Patriarch Athenagoras I of Constantinople lifted mutual excommunications dating from the eleventh century. It is again becoming possible to envision a time when the two communions will be united and, by the power of the Holy Spirit, fulfill their duty in bringing about Christ’s solemn desire and command “that they may be one” (John 17:11).
In between it offers a Catholic perspective on the division.
It's an interesting article but it doesn't address the unfortunate fact that there's a great deal of visceral hostility among the Orthodox for Rome that simply does not run both ways. I don’t know of any Catholic who harbours the kind of animus for the Orthodox that many of them have for the Catholic Church.
Delete@Jack - that's a fair article, I'm glad it recognises that the 'great schism' was a gradual occurrence. There's also something to be said for the differences in understanding between Greeks and Latins linguistically: Latin is simply not as flexible a language as Greek (see, for example, how the OT word 'law' was stripped of some its richness in translation from Hebrew to Greek, and then again in translation from Greek to Latin). I believe some of the theological misunderstandings were caused by this - the overly precise Latin expression of more expansive Greek terms. I encounter the same issues translating Japanese into English, incidentally. There's also centuries of nationalism, divergent culture and human pride getting in the way, too. The late Pope Benedict XVI worked hard to restore relations between the churches, although some were disappointed that he dropped the title of Patriarch of the West. I think there is some wariness over the current incumbent.
Delete@Bell - that's a rather sweeping generalisation. I don't know of any Orthodox who harbours animus for Catholics, except online (just as I know of no Protestants in real life who have the same venom for Catholics that online fundies do). There are feelings of nationalist resentment, to be sure, by those from Orthodox countries who feel wronged by Catholic ones, but this is arguably no more theologically motivated than the Irish troubles were.
Generally speaking, those Orthodox who feel wronged by Rome will point to the papal overreach in changing the Creed, the sack of Constantinople and the abandonment of the Eastern churches into the hands of the Muslims by the Latins - with the ensuing centuries of violent persecution, the latest of which still barely registers with the West today. That is a lot of history to overcome, particularly if the Latin demand is that all churches bow the knee to Rome, something the Eastern churches feel that they have been stung by in the past. I'm not surprised that you don't know of any Catholic who feels the same towards the Orthodox: since it is the Catholics demanding that the Orthodox submit to them, it's rather easier for them to be generous.
雲水,
DeleteThank you for your input here. If it was Cranmer I could have edited my comment to have better explained what my intentions with it were! Be that as it may, I shall continue here. If you are interested, I have just received delivery of the first part of the Philokalia, translated by yer man Kallistos Ware inter alia. Best wishes.
@Chef,
DeleteGood to see you here. Hope all is well with you and yours.
@ Gadjo
DeleteYes, it's a poorer format but we have to make do! It takes some adjustment.
@Gadjo - yes, as a person labouring under the curse of perfectionism, the lack of an edit button is a nightmare. All of my spelling and autocorrect errors laid bare for the world to see...
DeleteI hope you find it an edifying read; it's a good translation and Lent seems an ideal time to start. I would only say to keep in mind that most of the texts in it were written for monastics and ascetics, so some can be a little extreme or hyperbolic and one may not wish to follow every piece of advice literally. It's a treasure of the Church, may God bless you through it!
@Jack,
DeleteWhen I am a poor workman I should not blame my tools! We'll do OK. Not being able to edit may even have an effect like the game of word association does, revealing our initial gut-felt responses that we sometines didn't even know ourselves.
雲水,
DeleteThank you for your encouragement. Yes, Lent should be a good time for this, just gotta find the time. As somebody who rather craves the monastic existence, that aspect does not (yet) put me off; but as somebody who has never actually tried the experience, maybe it should!
@Bell,
DeleteAny such animosity - personally I have encountered any, but it's simply not a converstion that I have had - may be much more historical than doctrinal. The Catholic Hapsburgs, for example, instigated the Unite ('Greek Catholic') church in their Eastern territories to take believers away from Orthodoxy, which they often didn't even recognise as a church.
@Gadjo
DeleteNever say never! Personally, becoming a religious solitary (or to stop fighting the call to become one) was the best decision I have ever made in my faith life. I don't know how things are where you are, but a lot of monasteries do allow people (even from other traditions or none) to take retreats with them and participate in monastic life as far as they're able. Some also have lay oblates, who follow an adapted version of a monastic rule but in a secular context (those who are married, for example, but feel called to that kind of monastic devotion). Perhaps the Lord is nudging you...
雲水,
DeleteOh, that's wonderful that you have found such spiritual satisfaction in this way! I have just looked up 'lay oblates', which I didn't know about before. My married life would preclude me from becoming too monastic. There are fine monastaries where I live, and I think some have monks 'cells' where one could stay but I don't know or how I could contribute to the community there on any sort of temporary basis. Then there's my job. I might have to be a stay-at-home monk.
It is nice to see Chef again still wearing his lovely curls and promoting Protestantism. Lain the reason you are unaware of anti Catholicism in a Protestant household is because your father is a Minister and aware of Christian values. I have been told by other Protestants that they were raised as anti Catholic. I think this is fairly common knowledge.
ReplyDeleteThat is true. It would perhaps be more accurate to say that while I've come across a lot of Protestants who oppose Catholics as misguided, wrong, or 'not Christian' at the most extreme, I've rarely seen the kind of raw anti-Catholic hatred that I've seen from online commenters. Not from people who don't have much more obvious problems, anyway.
DeleteIt tends to be a 'blogger thing' - one can get caught up in extreme positions and rather locked into them. A view at the comments on various sites will affirm this. Looking back, to his regret and shame, HJ has been known to fall into this. At the end of the day, we are all stumbling to find Christ and are subject to all sorts of influences.
DeleteI think so. The internet seems to amplify our need to be right (rather than righteous) and makes us more willing to find molehills to die on. It's also easy to forget that, on the other end of a faceless comment, is a human being whom we are called to love, regardless of their views or affiliation. The divine light is not blue, yellow, red or white.
DeleteI suggest that all Christians should pray for Canadian pastor Artur Pawlowski at this time, again. He has just been banned from being present at a place for no fault of his own, other than being a Christian witness.
ReplyDelete@Happy Jack - you and me both.
ReplyDelete