Get Religion has a good piece on this at A Catholicism for journalists?
Looking back at the article I am amazed how much bad information is in it.
Anyway I left this comment:
A good article and I agree if the Boston Globe is going to run a piece like this then there needs to be counterpoint
"I suppose there are few people like Mr Wilson in comment two but for most the issue of child abuse in the Church is just being used as talking point for pre-conceived ideas. Lets face it we sort of went through this in 2001 and much of what has been reported is old news. I think the Church has started to recover in the USA.
However I think what you touch on and perhaps what Rod is touching on is this is far than just a Catholic attitude. I know people in Evangelical communities that have the ideas they are their own “Pope” and their “informed conscience” are the ultimate guide.
Of course one finds that their “informed conscious” is not too informed at all.
The Charles Pierces of the world are abundant all over the place, but if you set them down with a informed Catholic or just a informed Christian period on many issues they could not back their arguments based on scripture, tradition, philosophy, history, natural law, theology, or consistent Church witness.
Have we not seen this in numerous stories at just the religious literacy problem most Americans have. Even the agnostic Camille Anna Paglia has ranted how horrible it is because she sees it her class room
The fact that so many Christians think they are experts on everything under the sun is pretty amazing. It brings to mind the Chesterton’s quote:
“Tradition means giving a vote to most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead.” Chesterton goes on to say: “Tradition refuses to submit to the small and arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of birth; tradition objects to their being disqualified by the accident of death. Democracy tells us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our groom; tradition asks us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our father.”
Returning to the Globe article is that not really what is going on here. Charles and Bill in comment two might be talking about Popes and stuff but what about the above. That is one reason they don;t leave and become Eastern Orthodox or if they have problems with that become Traditional Lutherans, or Traditional Anglicans.
Heck maybe they don’t need a Orthodox Catholic respond at the Globe . What about just a well informed Eastern Orthodox. Take the Pope and the “opulence of the Vatican” out of the question and I suspect he would not like them either.
1 comment:
It seems to me that Mr. Pierce is probably staying in the Roman Catholic Church for social, cultural, and family reasons. I have a cousin who has no belief in the Roman Catholic Church whatsoever, but she went through all of the conversion non-sense because she married a man from a prominent Hispanic family. It is obvious from the fact that she has only given birth to one child that her submission to the Pope is limited.
Regarding your comment that Evangelicals are led by their own informed consciences, let me tell you that there are some of us who actually believe that God exists, and believe that we are led by the Holy Spirit. All things must be in agreement with the Bible, so when people tell me, as an example which is commonplace nowadays, that the Holy Spirit has led them to divorce and remarry, I know that they have been deceived. But with a Bible, and the living God to lead me into truth, I certainly do not need a Pope. And Jesus Christ has made all true believers to be Kings and Priests before the Lord.
Post a Comment