I'm not certain what keeps him from being Catholic instead of Anglo-Catholic, but I bet I'll find something on his blog when I have more time.
He does seem to have a serious contradiction in his theology, because he says on the one hand that
"The Bible stands over the Church, but the entire catholic church, the body of believers in all times and all places, is the interpretive community. One may not 'interpret' the demands of the apostolic faith all on one’s own"
but on the other hand he says of the Eucharist,
"I do not believe that 'legitimacy' is passed down through a mechanical 'apostolic succession' down two thousand years of history, such that God can be invoked by some priests and bishops but not others."
Yet that "mechanical" apostolic succession is precisely what "the body of believers in all times and all places" teaches is necessary for a valid Eucharist. The whole church believed it till the 1500's; the majority believes it still. Anyway, you could line up the Catholics, the Orthodox, nearly all Protestant denominations, and even most Anglicans, and they'd all agree (for different reasons) that he's wrong in his belief that he can receive the true Body and Blood of Christ in an Anglican church. Talk about setting yourself up against the teaching of the universal Church!
When I read Anglo-Catholics' blogs I get the impression that they get a lot of pestering from Catholic apologists, so perhaps he's heard and responded to this before...
Finally, I regret to note that his hair is neither red nor literate. But it was still an awesome post.
3 comments:
Very interesting. Just had time for a quick look. So what keeps him being Roman? Does he have read hair too?
I'm not certain what keeps him from being Catholic instead of Anglo-Catholic, but I bet I'll find something on his blog when I have more time.
He does seem to have a serious contradiction in his theology, because he says on the one hand that
"The Bible stands over the Church, but the entire catholic church, the body of believers in all times and all places, is the interpretive community. One may not 'interpret' the demands of the apostolic faith all on one’s own"
but on the other hand he says of the Eucharist,
"I do not believe that 'legitimacy' is passed down through a mechanical 'apostolic succession' down two thousand years of history, such that God can be invoked by some priests and bishops but not others."
Yet that "mechanical" apostolic succession is precisely what "the body of believers in all times and all places" teaches is necessary for a valid Eucharist. The whole church believed it till the 1500's; the majority believes it still. Anyway, you could line up the Catholics, the Orthodox, nearly all Protestant denominations, and even most Anglicans, and they'd all agree (for different reasons) that he's wrong in his belief that he can receive the true Body and Blood of Christ in an Anglican church. Talk about setting yourself up against the teaching of the universal Church!
When I read Anglo-Catholics' blogs I get the impression that they get a lot of pestering from Catholic apologists, so perhaps he's heard and responded to this before...
Finally, I regret to note that his hair is neither red nor literate. But it was still an awesome post.
So he isn't really your counterpart. His loss.
Post a Comment