Tuesday, February 03, 2009
From AFP via Breitbart comes this vexing story:
Attacks on Pope Benedict XVI's decision to lift the excommunication of a Holocaust denier escalated Monday, with one theologian calling on him to step down as the head of the Roman Catholic Church.

"If the pope wants to do some good for the Church, he should leave his job," eminent liberal Catholic theologian Hermann Haering told the German daily Tageszeitung.

An international uproar followed the decision to rehabilitate Williamson, an English bishop who has dismissed as "lies" historical evidence that six million Jews were gassed by the Nazis during World War II. Jews and Catholics alike have produced widespread criticism.

"A pardon that tastes of poison," wrote Franco Garelli, an expert in religious history, in Italy's daily La Stampa Monday.

Back in Germany, high-ranking Catholic officials said the pope risked losing vital support.

"There is obviously a loss of confidence" in the pope and "rehabilitating a denier is always a bad idea," the bishop of Hamburg, Werner Thissen, told the daily Hamburger Abendblatt on Monday.
Let me start by saying this is in no way an attack on the Pope, Catholicism, or the many fine Catholics living around the world. We're all sons and daughters of God and I have little patience for sectarian squabbles.

Having said that, it's things like this that completely baffle me. As I understand it (and prefacing any sentence with that should set off an alarm somewhere given my limited understanding) the Pope is the spiritual descendant of St. Peter and the earthly head of the Church. Being human, he is not infallible (pretty sure he's not supposed to be infallible anyway) but if you were to rank people by righteousness he should be in the top 5 or so, we'll say. It's his place to interpret scripture for humanity and to speak for God.

So given that, how can there be talk of a "loss of confidence" in the Pope, or other Catholics calling for him to step down? If he has been chosen by God to be His spokesperson then how could there be any mistake in the matter? The article seems to talk as if he could be impeached or something. But surely such a situation is unthinkable! That would mean the following statements are both true:
  • The Pope is God's representative on Earth and has been chosen, by God, to interpret God's will
  • The Pope can be wrong and can be removed from his position if people disagree with him.
How can both statements be true? This is saying that the Pope only speaks for God when everyone else agrees with him.

Unless I've missed something? If anyone has any thoughts by all means share, please.
Feb 3, 2009 9:07 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [2]  |  Trackback
 Thursday, December 06, 2007
Here's a great article on what it means to be a Christian living in America.  It echoes a lot of the same feelings I've had.  Due to my work with the church youth and trying to stay involved in politics, I am told all the time that we need to get fired up and take back this country.  Or that it used to be a Christian nation and now it's slipping and we need to stop it before it's too late.  But I could never really buy into that.  I thought it was just apathy but in reality it's a sense of hopelessness.  After all, as much as I care about this country, it is not my home.  And there is a coming darkness that will require the complicity of the U.S. simply because we are too powerful for it to succeed otherwise.  So the country is doomed eventually in any event.

Not that we shouldn't, of course, try to delay it as much as possible.  But ultimately we will not win and the country will perish because it is of this world.  So we should pray, and mourn, and, eventually, we should let go.

John Piper puts it better than I do (quoted in entirety and emphasis added):

The fact that Christians are exiles on the earth (1 Peter 2:11), does not mean that they don’t care what becomes of culture. But it does mean that they exert their influence as very happy, brokenhearted outsiders. We are exiles. “Our citizenship is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ” (Philippians 3:20). “Here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come” (Hebrews 13:14).

But we are very happy sojourners, because we have been commanded by our bloody Champion to rejoice in exile miseries. “Blessed are you when others . . . persecute you . . . on my account. Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven” (Matthew 5:11-12). We are happy because the apostle Paul showed us that “the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us” (Romans 8:18). We are happy because there are merciful foretastes everywhere in this fallen world, and God is glad for us to enjoy them (1 Timothy 4:3; 6:17). And we are happy because we know that the exiles will one day inherit the earth (Matthew 5:5). Christ died for sinners so that “all things” might one day belong to his people (Romans 8:32).

But our joy is a brokenhearted joy, because Christ is worthy of so much better obedience than we Christians render. Our joy is a brokenhearted joy because so many people around the world have not heard the good news that “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners” (1 Timothy 1:15). And our joy is a brokenhearted joy because human culture –- in every society –- dishonors Christ, glories in its shame, and is bent on self-destruction.

This includes America. American culture does not belong to Christians, neither in reality nor in Biblical theology. It never has. The present tailspin toward Sodom is not a fall from Christian ownership. “The whole world lies in the power of the evil one” (1 John 5:19). It has since the fall, and it will till Christ comes in open triumph. God’s rightful ownership will be manifest in due time. The Lordship of Christ over all creation is being manifest in stages, first the age of groaning, then the age of glory. “We ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies” (Romans 8:23). The exiles are groaning with the whole creation. We are waiting.

But Christian exiles are not passive. We do not smirk at the misery or the merrymaking of immoral culture. We weep. Or we should. This is my main point: being exiles does not mean being cynical. It does not mean being indifferent or uninvolved. The salt of the earth does not mock rotting meat. Where it can, it saves and seasons. And where it can’t, it weeps. And the light of the world does not withdraw, saying “good riddance” to godless darkness. It labors to illuminate. But not dominate.

Being Christian exiles in American culture does not end our influence; it takes the swagger out of it. We don’t get cranky that our country has been taken away. We don’t whine about the triumphs of evil. We are not hardened with anger. We understand. This is not new. This was the way it was in the beginning –- Antioch, Corinth, Athens, Rome. The Empire was not just degenerate, it was deadly. For three explosive centuries Christians paid for their Christ-exalting joy with blood. Many still do. More will.

It never occurred to those early exiles that they should rant about the ubiquity of secular humanism. The Imperial words were still ringing in their ears: “You will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved” (Mark 13:13). This was a time for indomitable joy and unwavering ministries of mercy.

Yes, it was a time for influence–-as it is now. But not with huffing and puffing as if to reclaim our lost laws. Rather with tears and persuasion and perseverance, knowing that the folly of racism, and the exploitation of the poor, and the de-Godding of education, and the horror of abortion, and the collapse of heterosexual marriage, are the tragic death-tremors of joy, not the victory of the left or the right.

The greatness of Christian exiles is not success but service. Whether we win or lose, we witness to the way of truth and beauty and joy. We don’t own culture, and we don’t rule it. We serve it with brokenhearted joy and longsuffering mercy, for the good of man and the glory of Jesus Christ.

By John Piper. © Desiring God. Website: desiringGod.org


Dec 6, 2007 9:11 AM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [0]  |  Trackback
 Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Somebody PLEASE come up with something better!


To the developers: I appreciate that you are trying to make a Biblical game.  And I can understand that it's hard: I've tried hard myself to come up with a fun game that would do what you're trying to do.  But, please, this is just awful.  Do you honestly believe, in your heart of hearts, that this would appeal to ANYONE who didn't want to play it already?  Some Christian kids will play it if they REALLY like the characters or the Bible.  Some people will buy it to mock it or for ironic purposes.  But I guarantee that not a single unsaved kid will willingly play the game because it looks like fun.  Not a one.

Even Captain Bible was more fun than this looks.  Did they just make you build this game and not give you any resources?  Were you just strapped for ideas?  What was it?  The gameplay looks like a mix of reading Bible verses and playing Berzerk, only with a clunkier interface.

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be negative, but either everyone was out of their league and out of touch or there was some real cynical development at work here.
 |  | 
Aug 15, 2007 12:06 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  |  Trackback
 Friday, July 13, 2007
Pope Says Catholicism Only True Church
Pope Benedict XVI has reasserted the universal primacy of the Roman Catholic Church, approving a document that says Orthodox churches are defective and that other Christian denominations are not true churches. The document, released Tuesday, restates key sections of a 2000 document that set off a firestorm of criticism among Protestant and other Christian denominations. It said they were not true churches but merely ecclesial communities and therefore did not have the "means of salvation." In the new document and an accompanying commentary it says "Christ 'established here on earth' only one church." It says the other communities "cannot be called 'churches' in the proper sense" because they do not have the ability to trace their bishops back to Christ's original apostles.
In other articles it's said that, basically, while the Protestant churches can contribute to a person's salvation inasmuch as God can use it (which you can actually say about anything), the only path to salvation lies through the Catholic church.

This is a shame and feels like a step backwards away from a church unity I was hoping to see some day.  C. S. Lewis has talked about this a lot and about the differences between "high church" and "low church" and how really both are necessary in some degrees.  I'm not sure, also, exactly where the apostolic succession rule is introduced.  Could be in the Apocrypha, I guess.
Jul 13, 2007 10:44 PM (EDT)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [1]  |  Trackback