Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Fallibility — Peter Robinson
As a friend, who is, like me, a convert to Catholicism, put it in an email: What is a Catholic to do when the Supreme Pontiff makes statements that are, on the very face of them, preposterous?
(If you disagree with the premise–that is, if you can see some way of constructing the statement such that it isn’t, actually, preposterous–please do say so. I’d be hugely relieved.)
Published in General
That’s why Christ left us a Church with a teaching authority. Without that teaching authority, things come unglued.
Which brings us full circle back to my original point.
Actually, I do remember my father, a Southern Baptist Minister, being vehemently opposed to the World Council of Churches. Somehow though–perhaps because of the independent nature of Protestantism–the WCC hasn’t affected Evangelical’s political orientation to the extent that LT seems to have done with Catholics.
“Evil” is a boy band, and Regular Evil is the one who’s always looking at the floor and frowning.
How many liberation theologians do you think there are amongst the Romans? Honestly, it’s not helpful to conflate “Marxist” and “Leftist”. Anyway, there’s a pretty good survey of evangelical political beliefs here. I don’t know which question most closely matches your definition of “leftist”, but if any of them do you’re talking about some tens of millions.
That just addresses “evangelical”, not “baptist”, but it also addresses only the traditionally white/ Hispanic churches. Do you consider African American Baptist churches to be “Baptists”? The Catholic church becomes a lot more conservative, too, when you filter out the swarthier parishioners.
The Tyndale Bible included an introduction and footnotes written by Tyndale, and the Church deemed those heretical. For instance one of the footnotes referred to the pope as “that great idol, the whore of Babylon, the anti-Christ of Rome.” You can see how that sort of thing might rub Church officials the wrong way, no?
If the Church was opposed in principle to vernacular translations, she wouldn’t have responded by authorizing and publishing the Douay-Rheims Bible.
Ah, but can a Papal tweet be considered infallible if it contradicts Holy Wikipedia?
Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Al Gore?
What about Black Liberation Theology, as preached by the likes of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright?
Full circle again re #98: How can the Roman church maintain its authority when everyone has access to the scriptures?
The Church has few definitive interpretations of Scripture. For instance, faithful Catholics can hold different interpretations of Genesis chapters 1 and 2 in regards to the interpretation of the “days” of creation and whether or not evolution is involved, as long as they hold that God created the world from nothing and that He created the human soul. But a Catholic may not hold a belief that Christ’s words in John 6:51ff are only symbolic. Holding that view of “dissent” would be labeled as heresy.
Church authority was given by Christ and is maintained by Him through the Holy Spirit working in the Magisterium.
Authority is a stumbling block and one is free to reject the Truth of the Church (her doctrinal cohesion), but to say that Truth (doctrinal cohesion) is an illusion is accepting moral relativism.
Don’t pity us. The Church isn’t trying to keep us in line; She exists as mission to proclaim the Gospel for the salvation of our souls.
I don’t know if this has been addressed yet, but was that tweet really written by Pope Francis, or was it written by a staffer?
He has a point. He is a pope, I am not, we are inequal, this is evil. The only cure is for him to step down so there are no popes or for him to make every person pope so we are all equal.
I’m talking about the greater tendency of Roman Catholics to lean left politically than Protestants. Particularly in the U.S., though I believe the influence of Liberation Theology throughout Latin America is a big factor in the political orientation there.
I don’t know how many U.S. Catholics openly ally themselves with Liberation Theology, but if Catholics voted like Protestants in the U.S., we’d be in much better shape. See here.
Could you explain this a bit more? Which parables, for instance?
Severely Limited: #117 “But no Liberation Theology branch of any of those as far as I know.”
If one reads the history of the early Church one will find heresies. Lets name a few. The circumcisers. Gnosticism. Montanism. Sabellianism. Arianism. Pelagianism. These go on and on, and they started within the Church, or beside the Church competing for the hearts and minds of the people.
The Church examined Liberation Theology. It was criticized for making Jesus a political figure, for attempting to Christianize Marxism. It is incompatible with Catholic thought.
When I left evangelicalism for the Church, I understood at least in part that I was outside of the Church Jesus founded. He did not found the denomination of which I was a member.
I understood that the Church was intended to help sinners become saints and that it is our Lord who separates the wheat and the tares. Not my job. I am not their judge but rather am required to forgive them for offenses against me.
Interesting idea that. When I arrived in Rome, I went to confession. I wanted to be rid of my sins per John 20:23. His representatives did exactly that for me.
Bereket Kelile: #120 “I have to disagree on the first point. There was opposition to people like Tyndale and Luther translating the Bible into the vernacular and thereby spreading “heretical” teachings.” (This in reference to the fact that there were nine versions of the Bible in Germany prior to Luther’s publication of his bible.)
First, I was wrong. Prior to Luther’s new testament no authority recognizes less than 14 editions in High German and three in Low German. The versions in High German seem to be reprints of a single MS of which two copies remain, one in a monastery in Tepl, Bavaria, and the other in the library of the University of Frieburg in the Breisgau. The former is known as the Codex Teplensis.
If necessary I can provide additional information about the availability of scripture in Germany prior to Luther’s new testament.
I bring this up for a reason. If Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, then He is the Truth. Those called by His Name are not supposed to represent Him by misrepresentation. We are supposed to seek the truth. Bereket, I am telling you the truth.
Bereket Kelile: #120 “Regarding denominations, that’s irrelevant to my point. I’m not talking about uniformity. I’m talking about the dilemma of maintaining orthodoxy and private interpretation. It’s a challenge for every denomination.”
How does a denomination handle the dilemma of maintaining orthodoxy and private interpretation? If I remember correctly, what was orthodox for a one denomination was not orthodox for another. So the better question is how one might maintain orthodoxy when orthodoxy itself is in question.
In a religious milieu where there is no central authority, where the Bible can and is interpreted willy-nilly by any- and every- one, how would one maintain orthodoxy?
I did note eight different Baptist, four unique Lutheran, three unique Methodist and three unique Presbyterian churches in my small city’s phone book.
Did you know that there are people who believe God willed this chaos?
That God wants this separation?
That God is credited with writing a book so obscure that people cannot agree about what it says?
Denominations are relevant to your point, and to mine. Private interpretation, or solo scriptura, is the problem. Pick your spot and grab the citations that help you stand out.
Response to Bereket at #106
Bereket, I have yet to write about my Ethiopia trip. I will, I will. It’s just taking me time to fully digest the experience and sort out how to encapsulate it in a post-length article.
My issue is that I need to be a much better writer in order to convey to the reader the beauty of the Ethiopian people I served alongside, the justifiable pride taken in their unique and ancient culture. I worry that any brief treatment–in my hands, at least–will come off as simply a post about a poor country with a dysfunctional government. The totality of Ethiopia is is much, much more.
Perhaps I can get there by posting a lot of photos. This weekend, I hope.
In the off-chance that you have not read Abraham Verghese’s, Cutting For Stone, I highly recommend it to you.
It is set in Addis Ababa in the 1950s, and tells a fascinating tale through the eyes of a physician (the author).
The most direct parables condemning those who complain about inequality are those of the Parables of the Vineyard (the gold standard, taking an explicitly free market justification that assumes that freely bargained for wages are just), Talents, and the Prodigal Son.
Christ also demonstrates comfort with inequality when he suggests that a just king exempts his own children from taxation (Matthew 17) and when he initially rebuffs the Syro-Phonecian woman (Mark 7/ Matthew 15).
Paul is happy to say civis romanus sum in order to get a trial that would not have been available to most citizens of the empire. Paul is slightly less comfortable than the slave relationship restoring Christ (Matthew 8), but no scriptural figure is particularly radical on the issue.
The unfallen angels are set higher than us (Christ, in joining us, becomes a little lower than the angels), and their society appears hierarchical, as does (according to the Catholic understanding) the priesthood set forth in Titus 2 and 1 Timothy 3. Note the irony of condemning “inequality” in others while proclaiming supremacy for oneself.
The Old Testament is filled with statements of God setting people on high/ in authority, statements echoed by Peter and Paul. Only abuses of inequality are condemned.
I always thought the point of the parables was to illustrate how the Kingdom of God is radically different than our Earthly expectations, how the mind of God is unlike the mind of man. In particular the lesson of the Parable of the Vineyard is that God is generous with his graces, that if He chooses to accept a death-bed conversion or forgive a notorious sinner, we should not become self-righteous and complain that it is “unjust” that someone who has done less than we have to “earn” salvation should be saved.
I’m not convinced Jesus intended to teach a lesson about Earthly economics here, but even if he did, couldn’t you read it the opposite way? Jesus endorses paying everyone an equal daily wage, regardless of how hard they work. Claiming you “deserve” to earn more than someone else just because you work harder at a more difficult job is unjust.
If Christ’s argument was that employers should pay x or y wages, then, sure, that argument might make sense. Instead, though, Christ’s argument depends on the intrinsic justice of freely bargained wages, the choice of both parties; whatever the purpose of the parable, the required assumption condemns critics of the free market. Plus, the workers who got the less good deal are condemned for their envy.
13 ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? 14 Take what belongs to you and go; I choose to give to this last the same as I give to you. 15 Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous?’
Yes, the leftist Catholics I know are big fans of Jim Wallis and the Sojourner publication. They’re involved in an organization called “JustFaith,” which is non-denominational Protestant in its outlook, as far as I know. But where the general public is concerned, I doubt that many could tell the difference between the Protestant Social Gospel and Liberation Theology. It’s all “socialist” to me. One possible distinction of LT, as I understand it, is it espouses “collective” salvation — for the poor*. Are there others?
*BTW, that “social justice” Catholics won’t go that far theologically allows them to deny their otherwise extensive overlap with LT in their socialism cloaked as Catholicism. I find their movement insidious, and disturbing.
I’m not sure which election cycle you’re referencing, but given how tight many congressional races are (and you know the numbers better than I do), do you doubt we’d be in a better position if the Catholic vote mirrored the Protestant?
If you compare the Evangelical (vs all Protestants) vote to the RC, it is an even more disturbing divide. No American president has ever made the sort of attack on a faith that Obama made on Catholicism last election and yet the the most Conservative RCs, white Catholics, still gave him 40% of their vote. 20% of Evangelicals voted for Obama. That amounts to a fundamental difference.
A parable that starts with “The kingdom of heaven is like… ” is not teaching economics. He’s teaching about eternal rewards. Latecomers to the kingdom receive the eternal award just like those who came before.
The law provides some economics lessons.
Leviticus 19:11-15
“You shall not steal; you shall not deal falsely; you shall not lie to one another. You shall not swear by my name falsely, and so profane the name of your God:I am the Lord.
“You shall not oppress your neighbor or rob him. The wages of a hired worker shall not remain with you all night until the morning. You shall not curse the deaf or put a stumbling block before the blind, but you shall fear your God:I am the Lord.
“You shall do no injustice in court. You shall not be partial to the poor or defer to the great, but in righteousness shall you judge your neighbor.
Leviticus 19:35-36
“You shall do no wrong in judgment, in measures of length or weight or quantity. You shall have just balances, just weights, a just ephah, and a just hin:
Social Justice Catholics don’t tend to spend a lot of time talking about revolution, or the end of history as a social development, or a lot of the purer elements of Marxism in LT. LT tends to be more theoretically radical, while SJ is more results oriented (supporting immediate progressive programs). A pretty good dividing line might be seen in paragraphs 59-60. To the extent that he condemns the violence, Francis is siding with the SJ Catholics over the LT, to the extent he excuses it he goes further than most SJ Catholics. He avoids celebrating it.
I agree that a lot of the distinction goes over most heads, but feel it important nonetheless.
The thought expressed in the tweet seems to encourage violation of the 10th commandment.
Deuteronomy 5:21
“‘And you shall not covet your neighbor ‘s wife. And you shall not desire your neighbor’ s house, his field, or his male servant, or his female servant, his ox, or his donkey, or anything that is your neighbor ‘s. ‘