Aging priest uses sermon at his Jubilee celebration to whine and praise himself. for believing that a momentary utopian glitch was going to overturn the shape of human history.
1 comment:
Anonymous
said...
Why doesn't anyone ever ask this sort of person for examples when they say »theologians with new ideas were censored and silenced«? What 'new ideas'?
There have been a few theologians required to be silent, but hasn't this been for explicit rejection of key doctrines? Perhaps the rejection was valid, and the silencing therefore mistaken or wrong.
None of the concerns this priest likes have been rejected by RC institutional authorities. In fact, the Teaching Church seems to claim them as her own. The institutional authorities, and the liberal clergy, could perhaps be faulted for glibness and hypocrisy in asserting these ideals or whatnot, but no priest has been silenced or admonish'd for calling for "social justice," environmental 'integrity,' peace, empowerment of the laity, etc.
Humanae vitae was really a great boon to this sort of dissolution: only sectarian RCs don't have a self-image as a basic dissenter from church doctrine.
As is proper, "the" Church in Gadium et spes offers her authority as the supreme interpreter of modern mankind. This may have been wishful thinking in practical terms, but it wasn't at all a recommendation of Free Thinking.
As for "new ideas" one could teach the Summa theologiae in a strong way that would shake the RCC to her foundations. I don't mean only in details of doctrine where Aquinas differs e.g. on the Immaculate Conception or does not see in the papacy a teaching office, but in foregrounding the meaning of scientia especially re sacred doctrine and why it properly destroys such flimflam as "epistemology." Indeed, a strong teaching of Aquinas would shake Protestantism, Islam, Judaism and Marxism and existentialism to their foundations.
I remember remarking to you that realistically one can't just dive into Heidegger's Being and Time and come out again an ordinary Christian or Catholic. You agreed. I still think that that's true, although I had almost no understanding at that time. But this is true also of the Summa theologiae, or Civitas Dei, or the Institutes of the Christian Religion, or the Phenomenology of Spirit. ...
1 comment:
Why doesn't anyone ever ask this sort of person for examples when they say »theologians with new ideas were censored and silenced«? What 'new ideas'?
There have been a few theologians required to be silent, but hasn't this been for explicit rejection of key doctrines? Perhaps the rejection was valid, and the silencing therefore mistaken or wrong.
None of the concerns this priest likes have been rejected by RC institutional authorities. In fact, the Teaching Church seems to claim them as her own. The institutional authorities, and the liberal clergy, could perhaps be faulted for glibness and hypocrisy in asserting these ideals or whatnot, but no priest has been silenced or admonish'd for calling for "social justice," environmental 'integrity,' peace, empowerment of the laity, etc.
Humanae vitae was really a great boon to this sort of dissolution: only sectarian RCs don't have a self-image as a basic dissenter from church doctrine.
As is proper, "the" Church in Gadium et spes offers her authority as the supreme interpreter of modern mankind. This may have been wishful thinking in practical terms, but it wasn't at all a recommendation of Free Thinking.
As for "new ideas" one could teach the Summa theologiae in a strong way that would shake the RCC to her foundations. I don't mean only in details of doctrine where Aquinas differs e.g. on the Immaculate Conception or does not see in the papacy a teaching office, but in foregrounding the meaning of scientia especially re sacred doctrine and why it properly destroys such flimflam as "epistemology." Indeed, a strong teaching of Aquinas would shake Protestantism, Islam, Judaism and Marxism and existentialism to their foundations.
I remember remarking to you that realistically one can't just dive into Heidegger's Being and Time and come out again an ordinary Christian or Catholic. You agreed. I still think that that's true, although I had almost no understanding at that time. But this is true also of the Summa theologiae, or Civitas Dei, or the Institutes of the Christian Religion, or the Phenomenology of Spirit. ...
Post a Comment