Pages

▼

Sunday, April 10, 2005

Armstrong's cafeteria Catholicism

When I said that “whereas the real Roman Catholicism is represented by the likes of Rahner and Raymond Brown,” Dave Armstrong replied that
<< [Raymond Brown was not even an orthodox Catholic in many beliefs. Yet Mr. Hays wants to lift him up as an example of "real Catholicism," while in effect denigrating the above monumental figures]>>

But this was the position which Brown held in the Church:

“Brown, a Sulpician priest, was Auburn Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Biblical Studies at Union Theological Seminary, New York. He was twice appointed a member of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, by Pope Paul VI in 1972 and by Pope John Paul II in 1996. He wrote extensively on the Bible.”

http://www.americancatholic.org/News/RayBrown/

So, yes, I happen to think that makes him a representative spokesman for the contemporary Catholic view of Scripture.

I happen to agree with Armstrong that Brown was unorthodox. And by Armstrong's own characterization, this means that the papacy twice appointed a known heretic to the Pontifical Biblical Commission. That says quite a lot about the official face of modern Catholicism. And it says quite a lot as well about Armstrong's own brand of cafeteria Catholicism.
at

2 comments:

  1. Dave Armstrong4/10/2005 11:56 PM

    Hi Steve,

    Two questions:

    1. Is this your entire "reply"?

    2. Do you accept the Catholic Church as a fully Christian institution, so that one can be saved if one accepts all its teachings, as opposed to only being able to be saved (if indeed it is possible at all for a Catholic) despite its teachings?

    In Him,

    Dave

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dave Armstrong4/11/2005 12:24 AM

    Oops, my mistake. I discovered your earlier response, upon scrolling down. A fan of yours on my blog had linked to the short reply, so I thought that was all there was at first.

    Further reply could have been a good thing, but when one consults the ferociously illogical nature of your earlier post, one quickly realizes that this is not the case.

    That same post (and another, "Papal Bull") clearly demonstrate that you are an anti-Catholic (one who denies that the Catholic Church is fully Christian). That being the case, our short-lived "dialogue" is over, as I no longer waste my time arguing with anti-Catholics.

    Have a great day, and may God bless you abundantly,

    Dave

    ReplyDelete