Evan May may have beaten me to the punch on Paul P.S.M.S. Owen’s latest post (hereafter P.P.S.M.S.O. for short), but his post has so much comedic potential that there’s more than enough raw material for the two of us.
So I’ll play Rowan to Evan’s Martin. And that still leaves plenty of elbowroom for Flip Wilson, Tiny Tim, Lily Tomlin, Goldie Hawn, and Arte Johnson.
[Sorry to all you teens and twenty-somethings for the stone-age allusion to long gone, but unforgettable TV show for. I’m showing my age again. Before there was the Jon Stewart Show, there was Saturday Night Live, and before SNL, there was Laugh-In.]
Meanwhile, back in the Mod, Mod World:
“But when properly understood, these verses [2 Tim 3:16-17] do not promote the imbalanced Anabaptist notion of solo Scriptura…”
Does Anabaptism in fact subscribe to solo Scriptura?
Speaking for myself, Anabaptism is several notches above P.P.S.M.S.O.’s Anglo-Catholicism.
I mean, let’s put in this way. Would you want your daughter to date an Anglo-Catholic? Nuff said.
By contrast, I'd be happy to have my daughter date a nice Amish boy. Farm-boys are real men, unlike nancy-pansy Tractarians who would rather turn the church into a dollhouse for their Mandarin costume drama.
“…which is promoted in modern Evangelicalism, and which in practice denies the authoritative nature of the teaching office of the Church.”
Depends on what he means. A Bible teacher has no more or no less authority than the teaching of Scripture itself. To the extent that he’s true to the teaching of Scripture, his teaching is fully authoritative.
Or is P.P.S.M.S.O.’s position that we should accord divine authority to unscriptural teaching?
The NT has a fair amount to say about false teachers—none of it especially encouraging.
“The Bible is only sufficient for this task within the framework of the teaching authority of the Church.”
And what authorizes the framework? Scripture?
Also, how do we differentiate between a true church and a false church? Scripture?
“But once again, the Bible is powerful for salvation only within the context of the teaching office of the Church…”
I thought P.P.S.M.S.O. was of the opinion that Muslims, Mormons, and virtuous pagans could be saved.
“The nature of the Bible is analagous to our American Constitution.”
Watch P.P.S.M.S.O. play Teddy Kennedy to Justice Alito.
“ The Constitution is the source of American law in our society, but that does not in any way undermine the real authority of judges and courts to interpret and apply the Constitution in individual cases.”
It isn’t entirely clear to me why an expatriate like P.P.S.M.S.O. speaks of “our” Constitution in “our” society, but be that as it may, he is using one contentious example to prop up another contentious example. It all depends on your judicial philosophy.
Do judges have the right to interpret the Constitution, consistent with original intent, in order to apply general principles to special cases? Yes.
Do judges have the right to go into business for themselves by flouting original intent, discovering newly-minted rights in the Constitution which have no textual or historical basis while denying rights explicitly contained in the Constitution? No.
That is to claim Constitutional authority for something that lacks any actual Constitutional warrant. It is the Constitution itself which both empowers and circumscribes the power of the judiciary.
“Ecumenical councils are the ecclesial equivalent of the Supreme Court, and the same principle applies down the line to more geographically limited councils and assemblies. Evangelicalism may on occasion give the deferential nod to the teaching office of the Church catholic, and allow its judgments some degree of consideration, but it then feels free to ignore such rulings if they should contradict what they think they see in their Greek New Testament.”
And what, exactly, is the problem with that?
Let us remember that, historically, the authority of church councils was not moral authority, but legal authority. Where you had state churches, schism and heresy, as defined by the party in power, were crimes against the state, punishable as treason.
Is that the status quo ante to which P.P.S.M.S.O. would return us? Are evangelicals guilty of sedition? Is the chopping block the next stop?
But everything P.P.S.M.S.O. has said up until now is just a warming up exercise for the following assertion:
“This is why Evangelicals feel free to call into question such fundamental doctrines as: the eternal generation of the Son and eternal procession of the Holy Spirit, Episcopal ecclesiology, baptismal regeneration and forgiveness, the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, the sacrificial character and real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, the priestly nature of the ministry, and indeed the very notion of binding, authoritative Tradition at all.”
The reason he resorts to conciliar authority is because he is impotent to exegete these “fundamental” doctrines from Scripture.
So his analogy does, indeed, hold firm. Like Teddy Kennedy, who treats the Constitution like a piece of silly putty, P.P.S.M.S.O. is prepared to extort from Scripture what he cannot find in Scripture by honest means. Hence, the iron-fisted recourse of conciliar authority.
“Modern Evangelicalism in all its chaotic variety (including its modern ‘Reformed’ expressions) is the offspring of ecclesial anarchy.”
For this statement alone, P.P.S.M.S.O. richly deserves The Flying Fickle Finger of Fate award for his utterly fickle invocation ecclesiastical authority.
Remember who he is. He is a schismatic. He belongs to a breakaway denomination—an Anglo-Catholic splinter-group.
Watching P.P.S.M.S.O. play high churchman is like watching a little brother and sister play king and queen for a day. We’ve all seen this coronation ceremony, haven’t we?
Little sister Jill dons her mommy’s purple bathrobe and rhinestone jewelry, while brother Jack sprays a cardboard crown with gold paint. Jill crowns Jack, and they live happily ever after in their royal tree house.
Next time you see P.P.S.M.S.O. play prelate in his dime store vestments, remind him that the cardboard is showing through the spray paint.
No comments:
Post a Comment