The actual content of Jason’s thread is concise, accurate, and presented in a charitable, non-controversial, manner.
Yes, that would be typical of Jason. Jason is a Christian gentleman, which makes him twice the man I am.
However, if Waltz truly thinks that a charitable, non-controversial manner is a virtue, then he’s in the wrong denomination since Catholicism has a long history of controversialists, not to mention a decidedly uncharitable treatment towards dissenters.
So why doesn’t Waltz join an Amish community?
As I reflect upon the material, I am left asking myself the question: “where does all this lead”?
It leads to the real world. You know, the world that God chose to make.
Questions concerning interpretation, development of doctrine, eccesiology, schism, church discipline, et al., are racing through my thoughts…
But God chose to make a world in which schism occurs, even though it lay within his power to make a world in which schism does not occur. For example, he could choose not to create schismatics. They would never be born. Never be conceived. Or he could strike them dead in the crib. So schism must serve a purpose in the providence of God.
And what about church discipline? Did the Catholic church discipline predatory priests who molest underage children? Did the Catholic church discipline bishops who were complicit in the priestly abuse scandal?
If it hadn’t been for the media, and lawsuits, and prosecutors, would there have been any accountability whatsoever?
Does the Catholic church discipline high profile Catholic politicians who promote abortion or stem cell research? How many of them have been excommunicated?
If Waltz truly believes that church disciple is a virtue (or even a mark of the true church), then he belongs in the wrong denomination.
If one jettisons the possibility that there exists an infallibility teaching authority instituted by Jesus Christ and His apostles to guide His Church through the perils of heresy and schism, what is left?
I don’t think anyone jettisons that “possibility.”
I also don’t jettison the possibility that Martians are living in subterranean cities beneath the barren surface of the red planet. It’s possible that they’re hiding from us. That’s why we can’t find them.
Here’s another possibility: once upon a time, a wicked witch cast a spell on a handsome young prince, turning him into a loathsome toad. He labored under that accursed condition until, one day, a beautiful princess broke the spell by kissing him on the lips. They lived happily ever after in a marble place, surrounded by swans and puppy dogs and butterflies.
Here’s another possibility: once upon a time an evil stepmother was envious of her beautiful stepdaughter. So she locked her stepdaughter in a tower, and posted a man-eating ogre to guard the tower. Then, one day, as a knight in shining armor was riding by the tower, he heard her piteous pleas. He slew the ogre and rescued the fair damsel. They lived happily ever after in a marble palace, surrounded by fawns and bunny rabbits and nightingales.
Here’s another possibility: once upon a time there was one true church on earth. Everybody belonged to the one true church. Every member of the one true church agreed with every other member of the one true church. The angel Gabriel appeared to every member of the one true church and catechized them in the one true faith of the one true church. Heresy and schism were unheard of. Church discipline was swift and effectual. And they all lived happily ever after.
What’s left? What’s left is the real world. The real church.
How did God guide Abraham’s servant to find a wife for Isaac? (cf. Gen 24). Did Abraham consult the infallible teaching office of the church? Or did God silently guide Abraham’s servant through the providential orchestration of opportune circumstances?
Are we to attempt to identify qualified, authoritative “teachers” to assist our private interpretation/s? If so, how does one come to know that they speak the truth?
As a convert to Catholicism, didn’t David Waltz have to identify qualified, authoritative teachers? If so, how he did he come to know that they spoke the truth? Can he use the Magisterium to test the Magisterium?
If one replies, “we test them by the Scriptures”, does this not raise the question: “if I can discern whether or not their teachings conform to God’s Word, why do I need them
Simple: you evaluate which commentator makes a better case for his interpretation. This is something we do all the time in other walks of life.
Once more, “where does all this lead”?
It leads us out of ecclesiastical fairy tales and back into the real church of the real world.