Horton is advocating confessional maximalism. He still believes not just the broad outlines (from some perspective or other) of the faith confessed by the Reformed churches but he actually believes the stuff between the first article and the last.
http://heidelblog.wordpress.com/2009/10/22/frame-horton-triperspectivalism-subjectivism/
Among the jacket blurbs for Roman Catholic scholar Scott Hahn’s new Covenant and Communion: The Biblical Theology of Pope Benedict XVI are endorsements from respected conservative Protestant Biblical Theologians Kevin Vanhoozer, Tremper Longman, and Hans Boersma offer tantalizing endorsements.
Even Michael Horton is in on the action:
“Even when one disagrees with some of his conclusions, Benedict’s insights, as well as his engagement with critical scholarship, offer a wealth of reflection. In this remarkable book, Hahn has drawn out the central themes of Benedict’s teaching in a highly readable summary. An eminently useful guide for introducing the thought of an important theologian of our time.” Michael Horton, Westminster Seminary California.
http://deregnochristi.org/2009/11/12/michael-horton-blurbing-scott-hahn/
The false church assigns more authority to itself and its ordinances than to the Word of God. It does not want to submit itself to the yoke of Christ.15 It does not administer the sacraments as Christ commanded in His Word, but adds to them and subtracts from them as it pleases. It bases itself more on men than on Jesus Christ. It persecutes those who live holy lives according to the Word of God and who rebuke the false church for its sins, greed, and idolatries.
http://wscal.edu/about/missionandcommitments/belgicconfession.php
The Lord’s Supper testifies to us, that we have complete forgiveness of all our sins by the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which He Himself has once accomplished on the cross;1 and that by the Holy Spirit we are grafted into Christ,2 who with His true body is now in heaven at the right hand of the Father,3 and is to be worshipped there4. But the Mass teaches, that the living and the dead do not have forgiveness of sins through the sufferings of Christ, unless Christ He is still daily offered for them by the priests; and that Christ is bodily present under the form of bread and wine, and is therefore to be worshipped in them. Therefore, the Mass is basically nothing but a denial of the one sacrifice and passion of Jesus Christ, and an accursed idolatry.
http://wscal.edu/about/missionandcommitments/heidelbergcatechism.php
I'm not going to read a book of "theology" written by the bishop of Rome, but I wonder if Horton is doing the same thing as Paul did on Mars Hill; i.e., the old saw that even a broken clock is right twice a day?
ReplyDeleteIf not, this will be another thing I disagree with Horton on (besides his railing on about the alleged evils of the Reconstruction movement).
But as for the quote from the WSC faith statement below, you a) don't know that Horton wrote it, and b) from the context it appears to simply be a statement as to the level of strict subscriptionism that the school requires. Nothing more.
Steve, thanks for pointing this out. I would very much like to see someone like Scott Clark explain Horton's endorsement of this book as "confessional maximalism." As you know, I have a great deal of respect for Clark, Horton, and WSC. And I am deeply disappointed by this.
ReplyDeleteIt appears as if Horton is only recommending the book as a good overview of Benedict/Ratzinger's thinking. And the only reason I can see him doing that is for the purpose of maybe "opening a dialog" of some kind.
This is very dangerous, as recent history is ladened with the dead (or zombified) bodies of Protestants who have tried to "dialogue" with Rome, only to find themselves formally and officially addressed as "not real churches":
"According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense."
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_responsa-quaestiones_en.html
Sorry for all the double posts. This is the second link I intended to post.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070629_commento-responsa_en.html
We should always seek to be careful with blurbs. I have seen many quotes ripped from their original context to suit the purposes of the editor. Do you have links to the original reviews, or material these quotes were pulled from?
ReplyDeleteThanks,
The Thinking Carnie
Steve,
ReplyDeleteHave you seen VanDrunen's article in Themelios?
http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/publications/34-3/bearing-sword-in-the-state-turning-cheek-in-the-church
I didn't know if you wanted to respond given that you've dealt with 2K stuff in the past.
S&S,
ReplyDeleteI'm aware of it. That's on the back burner at the moment.
I don't see how an endorsement of a survey of Ratzinger's theology constitutes a contradiction of confessional maximalism.
ReplyDeleteHad Horton said that Ratzinger was right in his Romanism or had Horton endorsed Romanist views, that would be another thing but to say that one Romanist scholar describes the theology of another (rather more important Romanist scholar) accurately is hardly a contradiction of one's confessional subscription.
On this logic one would have to not read books about Roman theology.
The problem is pretty obvious: Horton is a high-profile popularizer of Reformed theology who is plugging, and thereby promoting, a book by the most popular Catholic apologist of the day who's not merely summarizing the current pope's theology, but making a case for it in the process.
ReplyDeleteIf Frame did the same thing, you'd be all over his case.
In addition, if folks really want to understand Benedict's theology, why not simply read his stuff? He's actually a pretty good communicator. Knows how to express himself with a nice turn of phrase (even in translation).
Clark and Horton being naive regarding the devil's kingdom and the spiritual battle that is taking place have no discernment for how they can be used by the devil and his followers such as the rather odious Scott Hahn. Being obsequious to Ratzinger is bad enough (that academic respecting of persons that goes on in their, again, naive circles), but Hahn is an active soldier for the darkness that Romanism is; street level and take no prisoners, in his passive-aggressive way. That Horton would play into his hands so naively does not surprise me. Neither does Clark's predictable defense.
ReplyDelete