Bryan Cross is the gift that keeps on giving:
. . . the term ‘conservative Catholic’ is a misleading and inaccurate term, because it imports a political concept into a theological realm, as though it is just as permissible to be a “liberal Catholic” as a “conservative Catholic.” In actuality, there are those Catholics who “believe and profess all that the holy Catholic Church believes, teaches and proclaims to be revealed by God,” and those who don’t. The former are orthodox Catholics, and the latter are either material or formal heretics. This is why you won’t find the term “conservative Catholic” in the Catechism or any other Church document. Of course there is a sense in which an orthodox Catholic is conserving the faith handed down from the Apostles. But that’s not the primary connotation of the term “conservative Catholic.” The term is derived from politics, and when applied to the Catholic Church, it implicitly connotes theological relativism, which is part of the heresy of modernism.
(funny how when you apply such literalism to the Catechism on the doctrine/discipline difference, you find nothing)
Bryan continuuuuuuues:
we Catholics are in the same Church that Christ founded and which was born on Pentecost, under the same magisterium that has extended down unbroken from the Apostles, using the same canon used by the Church for her first 1500 years, and affirming the same Apostolic Tradition that all the Catholics before us have lived and died upholding. You, however, are on the outside, not even having a bishop, something that no Christian could have imagined for the first fifteen hundred years of Church history, and yet you deign to tell us that our standard of authority has no clear precedent in the early Church? We are the same Church that held the Nicene Council in AD 325, where three hundred and eighteen bishops were present. We are the Church of St. Justin Martyr, of St. Athanasius, of St. Irenaeus, St. Cyril, St. Chryostom and St. Augustine. St. Paul wrote his letter (Romans) to our principal Church, and his bones, as well as those of St. Peter, are buried in Rome, St. Peter’s being under the high altar of St. Peter’s Basilica. You have no Apostolic letters written to your congregation in Texas, or your PCA denomination founded in 1973. You have no bones of the Apostles. You have not a single bishop and no priests, because Protestantism abandoned apostolic succession four hundred and ninety three years ago. And this is why you have no Eucharist, by which agape is nourished in the soul.
And yet, such certainty may trouble other Roman Catholics:
“Students at some small Catholic colleges are being taught to feel that as Catholics living in America they are members of an alienated, aggrieved, morally superior minority,” says John Zmirak, who was writer-inresidence at Thomas More College in Merrimack, New Hampshire until resigning in 2012. “They are learning that they owe no loyalty to our institutions, but should be working to replace them with an aggressive, intolerant Catholic regime. In other words, they are being taught to think and act like radical Muslims living in France.” (Rod Dreher, “Benedict Option,” American Conservative, Nov/Dec 2013)
One other point, Bryan made this claim about the people in his communion:
I’m much more concerned that they are true. As the latest Pew study shows, if you want to know the truth about the Catholic Church, it is not a good idea to ask the average Catholic, since so many have been so poorly catechized. So, your method of determining what is the truth about what the Catholic Church believes and teaches, is flawed, because you are drawing from people who are not sufficiently catechized.
He did write this before the recent Vatican questionnaire distributed to the well and poorly catechized, but I do wonder if Bryan’s certainty could explain the meaning of this survey for the those who are confused:
Nearly a week after news that the Vatican has asked for the world’s bishops to distribute among Catholics a questionnaire on issues like contraception, same-sex marriage and divorce “immediately” and “as widely as possible,” there is no consensus on what that direction means.
Moreover, comparing notes from recent Vatican statements, it is hard to decipher whether the call for consultation is unprecedented or something that’s happened for decades.The Vatican’s chief spokesman said in an interview over the weekend that the Vatican’s request for the world’s bishops to survey Catholics on how certain topics affect their lives was part of a habitual “praxis.”
Yet the official who sent the questionnaire said Tuesday it is part of a wide-ranging project to reform how the Vatican reaches out to bishops and faithful around the world.
The questionnaire was sent Oct. 18 by the Vatican’s Synod of Bishops, which is preparing a global meeting of prelates for next October. Called by Pope Francis last month, the Oct. 5-19, 2014, meeting is to focus on the theme “Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of Evangelization.”
Old Life 
Bryan – . The former are orthodox Catholics, and the latter are either material or formal heretics.
Erik – Somehow that seems way less charitable than what Vatican II and Pope Francis have said.
LikeLike
The smugness of it all… Interesting interchange, revolving around the “smug word” over at Green Baggins, between Reed Here and J. Stellman. [ comments 106-107]
Jason:
FWIW, until you can find a way to consider the phenomenon of sincere believers sometimes leaving your ranks in terms other than insidious and treasonous betrayals of Jesus, you’ll just continue to sound smug and condescending to everyone outside your circle.
Reed –
Sometimes we do indeed sound smug and condescending. But that is not because we find those who leave the faith such as yourself treasonous. It is because we do not offer such conviction with the consistency of love that Jesus speaks with, who also calls your apostasy treasonous.
Our failures are fleshly. Yours, at least in terms of our understanding of the gospel, are mortal. I recognize you disagree. it is not smug to admit so and expect you to respect it when commenting here.
I’ll accept the criticism when I offer a fleshly failure. I must deny it when the smugness accusation comes on the basis of doctrine. In this case I demure your accusation, and put up with the sadly false judgment of those who hear what they want to hear.
http://greenbaggins.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/sjc-answers-the-overtures-in-the-negative/#comment-112063
LikeLike
You all might want to read Hart’s Reformed hero on this topic— Conservatism and Orthodoxy, False and True Preservation, Abraham Kuyper, A Centennial Reader, 1998
ww.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=articledisplay&var1=ArtRead&var2=1349&var3=authorbio&var4=AutRes&var5=1
LikeLike
above, one more w
is being “conservative” triumphalism?
or an act of despair?
it could always be worse?
The fundamentalists confuse being anti-modernist with being orthodox
http://www.kuyperian.com/abraham-kuyper-and-the-secularization-of-society/
LikeLike
Erik, this is why Bryan needs to get right with SSPX.
LikeLike
If it’s not the CtC zeal of the “one-true-church” led by Peter’s line of lieutenants as the unassailable “way of salvation” it’s the maze of doctrinal/discipline fine print that effectively buries the truth of simple saving faith taught throughout Scripture – to receive and rest upon Christ alone for salvation, as he is offered to us in the gospel. Of course that got anathematized at Trent…
LikeLike
Darryl,
You seem to be implying that there is some contradiction between what I said about the poor state of catechesis, and the Vatican survey. However, my statement was not a statement about the sensus fidelium of the Church universal, but about the state of catechesis in the US. I would have been glad to tell you that, if you had just asked.
In the peace of Christ,
– Bryan
LikeLike
Maybe instead of a survey they should try a suggestion box.
LikeLike
I’m pretty sure that the claims made in the quotes above would be disputed by the Eastern Orthodox Church… The Lutheran and Reformed can’t say “Papist” with as much disdain as I’ve heard the Orthodox muster.
LikeLike
Bryan, the point (you mean you don’t get it after all those years as a Protestant) is that you are out of touch even with the magisterium. You think the people simply need to follow the teaching of the hierarchy. Turns out the current hierarchy is asking the laity what they think (and the hierarchy isn’t so sure what their query means). In other words, where you see certainty and stability, you’re average observer doesn’t.
LikeLike
Darryl,
You seem to think that obedience to the magisterium is somehow incompatible with asking the laity what they think. But those two things are fully compatible. So your criticism is based on a false assumption. (And your ad hominem about me is just that, an ad hominem.)
This conclusion does not follow from your previous statements.
In the peace of Christ,
– Bryan
LikeLike
Bryan,
You seem to think that obedience to the magisterium is somehow incompatible with asking the laity what they think.
Maybe not post V2. Of course, the Magisterium didn’t care much about what the laity thought during the Reformation, otherwise they might have embraced Luther.
LikeLike
More Bryan parsing language and dialogue as if it were a math equation. Some people think that’s smart, others of us reflect that it has all the perception of an automaton. More sinisterly it may reflect a lack of honesty guised as religious fealty. It’s really not that difficult to grasp the dilemma; the vatican spokesperson says it’s habitual praxis, the official who sent the questionnaire claims it’s part of a wide ranging project to REFORM HOW the Vatican reaches out to bishops and faithful around the world. I don’t believe Bryan’s an idiot, so there’s one option of the table.
LikeLike
So there you have it, boys ‘n girls.
If the infallible pope reaches out in any kind of conciliatory or gasp, conciliar way to the laity, it can’t be in contradiction to the supremacy of the pope. Thus saith Bryan (Ex cathedra or inna comboxa?)
It’s only to determine in what fashion said laity doesn’t understand
igneruntimplicit faith, much more that the pope’s pronouncements rilly are infallible. We (the management) are jus’ checkin’ in uther words.(Admit it, you knew there was a reason you came over here from CtC, if only to determine what Francis was up to before
Bryan flat out told you something to the complete contraryFrancis spilled the beans and called Vat. 3. Hint, it’s that extra ontologicalarrogancefullness that being an ex prot gives one in these circumstances. If you post enough adulatory comments at CtC we might allow the charism to pass on, but don’t count on it.You’re welcome.
tata for now)
LikeLike
It’s interesting to me that 60% or so of today’s American Roman Catholics would be either “material or formal heretics” according to Bryan. (When word gets out he may not get any speaking engagements!) May we conclude then, based on that evidence that the magical mystical Magisterium has failed the Holy Spirit in its teaching mission? How shall we keep these heretics from the Mass or does Bryan acquiesce in their attendance?
Maybe having “the bones” will suffice.
Thank you, Dr. Hart!
LikeLike
@Paul
It is much much higher than that. There is a joke in Catholicism “the heretical 98%” over the issue of contraception. 98% of adult Catholics believe the hierarchy has erred on a major matter of faith and morals. That’s not saying they agree with the church but aren’t able to keep the discipline that’s the percentage that believe the church to be in error on the issue which means they reject the infallibility of the magisterium. They don’t reject the infallibility of the church, what they do reject is the ability of the hierarchy to speak for the church. That is on the major theological issue differentiating Western Rite (Roman Catholics) from the Easter Rite (Orthodox) there essentially is a consensus in favor of the Eastern position.
LikeLike
Bryan, but if the laity consists of heretics and false Roman Catholics as you admit, why are the bishops asking their opinion?
More important, why do you have a view of the church that does not match reality?
LikeLike
sean, we do have an important tell. If Bryan isn’t including links to his posts, he’s in trouble.
LikeLike
Darryl,
I never said that “the laity consists of heretics,” nor does anything I said entail this. As I explained just above, there is a difference between the sensus fidelium of the Church universal and the state of catechesis in the US.
Of course that’s a loaded question (e.g. when did you stop beating your wife?). First you would need to establish that my view of the church does not match reality.
In the peace of Christ,
– Bryan
LikeLike
More Bryan parsing language so as to argue material difference between polling insufficiently catechized laity and engaging the laity in sensus fidelium. Big difference between a pew poll and a Vatican questionnaire in service of a bishop’s conference to be used in further EXPLAINING the deposit. That the VATICAN is not completely clear of the intent and finality quite frankly points to the difficulty of such distinctions except apparently in Bryan’s mind, and again points to the rather impossible distinctions that Bryan wants to continue to make in his dialogue and render judgements on others grasp of his statements such as; “nor does ANYTHING I said entail this” and then illegitimately take cover behind an less than precisely defined distinction, particularly in this case, as if it’s clear as day to someone adequately catechized and formally orthodox in their paradigmatic considerations. B.S. And if he doesn’t know it, then it may be worse than if he knows he’s trying to split hairs that the Vatican, much less the bishops, aren’t exactly sure how to interpret. They need to just call Bryan apparently, he’s got the charism on speed dial.
LikeLike
“And this is why you have no Eucharist, by which agape is nourished in the soul.”
Traditionalists could use the same language to describe those that go to the Novus Ordo Mass. They in fact say that the Novus Ordo is worse than a Protestant service, since you end up worshiping a piece of bread.
Of course, whether one has a valid eucharist or not, does not matter too much to some recent Popes.
“Even a theology along the lines of the concept of [apostolic] succession, as is in force in the Catholic and in the Orthodox Church, should in no way deny the saving presence of the Lord in the Evangelical Lord’s Supper” – Ratzinger [Pilgrim Fellowship of Faith, 2002].
“What does it mean to restore the unity of all Christians?… this unity does not mean what could be called ecumenism of the return” – Ratzinger [Address to Protestants, 2005].
I think the Pope is a more Orthodox Catholic than any CTCer ever would be. I hope this does not mean CTCers become material heretics due to this.
LikeLike
Bryan – which is part of the heresy of modernism
Erik – Modernism is still heresy after Vatican II? I thought Vatican II was all about opening up the church and spraying some modernist air freshener?
LikeLike
Bryan – You, however, are on the outside, not even having a bishop
Erik – Maybe we can get this guy, but I hear he’s not cheap:
LikeLike
Maybe when Francis visited Franz-Peter he could have stayed in the garden shed.
LikeLike
The wives of all of the Callers have not converted. Is their failure to convert met with accusations of “ad hominem” and “hand waving”? If so, how are those Callers enjoying sleeping alone? The assumption that any rejection of Catholic teaching must be motivated by bad faith reveals a lot about the arrogance of these recent converts who presume to be teachers.
LikeLike
Would Bryan take the same pot shots at Eastern Orthodox believers as he takes at Presbyterian & Reformed? They would tell him to stick his antiquity where the sun don’t shine.
LikeLike