***So, you are familiar with Gerry Matatics. I have seen him speak several times, and the man is highly impressive. What do you think when you see him, as a protestant? ***
Gerry went through the Westminster Seminary doctoral program in Reformation Studies (he left ABD) a few years after I completed the program. I certainly respect his knowledge and ability to defend his beliefs.
Despite the same academic training, he and I come to opposing convictions regarding the events and issues of the Reformation era. I respect him highly. Nevertheless, my convictions remain.
I also understand a bit of his frustration with some of the post Vatican II "innovations" (my term). Ultima ratio has done, IMO, a good job of voicing the theological implications of the new liturgy. I believe the Tridentine best fits the historic Catholic position.
This is why I said that if I became a Catholic (and I am not even close) I'd identify with the trads. The ecumenism of Vatican II reminds me too much of the ecumenicism that infected the Protestant denominations at the turn of the previous century. J. Gresham Machen (founder of Westminster Seminary) wrote Christianity and Liberalism in the 1920's and his concerns have relevance for the trad/V2 discussions raging today.
At least that is how THIS Proddy sees it.
BTW, I am far more impressed with Gerry Matatics than Scott Hahn. Gerry does a better job, IMO, of explaining Catholic convictions to Protestants.
I would have to agree with your assessments here (with the exception of your convictions regarding the protestant revolution, of course). The Catholic Church seems to have engaged in a process of, to quote Pope Paul VI (which does not happen often, thank heavens) "auto demolition".
That said, it is time I got some shuteye.
I would hate to have to spend extra time in purgatory for spending an inordinate amount of time on the computer (sorry, I just had to say it).
God Bless.