Posted on 05/06/2007 11:58:17 AM PDT by NYer
Most of the post centers on the tussle over ETS matters and leadership, (he has resigned from the presidency) but:
There is a conversation in ETS that must take place, a conversation about the relationship between Evangelicalism and what is called the “Great Tradition,” a tradition from which all Christians can trace their spiritual and ecclesiastical paternity. It is a conversation that I welcome, and it is one in which I hope to be a participant. But my presence as ETS president, I have concluded, diminishes the chances of this conversation occurring. It would merely exacerbate the disunity among Christians that needs to be remedied.
The past four months have moved quickly for me and my wife. As you probably know, my work in philosophy, ethics, and theology has always been Catholic friendly, but I would have never predicted that I would return to the Church, for there seemed to me too many theological and ecclesiastical issues that appeared insurmountable. However, in January, at the suggestion of a dear friend, I began reading the Early Church Fathers as well as some of the more sophisticated works on justification by Catholic authors. I became convinced that the Early Church is more Catholic than Protestant and that the Catholic view of justification, correctly understood, is biblically and historically defensible. Even though I also believe that the Reformed view is biblically and historically defensible, I think the Catholic view has more explanatory power to account for both all the biblical texts on justification as well as the church’s historical understanding of salvation prior to the Reformation all the way back to the ancient church of the first few centuries. Moreover, much of what I have taken for granted as a Protestant—e.g., the catholic creeds, the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation, the Christian understanding of man, and the canon of Scripture—is the result of a Church that made judgments about these matters and on which non-Catholics, including Evangelicals, have declared and grounded their Christian orthodoxy in a world hostile to it. Given these considerations, I thought it wise for me to err on the side of the Church with historical and theological continuity with the first generations of Christians that followed Christ’s Apostles.
(Comments are open over there, btw. Worth a visit to add your support, if you like!)
For the benefit of any and all visitors to this thread, here is a link to the ...
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic Ping List:
Please ping me to all note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of interest.
(P.S. How are you feeling these days? All recuperated?)
Sounds like a typical, ecumenical/evangelical squishy answer to me. I wonder how he explains away the anathemas, declared against these same Reformed "biblically and historically defensible" positions, by the Council of Trent?
Oh, I don’t know, he probably views bringing them up as changing of the subject. I know I do.
I’m the only “usual suspect” who’s posted to the thread so far. Please ping me next time, instead of referring to me in the third person.
Can you provide a reliable/authoritative link or reference to such?
You could ask him.
Amen! Says Beckwith...
"the Catholic view of justification, correctly understood, is biblically and historically defensible. Even though I also believe that the Reformed view is biblically and historically defensible..."
LOL. So both are right?!?
Nope. The RC view of justification is antithetical to Scripture and to the correct Reformed understanding as outlined in Scripture and here in Hebrews --
From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." -- Hebrews 10:12-14"But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;
If Beckwith gets the heart of Christianity wrong, he can't get much else right. He obviously prefers the yoke of Rome to the liberty of Christ.
Thus the rediscovery of the gospel brought a rediscovery of evangelism, the task of summoning non-believers to faith. Rome had said, God's grace is great, for through Christ's cross and his Church salvation is possible for all who will work and suffer for it; so come to church, and toil! But the Reformers said, God's grace is greater, for through Christ's cross and his Spirit salvation, full and free, with its unlimited guarantee of eternal joy, is given once and forever to all who believe; so come to Christ, and trust and take!...""...where Rome had taught a piecemeal salvation, to be gained by stages through working a sacramental treadmill, the Reformers now proclaimed a unitary salvation, to be received in its entirety here and now by self-abandoning faith in God's promise, and in the God and the Christ of that promise, as set forth in the pages of the Bible.
I suspect the same way the Mormons explain away the everlasting commandment to commit polygamy. It's there, but they pretend it isn't.
Seems like Rome changes so many things they could do a quick erase of these anathemas if they really wanted to.
But they don't want to. They like them on the books and still "in effect" for their own peculiar reasons.
I guess we'll just have to face being cursed by Rome for a while longer. 8~)
Oh the Humanity.
BTW if you are cursed with the prouncement of an "Anathema" can that be rescinded? Is Beckwith still under the Anathema?
Has Beckwith repented of his Grace alone Reformation theology? Or is he trying to eccumenicize and harmonize his Five Solas Reformed Protestant Theology with Roman tradition based works salvation theology?
I suspect it won't be long before Beckwith is branded a heretic by Rome.
CANON VIII.-If any one saith, that by the said sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred through the act performed, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices for the obtaining of grace; let him be anathema.
That would make me......
It wouldn't be the first time. 8~)
But "what communion hath light with darkness?"
"But all these things will they do unto you for my name's sake, because they know not him that sent me." -- John 15:21
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.