Robert Sungenis recently posted his review of Pope Benedict XVI's book Jesus of Nazareth (JON):
All in all I have been rather critical of JON, but I make no apologies since the material covered by JON deals with some of the most important issues in both theology and society today. There are a few other theological points I could delve into that I believe JON has mishandled. All I can say is, if JON wishes to perpetuate the idea that the Gospels contain mistakes and he promotes Protestant and Jewish theological ideas in place of Catholic tradition, then it forces us to show that he himself has erred. The only way JON can match the infallibility of the Scriptures is when JON speaks infallibly from his papal chair. Everything else, as JON said himself, is open to criticism. We can only pray that whether its Joseph Ratzinger or Pope Benedict XVI, neither will fall prey to the errors and heresies that are so prevalent today, especially regarding the place of the Jewish people in the plan of God.
If Robert keeps this sort of thing up, he's going to end up as a co-contributor either here or on Triablogue.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Related to this, I just came across a this (how i know not), which i find interesting. Considering how little has been infallibly defined, and how little of the Bible is not open to some interpretation, the often trumpeted surety of doctrine in Rome is misleading
I got a 404 error on your link.
Take off an exta "L" of of the file ending of .htmll .
Then it works.
Sorry. I only checked that it showed up as a link, but not whether it would "drive." http://www.preteristarchive.com/PartialPreterism/catholic-apologetics-international_03_ga_01.html
That noted apologists could contend for such things as
"The fact that circumcision was a punishment levied on Abraham for his dalliance with Hagar is easily established by studying the biblical text",
while RCs often convey that we need the Infallible Magisterium and its subsidiaries to protect us from the variant interpretations caused by Private Interpretation, is telling.
Both the things that RCs disagree on and what they can disagree on becomes increasingly evident, while i see the cause for most RCs remaining Catholics as having more to do with culture and an overriding confidence in the church (that allows great variance) to see them to glory, than conformity in doctrine.
Post a Comment