Thursday, January 04, 2007

an interesting comparison

Fr Cantrell has posted a trenchant little comparison between the Old Religion (Christianity), as represented by Fr Louis Bouer's book Liturgical Piety, and the New Religion (ECUSA), as represented by ++++++Jefforts-Schori. One of the things I find so intensely irritating about the New Religion is how jargony it is: MDG's, reconciliation, shalom, the Reign of God, etc.

Here's a snippet from Fr Bouyer's book:

We do not, therefore, get to the heart either of the problems of the world or of the task of Christianity until we seriously face the problem of sin and accept, not the way of some illusory reconciliation with the world, but the way of conflict which is the way of voluntary death in and with Christ.

No doubt, you see the contrast. Christianity has ever been a religion of ascetic struggle for its devotees. That's totally left out of the New Religion... and its having been left out is a damnable error for which we will be held accountable.


Christopher+ said...

Why Fr. W. Thanks for noticing. The entire final chapter of Fr. Bouyer's book is phenomenally on point!

The Anglican Scotist said...

Interesting, but....
Once you've faced up to sin, then what? Suppose, say, I realize my righteousness is just so much used toilet paper in God's eyes. It's not as if I will cease to be a creature of sin for having become a creature of grace--indeed, it's grace that teaches one how to fear.

What then? Surely I don't keep selling slaves, so to speak. And when I stop and put the slave-selling behind me, well, I can say I've acted under the rulership of God, even if the Kingdom has not exactly come to fruition.

Why not view the MDG/Ephesians talk that way? Even: Schori as a fainter Laud (going by the old Trever-Roper reading of the latter)?