Thursday, April 05, 2007

simul haereticus et anglicanus

If you'd like to mortify your intellect during these last days of Lent, go to Stand Firm and read the most unedifying and pointless post I've ever seen there: David Ould's anti-catholic polemic masquerading as a soliloquy on justification by faith.

For fun, count the synonyms for "poop" in the post and the ensuing comments. Its probably the most instructive engagement you could have with this little essay.


Anonymous said...

Thank you Fr. WB. After reading that post on Stand Firm I've decided I'm no longer reading stand firm.
- Fr. Ken L.

Father Nelson said...

Me too...

I'm done with that junk. It just makes me angry.

Father Houk's Protestant Wife (or so he says...) said...

Father WB, Good show, my man, over there at Stand Firm. Clear and intelligent and gentle and honest. Perhaps you are the man to represent the AC side in presenting some articles there? Though I'm not sure I'd wish on you another p----match with Ould. Be encouraged, not all protestants are so obnoxious! Anyway, may our Lord bless you as you minister through these Holy Days.

Jody+ said...

Just wanted to say I appreciated your comments. Not something I want to spend my time during Holy Week on.

God bless and be encouraged

Anonymous said...

Fr. WB, just like to second the comment that you'd make an excellent addition to the SF team since I'm hearing they are seriously wanting to have a columnist from the Anglo-Catholic side of the spectrum.

Although I'm more reformed than catholic in my theology, I was disappointed in David Ould's post as well. Not SF at its best, though what I skimmed of many of the comments seemed actually fairly decent in terms of real engagement... a case of the comments being better than the original post, as sometimes happens.

--Karen B.

father wb said...

Karen, MSH, et alia,

Stand Firm (like T-19) has become a critical tool for the Anglcan orthodox in North America. The most frustrating thing about Ould's post, to me, was that it unnecessarily drove a wedge between evangelical and catholic Anglicans. Perhaps we'll have to address these issues at some point to maintain Anglican unity, but let's cross that bridge when we get to it. And what was Mr. Ould's point? The rhetorical foil of his essay seemed calculated to offend: the canonization of the holiest man in the presence of whom I've ever been priveleged to be (second place, in my world, goes to Thomas Keating -- that man too was ready to meet the Lord, and I could FEEL it).

Anyway, I would happily pray over and consider writing for SF if the Powers That Be would entertain the notion, or invite me.