Thursday, March 26, 2009

Cutting oneself off from the True Vine

I'm not quite certain why, but I am experiencing a new found hope regarding the Catholic faith these days, the kerfuffel at Notre Dame to the contrary notwithstanding.

Perhaps it is best thematized by Bishop Olmsted in a single sentence from his letter to President Jenkins of the University of Notre Dame regarding his invitation to I Won: It is a public act of disobedience to the Bishops of the United States.

Coming from a non-Catholic background myself, I see the long term ramifications of such a disastrous decision on the part of President Jenkins, though, apparently, he does not, being an impatient modern fellow who does not bother his head with Eric Voegelin's warning not to "immanentize the eschaton."

For, firstly, this was and continues to be the heresy par excellence of the Enlightenment project, from the French Revolution through the disasters of the 20th century, and on to the trite mayhem we are experiencing only leading edges of which were heralded in the pagan slogan, "Yes We Can."

But, secondly, Bishop Olmsted is doing more than stating the indicative. He is proclaiming a dread warning to Jenkins: Cut yourself off from the True Vine at your peril. Mainline Protestantism no less than the vast remains of Christendom are withering and becoming dry tinder ripe for the conflagration that Our Lord warns of in John 15.

Even so great an institution as the University of Notre Dame can be so short sighted if so great an institution as the Church in England can also cut herself off from the sole Church leading to the sad, dreadful affair the Anglican communion has become.

I, for one, would hate to see the Golden Dome become a relic of what it once was.

1 comment:

David Nybakke said...

Excuse my lack of knowledge regarding the determination to uphold USCCB's position on key Catholic teachings, but maybe one reason for your "new found hope regarding the Catholic faith" is the outcries coming, not only from the laity, but also bishops across the nation over such acts of disobedience to USCCB. Are we seeing a growing number who are naming acts that are in disobedience to USCCB positions and taking a public stand to condemn such acts?

Fr Barron review of "O's" book said something interesting when he commented that "O" recognized the difference between people who took an absolute stance on issues of truth - not compromising nor dialoging. And then, on issues which we struggle over, people demonstrate acts of dialogue leading to resolution.

Fr Barron acknowledged that there are issues where we can use dialogue to bridge our differences and come to resolutions, however there are truths that simply cannot be swept over - that must be seen and ways developed to align ourselves to them.

I believe that what we have seen from "O" is some inexcusable gullibility where he thinks we can have it both ways - resolution through dialogue regardless of and relativizing truth. (Fr Barron, does "O" deny what he knows to be true?)

It seems today we are having to deal more often, and especially in public venues, with the same question Pontius Pilate asked, What is Truth?

I hope that we are in a time where we are seeing more and more stand up and pronounce, Truth is Christ.