State of the Blog | Latin Mass
Since I’ve been absent for a long while, I figure that a short explanation and a list of the priorities for this month are in order. But, first and foremost, I wanted to let everyone know that I am back, and hopefully for good this time! It’s been fun catching up on the conversations that I’ve missed these past few weeks by not having Internet access, and I’m ready to dive headlong back into the fold of the blogosphere.
I also wanted to thank everyone who kept faithful to the blog; by the third week I didn’t really expect any readership, but I see I’m still in the teens on my hits-per-day chart. That’s a very positive sign, and I thank God as well for leading readers to His truth presented here.
State of the Blog
At the present, I’m reading the actual book The Jesus Family Tomb by Simcha Jacobovici and Charles Pellegrino. I will be taking careful notes and doing additional research as needed to expand the three blog articles I wrote already on the Jesus Family Tomb { 1 | 2 | 3 }. By the end of next month, I hope to have enough material for a book. Given the controversy is old news and my lack of scholarly credentials, I will probably not try to sell the book to a major publisher or enlist an agent, but instead I’ll try to use a low or no cost self-publishing company to market the book.
After a few months, I’ll publish the text online, under my Articles tab.
As for articles, I noticed that Mike over at Geocreationism.com has published a few things that I just have to address (most specifically this). I think I’ll write a series of articles, but that probably depends on how much material I end up getting. A series of articles has been the SOP for me in response to a particular website in the past.
I’m also going to do a small reorganization of the articles tab, grouping the articles by subject. I’m also going to mess around with the Debate tab, and modify the one and only debate that I have there into an easier format to read.
I’m also going to switch my feed to something that is more easily tracked, if I can. WordPress has a few quirks to it that make it difficult at times for serious blogging.
You know, I think that Mike and Brian are the closest people I have to “blogging buddies.” All three of us have such divergent ideas about the natural world. I’m the conservative theologian, Mike is the guy who tries to reconcile science and Scripture, and Brian is the guy who has given up Scripture in favor of science. And yet, despite our differences, I get along with both of these guys. Brian’s blog helps me learn about evolution: the enemy, the opposition, the Great Lie (as some call it). Mike shows me what happens when you try to compromise Scripture. I learn much by interacting with these two. Mike would agree that it is the will of God that brought us in contact. Brian not so much.
Thank you both for your blogs. I only pray that both of you have gained something by reading my blog.
Next on my plate for articles is to do some book reviews. With my first child (daughter probably, but we can’t tell on the ultrasound for sure) on the way in the first part of October, I don’t have a lot of money. Therefore, I will have to stick to best sellers (since I know that the library will have a copy). That only makes sense anyway, since those are the ones that will cause the most trouble anyway. I’m going to start with this gem, and I might do this one next, but I’ll keep my eyes open for a substitute since the library doesn’t seem to be carrying it.
By request, I’m going to try to fit an article on open theism into my schedule. Some new questions have come up by a reader, and I want to research it more carefully before I make a pronouncement.
I see nothing wrong with open theism as a philosophy, but as a theology it falls short when it comes to the issue of Exhaustive Divine Foreknowledge (EDF). In most cases, open theistic principles deny God EDF (since if we are truly morally free to do as we please, our actions cannot be known ahead of time) and that leads to serious problems when interacting with texts like Genesis 50:20 (see also here) and any prophecy of the Bible.
Latin Mass
It seems that Pope Benedict XVI is going to reintroduce the Latin Mass despite protests from upper-echelon clergy and Jewish community leaders. The Tridentine Rite–the Latin Mass from the sixteenth century, contains antisemitic phrases.
I’ve read a few articles about this document that will be released late this week or early next week, and the news media likes to accuse the Mass of antisemitism. The article that I link to actually explains what is considered antisemitic in the Mass, and I have to say that I am absolutely appalled by it. The Mass says:
. . . Jews live in “blindness” and “darkness”, and pray “the Lord our God may take the veil from their hearts and that they also may acknowledge our Lord Jesus Christ”.
How, exactly, is this antisemitic? It appears as though the Catholic Church is now heading more and more toward ecumenism. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it becomes a very bad thing when one must sacrifice God’s truth in order to achieve it.
Jesus Christ Himself said “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except by Me” (Jn 14:6, emphasis added). No words have been minced, and there is nothing unclear about this passage. Jesus said He was the way, the truth, and the life–not a way, a truth, and a life. Jesus isn’t one path of many to God, He is the one and only path.
The text of the Mass isn’t denigrating Jews, it is proclaiming the truth of God’s Word: those opposed to Jesus are enemies of God (Mat 12:30, see also Jms 4:4 ). The text of the Mass is asking for the Jews to come to realize the truth and fullness of God’s revelation in Jesus.
Objective truth is taking a backseat, once again, to the rights of the individual to believe as he or she so chooses. Here in the US, we who believe in objective truth are increasingly being treated as outcasts. Those of us who dare proclaim the Word of God from the Bible are ridiculed and scorned. This is yet more evidence of it. The Catholic isn’t allowed to pray a prayer in a public service that infringes on someone’s religion.
James White had a similar piece, in which he responded to a reader who said that apologists like White should spend more time refuting cultists rather than arguing theology with fellow scholars. I have to agree with Dr. White:
If I demand that God’s Word be held as the highest standard, and that stringent rules of consistent exegesis be applied in responding to the claims of others, I cannot “give a pass” to my brethren who refuse to apply such stringent standards to themselves, and I must apply them to my own teaching and preaching as well.
It seems as if the Catholic higher-ups are once again looking at ideas invented by man–freedom of religion–to set the standards. The apologist like myself, then, must do as Dr. White does: call them out on it, with the Word of God as the highest standard. Rather than looking at this prayer as a sincere request for the Jews to embrace God’s truth, they are more concerned that it makes the Church appear to hate Jews by impinging on the Jewish person’s individual right to believe in a religion of his or her choosing.
I doubt that God will gloss over that at Judgment Day. The Catholics are embracing the values of the world, which is enmity with God (Jms 4:4). They aren’t gathering souls to Jesus; they are scattering (Mat 12:30). Mind you, these protests come from cardinals–allegedly the most learned of Bible scholars within the Church! If I, a Protestant layman with no formal theological training, can figure this out, surely they can, too!
Whatever happened to the Great Commission, Catholics?
>>You know, I think that Mike and Brian are the closest people I have to “blogging buddies.”
>> Mike shows me what happens when you try to compromise Scripture.
This made a laugh. I really hope it’s misworded. At least in my own mind, I try **not** to compromise scripture, though reviews on my success have been mixed.
>>Mike would agree that it is the will of God that brought us in contact.
I do agree.
>>Thank you both for your blogs. I only pray that both of you have gained something by reading my blog.
Thank you, too. One of the things I think you are showing me is how I can effectively dialog with non-believers without offending or being offended, and without distancing myself from God, as I tend to do when I debate with non-believers (I can debate with Christians and know we both want God’s truth, but debating with non-believers makes me feel bad inside). As for who ends up teaching who about Creation, I think only God knows that for now, but my mind is open (I sometimes write in a manner that sounds more stubborn than I am).
Would you mind posting on my blog when there is something applicable to read on yours? No pressure. I’ll probably be watching your blog regardless.
My prayers are with you.
Mike
Cory, thank you for the link and the mention (although I’m not entirely sure about how I feel being branded “the enemy, the opposition” in support of “the Great Lie,” hah). Just to make things clear, I am skeptical about many things in the Bible, but I was not driven to my skepticism by science; I simply do not see or feel the presence of God in the world or in my life, and what I am learning/observing in nature is not consistent with the Bible (although it should be if creationism is correct). You are right that you, Mike, and I represent different points on the spectrum, and while you may read what I have to say from a primarily tactical perspective, I hope you are able to learn something about nature from my writing as well. Regardless of how you believe extant life came to be, there is a wonderful unity and diversity of life on the planet, and I find that more amazing that nearly anything else.
Anyhow, I’m glad that we can keep things on a vaguely-respectful level even though we disagree, and I wish you luck with your book (I have my own to work on as well).
I’m neither Jewish nor Catholic, so may be way off base here… but maybe it’s seen as antisemitic because it picks on them specifically, in the same way that the following passage might be seen as anti-Christian if it were included in Islamic ceremonies?
“Christians live in blindness and darkness. Pray the Lord our God may take the veil from their hearts and that they also may acknowledge our prophet Mohammed.”
That is anti-Christian because it picks on them specifically, rather than Baha’i, Buddhism, Candomblé, Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Paganism, Rastafari, Santeria, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, Unitarianism, Zoroastrianism, etc… or other branches of Christianity like Mormonism, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Protestantism, etc… or non-religions like atheism, agnosticism, etc… or things it really SHOULD pick on like Scientology (*ptui*)!
A rite which specifically picks on the single religion of Judaism can, yes, quite rightfully be called antisemitic: and to claim “the text of the Mass isn’t denigrating Jews” is simply dodging the issue: it is denigrating not Jews, but Judaism as a belief - unless you are using a different definition of “denigrate” than I.
It would be otherwise if all the other religions are similarly called out by name, but (I presume) they are not. Thus, this ritual is antisemitic.
But replace Jews with Scientologists, however, and I’m sure all religions will gladly sing the Pope’s praises… and pay towards his legal fees, too!
The difference between Christians and others in this instance is that we would “turn the other cheek” as Jesus taught. Therefore, a phrase like this in their service would then become acceptable.
I think, though you would probably disagree, the very fact that they are mentioned by name and we request that God work on their hearts shows nothing but the utmost respect for them as people. No, it sure doesn’t show respect for their belief system. Remember, however, that showing respect to a person’s belief system, and allowing them to believe complete error if they so choose to believe it, is a human ideal and is not biblical.
We are called to defend the truth of the Bible, not cave to the ideals of human invention.
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes!!!!
BTW, Cory, this isn’t a challenge but I would be very interested in hearing your interpretation of the hominid fossil record (i.e. Homo sapiens down through Proconsul). I know you’re busy and have quite a bit to work on with your book and all (and also I know you recently said that you’d rather focus on the salvation message rather than on geology/evolution/human origins), but I would be interested just to see how you interpret the fossil evidence for our ancient ancestry. I plan on reading the book Bones of Contention to get an idea of modern creationist thought on the subject, and if you’re really interested in the science of this issue I’d recommend the beautifully illustrated From Lucy to Language: Revised, Updated, and Expanded and Sawyer’s The Last Human.
Dear Cory,
In response to Dewi’s comments regarding anti-semitism. I would like to state that mainline Protestant Christianity hold this same view. Go out and spread the Good News to all men. Not go out and spread the Good News to all men, except Jews. Christianity is the fulfillment of the Old Testament Tradition. If this is true? Is not the statement “lift blindness” acurate? The real point that is missing in the discussion here is, that the Latin Mass is a movement of the Holy Spirit, glorifying the Savior. This glorification is the living out of the Gospel message found in John chapter 6.
“You must eat My flesh and drink My blood in order to have eternal life”.
Pete
P.S. Cory, I have been to the locality of your Polish ancestors “Tuchola” neat place. If you ever want rediscover your Christian faith make a pilgrimage to Poland. You will not be disapointed, I promise.
Cory,
The proper pronunciation of Tucholski is… Too hole ski the “c” is silent.
Pete
very interesting, but I don’t agree with you
Idetrorce