Magic Statistics

In my previous post, I mentioned Evangelicals and Catholics Together, and then I saw this item by Russell Moore at Mere Comments entitled "Evangelicals and Catholics Together … at the Abortion Clinic". Evangelicals and Catholics often stand together outside abortion clinics in protest against what's going on inside the clinic, but Mr Moore points out that there is a parallel alliance inside to enable the clinic's destructive work.

Mr Moore refers to a story on daily life at an Arkansas abortion clinic, which appears on the front page of this morning's New York Times. Many of the clinic's employees, as well as some of the women in the waiting room, come from Southern Baptist or Roman Catholic churches. They believe that what they are doing is sinful, and they say they feel badly about it, but they have found ways of going ahead regardless. Says a Baptist student: "In a way I feel I'm doing wrong, but you can be forgiven".

[C]linic operating room supervisor Ebony . . . too has had an abortion. "As a Baptist, she still considered abortion a sin, but so are a lot of things we all do, she said." The article closes with the Baptist's words to the Catholic undergoing the abortion: "No problem sweetie. We've all been there."

I find this both sad and shocking. These women are excusing each other's disregard for Christian teaching ("everyone makes mistakes", "we've all been there"), as well as presuming on God's benevolence, something even our Lord would not do. Moore suggests that the clinic is teaching a doctrine of grace that says, "Let us sin that grace may abound".

The challenge for the church is to preach and teach the full gospel message. The gospel message is about forgiveness and reconciliation, but it is also about holiness and self-sacrifice. Christ gives his people freedom, but that is freedom from sin—not freedom to sin with impunity. St Paul says our freedom is to be used in the service of others, not to indulge ourselves. These women should not be condemned, but they (and all of us) need to hear the whole counsel of God.

For, as Moore concludes, "[I]f we don't preach a biblical understanding of sin and grace, don't be deceived: the local abortion clinic operator is ready to take our place in the pulpit".

Last week I commented on an article by Paul Zahl, evangelical Anglican minister and Dean of Trinity Episcopal Divinity School, in which he defends the traditional Protestant view of justification against the Roman Catholic view. Dean Zahl wrote:

"They" believe in infusion, "we" believe in imputation. For the layman, this means "they" teach that we are OK when we become actually OK, while "we" teach that we are OK before we become actually OK.

Now Fr Al Kimel (aka "Pontificator"), a former Anglican pastor who converted to Roman Catholicism earlier this year, has responded to Zahl’s article, arguing that Zahl misunderstands what Roman Catholics believe and teach regarding justification.

Fr Kimel says that he used to agree with Dean Zahl’s position, but things have changed in more recent times:

Twenty years ago I would have sounded a hearty "Amen"; but today I read this statement and shake my head. Where has Dean Zahl been during the past two decades? After years of intense research and dialogue on the theme of justification, Lutherans and Catholics have discovered that the anathemas of the 16th century no longer obtain, given what each Church actually believes and teaches about justification. Catholic are now persuaded that Lutherans do not presently teach, and quite likely never did teach, the errors condemned by the Council of Trent—specifically, that justification is a legal fiction and that believers can rely upon their subjective exercise of faith for assurance of salvation. Lutherans are now persuaded that Catholics do not presently teach, and quite likely never did teach, the errors condemned by Luther and the Lutheran confessions—specifically, that salvation is achieved by the believer’s spiritual and moral works. In the late 1990’s Lutherans and Catholics finally reached a formal consensus on justification. Yes, differences remain, but they are not considered as church-dividing. One can hold a Lutheran understanding of justification by faith, as defined by the document, and be a Roman Catholic in good standing!

Furthermore, in 1986, Anglicans and Roman Catholics reached agreement on an understanding of justification. This latter agreement, says Kimel, "clearly states that we are saved by the sheer unmerited grace of God, not by our own works and strivings. It even affirms the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to undeserving sinners, but with the imputation construed as an efficacious, performative word that truly makes the sinner righteous."

In short, Fr Kimel says that the Roman Catholic Church does not reject the Reformation understanding of justification as entailing imputation of Christ’s righteousness. At the same time, the statements agreed to by Anglican, Lutheran, and Roman Catholic theologians ascribe two aspects to justification: in justification, God both declares the sinner righteous and also makes the sinner righteous. So, Kimel concludes, it looks to him like Dean Zahl is still stuck in the 16th century.

Kimel has a follow-up post in which he states that Dean Zahl’s view, as set forth in his recent article, "grievously distorts" the Roman Catholic position. He also presents a theological-historical argument in support of the Catholic teaching on justification and sanctification.

As one who considers himself a Reformed Anglican, I have to say that I’m not sure what to make of all this. I haven’t read the statements that Fr Kimel cites, and I haven’t followed the Evangelicals and Catholics Together project and its attendant controversies as closely as perhaps I should. (Besides the fact that I’m not a theologian, I already have a full-time job.)

Both Fr Kimel, and the knowledgeable people who post comments at his site, have provided much food for thought. I should do more research and prayerful thinking on this.

All you Anglophiles out there will be amazed at the "Virtual Tour of Oxford", a unique photographic tour of Oxford made up of hundreds of high-quality photos shot in panorama views. (This has been up on the web for a while, but I just found it.) Visitors to the site can travel all around the city of dreaming spires with just a click on the mouse. Among the tours listed on the home page are JRR Tolkien’s Oxford, The Virtual Pub Crawl, and A Virtual Walk Up St Giles. St Giles is an extremely wide boulevard running into the heart of Oxford; the first photo in the tour shows The Martyrs’ Memorial, commemorating the Reformation leaders Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer, who were martyred in Oxford under Bloody Mary.

The exhibit includes an interactive city map and a portal listing all the colleges, museums, libraries, and other buildings in Oxford posted at the site.

There is also a link to The Oxford Eye, a public exhibition of limited edition prints from the Virtual Tour of Oxford shown at Blackwells Bookshop, the world’s best book store, in August 2005.

Here is a map of Keble College, of which I was a member during my year at Oxford, 1986-87. My supervisor, the brilliant moral theologian Rev Dr Oliver O’Donovan, was affiliated with Christ Church college, one of the most prestigious at Oxford. (I applied to Christ Church, but they wouldn’t have me.)

For some features of the site, you need Apple’s QuickTime 6 or better and Macromedia Flash 6.

via Oxford Inklings.

The collect for today, the 17th Sunday after Trinity, from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer:

Lord, we pray thee that thy grace may always prevent and follow us, and make us continually to be given to all good works; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.