Nominalism and the Church with Ockham, Luther, and Hobbes

William of Ockham was a philosophical nominalist. William of Ockham sought to undermine papal authority through his dealings with the Holy Roman Emperor Louis IV of Bavaria.

Martin Luther was a philosophical nominalist. Martin Luther sought to undermine papal authority by appealing to the princes of Germany.

Thomas Hobbes was a philosophical nominalist. Thomas Hobbes sought to undermine papal authority by placing ecclesial authority in the arms of the state (see Book IV of Leviathan for details).

Here’s the question that I have been pondering. Is this a coincidence or does nominalist thinking lead its adherents to shake off the shackles of ecclesial authority? Is this a historical accident or is there a true connection?

My suspicion is that nominalism creates an epistemology of angst. It drives one to sacrifice balance for an extreme position.

Whether it be Ockham’s razor, Luther’s faith alone, or Hobbes’ absolute statism; each nominalist “solution” rejects communal consensus. If one rejects communal consensus, then one cannot truly believe in ecclesial authority, because the church is necessarily common.

In fact, in one is not a realist, then one cannot believe in true participation in any metaphysical sense. And if there is no participation there is no such thing as “being in communion”. It’s all fractured.

I Highly Recommend This Book: Waugh’s Edmund Campion

I just finished Evelyn Waugh’s Edmund Campion: A Life (Ignatius Press, of course). This book is a must-read for the convinced Anglo-Catholic. It is a terrible reminder that the Elizabethan Settlement carried with it a rage against the Mass, which is difficult to explain. This book tells the story of the Oxonian Edmund Campion who refuses the promised glories of Protestant England, flees his homeland and eventually becomes a Jesuit on the Continent. He returns to England to do three things: preach the Roman Faith, hear confessions, and say the Mass in secret. He was successful for just over a year until he was captured. He was taken to London where he was constantly beaten, being racked at least thrice, and spent the rest of his time in dark solitary confinement. He was a few times brought out to debate theology with Anglican divines. He fared pretty well considering his joints were pulled out of socket, he was tired, and had no notes or books on which to depend. He was falsly convicted for treason on account of spurious rumors of Spanish invasion and his “obvious” connection to such schemes.

I couldn’t put it down and read it all in almost one sitting. Buy it now at Amazon.com by clicking here.

Real Ultimate Anglican Fox Hunting Power

Back by popular demand:

Real Ultimate Anglican Fox Hunting Power
by Taylor Marshall

Anglican Blessing of the Hounds
Hi, this post is all about Anglican Fox Hunters, REAL ANGLICAN FOX HUNTERS. This post is awesome. My name is Alfred and I can’t stop thinking about Anglican Fox Hunters. These guys are cool; and by cool, I mean totally sweet.

Facts:
1. Anglican Fox Hunters are mammals.
2. Anglican Fox Hunters sip Earl Grey ALL the time.
3. The purpose of the Anglican Fox Hunter is to sip Earl Grey and kill foxes.

Anglican Fox Hunter Gear:

Anglican Fox Hunter Hounds

Anglican Fox Hunter Horse

Anglican Fox Hunter Outfit

Testimonial:
Anglican Fox Hunters can kill any fox they want! Anglican Fox Hunters hunt ALL the time and don’t even think twice about it. These guys are so crazy and awesome that they sip Earl Grey ALL the time. I heard that there was this Anglican Fox Hunters who was enjoying high tea. And when some liberal Brit dropped a spoon the Anglican Fox Hunters ran his hounds thorugh the whole town. My friend George said that he saw a Anglican Fox Hunter totally put his hounds on a fox just because the butler opened a window.

And that’s what I call REAL Ultimate Power!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you don’t believe that Anglican Fox Hunters have REAL Ultimate Power you better get a life right now or they will treat you like a liberal fascist Brit!!! It’s an easy choice, if you ask me.

Anglican Fox Hunters are sooooooooooo sweet that I want to actually remain Anglican. I can’t believe it sometimes, but I feel it inside my heart. These guys are totally awesome and that’s a fact. Anglican Fox Hunters are fast, smooth, cool, strong, powerful, and sweet. I can’t wait to get my hounds blessed by an Anglican priest.

Q and A:

Q: Why is everyone so obsessed about Anglican Fox Hunters?
A: Anglican Fox Hunters are the ultimate paradox. On the one hand they don’t give a crap, but on the other hand, Anglican Fox Hunters are very careful and precise.

Q: I heard that Anglican Fox Hunters are always cruel or mean. What’s their problem?
A: Whoever told you that is a total liar (and probably a liberal Brit). Just like other mammals, Anglican Fox Hunters can be mean OR totally awesome.

Q: What do Anglican Fox Hunters do when they’re not sipping Earl Grey or fox hunting?
A: Most of their free time is spent drinking gin and tonics, but sometime they play chess or cricket. (Ask Queen Elizabeth if you don’t believe me.)

This is a picture of my hound “Sir Winston” showing off.
He’s a lot younger than most hounds and almost done with his training, which is bragable.

What is an Ephod?

Hebrew: aphwd or aphd
Greek: ’epomís, ’ephód, ’ephoúd
Latin: superhumeraleThere seems to be two super-sacramental items in the Old Covenant, the Ark of the Covenant and the High Priest’s Ephod. The latter consisted of three parts and was worn (it seems) only in liturgical contexts (Exodus 28:4; Leviticus 8:7; 1 Samuel 2:28). It was red, blue, purple, and gold in color.

The Ephod of the High Priest in Three Parts
Supplementing the data contained in the Bible with those gleaned from Josephus and the Egyptian monuments, we may distinguish in the ephod three parts:

1) the “rational of judgment” or breastplate
2) the two shoulder-pieces
3) the girdle or cincture

The “rational of judgment” was a breastplate fastened on the front of the ephod which it resembled in material and workmanship. It was a span in length and width, and was ornamented with four rows of precious stones on which were inscribed the names otwelvewelvfe tribes. It held also the Urim and Thummim (doctrine and truth) by means of which the high-priest consulted the Lord.

The second part of the ephod consisted of a pair of shoulder-pieces, or suspenders, fastened to the bodices in front and behind, and passing over the shoulders. Each of these straps was adorned with an onyx stone engraved with the names of six of the tribes of Israel, so that the high-priest while ministering wore the names of all the tribes, six upon each shoulder (Exodus 28:9-12; 25:7; 35:9; 39:16-19).

The third part of the ephod was the cincture, of the same material as the main part of the ephod and woven in one piece with it, by which it was girt around the waist (Leviticus 8:7). Some writers maintain that the correct Hebrew reading of Ex., xxviii, 8, speaks of this band of the ephod; the contention agrees with the Syriac and Chaldee versions and with the rendering of Josephus (cf. Exodus 28:27 sq.; 29:5; 39:20 sq.).

The Liturgical Use of the High Priest’s Ephod
It must not be imagined that the ephod was the ordinary garb of the high-priest; he wore it while performing the duties of his ministry (Exodus 28:4; Leviticus 8:7; 1 Samuel 2:28) and when consulting the Lord. Thus David learned through Abiathar’s ephod the disposition of the people of Ceila (1 Samuel 23:11 sq.) and the best plan of campaign against the Amalecites (1 Samuel 30:7 sqq.). In I K., xiv, 18, it appears that Saul wished the priest Achias to consult the Lord by means of the Ark; but the Septuagint reading of this passage, its context (1 Samuel 14:3), and the text of Josephus (Ant. Jud., VI, vi, 3) plainly show that in I K., xiv, 18, we must read “take the ephod” instead of “bring the ark”.

“Ephod” from Catholic Encyclopedia.

Celebrate Christendom – Wear a Neck Tie!

This is from my friend Mark Adams:

I must defend the necktie. A friend of mine is an administrator at boys school and all the boys wear ties. To encourage them to wear their ties with pride he tells them the history of the garment (a little different than the one provided by Mr. Lauren) that links it to the defeat of the Muslims.

Here is how the story goes according to him:

“I can hunt the details down, but it was a small regiment that held off the Turks outside the gates of Vienna; it was a huge victory for Christendom that finally turned the tide of the great eastern arm of the Crescent until the present ebbing of muslim violence. The regiment wore a long red scarf tied around their necks and draped down in front. People began to honor them all over Europe. Then other regiments began to use the scarf idea with their own designs and colors. Soon colleges and guilds too. Now it is a symbol of almost every profession to wear the tie.”

And allow me to note that even today there are some Muslims who say that it is wrong to wear a tie (do a google on Muslims and neckties) because they say it is supposed to be a symbol for the cross. So I say to all the laymen: Wear your neckties with pride as a symbol of Christendom’s defeat of the Muslims.

This is awesome. Makes me want to rip off my collar and put on a red necktie!

Why the Neck Tie

Believe it or not, ties may be the oldest part of a man‘s wardrobe, having existed for thousands of years in one form or another. Knotted scarves can be seen on life-size terra-cotta warriors in China dating from the third century B.C. Some say that ancient Roman orators used ties to keep their vocal chords warm when they spoke in their cold marble chambers.But it‘s certain that the modern idea of a cravat began to develop in the 17th century, during the Thirty Years War. France recruited legions of mercenary soldiers, among them Croatians who were distinguished by their colorful kerchiefs. The look was adopted by French soldiers, made its way to the court of Louis XIV, and by 1650 had spread across Europe. During the 1800s, neck scarves became long and narrow, and popular methods of tying them (the ascot, for example) started to develop. The tie as we know it today took shape when the industrial revolution created a new class of office workers.In 1924, Jesse Langsdorf patented the modern tie, designed to elongate the silhouette and draw the beholder‘s focus up to the wearer‘s face.

From Ralph Lauren.

C. S. Lewis on Worship

“It is in the process of being worshipped that God communicates His presence to men.”

from Reflections on the Psalms

Israel, Dispensationalism, and the Epiphany

Recently, the evangelical broadcaster Pat Robertson suggested Ariel Sharon’s stroke was divine retribution for “dividing God’s land” of Israel.

“The prophet Joel makes it very clear that God has enmity against those who, quote, ‘divide my land.’ God considers this land to be his.”

“You read the Bible, God says, ‘This is my land.’ And for any prime minister of Israel who decides he’s going carve it up and give it away, God says, ‘No. This is mine.’”

What is wrong with this theology? Two things.

Human suffering is not always linked to individual sin. Sharon’s stroke doesn’t mean that God is angry at him, anymore than John the Baptist and all the martyrs were being punished for something they did against God.

Secondly, and more importantly: Israel is not specifically “God’s land” anymore. Christ’s great commission to make disciples of all nations extends “God’s land” to the “ends of the earth.” Fundamental to Robinson’s theology is theological school of Dispensationalism, which teaches that the Old Covenant promises were not fully realized in Christ and the Church but that they are yet to be fulfilled in a ethnically Jewish manifestation of the political nation of Israel. This sort of thinking expressly denies that the Church is the “New Israel” of God.

According to Catholic (and I should add, magisterial Protestant) teaching, the plot of land formerly called “Israel” and the ethnic people known as “Israelites” are no longer the singular object of God’s special redemptive interest. This being the second day of Epiphany it is worth noting that the Kingdom of God includes the Gentiles and the Old Covenant promises of “God’s land” and “God’s people” apply to wherever and whoever calls upon the name of Jesus Christ.

Pat Robinson’s literalism of the Old Testament prevents him from seeing that all the Old Covenant promises find their fulfillment in Christ and His Body the Church. These fulfillments are often times allegorical, but true all the same.

Southern Baptists at the Council of Nicea

Nicea, August 24, A.D. 325, 7:41 p.m. “That was powerful preaching, Brother Athanasius. Powerful! Amen! I want to invite any of you folks in the back to approach the altar here and receive the Lord into your hearts. Just come on up. We’ve got brothers and sisters up here who can lead you through the Sinner’s Prayer. Amen! And as this Council of Nicea comes to an end, I want to remind Brother Eusebius to bring the grape juice for tomorrow’s closing communion service . . .”Ah yes, the Baptists at the Council of Nicea. Sound rather silly? It certainly does. And yet, there are those who claim the Church of Nicea was more Protestant in belief and practice than Catholic. I recently read an article in The Christian Research Journal, written by a Reformed Baptist apologist, who argued this very point. No, I’m not making this up. The article, “What Really Happened at Nicea?” actually claimed the Fathers of the Council were essentially Evangelical Protestants.

Rest of article from Envoy.

Christmas Customs in the Sarum Rite

It’s the Eleventh Day of Christmas so I have to squeeze this one in before it is too late. There are some very interesting Christmas customs of the Sarum Rite.

On Christmas Day the geneology of St Matthew was solemnly recited. On Epiphany the geneology of St Luke was solemnly recited. In this way the season had two Gospel “bookends.”

Also, the feast of St. Stephen on Dec. 26 was ceremonially elaborated to be the “Feast of Deacons.” The feast of St John on Dec. 27 was ceremonially elaborated to be the “Feast of Priests.” And Holy Innocents on Dec. 28 (Childermas) was the “Feast of Children.”

And of course, who can forget the custom of “boy bishops” that ran from St Nicholas Day (Dec. 6) until Childremas (Dec. 28)? Queen “Bloody” Mary brought back the practice of boy bishops and the Calvinists used this custom against her as clear testimony that Roman Catholicism was full of superstition and foolishness.

But, heh, you’ve got to admit that at least the Queen was POD at heart. Dressing up little kids like the Infant of Prague and marching them around in processions like bishops is pretty cool. Talk about a stragedy for fostering vocationsto the Priesthood!