apropos his response to Frances Beckwith's blog:
http://rightreason.ektopos.com/archives/2007/05/my_return_to_th.html
and his own blog entry:
http://theconstructivecurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2007/05/reversion-of-francis-beckwith.html
Dear Dr. Groothuis,
Can you please explain to me how you dare to include G.K. Chesterton in your list of favorite books on your blog profile? Haven't you read the final two chapters of St. Thomas Aquinas?
Surely this must pain "all true sons and daughters of the Protestant Reformation who lived and died for its truths." Aren't you in danger of embracing serious theological error by giving GKC such approval? After all, GKC certainly was "never well-grounded in the essential doctrines of the Christian faith, as articulated by the Five Solas of the Reformation." Why, the man even believed there was such a thing as (gasp!) philosophia perennis!
Until I hear how this inconsistency can be reconciled, I dare not take your criticisms of Dr. Beckwith seriously. And please, don't tell me its a matter of paradox. We protestants never have our cake and eat it too. It's Catholics like GKC that are into such paradoxes, not protestants! Once you let a paradox's nose in the tent, the whole Roman camel will follow. Sacraments! Thomism! Tradition! St. Theresa! The Culture of Life! Fides et Ratio! Whatever is true, noble, right, pure and lovely!
See what has happened to me? (grin) Reading Chesterton has just exacerbated things! I'd hate for it to happen to you!
P.S. Can you also please tell me, how can there be FIVE solas? I thought the only sola that mattered was Jesus. (Cf. Peter and Martha's confessions.)
Groothuis' reply:
http://theconstructivecurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2007/05/reversion-of-francis-beckwith.html
BB:There is no contradiction. I am listing authors who proved significant to me. That includes Roman Catholics like Pascal and Chesterson. So what? My favorite Chesterton book, Orthdoxy, was written before he became Catholic anyway.One need not believe everything a writer says to be shaped by him or her. I was helped enormously by John Searle's The Construction of Social Reality; it is one of the best defenses of realism I know. Searle is an atheist.
6:54 AM
7:18 AM
Karen LH said...
Dr. Groothuis,I had the same reaction as Beth to your including Catholics like G.K. Chesterton (and Pascal) in your list of influential authors.The reason has to do with the tone of your post here about Dr. Beckwith's reversion. It's one thing to say something like: "I disagree completely with Frank's reasons for returning to Catholicism." It's another to say: "Frank has done some excellent work over the years, but was apparently never well-grounded in the essential doctrines..."In other words, Catholics are not too intelligent and are poorly informed. I guess you're entitled to your opinion, but if that's what you think of them -- that they are not only wrong but stupid -- then it's a little strange that you would include them on a list of recommended authors.Chesterton wrote somewhere regarding his conversion (I looked and can't find the exact quote) something like the following: "When I became a Catholic, I thought that people would say: 'That Chesterton fellow is pretty smart: maybe there's something to the Catholic Church.' Instead they said: 'That Chesterton fellow used to be pretty smart: I wonder what happened to him.'"This seems to be the way a lot of people are treating Dr. Beckwith. If he "has done some excellent work over the years", then maybe he is still doing excellent work. If you disagree with him, then by all means say so and say why. But he deserves to be treated with more respect than a condescending dismissal.(As for Orthodoxy, while it's true that Chesterton wrote it before becoming a Catholic, as I recall it's an extremely Catholic book. Chesterton himself was Catholic for years before he entered the Church. You must know that.)
8:30 AM
No comments:
Post a Comment