Thursday, March 24, 2005

Oh, you've asked for it now

The reply will be forthcoming. It may take a while.

6 Comments:

At 10:58 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did you delete an earlier, longer version of this post?

 
At 11:02 AM, Blogger CrimsonCatholic said...

Yes. I decided the less said, the better.

 
At 3:32 PM, Blogger John Betts said...

I hope you realize that whatever you post Mr. Svendsen is going to castigate you and dismiss your arguments regardless. He seems to thrive on this kind of attention and any argument, no matter how trite which this "ApollinariMonophysitism" nonsense is. The only reason he is doing this is a poor attempt to flail Catholics (I presume Orthodox as well) for our beliefs concerning the Blessed Mother. Take for example his charge that St. Cyril was in fact a Monophysite. That is absurd on its face, but no charge to fling at Catholics is worth letting go regardless of how ridiculous it is if it furthers his goals. Read the articles I left links for from the NonChalcedonian Assyrian Church of the East. They themselves say there was a misunderstanding of terminology and that at the most they once suspected St. Cyril of Apollinarianism -- not Monophysitism. They accept that he was not a heretic and his teaching, even if they do not believe his methods were charitable and good. Mr. Svendsen is trying to make an issue out of this, where none exists, against Catholics because it serves his interests. As for his own Christology, I believe he expresses himself poorly at times leading one to suspect heresy but if one were able to nail down a forthright answer its probably okay if somewhat different. Just my two cents...

 
At 3:38 PM, Blogger John Betts said...

Btw, it might be interesting to get comment from Mr. Svendsen on the Common Christological Declaration Between the Catholic Church and the Assyrian Church of the East: http://www.cired.org/cat/03_Common_Christological_Dec.pdf

This is not an issue as far as both sides are concerned, despite Mr. Svendsen's arguments, and the breach formed at Ephesus on Christology has been healed.

 
At 4:03 PM, Blogger CrimsonCatholic said...

"As for his own Christology, I believe he expresses himself poorly at times leading one to suspect heresy but if one were able to nail down a forthright answer its probably okay if somewhat different."

If I didn't have serious doubts about that, I wouldn't even bother. As I said, though, I think he is denying the full humanity and divinity of Christ while claiming to be a part of mainstream Christianity. I see serious risks in that situation. If people are openly in denial of major Trinitarian dogma (e.g., Oneness Pentecostals, Jehovah's Witnesses), it's one thing, because then people are making their choices deliberately. But when Christians are being unwittingly led into a denial of their own Savior, that strikes me as a much different situation. That's why I said that I wouldn't have a problem if he was openly Nestorian, but this notion that he's covertly Nestorian troubles me.

 
At 6:01 PM, Blogger John Betts said...

Understandable, John. Well, good luck on getting a straight answer from him. I learned long ago that such is very difficult for him. God bless.

 

<< Home