kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Napkin Chicken's Secret Identity) (12/06/90)
In a previous article, I became a little irritated with the tendency of people to say "Famous Person Foo said XXX, and thus the matter is settled". The example before me was David Wagner's statement that those opposed to infant baptism were in error, with no qualifications. He was right, those who disagree were wrong, end of discussion. Being unable to discern any difference between Mr Wagner's attitude toward Martin Luther and the RC doctrine on Papal Infallibility, I said: k> While I suppose I ought to be flattered that His Holiness Mr Luther k> felt I was worth a word or two [...] And in reply to that, I think Mr Wagner has tipped his hand: >Perhaps I should use the Word more, and Luther less? But I think it is >unfair of Mr. Provine to paint Luther as an antichrist. The previous comment was my only reference to Luther in my article; I said only that I disagreed with him, and implied that he seems to be considered infallible. I said nothing about either the Pope or Luther being anti- or even non- Christians, and I see only two ways that the equation of `Pope' with `antichrist' appeared in the reply: 1) Mr Wagner thinks I consider the Pope to be non-Christian; 2) Mr Wagner thinks the Pope is non-Christian. I have on numerous occassions disclaimed the first and defended the Roman Catholic Church against the attacks of self-appointed net.magisteriums (of which Mr Wagner reminds me); so it seems unlikely that Mr Wagner has picked up that impression from any of my articles. In any case, since I feel I have been misrepresented, I am going to say it again for the umpteenth time: I do not believe the Pope is the AntiChrist, I do not believe the RCC is evil, and I do not believe that there is some Huge Conspiracy among all Roman Catholics to hide the Truth from everybody else. If Mr Wagner believes such things, I would appreciate his refraining from assuming everyone else does. kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu Darren F. Provine ...njin!gboro!kilroy "There is nothing like moving to give one a healthy respect for entropy." -- James W. Williams
wagner@karazm.math.uh.edu (David Wagner) (12/12/90)
[In a previous posting kilroy objected to David's citation of Luther as an authority on the matter of infant baptism, giving the impression that this settled the matter. --clh] I sincerely regret giving the impression that I regard Luther as a source of infallible teaching authority. I had quoted Luther because I thought he presented a good argument, and that he was a better wordsmith, even filtered through translation, than I am. I do confess I admire Luther's cleverness; perhaps there is an element of idolatry in this, of which I repent. [in the course of his response, kilroy compared David attitude toward Luther with papal infallibility, thus leading David to conclude that he regarded Luther as an antichrist. Kilroy wanted to be clear that he did not view either Luther or the pope as anti-Christ or non-Christian, and that he does not view the RCC as evil. --clh] I do not think of myself as a net.magisterium. My purpose for participating in src and trm is to show what the scriptures actually say on various topics. Occasionally I express my own opinions, as we all do. Occasionally I get emotional, as most of us do -- and perhaps as we should, because false doctrine is very dangerous. Mr. Provine seems to have accused me of violating the command against false witness with regard to himself. This is a serious charge. In retrospect, I think I gave him the benefit of the doubt. :-) He accused me of treating Luther as 'his Holiness', which is one of the 'marks of the antichrist' (literrally, 'substitute christ'), or of the 'man of lawlessness', the one who "will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshipped, so that he sets himself up *in God's temple*, proclaiming himself to be God." (2 Thess 2:4) Or, as we should read Rev. 13:12: "Lamblike, he had two horns, but his speech was dragonlike". The antichrist appears to be christian, or Christ-like, but his doctrine is that of the devil. By implying that I considered Luther to be 'His Holiness', Mr. Provine seemed to be saying that I equated Luther with God, i.e., an antichrist. I am glad that Mr. Provine has clarified himself, even if I believe he has done so in a way that is sadly mistaken. I will try to avoid imputing doctrine to him in the future. I ask his forgiveness. David H. Wagner a confessional Lutheran "Lord, keep us steadfast in Thy Word; Curb those who fain by craft and sword Would wrest the kingdom from Thy Son And set at naught all He hath done. "O Comforter of priceless worth, Send peace and unity on earth. Support us in our final strife And lead us out of death to life." --"Erhalt uns, Herr, bei deinem Wort", v. 1,3 --Martin Luther, 1541 --from "The Lutheran Hymnal" #261. My opinions and beliefs on this matter are disclaimed by The University of Houston.