Skip to main content

Is Scott Hahn a Fundamentalist Catholic - What are they afraid of?

Image
By
 +
JMJ

The curious title caught my eye a few days ago because it had "Scott Hahn" and "Fundamentalist" in the title. Full points to Crisis Magazine for a clickable title and a great article by Eric Sammons (link).

I've never met Scott Hahn, but I have several of his CDs and the thought of him being portrayed as a Bible thumping Catholic Fundamentalist was interesting.

In the article Eric offers a critique of American Pope: Scott Hahn and the Rise of Catholic Fundamentalism by Sean Swain Martin. Eric asserts that:

The basic thesis of American Pope is this: Scott Hahn claims the message of the Bible is simple and clear, and that the Bible itself is inerrant; American Fundamentalists make similar claims; therefore, Scott Hahn is an American Fundamentalist disguised as a Catholic. To make the Bible accessible to the masses, as Hahn does, is akin to fundamentalism, according to Martin.

First, I think that the accusation of fundamentalism falls flat and would probably be more appropriately ascribed to the likes of the SSPX et al.  After all, they're the ones who've been faithful to Church Teaching since Vatican II.  Looking at the Wikipedia article (link) on Christian Fundamentalism, I found that it arose in response to the rise of modernism.  Well, that's interesting.  I also found the following quote particularly interesting:

A few scholars label Catholics who reject modern Christian theology in favor of more traditional doctrines fundamentalists.[10]

Ok, so colour me fundamentalist in that I happen to believe what the Catholic Church teaches. This includes what the Church Teaches concerning the contents of the Deposit of Faith ... that includes the Bible.  ... While I am confident that Dr. Hahn is a faithful Catholic, I never thought of him as a fundamentalist.Then Eric highlights this:

To Martin, average Catholics reading and interpreting the Bible is a bad thing, or at least a fool’s errand. He writes, “It would be difficult to expect each individual Catholic to be prepared to offer such a careful investigation of the different literary forms employed, cultural influences manifest, etc., in the Scriptures so as to easily move from familiarity to ‘eminent knowability.”

 Well, I guess Martin has forgotten all the work done by pre-Conciliar Catholic Theologians to clarify the difficult passages.  But the Hubris of it is that the modern theologians don't teach with clarity, they teach with academics that don't want to make a definitive conclusion, they want academic freedom to interpret as they see fit ad nauseum.

I think Eric nails it when he writes:

In other words, Martin believes in the “Magisterium of the Theologians”—you simple-minded Catholics can’t be expected to understand the Scriptures without a bunch of PhD’s telling you what to think (unless the PhD happens to be Scott Hahn, of course). The fact that Hahn believes the Bible is for everyone apparently marks him as one of those anti-intellectual fundamentalists. 
Aha, perhaps modern theologians (aka Modernists) are afraid that if Catholics read the Bible they would:

  1. Stay Catholic 
  2. realize that most of the work on biblical exegesis was done 
  3. conclude we can pack off the religious theologians to monasteries 
  4. be able to fire the lay theologians to find work in the civil service of their home countries.

Of course that won't happen, but one can dream can't they?

 So, yes Catholics need to read the bible and have next to them a reputable exegesis.  That will really send the Megamind Modernists shaking in their baby seal skin leather boots. 


MegaMind Modernist Theologian


P^3

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II: Dr. John Lamont

By
+ JMJ This is the second article from Dr. Lamont from his lecture given in May 2014. P^3 Source Part A: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny Source Part B: Society of St. Hugh of Cluny 8 May2014 The Catholic Church and the Rule of Law- Part II By John Lamont To understand how the Jesuit conception of obedience departed from earlier conceptions, it is helpful to compare it with the teaching of St. Thomas on obedience. The fundamental difference between the two is that St. Thomas considers the proper object of obedience to be the precept of the superior (2a2ae q. 104 a. 2 co., ad 3). Obedience that seeks to forestall the expressed will of the superior does not bear on what the superior wants or thinks in general, but only on what the superior intends to command. St. Ignatius’s lowest degree of obedience, which he does not consider to be virtuous, is thus what St. Thomas considers to be the only form of obedience. St. Thomas holds that St. Ignatius’s alleged higher forms of o...
Post a Comment
Read more

Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin - July 6, 1988

By
There has been some discussion (read lots) about the term 'Conciliar Church'. I have posted this letter written by the Superior General and District Superiors of the SSPX after the 1988 Consecrations. Of particular interest is that the 'Conciliar Church' being referred to as a system. My paraphrase would be that the SSPX regards the 'conciliar Church' as an error within the Church. Source Open Letter to Cardinal Gantin Prefect of the Congregation for Bishops
Post a Comment
Read more

Morning and Evening and other sundry Prayers

By
+ JMJ Along the theme of P^3 (Prayer, Penance, Patience), and for my own reference ... here is a collection of Morning and Evening prayers from the Ideal Daily Missal along with some additional prayers. In this crisis of the Church, I do not think it is possible to do too much prayer, penance and have patience. P^3
Post a Comment
Read more

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 6b: Principles and Rules for Surviving this Crisis of the Catholic Church (Principle 1)

By
 + JMJ Principle 1: Realize that something is amiss in the Catholic Church The world in which I had my Traditional Awakening, is one in which practically anything pre-Conciliar such as liturgy, doctrinc, and even dogmas are either suppressed, ignored or re-framed to be acceptable to the ‘world’. What is more, the people adhering to these pre-conciliar teachings and liturgy are persecuted by other members of the Catholic Church. The things that non-Trads say about Trads can be quite extreme. For example, accusations against Traditionalists include that they are: A revival of the Jansenists (link) , Schismatics, Heretics, Uncharitable, Lefebrists Radicals Integrists When one group of Catholics is persecuted by the others for simply wanting to live as Catholics before them did for generations … well something is wrong. Further, we need to realize that when what was previously condemned is now promoted and what was previously promoted as the trut...
Post a Comment
Read more

Forget the Reformation - It is time for Abrogation - Louie Verrecchio

By
Mr. Verrecchio has pointed out one solution to this crisis that is a dream of many Traditional Catholics of my acquaintance: The complete obliteration of the Novus Ordo Missae. If this were to occur, undoubtedly a revolt would occur within the Church, but the battle lines would be much clearer.  I assume that a lot of material heretics would make the transition to being formal heretics. P^3 Prayer Penance Patience Courtesy of Louie Verrecchio A recent article by Fr. Thomas Kocik on the New Liturgical Movement website,  Reforming the Irreformable? , is getting some well-deserved attention in traditional circles. (Do yourself a favor and read it in its entirety if you haven’t already.)
Post a Comment
Read more