Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Timothy Keller

Quote by Timothy Keller

“Jesus Christ says, 'Kill me and in 3 days, not only this temple, but all temples in the whole world will be out of business.' This is the most stunning thing any human being has ever said.”

Quote by Timothy Keller

Author

Timothy Keller
Timothy Keller

Timothy Keller, born in 1950, is a renowned American author and theologian. His works primarily focus on urban culture, Christian faith, and public life. Keller is known for his insightful and accessible writing style, which combines theological concepts with everyday life. more

You May Also Like

“In considering the evidence we about to present, we ask you to keep one overarching principle in mind: As Saint Thomas teaches, there is no argument against a fact - contra factum non argumentum est. If a statement is contrary to fact, then no authority on earth can expect us to believe it. Thus, for example, if a high-ranking prelate in the Vatican were to issue a decree that Catholics must believe that the Eiffel Tower is located in Saint Peter's Square, that would not make it so and we would be obligated to reject the decree. For the fact is that the Eiffel Tower is located in Paris, and there is no argument against that fact. Therefore, no man, no matter what his authority, can demand that we believe something that is manifestly contrary to fact. (page xxiii)”

“It was intended that Catholics and Protestants draw closer together, but it is evident that Catholics have become Protestants, rather than the reverse. The New Mass itself was a Protestant conception and leads to Protestantism, and it is for that reason that we cannot conceive the possibility of using it in our seminaries. The definition of the Mass as given in the Introduction of the Novus Ordo Missae is clearly a Protestant one, and this, in itself, is inadmissible and inconceivable! Henceforth, the emphasis will be on the Supper, the Meal, and no longer on the Sacrifice. This shift of emphasis must of necessity lead - and is already leading - to the destruction of Catholic Doctrine which rests upon the Sacrifice of the Cross continued on the altar. It will lead to loss of faith in the Real Presence, and to the ruin of the Catholic priesthood. This alone would suffice to justify our emphatic rejection of the Reform. This means that no compromise whatever can be consented to in this regard. It means also that those who have taken the Mass along that road bear a heavy burden of responsibility.”

“I can hear them say: "You exaggerate! There are many good bishops who pray, who have the Faith, who are edifying . . ." They may have been saints, but as soon as they accept the false religious liberty, hence the secular State; false ecumenism, and hence the admission of many ways of salvation; liturgical reform, and hence the practical negation of the Sacrifice of the Mass; the catechism with all their errors and heresies - they are officially contributing to the revolution within the Church and to its destruction! The current Pope and bishops no longer hand down Our Lord Jesus Christ, but rather a sentimental superficial, charismatic religiosity, through which, as a general rule, the true grace of the Holy Ghost no longer passes. This new religion is not the Catholic religion; it is sterile, incapable of sanctifying society and the family.”

“We can never show enough reverence, nor ever worship the Eucharist with adequately heartfelt veneration. That is why throughout the ages it has been the custom in the Church to receive the Holy Eucharist kneeling. We should receive the Holy Eucharist prostrate and not standing. Are we the equals of Our Lord Jesus Christ? Is it not He who will come upon the clouds of heaven to be our Judge? When we see Our Lord Jesus Christ, shall we not do as did the Apostles on Thabor when they prostrated themselves on the ground in terror and wonder at the greatness and splendor of Our Lord Jesus Christ? Let us keep in our hearts and souls that spirit of worship, that spirit of profound reverence for Him who created us, for Him who redeemed us, for Him who died on the Cross for our sins.”

“Finally, what the history of this period proves is that, during a time of general apostacy, Christians who remain faithful to their traditional faith may have to worship outside the official churches, the churches of priests in communion with their lawfully appointed diocesan bishop, in order not to compromise that traditional Faith; and that such Christians may have to look for truly Catholic teaching, leadership, and inspiration not to their diocesan bishop, not to the bishops of their country as a body, not to the bishops of the world, not even to the Roman Pontiff, but to one heroic confessor when the other bishops and the Roman Pontiff might have repudiated or even excommunicated. And how would they recognize that this solitary confessor was right and the Roman Pontiff and body of the episcopate (not teaching infallibly) were wrong? The answer is that they would recognize in the teaching of the confessor what the faithful of the fourth century recognized in the teaching of Athanasius: the one true Faith into which they had been baptized, in which they had been catechized, and which their Confirmation gave them the obligation of upholding. In no sense whatsoever can such fidelity to tradition be compared to the Protestant practice of private judgment. The fourth century Catholic traditionalists upheld Athanasius in his defense of the Faith that had been handed down, the Protestant uses his private judgment to justify a breach with the traditional Faith.”

“It is obvious that if many bishops had acted like Msgr. de Castro Mayer, Bishop of Campos in Brazil, the ideological revolution within the Church could have been limited, because we must not be afraid to affirm that the current Roman authorities, since John XXIII and Paul VI, have made themselves active collaborators of international Freemasonry and of world socialism. John Paul II is above all a communist-loving politician at the service of a world communism retaining a hint of religion. He openly attacks all of the anti-communist governments and does not bring, by his travels, any Catholic revival. These conciliar Roman authorities cannot but oppose savagely and violently any reaffirmation of the traditional Magisterium. The errors of the Council and its reforms remain the official standard consecrated by the Profession of Faith of Cardinal Ratzinger in March 1989.”

“We ought to remember during this entire contemplation of God that we must apply all that is said of God to Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is God. We cannot separate Jesus Christ from God. We cannot separate the Christian religion from Jesus Christ, who is God, and we must affirm and believe that only the Catholic religion is the Christian religion. These affirmations have, as a result, inescapable conclusions that no ecclesiastical authority can contest: outside of Jesus Christ and the Catholic religion, that is, outside the Church, there is no salvation, no eternal life. Whoever is saved attains to everlasting life by his adhesion to the Mystical Body of Christ. Another consequence: all of the societies Our Lord created must necessarily work together, in accordance with their entire purpose, to make souls Catholic and to keep them Catholic, in order to procure their eternal salvation, which is the end of all Creation, of the Incarnation, and of the Redemption.”

“The Bishop rightly understood that the Church's doctrines were inviolable. They were not something to be tampered with by each new generation. Rather, the duty of every generation was to preserve the faith just as it had been received. Jesus Christ had entrusted the Gospel to His disciples. Their calling was to preserve and pass it on to other faithful men who also would do likewise. The truths of the Church could be defined and expounded upon, but not changed.”

“It is fashionable today to praise the Church of the first four centuries, to extol primative practice. How would the Church of the first four centuries have regarded Archbishop Whealon? Anyone who is remotely acquainted with Church history can give one answer and one answer only. Archbishop Whealon would have been regarded as an apostate; he would have been anathemized, and every true Catholic bishop would have broken off communion with him. I believe that the Church of the first four centuries was right. I believe that Archbishop Whealon is at least a de facto apostate. It seems a harsh thing to say. It may make me appear harsh and intolerant - but nonetheless it is the truth. Cardinal Newman has a magnificent sermon upon this very point, "Tolerance of Religious Error". He castigates those who concern us not to uphold truth but to avoid the appearance of being intolerant. Once again I must repeat, those who possess the truth, those who love the truth, cannot tolerate error . . . Furthermore, I submit that Archbishop Whealon's conduct would have been considered incompatible with Catholicism not only by the Church of the first four centuries - it would have resulted in his immediate excommunication by every Roman Pontiff up to and including Pope John XXIII. I accept that what I am saying will make me appear singular, intemperate, and extreme in the ecumenical climate of the Conciliar Church but the viewpoint I am putting forward would have been accepted by 99% of Catholics up to Vatican II. Read the encyclical Mortalium Animos of Pope Pius XI, read the relevant encyclicals of Pope Pius XII. If Archbishop Whealon is right, the the Church has been wrong for 2,000 years. (chapter 8)”