Since the Reformation split the Western Church in the sixteenth century, Catholics and Evangelicals have considered each other suspect. This view began to change after the Second Vatican Council. Catholics now call Protestants “separated brethren.” People could be “members of the Church in a certain sense without being members of the institution” (Berkouwer, The Second Vatican Council, Eerdmans.) Catholics and Evangelical Protestants often found themselves on the same side concerning such cultural issues as abortion, euthanasia, homosexuality, and secularism.
Since Vatican II, Catholics and Evangelicals have come together to discuss ways to address the aforementioned cultural concerns. In addition, the two groups have begun addressing theological issues that have historically divided them. One of the more visible efforts is the Evangelicals and Catholics Together project. The primary movers in this effort have been Catholic intellectual Fr. Richard Neuhaus and Protestant minister Charles Colson.
I am a part of a ministry that presents Bible study classes to over six thousand people weekly. The classes are cross-confessional, almost equally divided between Catholics and Protestants. The two-hour weekly sessions are a verse-by-verse study from Genesis to Revelation. In these classes, the primary purpose is to teach Scripture in its contextual and cultural settings. It is to be expected that when the Bible is taught in a systematic way some people will discover that their understanding of Christianity falls short of saving faith. In these cases, individuals are encouraged to fully embrace the claims of the Gospel.
While there is no attempt to get people to change their faith community, neither do we confuse proselytizing with evangelism; “converting goats” (which Scripture enjoins us to do) is not to be confused with “stealing sheep” (Matt. 25:33). Occasionally questions are asked concerning theological issues that arise out of the text. In such cases, the inquirer is encouraged to take the question back to his particular church; answers to such questions are best found not in an ecumenical Bible class but in one’s own faith setting.
A Personal History
It is perhaps helpful to offer some personal history, since a man’s early experiences can help shape his adult formation. My mother was born and raised in a small farming community near Paris, France. As a young woman she accepted a position as traveling companion for a wealthy American lady. Soon after arriving in the United States, my mother met my father and they married.
My father was a practicing Freemason and was not enthusiastic about his son being brought up in Catholic, my mother’s religious tradition. Therefore she and I attended an independent Baptist church in our neighborhood. (To the best of my recollection, my father never accompanied us—perhaps feeling that his participation at Lodge satisfied his religious obligations.)
When Lent and Advent came around, I would accompany my mother to the nearest Catholic Church. There I was exposed to a liturgical service that differed greatly from the simple Bible teaching and preaching of our regular Baptist church. Also, the vaulted ceilings, the surrounding statuary, the hundreds of flickering candles—not to mention the presence of incense—contrasted with the austere nature of our normal church home.
At this time, I was old enough to realize that there was considerable tension between Catholics and Protestants. It would not be until later that I would come to understand the dynamics at work between the two groups. At this point, I viewed Catholics and Protestants as reflecting different, but not necessarily hostile, perspectives concerning Christianity. These early experiences would be important in the forming of views relating to the possibility of interaction between these two Christian communities.
In 1953, I became friends with a man my age who, a committed Evangelical who was up-front about his faith. In spite of the church experiences of my youth, I had become pagan and took delight in thwarting his evangelistic efforts with me. When I raised objections to Christian faith with which he was unfamiliar, he would research the issue and get back to me. The faith that my new friend and his wife exhibited had real impact in their daily lives, and through their witness, I finally embraced the gospel and received Jesus into my life.
My mother had instilled in me the love of reading; and after conversion, my preference in literature expanded. Thomas Paine, Robert Ingersoll, Isaac Asimov, and Voltaire made way for Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Thomas à Kempis, Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Blaise Pascal. I developed an interest in Church history (in which I would later receive my graduate degree) and also in the field of Christian apologetics.
There was no latent anti-Catholicism in the Protestant faith of my youth, and so I read Catholic as well as Protestant sources. I was Evangelical in my theology (and still am) but I soon realized that—as distasteful as the notion is to some Protestants—prior to the Reformation, if we were Christians, we were members of the Catholic Church (unless of course we lived in the East and were Orthodox).
Anti-Catholicism was fueled in those early years by two books. The first was American Freedom and Catholic Power by Paul Blanshard. He assured Fundamentalists and Evangelicals that the Vatican has sinister designs on our freedoms in general and religious liberty in particular. Blanchard was later recognized as a secular humanist who detested not only Catholicism but orthodox Christianity in general.
The second book was Catholicism by Loraine Boettner. This work was considered the major text on the subject by Evangelicals of the day. It contains a number of errors—both of historical fact and theology—and is a poor source for critiquing Catholicism. (A more objective Protestant treatment available at the time was J. Pelikan’s The Riddle of Catholicism.)
Why Attempt to Learn from Catholics?
Christendom is made up of three divisions: Eastern Orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Protestantism. Being Protestants, Evangelicals—along with Catholics—are part of the Western tradition. The Church was Eastern before it was Western. Paul was baptized by an Eastern Christian in Damascus, Syria (Acts 9:10-19). We in the Western branch of the Church are indebted to Paul receiving the Macedonian Vision, which directed him to preach the Gospel in Europe (Acts 16:6-10). The Eastern and Western branches of the Church had been growing apart since the fifth century, and the separation was ratified in A.D. 1054 (The Great Schism).
Historic Christianity
Though Catholics and Protestants dispute exactly what Jesus declared in Matthew 16:18-19 concerning Peter’s status in the Church, it is clear to all that the Lord said Satan would never prevail over the Church and its message. The belief that true Christianity died for centuries is cultic; Evangelicals should not embrace it. (Groups such as the Mormons and the Jehovah’s Witnesses hold this position.)
In Reclaiming the Great Tradition, (James Cutsinger, ed.), Catholics, Orthodox, and Evangelical scholars use the early creeds and councils to identify the core beliefs of the Christian Church. The creeds are the Apostles Creed (c. A.D. 150), the Nicene Creed (326) and the Athanasian Creed (428). The Councils are First Nicea (325), First Constantinople (381), Ephesus (431), and Chalcedon (451).
During the period from the apostolic era to the end of the fifth century, the leaders in the undivided Church grappled with issues and movements that threatened its integrity. These included heresies such as Marcionism, Gnosticism, Pelagianism, and Arianism. The doctrines formed by the Church during this time are the core of our Christian faith, and Evangelicals should be made aware of the efforts of these faithful Fathers of the Church.
In the East, Athanasius (296-373), bishop of Alexandria, was active in two councils, and helped formulate the creed bearing his name. Dubbed “the Black Dwarf” by his enemies, Athanasius confronted Arius and the heresy that bears his name. Other Eastern Fathers worth mentioning are Basil the Great (330-379) and John Chrysostom (347-407), who was called the “Golden Mouth” for his oratorical skills.
In the West, Ambrose, bishop of Milan (337-397) was instrumental in the spiritual formation of Augustine of Hippo. Jerome (347-419) produced the Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible and was perhaps the most accomplished Scripture scholar in the entire early Church. Augustine (354-430), who is honored equally by Catholics and Evangelicals, and Gregory the Great (540-604), the monk who reluctantly became pope in 590 and had great teaching and preaching skills, should be noted as well.
Though space constraints prevent me from commenting on the many Catholic leaders and scholars—both lay and cleric—who were prominent prior to the Reformation, I do want to call attention to some influential women during this period. Catherine of Siena (1347-1380) was one of the most notable spiritual mystics of the late Middle Ages. One of twenty-four children, she entered a Dominican order at age sixteen and began to evangelize the sick, the poor, and the condemned. Her spiritual insight and personal piety drew a large number of young women to become her followers. She also was involved in advising Pope Gregory XI during a difficult time for the papacy. Catherine of Siena was an activist in a time when a woman’s spiritual activities were to be confined and separate from the world.
Teresa of Avila (1515-1582) was active in the Catholic reform movement of her time. She experienced intense mystical visions of Christ that detailed his terrible suffering for the salvation of mankind. The most famous of her “spiritual children” was John of the Cross, himself a mystic and a poet.
Both Teresa of Avila and Catherine of Siena stressed the necessity of having a personal relationship with Jesus—what Evangelicals call the “born-again” experience—in addition to one’s institutional connection. They also have been declared Doctors of the Church, a designation that the Catholic Church bestows on saints who exhibit outstanding holiness and sanctity.
The Importance of Natural Law
Natural law has its roots in the thinking of the Church’s greatest theologians, including Augustine, Anselm, and Aquinas, and forms the basis for Evangelical as well as Catholic morals and ethics. Biblical warrant can be found in such passages as Rom. 2:14,15 (“law written on the heart”) and in Paul’s address before the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers at the Areopagus in Athens (Acts 17:16-34).
The founding fathers of our country appealed to natural law when they wrote in the U.S. Constitution, “We hold these truths to be self evident.” Currently, Catholics such as Princeton University philosopher Robert George, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, and Pope John Paul II himself all use natural law as the philosophical basis for their approach to ethical and moral issues. Evangelicals who are practitioners of the natural law approach include Norman Geisler and Francis Beckwith.
The Written Word
Evangelicals should familiarize themselves with the literary accomplishments of such Catholics as G. K. Chesterton (1874-1936). Among his other achievements, he was an able apologist—much in the same strain as his Protestant successor, C. S. Lewis. Also mention should be made of J. R. R. Tolkien, who is best known for his The Lord of the Rings trilogy. Tolkien was a close friend of C. S. Lewis and considered himself an apologist working through the medium of fantasy.
Concerning the ratio of Evangelicals to Catholics in literary endeavors, Evangelical theologian Carl F. H. Henry comments that, “Catholics have been more successful than Evangelicals in writing significant novels; they also far outnumber Evangelicals as syndicated newspaper columnists. This may in part reflect the price of an excessive Evangelical withdrawal from the culture” (In Search of a National Morality, Ignatius Press/Baker Books.)
The secular media is a poor source of information concerning religious affairs. It is, with rare exceptions, biased in its coverage and analysis of events and statements, be they involving Catholicism or Protestantism. Evangelicals should learn to distinguish between radical organizations that claim to be Catholic and groups that reflect orthodox Catholicism. It is also helpful for Evangelicals to become aware of publications such as Catholic World Report, First Things, and Touchstone. These journals, which contain articles written by orthodox Catholics and Protestants, offer a more balanced approach than can be found in more “mainstream” sources.
Taking a Second Look
Some Evangelicals, primarily from Free church traditions, take a dim view of the liturgy and rituals found in the Catholic Church. Liturgy can be defined as “prescribed forms that are used for public worship.” This rejection of liturgy did not originate with the magisterial reformers but was found in the teachings of the Anabaptist movement (also known as the Radical Reformation). In addition to the rejection of infant baptism, these groups were separatists who felt that Luther and Calvin were not radical enough. Liturgy can be helpful in instructing Evangelicals in how the early Church, in both the East and West, worshiped and passed on the gospel to its members.
A related issue is the argument over extemporaneous versus written prayers. Baptists and Puritans in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century England vigorously opposed the use of the Book of Common Prayer, which contained the order and prayers of the Church of England. It goes without saying that the liturgical forms of the Catholic Church were rejected as well. This seems to me a case of both/and. There are times when extemporaneous prayers are appropriate; on the other hand, written prayers can connect us with the historic Church in a unique way.
Evangelicals should investigate another spiritual discipline that is practiced in Catholicism (and Orthodoxy): following the Church year as a personal devotional. This is a systematic way to follow the life of Christ. It begins with Advent, which centers on the coming Christ. Lent is ushered in on Ash Wednesday, which begins a time of spiritual examination leading to renewal and deeper faith. Good Friday and Holy Saturday complete Holy Week, which culminates with the rising of the Son on Easter morning. Following the Church year and reading the appropriate scriptural texts provides the Christian with a sound foundation for his faith.
Evangelicals should also endeavor to avoid “the Gnostic impulse.” (Gnosticism was a first-century heresy that taught, among other things, that matter is evil and that Jesus was not truly human.) Fr. Neuhaus touches on this issue when he writes, “Protestantism, so insistent upon the worship owed to God alone, tends to neglect or despise the holy that is less than Absolute” (The Catholic Moment, p. xx). Classic Calvinism is particularly prone to this danger when the doctrine of total depravity is understood to mean that the image of God in man is completely erased. Evangelicals can be guilty of this error when they refuse, for example, to recognize the Blessed Virgin Mary for her virtue and faithfulness. Honoring great personages of our faith need not, of necessity, lead to idolatry.
Conclusion
Although I have been writing primarily to Evangelical Protestants, since this is a Catholic magazine I trust Catholics have been looking over my shoulder. It is important for them to realize that some of us Evangelicals recognize the common ingredients we share with Catholics who honor Scripture and recite the creeds in faith. A number of orthodox Catholics, including men such as Peter Kreeft, James Hitchcock, Thomas Howard, and Mark Brumley, have been in discussion with Evangelicals concerning issues of common concern. By all means, let us defend our theological distinctions while laboring together when possible “for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (Jude 3).