Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Catholic
History and Religion
Dialogue with an Anglican Philosopher on Catholic-Protestant Ecumenism

Dialogue with an Anglican Philosopher on Catholic-Protestant Ecumenism

Last updated on: May 24, 2017 at 2:39 pm by Dave Armstrong

Dialogue with an Anglican Philosopher on Catholic-Protestant Ecumenism 2017-05-24T14:39:47-04:00 Dave Armstrong

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

(vs. Dr. Jerry Walls)

President Reagan and First Lady Nancy Reagan Meet with Pope St. John Paul II (7 June 1982) [public domain / Wikimedia Commons]

***

(5-13-15)

***

Jerry Walls is a philosophy professor at Houston Baptist University, and received his doctorate from Notre Dame. He himself is Anglican. He will be shortly publishing a book which is a critique of Catholicism. He is not an anti-Catholic. This exchange took place on my (public) Facebook wall. His words will be in blue.

* * * * *

I knew you would not convert me, and I did not see a reasonable hope of my converting you. I believe what you do – but I believe more. I rejoice to think that you with all your heart and soul believe our Lord Jesus Christ to be the Saviour of the world, and of every soul who comes to Him for salvation; and the sole Saviour. I wish you believed the whole counsel of God. But in this bad time, when there are so many unbelievers, I rejoice to think you are not one of them.

(Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman, Letters & Diaries, v. 25; To J. F. Lloyd, 14 April 1870)

All I claimed was that he showed disdain for them in “Development,” in order to bolster his “Rome or nothing claim,” which is true. He also shows similar disdain for the Eastern church in that book. My only interest in Newman pertains to his celebrated argument in that book, which I found wanting in several respects, many of which are shown in Mozley’s reply. And if he did not really believe it’s “Rome or nothing” he should have refrained from that rhetoric. I was frankly even less impressed with his charity in that book than his arguments.

You also made a remark about Newman quite possibly rejecting Protestantism as a Christian tradition altogether. Newman treats individuals with extreme charity, regardless of affiliation. He has hard words for Anglicanism and Protestantism, but they have to be interpreted within the framework of many “ecumenical” statements like the one above.

Well it all depends on how serious he is about the “Rome or nothing line,” whether it is just rhetorical exaggeration or he really believes it.

As I already stated (on your wall), that is an argument concerning logical consistency, which all thoughtful Christians make. If we believe our communion is the best or truest one, we will necessarily think that others are less logically consistent.

Newman simply extends that thought all the way, believing that only Catholicism is perfectly consistent. It doesn’t follow that he denies that any non-Catholic Christian group (and esp. individuals) is Christian at all. All the evidence is against such an alleged denial.

I’ve done the same thing myself for 25 years, holding that any form of Protestantism is viciously circular and unable to be consistently maintained under scrutiny, in terms of logic and its relation to historical facts and the Bible.

At the same time, I have very warm, affectionate relations with many Protestants, whom I consider my esteemed brethren in Christ, and have written dozens of ecumenical posts and book chapters.

Yes, he seems to recognize incoherent Protestants as in some sense Christians in his other writings. But in “Development” his comments about other Christians are not only dismissive but also comical caricatures.

I have already agreed that he broad-brushes. He has a deep contempt in particular for Wesley and Methodism that I have never understood. Yet even there he recognizes the good qualities found therein.

Yeah, too bad all of us Protestant Christian philosophers can’t see how incoherent we are.

You say Catholicism is incoherent and inconsistent. That’s inherent in any strong critique of another view. What the Hades is the difference? I see none. Insofar as we say x, y, and z in another view are incorrect, we are alleging inconsistency: more so, the more examples we submit.

No, I’m inclined to think it is possible to be a consistent RC, given your assumptions. You can be wrong without being inconsistent, or at least obviously or demonstrably so.

That’s what I think about Calvinism. But that is only post-premises. If we disagree with another view, we have to either critique its premises, or consistent application from premises, or both.

So, e.g., in critiquing us, if you deny the three-legged stool rule of faith (Scripture-Tradition-Church), that is the major premise of authority we operate on. We may consistently apply it, but are wrong (in your eyes) because the premise is wrong.

Conversely, we deny your premise of sola Scriptura, and say that the massive edifice you build upon it is built upon the flimsy foundation of unbiblical, illogical sand.

Again, too bad all us Protestant philosophers have a faith that is flimsy, unbiblical and illogical. With ecumenism like this, who needs sectarians?!

Okay; what is it that you think ecumenism is? I think all trinitarian, baptized Protestants are brothers in Christ, part of the kingdom and body of Christ; the great bulk of whom will likely be saved and in heaven. At the same time they believe some false doctrines (a small minority of their entirety of beliefs) and fail to believe some things that we think they should (Catholic “distinctives”).

What is so uncharitable or unecumenical in such a view? How is it vastly different from your view of Catholicism? Did I say your weekly worship adored Ba’al, as the Lutheran Confessions say of us, or that it is relentlessly blasphemous, sacrilegious, and idolatrous, as Calvin and Luther say of our Mass?

It’s not uncharitable to claim that another Christian view has less support from the Bible or logic than your own. Certainly if you are writing a book about Catholicism, you will do that. You do so without being anti-Catholic or bigoted, just as I make my critiques without being anti-Protestant or bigoted.

I’m extremely grateful for my evangelical background, as I have made clear many times in papers, books, and radio interviews. I view it as a very good thing overall, but I view Catholicism as “better” and “the fullness of Christian faith.”

A belief in “One True Church” is not inconsistent with a high respect for Protestants, who are imperfectly part of that Church by virtue of baptism, the Nicene Creed, and a host of commonalities. Protestants don’t like talk of “The Church.” Their presuppositions make it almost inevitable that they will regard such a view as intolerant and insufferably arrogant. I did this myself. My biggest bugaboos were papal and Church infallibility (which I thought were the height of absurdity): far more than Mary.

I got no problem with the church, I just recognize the holy catholic Church is much larger than Rome. But we will just have to disagree and you can read my reasons if you want when our book comes out.

Exactly. The difference is on the definition of the Church. I follow the one that was held from the beginning. You prefer the post-16th century definition. :-)

It’s pretty likely that I will be critiquing your book to some extent. I’ve been waiting for an intelligent non-anti-Catholic critique of Catholicism since Geisler’s excellent book some 20 years ago now.

Question begging as you surely know. If not, I can’t help you.

I was simply stating my beliefs held in faith. Rest assured that I can defend them at extreme length (from the Bible and history). And I can criticize your ecclesiology at extreme length as well (from the Bible and history): none of which would be question-begging at all.

I still await an answer as to what is so unecumenical in a Catholic holding his views, yet respecting Protestants as Christian brethren.

[C]ultivate that great virtue, faith, which I acknowledge may be possessed in the Anglican Church; which, knowing your earnestness and sincerity, I will believe you possess in it, if you tell me so. This is not inconsistent with my holding that in reality there is ’no medium between scepticism and Catholicism –’ and on the contrary quite consistent with my saying that if you join us, it must be ’to save your soul’ . . . (Blessed John Henry Cardinal Newman to an Unknown Correspondent, beginning of 1871?; from Letters & Diaries, v. 25, p. 261)

Well, I’d say thinking a fellow Christian’s views are flimsy, illogical and unbiblical is not very ecumenical.

To paraphrase my actual counter-argument earlier:

“Well, I’d say thinking a fellow Christian’s worship every Sunday is the worship of Ba’al, sacrilegious, idolatrous, and blasphemous is not very ecumenical.”

I mean, I only think Roman views are unbiblical and flimsy, but I am inclined to think you can be consistent, given your assumptions.

So now we disagree on only one of the three (and we don’t really even disagree on that). I have already stated that I think Calvinism is consistent, given its assumptions. I’d say the same for Arminianism (my old view, and similar to my Molinist [Congruist] soteriology now). So we’re in exactly the same boat vis-a-vis each other’s views. Yet you seem to think we are not.

I do moreover, believe you hold essential biblical truth, even if I think you hold a lot that is not.

. . . which is exactly what the Catholic Church and Catholics think of Protestantism and Protestants.

I also think you are a member of the one true church, . . .

As we do you, though in an imperfect, not fully realized sense; by virtue of baptismal regeneration.

and would gladly invite you to share the sacrament at my church.

A nice gesture . . . Closed communion, however, is not inherently “intolerant.” Thus, some Protestants, such as Lutherans, practice it, on the basis of assumed prior doctrinal agreement.

I have no intention of getting into these issues here.

No need to, Jerry. I just demonstrated that we are no different at all, in terms of ecumenical outlook. We have theological differences, but not ecumenical ones (nothing serious, anyway).

I am co-authoring a book explaining why I am not a Roman Catholic. If you want to know my views you can read them there.

I will, and I will be responding to it at length.

* * * * *

Ecumenism & Christian Unity

Catholics & Protestants

Christian unity

ecumenical

Ecumenism

Previous Post

April 29, 2015

What I LIKE (a Lot!) About Calvinism and Calvinists

Next Post

May 23, 2015 Intro.: "Cardinal Newman: Q & A in Theology, Church History, & Conversion"

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category & Last Things About Me Anti-Catholicism Atheism & Agnosticism Baptism and Sacramentalism Bible and Tradition Blessed Virgin Mary Books by Dave Armstrong C. S. Lewis Calvinism & General Protestantism Catholic Apologetics Catholic Apologists Catholic conversion Catholic converts Christmas Church (Ecclesiology) Church History Conversion and Converts Development of Doctrine Eastern Orthodoxy Ecumenism & Christian Unity Eucharist & Liturgy Fathers of the Church French Translations G. K. Chesterton Hell Hell & Satan Hell & Satan & Last Things Heresies & Comparative Religion Holistic Health Inquisition & Crusades & Scandals James White Jews & Judaism & Old Testament John Calvin John Henry Newman Liberal / Modernist Theology Life Issues Literary Resume Lutheranism Mariology Martin Luther Music Orthodoxy Papacy & Infallibility Personal Page Philosophy & Science Political & Ethical & Moral Issues Protestant Persecution & Intolerance Protestantism Purgatory Purgatory & Penance Romantic & Imaginative Theology Saints & Purgatory & Penance Salvation Salvation & Justification Satan & Last Things Sexuality and Gender Issues Spanish Translations Traditionalism vs. Radical Catholic Reactionaries Traducciones al español / tradução para português Trinitarianism & Christology Uncategorized Videos

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 April 2010 March 2010 December 2009 October 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 March 2009 February 2009 October 2008 September 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 May 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 October 2005 June 2005 April 2005 February 2005 July 2004 May 2004 April 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz