Should we Evangelize Protestants ?

The Catholic Thing ^ | August 9th, 2020 | Casey Chalk

[MurphsLaw]

We should stop trying to evangelize Protestants, some Catholics say. “Let’s get our own house clean first, before we invite our fellow Christians in,” someone commented on a recent article of mine that presented a Catholic rejoinder to a prominent Baptist theologian. Another reader argued that, rather than trying to persuade Protestants to become Catholic, we should “help each other spread God’s love in this world that seems to be falling to pieces before our eyes.” As a convert from Protestantism, actively engaged in ecumenical dialogue, I’ve heard this kind of thinking quite frequently. And it’s dead wrong.

One common argument in favor of scrapping Catholic evangelism towards Protestants is that the Catholic Church, mired in sex-abuse and corruption scandals, liturgical abuses, heretical movements, and uneven catechesis, is such a mess that it is not, at least for the moment, a place suitable for welcoming other Christians.

There are many problems with this. For starters, when has the Church not been plagued by internal crises? In the fourth century, a majority of bishops were deceived by the Arian heresy. The medieval Church suffered under the weight of simony and a lax priesthood, as well as the Avignon Papacy and the Western Schism, culminating in three men claiming, simultaneously, to be pope. The Counter-Reformation, for all its catechetical, missionary and aesthetic glories, was still marred by corruption and heresies (Jansenism). Catholicism has never been able to escape such trials. That didn’t stop St. Martin of Tours, St. Boniface, St. Francis de Sales, St. Ignatius Loyola, or St. Teresa of Calcutta from their missionary efforts.

The “Catholics clean house” argument also undermines our own theology. Is the Eucharist the “source and summit of the Christian life,” as Lumen Gentium preaches, or not? If it is, how could we in good conscience not direct other Christians to its salvific power? Jesus Himself declared: “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.” (John 6:53) Was our Lord misrepresenting the Eucharist?

Or what of the fact that most Protestant churches allow contraception, a mortal sin? Or that Protestants have no recourse to the sacraments of penance or last rites? To claim Protestants aren’t in need of these essential parts of the Catholic faith is to implicitly suggest we don’t need them either.

* Moreover, in the generations since the Reformation, Rome has been able to win many Protestants back to the fold who have made incalculable contributions to the Church. St. John Henry Newman’s conversion ushered in a Catholic revival in England, and gave us a robust articulation of the concept of doctrinal development. The conversion of French Lutheran pastor Louis Bouyer influenced the teachings of Vatican II. Biblical scholar Scott Hahn’s conversion in the 1980s revitalized lay study of Holy Scripture.

Another popular argument in favor of limiting evangelization of Protestants involves the culture war. Catholics and theologically conservative Protestants, some claim, share significant common ground on various issues: abortion, homosexuality, transgenderism, euthanasia, religious freedom, etc. Secularism, the sexual revolution, and anti-religious progressives represent an existential threat to the survival of both Catholics and Protestants, and thus we must work together, not debate one another. “Let’s hold back any criticism of them,” a person commenting on my article wrote. “Believe me, in the times that we are in, we need to all hang together, or we will definitely hang separately on gallows outside our own churches.”

This line of thought certainly has rhetorical force: we don’t have the luxury of debating with Protestants when the progressivists are planning our imminent demise! Ecumenical debate is a distraction from self-preservation. One problem with this argument is that it reduces our Christian witness to a zero-sum game – we have to focus all our efforts on fighting secular progressivism, or we’ll fail. Yet the Church has many missions in the public square – that Catholics invest great energy in the pro-life movement doesn’t mean we shouldn’t also focus our efforts on other important matters: health-care, education, ensuring religious freedom, or fighting poverty and environmental degradation. All of these, in different ways, are a part of human flourishing. Even if we consider some questions more urgent than others, none of them should be ignored.

Besides, there is a vast difference between mere polemics and charitable, fruitful discussions aimed at resolving disagreements. The former can certainly cause bad blood. The latter, however, can actually foster unity and clarity regarding our purposes. Consider how much more fruitful our fight against the devastation of the sexual revolution would be if we persuaded Protestants that they need to reject things like contraception and the more permissive stance towards divorce that they have allowed to seep into their churches. Consider how non-Christians could learn from charitable ecumenical conversations that don’t devolve into name-calling and vilification.

Finally, abandoning or minimizing the evangelizing of Protestants is to fail to recognize how their theological and philosophical premises have contributed to the very problems we now confront. As Brad Gregory’s book The Unintended Reformation demonstrates, the very nature of Protestantism has contributed to the individualism, secularism, and moral relativism of our age. A crucial component to our Catholic witness, then, is helping Protestants to recognize this, since even when they have the best intentions, their very paradigm undermines their contributions to collaborating with us in the culture war.

I for one am very grateful that Catholics – many of them former Protestants – persuaded me to see the problems inherent to Protestantism, and the indisputable truths of Catholicism. My salvation was at stake. I also found and married a devout Catholic woman, and am raising Catholic children. The Catholic tradition taught me how to pray, worship, and think in an entirely different way. It pains me to think what my life would be like if I hadn’t converted to Catholicism.

Why bother to evangelize devout Protestants? Because they are people like me.

[ebb tide]

I can’t help it if facts insult you. But I can pray for you.

[Luircin]

Are you going to apologize for calling me Lurch?

[ebb tide]

Sure. I didn’t know it offended you.

You’ve never complained before.

[Mom MD]

Try the athanasian creed ebb - held as true by the Roman Church

3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity;

4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.

5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.

6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.

see the part about not confounding the persons?

[Luircin]

You’ve never complained before.

***

So claiming that you never insult people and then actually insulting people is only a lie if they complain about it?

Apology—somewhat amusedly—accepted.

[ebb tide]

Sure there is. It's right there in your post:

6. But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit is all one, the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.

[Mom MD]

You are such a good cherry picking catholic. The two lines before it:

4. Neither confounding the persons nor dividing the substance.

5. For there is one person of the Father, another of the Son, and another of the Holy Spirit.

Or do you really state that the Father the Son and the Spirit are not separate persons?

[ebb tide]

So claiming that you never insult people.

I've never claimed that. But I do admit I may have insulted some folks for proclaiming the Catholic faith. Didn't Jesus Christ insult some folks?

Speaking of that, what do you find as gobbledy gook in the Preface of the Holy Trinity in post #630?

Specifics, please.

[ebb tide]

You’re so funny.

The Athanasian Creed is not in scripture. So much for “sola scriptura” defense!

[Mom MD]

changing the subject. The Roman church recognizes the athanasian creed as authoritative. an asked you if you believe what your church recognizes not a discussion of sola scriptura. You never answer a question. just change the subject and deflect. good night ebb

[ebb tide]

Or do you really state that the Father the Son and the Spirit are not separate persons?

No.

See post #630. That's what I believe.

[ebb tide]

I’m not changing the subject.

It was you who have been arguing sola scriptura and I’m pointing out your hypocrisy in going outside of it.

[ebb tide]

You never answer a question.

I have answered it. See post #630. Do you have problems with the Preface of the Holy Trinity? If so, what are they?

[MHGinTN]

Ebb, this protestant's definition of sola scriptura is that the Word of God has all that is needed for Salvation because The Word of God is sharper than any two-edged sword, able to separate soul and spirit and thus have GOD birth me again, in the spirit, where the Word of God tells me He, GOD, abides thereafter, in my born again spirit.

What you keep projecting is not what this protestant has learned sola scriptura means. But that is understandable since as a Catholic you do not believe one can be born again until death and the many 'works of righteousness' you imagine you have done to earn eternal life are counted up.

I am convinced that Jesus eliminated works of righteousness for any who are not born again because without The Righteousness of Christ imputed to the human spirit there is no righteousness to be source for works of righteousness.

[metmom]

Neither is.....

Catholic

Blessed Mother

Mother of God

Trinity

pope

purgatory

sacrament

holy water

confirmation

sacred tradition

catechism

eucharist

rosary

assumption (especially of Mary)

immaculate conception

And a whole host of other fables that Catholicism purports to be truth on par with God breathed, Holy Spirit inspired Scripture.

[metmom]

So, Catholic religious reasoning goes thus....

Mary is the mother of Jesus, and Jesus is God, therefore, Mary is the mother of God.

Continued is, God is three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

If Mary is mother of God, and mother of God the Son, then Mary is mother of God the Father, and God, the Holy Spirit as well.

Or are you denying that the Father and the Holy Spirit are God?

Then how can Mary be the *faithful spouse of the Holy Spirit*, if she’s his mom?

[metmom]

I’m not changing the subject. It was you who have been arguing sola scriptura and I’m pointing out your hypocrisy in going outside of it.

Yes you are, in this very post as you are claiming you are not changing the subject.

You are claiming that MomMD is has been arguing sola scriptura, so I checked out her posting history looking for where she did that on this thread and found ZERO places where she even came near addressing it.

So it appears that you are falsely accusing MomMD of something she did not do.

So you could either show us the posts where she did this, or man up and apologize for falsely accusing her of something she did not do.

[metmom]

Catholics like to make up strawmen about what they think sola scriptura is and knock it down and then demand we defend some fabrication they invented.

Time and again they’ve been told what we define it as, and it falls on deaf ears. I have not met one FRoman who ever even acknowledged how we define it as nor accepted the correction to their errant belief.

They just double down on their fabrication, and their demands we defend their mistaken ideas.

It’s kind or ironic that the group that claims responsibility for giving us Scripture and claims that it is the only entity capable of correctly interpreting it, fights its authority so hard.

They claim their prelate, the so called pope, can speak infallibly and has supreme authority but when it comes to acknowledging that Scripture, as God breathed, Holy Spirit inspired Divine revelation is authoritative and adequate to bring us to salvation, and equip us for every good work, complete in Christ, the teeth gnashing begins.

And after claiming they wrote the Scripture which they now claim isn’t good enough, they tell us to accept sacred tradition and ex cathedra statements and trust them.

Why is beyond me because if the very Scripture they claim to have authored is so inadequate that it now needs to be added to, why should we trust them to get it right this time?

[Elsie]

So are you committing heresy by saying that Jesus is not divine and human?

At least you start your strawman with a question; even though it is the same as the, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" one.

[Elsie]

So you do not believe the Bible:

Your statement/accusation SO reeks of hypocrisy!