WHI-1073 | Should We Reform or Abandon American Protestantism?
Oct.31, 2011 by
in
2011 Show Archive, White Horse Inn
Have you grown impatient with your church’s seemingly endless quest for being hip and relevant? Have you become weary of “meaningful worship services” that say more about radio dial preferences than biblical fidelity? Are you irritated by the constant flow of shallow, superficial, and even narcissistic books that stock the shelves of evangelical bookstores? On this program, Michael Horton talks about these issues and more with Notre Dame sociologist Christian Smith who describes his conversion to Roman Catholicism in his recent book, How to Go from Being a Good Evangelical to a Committed Catholic in 95 Difficult Steps. Mike also talks with Christian about his other new book, Lost in Transition.
RELATED ARTICLES
Evangelicals & Catholics Together?
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
Turning Romeward?
Paul Zahl
Paul Zahl
Can We Be Confessional & Catholic?
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
MUSIC SELECTION
Doug Powell
PROGRAM AUDIO
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
RECOMMENDED BOOKS
How to Go From Being a Good Evangelical to a Committed Catholic in Ninety-Five Difficult Steps
Christian Smith
Christian Smith
Evangelicals, Catholics & Unity
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
Lost in Transition
Christian Smith
Christian Smith
RECOMMENDED AUDIO
You Foolish Galatians!
WHI-140
WHI-140
October 31st, 2011 at 9:17 am
Great job by Michael Horton holding to the truth and keeping Christian Smith’s feet to the fire that words actually mean things.
An awesome episode of the White Horse Inn!
Thanks, so much!
October 31st, 2011 at 5:17 pm
I concur, Steve, and done in a very cordial and loving way. Wonderful! I guess the positive regarding Christian Smith is that he seems to hold to Christ alone.
On that related note, it seems more and more that words can mean whatever a person wants them to mean. It can make for difficult discussion. Do others find this, or is it just me?
November 1st, 2011 at 7:04 am
[...] You know that feeling you get when someone perfectly describes something you have witnessed or seen dozens of times, but never been able to articulate yourself? I had that feeling as I listened to Christian Smith describe the average, American Evangelical Bible study. The following quote is taken from an interview at The White Horse Inn: [...]
November 1st, 2011 at 7:57 am
Words are being twisted into all kinds of things these days. I’m quite sure that the devil loves this as deception is part and parcel of his trade.
November 1st, 2011 at 12:56 pm
“On that related note, it seems more and more that words can mean whatever a person wants them to mean. It can make for difficult discussion. Do others find this, or is it just me?
”
Unfortunately it’s not just you, Peter. I get this refrain from my wife a lot such as well that’s just your interpretation. And I have been in those bible studies where the historical narrative is ignored and it’s just, How does this apply to my life now? or What does this mean for ME?
November 1st, 2011 at 2:48 pm
I’m about half way through the book (I read it here and there on my phone – modernity, gotta love it). The thing that’s stood out and struck me most, believe it or not, is the tone, rather than the ideas. I expected something more along the line of a meditation or confession.
Instead, the tone thus far has been, for lack of a better word, snarky. Granted, there’s much to be snarky about. But the subject is too serious to be communicated in a tone more typical of an email exchange. Indeed, the subject is about eternal souls, and we should expect a little more solemnity in a book seeking to pull people out of Evangelicalism into Roman Catholicism.
Other than that (!), good interview about a serious subject.
November 1st, 2011 at 2:57 pm
I wouldn’t abandon the Christian truths I’ve held in turn for Roman Catholicism because of the failures of moralistic thereputic deistic “protestantism”. Our churches need reform and change, and we ought to pray for this.
November 1st, 2011 at 3:12 pm
Isn’t it a false dilemma to hold out as the only two choices an evangelicalism as it is in its often aberrant forms, and historic Catholicism in its doctrinal deficiency? What about a position that holds quietly to the work of the Reformers and refuses, against the tide of pop Christianity all around us, to let go…?
November 1st, 2011 at 3:36 pm
What is SOLO scriptura ? Or how does it differ from SOLA scriptura ?
November 2nd, 2011 at 5:13 pm
Here is a list of links to various documents mentioned in this excellent episode of “The White Horse Inn”, which I compiled while I was doing my own further reading on the reformation divide between Protestants and Catholics.
“Disputation on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences” (Commonly Known as “The 95 Theses”) by Dr. Martin Luther
http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/history/95theses.htm
“JOINT DECLARATION ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION” by the Lutheran World Federation and the Catholic Church 1999:
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html
“Evangelicals and Catholics Together: A Critical Review Christian Mission In the Third Millennium” by Michael S. Horton
http://www.modernreformation.org/default.php?page=articledisplay&var1=ArtRead&var2=753&var3=main
“The canons and decrees of the sacred and ecumenical Council of Trent” (commonly known as “The Council of Trent”):
http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent.html
Anathemas from Session 6 – ON JUSTIFICATION – Cannons I-XXXIII of “The Council of Trent”:
http://history.hanover.edu/texts/trent/ct06.html
“Catechism of the Catholic Church” 2nd Edition 1997:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
“Documents of the II Vatican Council”:
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/
November 2nd, 2011 at 10:32 pm
“Evangelicals and Catholics Together” 1994:
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2007/01/evangelicals–catholics-together-the-christian-mission-in-the-third-millennium-2
November 4th, 2011 at 5:50 am
[...] Protestants and Tridentine Roman Catholics remain intact (as an example, see this helpful dialogue between Michael Horton and Roman Catholic convert Christian Smith). This doesn’t mean that we [...]
November 4th, 2011 at 6:41 pm
I had a lengthy email dialogue once with a guy that I was in seminary with a few years ago at a Reformed seminary who converted to Roman Catholicism after growing up Protestant. One of the things that was common to both the person in my class and Dr. Smith was interpreting Rome through the lens of Reformation theology. In other words, they read statements about justification, grace, faith, etc., in the Roman Catholic documents with an “evangelical” bent. In that way they can placate their desire for tradition, antiquity, unity, authority, or whatever else they long for, without having to abandon their theology wholesale. It seems to me that very few Roman Catholic converts evangelicalism wind up saying, “gee, I’ve really got to do more good works to merit salvation.” Instead, they say “gee, I never knew Roman believed that a person is saved by grace through faith in Christ.” I hope all Roman Catholics are equally mistaken about Roman Catholic theology and actually believe the true gospel in spite of Trent or the Catholic Catechism.
November 9th, 2011 at 2:15 pm
Excellent Reformation Day discussion!
“Justification (sixth session) was declared to be offered upon the basis of faith and good works as opposed to the Protestant doctrine of faith alone, and faith was treated as a progressive work. The idea of man being utterly passive under the influence of grace was also rejected.”
-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Trent
Jacobus Arminius has technically won the Protestant battle (1 Calvinist for every 3 Arminians worldwide), yet Arminians (human dignity requires an unimpaired freedom of the will) are considered brothers-in-Christ by the hardest-core Calvinists I know. However, worst case, this Trent soteriology is on par with Arminius.
Therefore, why would there be animus toward or even concern for Dr. Smith swimming the Tiber to Rome?
Protestantism, with its 1000s of denominations (not including independent baptist congregations) is like a Parliament constantly trying to build a coalition government just so they can appear to agree on something.
For better or for worse, the Roman Catholic Church is a church as Jesus prayed that we would be (John 17).
November 10th, 2011 at 8:20 am
Ya, I agree John 17 says everything about the Roman Catholic Church – Maryology, praying to and for dead people, Purgatory. Should I continue?
November 10th, 2011 at 8:58 am
Matt,
(1.) To the extent that one refuses to honor Mary, and recognize that she is the Mother of God, he is a Nestorian — a Christological heretic. If we don’t remember and revere her, we are cut off. Catholics could never be accused of this.
(2.) Since “We are surrounded by this great cloud of witnesses” can they only see and not hear us? Can these saints only see and not ask Christ to help us? If I request you to pray for me, may I not ask them for help, too?
(3.) If there’s no Purgatory, what is happening between the time of the elect’s death and reunification of his body and soul? Perhaps this is the time the “snow covered dung” (Luther) is removed from each of us.
November 10th, 2011 at 10:49 am
To Anon,
I’m not saying we shouldn’t remember her or revere her. Maryology is quite different than remembering and revering her.
Regardless of the great cloud of witnesses, the Bible doesn’t instruct us to pray to or for those who have passed.
Purgatory denies the sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice. Do you really want to say to Christ that his sacrifice wasn’t (quite) enough? I’ll stick with Paul’s absent from the body, present with the Lord concept. And I’ll apprehend the mystery of where our non-corporeal souls go upon death.
November 10th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Anon said:
(2.) Since “We are surrounded by this great cloud of witnesses” …may I not ask them for help, too?
The Bible says “no.” The Scriptures clearly prohibit attempts to communicate with the dead (Lev. 19:31; 20:6; 20:27; Deut. 18:11; 1 Sam. 28). One cannot draw an inference from Hebrews 12:1 that is flatly contradicted by clear teaching elsewhere in Scripture. That is a basic hermeneutical principle.
November 20th, 2011 at 4:08 pm
Chris:
If we are going to proof-text from Leviticus, to correct the great cloud of witnesses, please submit a group photo of your congregation which displays the various hairstyles so that we can see your compliance with the verse that appears just 4 verses before in Leviticus 19:27 (“You shall not round off the hair on your temples or mar the edges of your beard.”) #selective literalism