Posted on

103. Evangelicals and Catholics Together (1994-2015)

March 9th, 2015

Twenty years is a sufficient time to reflect on the current trajectory initiated of the “Evangelical and Catholics Together” (ECT) initiative. Over the years this informal North American project spurred by Chuck Colson and Richard Neuhaus has produced a substantial series of documents on various doctrinal and moral topics. More than that ECT has set a friendly tone to a complex relationship that was previously marked by distance and even mutual opposition. I have already critically dealt with the context and the content of ECT elsewhere,[1] and so my primary concern here is to reflect on two commitments that ECT has embodied thus far and that perhaps represent its major on-going legacy.

Togetherness

The title of the initiative has proven to have had a far-reaching and programmatic value and has superseded in importance of the more than several thousand words of its texts. Evangelicals and Catholics stand together. They confess together. They pray together. They are together. They belong together. More than anything else the insistence on them being together is what really seems to matter. The outcome is that one group cannot be thought of without the other and vice versa. They continue to be distinct as Evangelicals and Catholics, but they are and shall be always together. Few of those familiar with ETC will be aware of the existing differences between Evangelicals and Catholics (which the ECT documents readily admit), but all of them will remember the emphasis on togetherness. In a world heavily characterized by religious conflicts and divisions, the psychological attachments of the word “together” prevail over the informational import of the initiative. Being together is an overarching commitment that addresses deeply felt concerns. The point is subtle because nowadays no one likes to be perceived as divisive and sectarian.

Generally speaking, togetherness is a highly valued condition. Biblically, however, it needs to be qualified in order not to become an intrusive idol. Togetherness, in fact, can become an idol if it is made an absolute in itself and is not defined by biblical truth. If this is the case, it can lead to unwarranted alliances and dangerous forms of unity, forcing people to say only “nice” things and only those things that do not question what is assumed as an already given unity. There is a whole stream of biblical teaching instructing God’s people to be aware of the dangers of forming spurious alliances (e.g.: Leviticus 20:26; 1 Kings 8:53; Proverbs 13:20; 2 Corinthians 6:17). The point here is that all references to togetherness need to be safeguarded and counter-balanced by a biblically defined theology of separation. Christian identity must define both sides according to the Word of God. ECT does recognize areas of difference, but its overall framework is to stress Evangelicals and Catholics being together in spite of being separated in very substantial ways. The former is stronger than the latter and ultimately defines the relationship. Therefore ECT has not only been an opportunity for dialogue and mutual understanding, it has from the beginning assumed the unity that needs instead to be biblically demonstrated. In this sense, ECT contains in its title a programmatic statement which is somewhat one-sided and over-stretched.

The Part for the Whole

The second remark has to do with another characteristic of ECT, namely its tendency to project what can be said of a single part onto the whole. Take, for instance, those who have been involved in the dialogue. The Catholic signatories of ECT are all biblically informed and very much influenced by a historically significant Protestant culture which has contributed to the shaping of their religious worldview. They are culturally close to their Evangelical counterparts and share with them important contours of the Christian life. All of this is mediated by a pluralist setting (i.e the USA) which crucially benefited from a Protestant input. Their attachment to Catholic popular devotions is discrete, and their underlining of certain Roman Catholic teachings and practices, which can hardly be found in Scripture, is almost unnoticeable. This is a very selected group of Roman Catholics and yet ECT, while legitimately speaking of them as “Catholics”, does so as if they embodied the whole or at least the majority of Catholics. Those who have at the very least a minimal experience outside of certain North American intellectual circles know that the bigger picture is much different. In many parts of the world Catholicism is largely defined by other religious commitments than those of ECT. What ETC says may apply to a group of people (be they Evangelicals or Catholics), yet the impression is given that the US Catholics with whom Evangelicals supposedly stand together are representative of the billion plus Catholics around the world. It is an overstatement, to say the least.

Secondly, the exchange between the part and the whole occurs also as far as the theological framework of the dialogue is concerned. Typically, each topic that is discussed by ECT is analyzed thematically, exploring the areas of agreement along with the points that need further study or where divergences can be found. In this way it is difficult if not impossible to get to the crux of things, i.e. the core issues which prevent Evangelicals and Catholics from being together on basic issues. Little attention is given to doctrinal presuppositions, spiritual assumptions, and the bigger theological frameworks that inform each one’s theological traditions. The outcome is that each document contains a cahier de doléances concerning the remaining areas of divergence but does not provide suggestions for coming to terms with what is at stake fundamentally between the two groups. It tends to go around it without tackling it.

Instead of ECT, perhaps a better and more realistic title for the next twenty years would be ECD: Evangelicals and Catholics in Dialogue.

[1] Christian Unity vis-à-vis Roman Catholicism: a Critique of the Evangelicals and Catholics Together Dialogue, “Evangelical Review of Theology” 27:4 (2003) pp. 337-352. https://vaticanfiles.org/2015/02/christian-unity-vis-a-vis-roman-catholicism-a-critique-of-the-evangelicals-and-catholics-together-dialogue/

Posted on

A Christian’s Pocket Guide to Papacy

Dear Friends of the Vatican Files,

this is not a new Vatican File but a short message to inform you that my book on the Papacy is now available for purchase.

http://www.christianfocus.com/item/show/1617/-

USA: http://www.stl-distribution.com/details/?id=9781781912997

Other areas, check here:  http://www.christianfocus.com/distributor/list/-/-

I hope that you will enjoy it!

A Christian’s Pocket Guide to Papacy

Its origin and role in the 21st century

by Leonardo De Chirico

A Christian's Pocket Guide to Papacy

Pages: 128
Trim: Pocket paperback (178 x 110mm)
Isbn 13: 9781781912997
List Price: £4.99
Originally Released: January 2014
Last Reprinted: January 2014
Imprint: Christian Focus
Category: Church Life > Protestant Denominations

 

 

  • Comprehensive introduction to the Catholic Church’s doctrine
  • Unpacks the mystery of the Papacy
  • Investigates the topic biblically

Description

Who are the Popes and how does the Roman Catholic Church define their role? What about the present day Popes? What is the ecumenical significance of the Papacy and what are its prospects in the global world? These and other questions are tackled as Leonardo De Chirico explores the Biblical, historical, and theological fabric of the Papacy.

Leonardo De Chirico has been involved in a church planting project in Rome and is now pastor of the church Breccia di Roma (www.brecciadiroma.it). He is lecturer of Historical Theology at Istituto di Formazione Evangelica e Documentazione (www.ifeditalia.org) and vice-chairman of the Italian Evangelical Alliance (www.alleanzaevangelica.org).

 

Reviews

…Professor De Chirico investigate the phenomenon of Roman Catholic hierarchy using biblical exegesis, fascinating historical data, and basic theological insights to inform our view…engaging, clearly written, polemical in the best sense, and resolutely Scriptural, this is easily the best shorter guide for those wanting to know how to evaluate the institution of the papacy and related matters.

William Edgar, Professor of Apologetics, Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

 

How readable! How fascinating! How important! This book is a page-turner. I kept thinking, “I have it, to whom can I give it?”…Right at the heart of Roman Catholicism there is this giant delusion. You don’t believe me? Then read this fascinating and brief book and think for yourself.

Geoff Thomas, Aberystwyth Baptist Church, Aberystwyth, Wales

 

In terms of an introduction to the Catholic Church’s doctrine and exercise of the papacy, this book is unmatched! Read this book and you will gain essential insights into what for many Christians is a mystery, now unpacked by a trusted evangelical theologian and pastor.

Gregg R. Allison, Professor of Christian Theology, The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky

Posted on

102. Still “our Holy Mother the Hierarchical Church”

February 28th, 2015

A Church more interested in promoting mission than keeping traditions. A Church less concentrated on theological boundaries and more focused on expanding its loving appeal to all men. A Church whose unity is like a polyhedron and allows multiple relationships with her. This is the picture of the Church that Pope Francis has been presenting since his election in 2013. Overall the secular public opinion resonated well with this seemingly “lighter” form of Roman Catholicism, i.e. a more relaxed Church in terms of faith and morals living out its message in more organic and relational ways. In Francis’ preferred metaphor, the Church is a “field hospital” welcoming the irregular ones more than an impressive cathedral assembling the liturgically righteous. This is only one side of the coin, however. While it is true that Francis’ emphasis has been consistently put on the missional side of the Church, it is also true that he has occasionally but consistently re-stated the full, heavy and thick traditional understanding of the church.

Holy Mother

The last instance was during a recent catechesis on the topic of the Church[1]. In introducing the role of the Bishop, Francis said: “In the presence and ministry of the Bishops, of Presbyters and of Deacons we can recognize the true face of the Church: it is the Hierarchical Holy Mother Church”. Notice the reference to the “true face” of the Church, which is shown in the hierarchical structure of the Church thought of as the Mother. This is a very propositional statement about the Church. Two dimensions are particularly stressed: the hierarchical and the motherly aspects of the church, which form the backbone of its self-understanding.

According to Francis, as mother the Church “generates us in Baptism as Christians, making us reborn in Christ; she watches over our growth in the faith; she supports us between the Father’s arms, to receive His forgiveness, she prepares for us the Eucharistic table, where she nourishes us with the Word of God and the Body and Blood of Jesus; she invokes upon us God’s blessing and the strength of His Spirit, sustaining us throughout the course of our life and enveloping us with His tenderness and warmth, especially in the most difficult moments of trial, of suffering and of death”. This is a breathtaking list of verbs: generating, making reborn, watching over, supporting, nourishing, sustaining, enveloping … these are the maternal roles of the Church that always accompany the Christian life. Their cumulative force is overwhelming and makes them resemble the role of the Head of the Church, Jesus Christ. Actually this is what they are meant to be. Christ continues his mission through the Mother Church.

If one wants to come to terms with Roman Catholicism at all levels she needs to grapple with this deeply felt sense of motherhood, which is also the theological and devotional architecture of the Roman Catholic Mariology. It is Mary, the Mother par excellence, who embodies the motherly care of the Church and who is by no chance always invoked to ask for motherly protection and care.

The Hierarchical Church

The maternal principle of the Church lies at the heart of Francis’ vision of the Church. There is also an intertwined element to this. The motherly dimension is organically connected to the hierarchical structure of the Church. The Pope goes on to say that in the Bishop, the hierarchical top of the motherly Church, “is Christ Himself who renders Himself present and who continues to take care of His Church”. The presence of Jesus Christ is made present in the motherly role of the Church through its hierarchical structure. It is curious to notice that in his earthly ministry Jesus showed the Father, whereas now He carries on his mission in and through the motherly face of the Church. It is through the hierarchy that “the Church exercises her maternity”.

According to the Pope then, the “true face” of the Church is where the maternal and the hierarchical dimensions are intimately connected to one another and form the core of the church’s identity. In churches where the motherhood of the church is less explicit because it is defined by the sobriety of biblical boundaries and where the hierarchical structure is lived out against the background of the headship of Christ and the universal priesthood of all believers, the Church loses her “true face”. So, on the one hand, Francis is sending the message that Christian unity and human brotherhood are at hand in a loosely articulated vision of unity; on the other, he maintains the traditional understanding of the Roman Catholic Church which stemmed out of the Council of Trent.

At a superficial level Christian unity under Pope Francis may seem “easier” for non-Catholic Christians, but a closer look shows that the theological issues of the historic differences, at least with Evangelical Christianity, are still standing.

Posted on

101. Holy Mother of God! Three Times!

February 12th, 2015

In the Roman Catholic liturgical calendar the first day of the year marks the solemnity of Mary, the Mother of God. On this occasion the Pope delivers a Marian homily that highlights the unique status of Mary and her unparalleled role in Catholic doctrine and spirituality. Given the strong Marian devotion of Pope Francis it is no surprise that he celebrated this solemnity with great enthusiasm that also included an unexpected finale. A recent book (Francesco e Maria. L’amore di Papa Bergoglio per la Madonna, edited by V. Sansonetti, Milano: Rizzoli 2014) highlights the love of Pope Francis for the Madonna by collecting a number of Marian prayers and devotions which are extremely dear to him.

Inseparable Mother

In his first speech of the year Francis offered a meditation on the inseparability of Christ and his mother[1]. He then elaborated on that inseparability by underscoring the relationship between Mary and the church and ultimately between Mary and the whole of mankind. “Jesus cannot be understood without his Mother” said the Pope. This is true of course, but with certain limits and biblical distinctions. With the Incarnation the Son of God became a man by being born of Mary. He is the sinless God-man that brings forth the Father’s grace through the Spirit while his mother is a sinful creature that receives God’s grace. That inseparability needs biblical qualifications otherwise it can lead to the exaltation of Mary beyond what Scripture allows.

Having established the inseparability between Mother and Son, the Pope went on to apply it to another relationship: that of Mary and the Church. Here is what he said: “Likewise inseparable are Christ and the Church – because the Church and Mary are always together and this is precisely the mystery of womanhood in the ecclesial community – and the salvation accomplished by Jesus cannot be understood without appreciating the motherhood of the Church”. The train of thought is that Mary is inseparable from Christ and from the Church; therefore Christ is inseparable from the Church through Mary. Mary is the connecting point between Christ and the Church. As she is inseparable from the former, she is also inseparable from the latter and mediates the relationship between the two. Thus Mary is theologically central in the overall Roman Catholic scheme.

There is yet another step. As Mary is the mother of Jesus and the mother of the Church, she is also deemed to be the mother of all mankind. The Roman Catholic transitive property of the inseparable link is at work here. In lyrical style Francis concludes: “Mary, the first and most perfect disciple of Jesus, the first and most perfect believer, the model of the pilgrim Church, is the one who opens the way to the Church’s motherhood and constantly sustains her maternal mission to all mankind. She, the Mother of God, is also the Mother of the Church, and through the Church, the mother of all men and women, and of every people”. The human inseparability between Mary and Jesus is worked out in the inseparability between Mary and the Church and then between Mary and the whole of humankind.

A Crescendo With A Marian Grand Finale

Francis’ speech is a clear example of how Roman Catholic Mariology has been at work throughout the ages. An initial step with some biblical support (i.e. the Son-Mother link in the context of the Incarnation) was developed in subsequent syllogisms that lacked biblical criteria (e.g. Mary mother of the Church, Mary mother of mankind). The outcome is a brand new theological framework that has little resemblance to how it began.

As an experienced bishop with pastoral warmth, Francis ended his homily with an unusual request that is hardly common in Vatican celebrations. “Let us look to Mary, let us contemplate the Holy Mother of God. I suggest that you all greet her together, just like those courageous people of Ephesus, who cried out before their pastors when they entered Church: “Holy Mother of God!” What a beautiful greeting for our Mother. There is a story – I do not know if it is true – that some among those people had clubs in their hands, perhaps to make the Bishops understand what would happen if they did not have the courage to proclaim Mary “Mother of God”! I invite all of you, without clubs, to stand up and to greet her three times with this greeting of the early Church: “Holy Mother of God!”.

Reports say that the puzzled crowd that was sitting and standing in the Vatican basilica shouted “Holy Mother of God” three times as the Pope had instructed. Thus the first day of the year was an occasion to introduce a highly sophisticated Mariological doctrine and a strongly felt Mariological devotion which were blended together by a committed Marian Pope. For those who desire to live according to the Word of God, it was not a very promising start to the year.

Posted on

100. The Idols of Rome

January 31st, 2015

Idolatry has become a theme of renewed interest in recent theological discussion. It neatly describes what the Bible warns against, and it helps to make sense of the overarching narrative of the Christian message. Idols are the enemies of God and try to replace God as the ultimate source of human life. Here is how Tim Keller identifies the essence of an idol in Augustinian terms: “If you love anything more than God, even though you believe in God, if there is anything in your life that is more important to your significance or security than God, then that is an idol – a kind of pseudo-god, a false god, a covenant master”.[1]

Idols are counterfeit gods that infiltrate personal lives and divert them from searching for God and following Him. It would be utterly simplistic to think of idols only operating in individuals or groups of people. If the presence of idols is so pervasive in the whole of human life, certainly they have a place in cities. Actually, cities are spatial and cultural spaces for idols to shape and destroy what comes under their dominion. Idolatry is therefore an “interpretative key” to come to terms with the spiritual condition of the city. Here I offer my homework as far as the city of Rome is concerned. This is a tentative sketch of what the idols of Rome look like. They are in chronological order, going back to the ancient past of Rome down to its present-day outlook. The idols do not replace one another, but they build on each other.

Idol n. 1 PAX ROMANA (The Roman Peace)

From the second century BC until 476 AD, Rome dominated the ancient world. Its status quo was named pax romana, the Roman peace. Its goal was to have dominion over nations and to exercise political power. Through military conquest this “peace” was taken to the world. But it was hardly a real “peace” for anyone. It was actually based on the use of violence, the imposition of slavery and the oppression of dissenters. The Pax Romana is gone as a political system but its achievements in terms of architecture and ruins are famous throughout the world. Moreover, it influences the culture of the city by way of infusing a kind of spiritual arrogance and the illusion of being at the center of the world. The gospel brings another kind of peace: the shalom of God, the peace of God that gives dignity and reconciliation in Christ.

Idol n. 2 PAPAL CATHOLICA (The Religious Stronghold)

As the Rome Empire faded away, the city was run until 1870 by the Roman Catholic Church with its highest institution, i.e. the Pope. Popes considered themselves to be the true inheritors of the emperors. Of course, they also brought some Christian elements, thus practicing a kind of assimilation between pagan and gospel motives. The main ideology that drove the city was still “imperial” and political at its very heart. The city grew full of magnificent religious buildings, wanting to show greatness and power. As far as the spiritual influence of the Papal “catholica” is concerned, the church has been running people’s lives for centuries, exercising political and economic power. The gospel that Rome needs to hear and see is instead a message based on God’s word alone (sola Scriptura), centered on Christ alone (solus Christus), grounded on grace alone (sola gratia).

Idol n. 3 THE PALAZZO (The Palazzo)

After the unification of Italy (1861), Rome became the capital of the Italian nation (1870). Following the Roman Empire and the Catholic Church, now the state ruled the city, adding another layer to its spiritual outlook. Rome is a city where political structures are far from transparent, and its standards of governance are far from just. A general shrewdness of spirit marks public life. Rome is a city of political maneuvering where things can be settled if you are “in” the right circle. As the gospel alternative, the church needs to be the place where a culture of responsibility is promoted, in personal life, family, society, politics, etc.

Idol n. 4  LA DOLCE VITA (Sweet Life)

Finally, Rome is also famous for its “sweet life”, from the title of the movie by Federico Fellini La dolce vita (1960). Good food, easy life, a-moral pleasures, and sex without commitment – all contribute to the shape of the dream of a good life. Of course, there is much emptiness around and its promises are futile. Real life is different, yet the sweet life inspires people and nurtures their expectations. The gospel needs to match the aspiration of a good life, while denouncing the slippery slope of a life without Christ. After all, the Christian life means to glorify God and to enjoy Him forever.

The church needs to be aware of these idols, as well as to embody viable gospel alternatives. The gospel not only denounces the bankruptcy of idolatry, but also fills life with real meaning, love and hope.

(This is an excerpt of my article “Identifying the Idols of the City” in Tim Keller, Center Church Europe. Doing Balanced, Gospel-Centered Ministry in Your City, Franeker: Uitgeverij Van Wijnen, 2014, pp. 168-174. The book can be bought at http://www.amazon.co.uk/Center-church-Europe-balanced-gospel-centered/dp/9051944802)

[1] Timothy J. Keller, ‘Getting Out (Exodus 4)’, in: D.A. Carson (ed.), The Scriptures Testify About Me, Nottingham: IVP 2013, p. 41.