Concurrently, I've been mulling my experience of Protestant evangelism and the ensuing interaction of Catholics and Protestants, conservatives all, in the blogosphere.
The result, time after time on Protestant blogs, is that Catholic comments are uniformly discounted in short order. Try as I may, I can no longer rationalize their rapid dismissal as pure prejudice, despite how easy and self-satisfying that conclusion may have been to me in the past. To the contrary, the collective write-off must needs be based upon something objective because its occurrence is simply too consistent, across the board, to be otherwise.
Of course, Protestants admit that some Catholics might be Christians; they are obliged to give a fair hearing. And they do, yet their discernment process is so quick. How's that?
In spite of platitudes about Christians not judging, and pragmatism as well as some theologies that say mortals can't tell who's really a Christian, Protestants ... it is Protestants, 'though I find myself getting in the game and you'd be surprised ... make calls ( 1 John 4:1 ) and even "call out".
So, what's the basis?
Gone are the questions that used to confound Catholics, "Are you born-again? Are you saved?" Catholics have long learned the appropriate answers to these.
Then what's the latest litmus test for Catholics among Protestants these days? Scripture, of course, one's understanding of it and attitude towards it.
Last summer, Fick & Oz recommended a fresh read of John's First Epistle. Last night, I came across another pastor with this to say about 1 John:
The book of 1 John was written so that someone, through self-examination, could determine whether or not they were a Christian.This might be a legitimate use of the Letter today, but I don't believe St. John wrote his Catholic Epistle with that purpose. John's assumption was that the community addressed by his polemical and pastoral Letter was comprised of true Christians.
1 John is a book which is easy for men to use in a prideful way to preach moralism and thereby bound people up in legalism. 1 John was intended to help us discern who has been made righteous in Christ and who is still lost.
(Actually, a Catholic sees in the strong ecclesiology of 1 John mention of the sad divisions of Christianity into denominationalism, so the Catholic is equally eager for the Protestant to read 1 John in hopes that they will see themselves as the secessionists!)
These men who use 1 John in this way are evangelists and pastors. It is their job, their calling, to discern spiritual progress in the lives of others. They are what Catholics call "spiritual directors," and their vocation gives them a degree of authority and charism.
But what of everyone else in the blogosphere who engages in "testing the spirits" of other professing Christians? Well, there's no stopping it, so just be aware that it's happening and it's based on your comments about Scripture and what the Good Book teaches about God, man and salvation (but not the Church).
Myself, I simply trust God that professing Christians in the blogosphere attend local churches with their own pastors who are teaching them biblical truth and that it isn't my place to usurp the pastor's position. And I would appreciate the favor being returned in kind.
But, let me add that Catholics do judge Protestants, in a different way: much less consciously, much less intentionally, because "testing the spirits" isn't considered a part of the Christian layman's duty. Not by their attitude towards Scripture, which is often impeccable, do Catholics judge, but on their feelings for the Christian Church, not the Body of Christ, per se, but the Church as a visible structure: whether they think the Church necessary, etc.
And, of course, vehement hostility, above and beyond charges of doctrinal error - after all, they are Protestant for some reason - directed towards the Roman Catholic Church - hate-filled charges that the RCC is evil through & through, that the pope is the antichrist, that Catholics aren't Christian, these are all clear indications to the Catholic that the individual asserting these things can't possibly be "in Christ" (1 John 4:20). And these ones, more than the rest, really need and deserve our prayers, for the Lord's sake.
2 comments:
I am grateful for your quote. Yet don't dismiss it too quickly. Certainly John was addressing those he believed were Christians, but the situation in which it was written was far different that one crossing denominational lines.
Possibly close friends and fellow worshippers were departing the assembly, returning to Judaism, and denying the diety of Jesus. The Apostle is writing his letter to Christians who though, because their friends were assembling with them, they were converts. John is instructing them that conversion is a supernatural act of God with far reaching evidences in the lives of Christians.
It is, however, an immense gift for a Reformed blogger like me to be quoted on a Catholic blog. Soli Deo Gloria!
"departing the assembly, returning to Judaism, and denying the deity of Jesus"
Yes, I accept your correction, that the situation of John's day, with people denying Christ's divinity, was more dire than today's denominationalism.
I also find your simple gratitude wonderfully disarming. Thank you for reading and commenting.
Post a Comment