That’s what an article at Baptist Bulletin is claiming.
One of the major influences paving the road back to Roman Catholicism is the emerging church movement. Proponents say it’s time for Christianity to be reinvented for a new generation. It must become more relevant to a postmodern generation. They say the best way to reinvent Christianity for the present generation is to reintroduce ideas and experiences from the past. Emergent leaders say God’s Word no longer holds the answers to life’s questions. Experience must become the key factor to encounter spiritual reality.
The Reverend Robert Whipkey, a 53-year-old catholic priest in Frederick, Colorado, was caught jogging in the nude on a high school track at 4:35 AM (about an hour before sunrise) on June 22. He said that he “didn’t think anyone would be around at that time of day” and that “he sweats profusely if he wears clothing while jogging.” He also admits that what he did was wrong and is facing a charge of indecent exposure with a court date set for September 14. If convicted, Whipkey will become a registered sex offender.
If you’ve had many conversations with Roman Catholics, you’re probably well aware that many like to compare the one, unified Roman Catholic Church with the divided and splintered Protestant church, which has spawned tens of thousands of denominations.
The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs. God is a Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, each an uncreated person, one in essence, equal in power and glory.
The problems with such a broad statement became apparent (again) in Francis Beckwith’s recent reversion to Roman Catholicism, who, although he resigned, was convinced that in good conscience he could have continued to be a member.
Neste and Burk are proposing that the ETS merge its statement with the statement of belief used by the U.K.’s Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship (UCCF), which is also the doctrinal basis for the U.K.’s Tyndale Fellowship.
The Bible alone, and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs. This written word of God consists of the 66 books of the Old and New Testaments and is the supreme authority in all matters of belief and behavior.
God is a Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, each an uncreated person, one in essence, equal in power and glory.
The italicized text is the current ETS doctrinal basis. The second point is unchanged. The added statement to the first point would eliminate Roman Catholics, whose definition of the written word of God would encompass more than the the 66 books accepted by Protestants.
Gregg Allison, Associated Professor of Christian Theology at SBTS, shares two reasons that he believes informed Roman Catholics could not sign the ETS doctrinal statement:
“In my opinion, Roman Catholics should find the wording of the ETS doctrinal basis strange at least, for it does not view the Word of God as consisting of both Tradition and Scripture. The statement ‘the Bible alone . . . is the Word of God written’ is a woefully inadequate statement about what Roman Catholics believe about the Word of God, and I would seriously doubt that informed Roman Catholics would sign it.”
“If authors’ intent means anything, then the ETS statement concerning ‘the Bible’ means that those sixty-six books constitute ‘the Word of God written.’ Roman Catholics cannot agree with this, because for them ‘the Bible’ refers to the seventy-three books (Tobit, Judith, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 and 2 Maccabees are included) with expanded editions of Esther and Daniel.
“Thus, that to which the ETS statement concerning ‘the Bible’ refers, and that to which Roman Catholics refer when they use that term, are different matters. This is a second reason that I would seriously doubt that informed Roman Catholics would sign the ETS doctrinal basis.”
Some of the people who have been critical say, “You’ve gone into the oppressive works system of Catholicism.” That’s not the way I look at it at all. I look at it as a chance to do good. It doesn’t matter for my salvation, but it matters for the sort of person I can become. Unfortunately, the view of justification is sometimes presented clumsily by some Catholic laypeople.
“It doesn’t matter for my salvation”? I am assuming from the context that the antecedent of “it” is “works” or “do[ing] good.” As for “salvation,” he seems to have justification in view (”Unfortunately, the view of justification is sometimes presented clumsily.”), but whether that is initial justification, progressive justification (which “entails . . . sanctification,” CCC, 1995), or final justification is not clear. However, if he is referring to justification as a whole, progressive justification, or final justification (anything other than initial justification, which according to Catholic teaching is not merited),1 which seems likely since the progressive nature of justification is normally what gets the focus and since he talks about “the sort of person [he] can become,” then he does not believe Roman Catholic theology.
Question 2010 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (2000) says,
Moved by the Holy Spirit and by charity, we can then merit for ourselves and for others the graces needed for our sanctification, for the increase of grace and charity, and for the attainment of eternal life.
To say that doing good works doesn’t matter for one’s salvation but matters only for the sort of person one can become flies in the face of Roman Catholic teaching at least since Trent. It seems to be common for Protestants who turn Roman Catholic to try to maintain the essence of the Protestant gospel while testifying to their belief in the Roman Catholic view.
Furthermore, one could even argue (rightly so) that Beckwith’s statement is not even good Reformed soteriology, let alone Roman Catholic soteriology. In Protestantism good works do matter for one’s salvation. While they do not contribute by way of meriting salvation (as Roman Catholicism teaching), they are necessary conditions of salvation and even in a sense justification.2 The Scripture makes this clear in numerous places.
Since the initiative belongs to God in the order of grace, no one can merit the initial grace of forgiveness and justification, at the beginning of conversion. CCC, 2010. [↩ back]
They are necessary postconditions of initial justification and necessary preconditions for final justification. They will be there, and they must be there, but their being there doesn’t merit justification or salvation in any sense. Jonathan Edwards’ treatise on justification deals with these matters very thoroughly. [↩ back]
Dr. Beckwith’s resignation as President and subsequent withdrawal from membership [is] appropriate in light of the purpose and doctrinal basis of the Evangelical Theological Society and in light of the requirements of wholehearted confessional agreement with the Roman Catholic Church.
The work of the Evangelical Theological Society as a scholarly forum proceeds on the basis that “the Bible alone and the Bible in its entirety, is the Word of God written and is therefore inerrant in the autographs.” This affirmation, together with the statement on the Trinity, forms the basis for membership in the ETS to which all members annually subscribe in writing. Confessional Catholicism, as defined by the Roman Catholic Church’s declarations from the Council of Trent to Vatican II, sets forth a more expansive view of verbal, infallible revelation.
Specifically, it posits a larger canon of Scripture than that recognized by evangelical Protestants, including in its canon several writings from the Apocrypha. It also extends the quality of infallibility to certain expressions of church dogma issued by the Magisterium (the teaching office of the Roman Catholic Church), as well as certain pronouncements of the pope, which are delivered ex cathedra, such as doctrines about the immaculate conception and assumption of Mary.
We recognize the right of Roman Catholic theologians to do their theological work on the basis of all the authorities they consider to be revelatory and infallible, even as we wholeheartedly affirm the distinctive contribution and convictional necessity of the work of the Evangelical Theological Society on the basis of the “Bible alone and the Bible in its entirety” as “the Word of God written and . . . inerrant.”
Without a doubt the wording of the statement is not as clear as it could be, but since meaning is determined by context and intent, the precise wording is not the final issue on the matter. I ran into this when pursuing church membership at the church where we attend. I felt that I could possibly affirm the wording of the statement of faith on eschatology (when I interpreted it according to my understanding), but I could not in good conscience affirm it in light of the clear intent of its authors.
Francis Beckwith, who just days ago became a Roman Catholic and resigned as President of ETS and as a member of the executive committee, initially stated that he would continue as a member of ETS:
Because I can in good conscience, as a Catholic, affirm the ETS doctrinal statement, I do not intend to resign as a member of ETS.
Last night, however, he decided that it would be in the best interest of the body of Christ to resign.
It is with deep regret that about an hour ago I tendered my resignation as a member of ETS.
Although I firmly believe that I can sign the ETS doctrinal statement in good conscience, my high-profile presence in ETS will likely result in the sort of public conflict that occurred during the debate over the openness view of God and the attempt on the part of some members to oust believers in that view. Because, as I noted in my prior posting on this matter, that I deeply desire a public conversation among Christians about the relationship between Evangelicalism and the Great Tradition, a public debate about my membership status, with all the rancor and stress that typically goes with such disputes, would preempt and poison that important conversation. For this reason, I am resigning as a member of ETS.
On Saturday, April 28, 2007, I received the sacrament of Confession. The next day I was publicly received back into the Catholic Church at 11 am Mass at St. Joseph’s Catholic Church in Waco, Texas. My wife, standing beside me, was accepted as a catechumen.
Dr. Beckwith has since resigned as President of ETS.
Because I can in good conscience, as a Catholic, affirm the ETS doctrinal statement, I do not intend to resign as a member of ETS. [Update: Dr. Beckwith has now also resigned from being a member of ETS.]
. . .
I intended to remain as ETS president until my term expires in November, but not to accept a nomination for a four-year at-large appointment to the executive committee after the end of my term.
. . .
As I have already stated, my decision was based on a cluster of goods that I thought would be best protected by my completing my tenure and then permanently moving off the executive committee. However, given the immense public attention and commentary that my reception into the Church has provoked, I no longer think that it is possible for ETS to conduct its business and its meetings in a fashion that advances the Gospel of Christ as long as I remain as its president. I now believe that my continued presence as president of ETS will serve the very harms that I had originally thought that my retention would avoid. For this reason, effective May 5, 2007, I resign as both President of the Evangelical Theological Society and a member of its executive committee.
Dr. Beckwith explains his reasons for returning to Rome in this paragraph:
I would have never predicted that I would return to the Church, for there seemed to me too many theological and ecclesiastical issues that appeared insurmountable. However, in January, at the suggestion of a dear friend, I began reading the Early Church Fathers as well as some of the more sophisticated works on justification by Catholic authors. I became convinced that the Early Church is more Catholic than Protestant and that the Catholic view of justification, correctly understood, is biblically and historically defensible. Even though I also believe that the Reformed view is biblically and historically defensible, I think the Catholic view has more explanatory power to account for both all the biblical texts on justification as well as the church’s historical understanding of salvation prior to the Reformation all the way back to the ancient church of the first few centuries. Moreover, much of what I have taken for granted as a Protestant—e.g., the catholic creeds, the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation, the Christian understanding of man, and the canon of Scripture—is the result of a Church that made judgments about these matters and on which non-Catholics, including Evangelicals, have declared and grounded their Christian orthodoxy in a world hostile to it. Given these considerations, I thought it wise for me to err on the side of the Church with historical and theological continuity with the first generations of Christians that followed Christ’s Apostles.
LATimes has a story about the influence Latinos are having on religion in the U.S., particularly the Roman Catholic Church.
The growing numbers of Latinos in the United States, and that population’s embrace of charismatic styles of worship, are reshaping the Roman Catholic Church and the nation’s religious landscape, according to a major study of Latinos and faith released Wednesday.
The study, by the Pew Hispanic Center and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life, found that a majority of Latino Catholics practiced a distinctive, charismatic form of Catholicism, one that might include speaking in tongues, prophesying and other practices considered more typical of Pentecostal churches. Those traditions are much less widespread among non-Latino Catholics, who also are less likely to identify themselves as charismatics or Pentecostals, the researchers found.
. . .
About a third of all U.S. Catholics are Latinos, with that percentage considered certain to rise, alongside the growing Latino population. And about 54% of Latino Catholics surveyed identified themselves as charismatics or Pentecostals, compared to about 12% of non-Latino Catholics, the study showed.
That’s what an article at Baptist Bulletin is claiming.
.
The Reverend 
If you’ve had many conversations with Roman Catholics, you’re probably well aware that many like to compare the one, unified Roman Catholic Church with the divided and splintered Protestant church, which has spawned tens of thousands of denominations.
There is an effort underway to amend 
Francis J. Beckwith