J.I.

Packer

Copyright J.I. Packer

Transcription of a lecture in “Christian Thought and Culture II,” given at Regent College,
19 January 2010.

Audio recording available through the Regent College bookstore.

This transcript is not to be shared beyond CTC and not to be shared electronically.

“Approaching Roman Catholicism: An Evaluation of the Protestant-Catholic Divide”

Recommendation of two books:

Chris A. Casteldo, Holy Ground: Walking with Jesus as a Former Catholic

http://www.amazon.com/Holy-Ground-Walking-Former-Catholic/dp/0310292328/
ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1263943718&sr=8-1

- left Catholicism to become a pastor at College Church, Wheaton

- value of this book is that he tells you what it feels like to be ROMAN
CATHOLIC who should be a Protestant. He well understands how RCs feel
with regard to Protestant evangelicals. His presentation on those two topics
are exceedingly perceptive.

1995 book still in print

Ralph Mackenzie and Norman Geilser, Roman Catholic s and Evangelicals, Agreements
and Disagreements
-
- Should be on your shelves in regard to this area of uncertainty and tension
which won’t go away in our life-time

Why am I taking this subject at all?

3 Reasons:

1. Political perplexity of the situation – in the 16th century it was political action on the
part of Henry VIII of England that separated the Church of England from the Roman
Catholic communion. It continued to be a political business for more than 100 years. In
the early 1560s the Pope was encouraging missionaries to go to England to try to restore
England to the Catholic fold. When it appeared that Elizabeth would not bend, he
excommunicated her and declared that any Roman Catholic who assassinated her would
be blessed. But it boomeranged. The knowledge that the pope had spoken in those

1
terms, which made Englishmen react. England has been solidly anti-Roman Catholic
ever since.

In 19th century Rome renounced any political hope of having England back in the fold –
Catholic Emancipation – the Roman Catholic Episcopal hierarchy was restored in 1851.

Still stands as this today in Britain. Here in Canada and the USA immigration has
brought in a very large number of Catholics and of nominal Catholics than in any of the
Protestant churches.

Tensions arising from this situation. Tensions in pastoral ministry over inter-
marriage and local ecumenical cooperation.

As a clergyperson I have a responsibility to address this state of affairs from time

to time.

2) Personal reason to accept: I am a member of the free-standing ecumenical

dialogue venture of “Evangelicals and Catholics Together – basically a pastoral
endeavour arising from a conversation between Chuck Colson and Richard John Neuhaus
(Ex Lutheran turned Catholic) – meeting in 1992 – report on relations between
Pentecostals and Catholics in Latin America – stressed intense hostility between both
sides. RCs insisted that Pentecostals were sheep-stealers.

Decided together to try to do something about this. Thus the dialogue – pastoral
in its purpose – to work over the tension points between evangelicals and Catholics and
maximize the amount of agreement that there is and noting the disagreements in each of
these areas. Thus to try and focus in a positive way cooperative activity on a local level.

I think that this project is worth the time and trouble – produced a number of
irenic statements – justification by faith, place of Mary, the doctrine of the church,
doctrine of saints, etc.

This defusing ecumenical activity is important and significant. I speak to you as

one who is part of ECT.

3) There is a papal contribution – a few weeks ago Benedict XVI – formerly Cardinal
Ratzinger -- offered Anglican clergy and congregations a sort of uniate status within the
Catholic communion – allow your own liturgy – Anglicans attached to their prayerbook –
clergy have to be re-ordained to serve you and they will be accepted and welcomed under
the ROMAN CATHOLIC umbrella.

Different reactions – the action by the pope has drawn attention to the fact that
Anglicans and RCs are not one and the same.

I am caught in this situation because I am an Anglican clergy person.

2
 I come into the discussion with a vivid awareness that historically the lines have
been sharply drawn between the Cof E and Roman Catholicism in the 39 Articles. Many
of these are points are made against Roman Catholicism in the 1550s and 1560s.

Article 6 – Sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures for Salvation

Sufficiency is an anti-Roman Catholic idea –

On the canon – Canon of 66 biblical books – not 78 books of the Catholics

Article 8 – the three creeds – are to be received “because they are to be proved by
Scripture” - Roman Catholic position is that one should believe the creeds because they
are authorized by the church as a faithful expression of its belief

Articles 11 – 14 – justification by faith “for the merit of our Lord Jesus Christ” – point is
spelled out and branched out and deliberately meant to contradict Roman ideas of human
merit

Article 19 – As the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria and Antioch. Also Rome” – erred in
matters of faith

Article 20 – not lawful to ordain anything beyond what Scripture ordains

Article 22 – Purgatory – Romanism doctrine, pardons , relics , images, invocation of saint

“a fond thing, vainly invented “ repugnant to the Word of God

Art 24 – Public prayer in the church in a tongue not understood of the people – use of the
vernacular – now accepted in the Roman Church

Article 25 – Introduced to the sacraments and they not ordained of Christ to be gazed
upon or carried about – only two sacraments – other five are estates of life but are not
sacraments

- Penance – sacramental confession to a priest with imposed penances

- Communion – transubstantiation rejected, adoration, reservation also rejected

Article 32 – Clerical celibacy dismissed

Article 37 – Pope has no jurisdiction “in this realm of England”

Comments:

3
 1) There is here a fundamental division from which all the others grow, between
Anglican and Roman Catholic thinking about the church and it is the nature of the
church, its structure before God.

Roman Catholicism following fathers like Cyprian and Augustine, conceives the
church as essentially as a ministerial structure – an inner community of ordained priests
who share in “the apostolic succession” – a commission of priesthood that stems from
Christ.

The validity of sacraments depends on this. If people want to be assured by the

sacraments, they must make sure that they are administered by priests in the apostolic
succession.

We evangelicals would agree that the NT church is the community of believers –

the ministry of the church grows out of that fellowship. The Roman Catholic idea is that
the original item is an institution and the fellowship results from lay people linking
themselves up with priests in the apostolic succession to get the benefit of their apostolic
succession.

The nature of the church is referred to as sacramentalism – importance of

achieving valid sacraments. And sacerdotal. When it comes to looking at the sacramental
situation – the Roman Catholic doctrine of the Lord’s Supper has been adjusted into a
service in which the traditional name is the mass – the central action is the
transubstantiating of the bread and the wine into the body and blood of Christ and then
the offering of the transubstantiated bread and wine to God on behalf of the congregation,
an action which is supposed to be an extension of Christ’s own self-offering on the cross.
As a priest expressed it long ago to me: God privileges the church in the taking away of
its own sins. Hearing the good man say that made my ears flap.

That is a view of the church and its saving ministry which evangelicals cannot go
along with. That view of the church remains unimpaired because no attempt to narrow
the gap on this has ever been made. This is fundamental.

I have to say, unhappily, that the Roman Catholic Church has declared as part of
its own defined doctrine that the Lord Jesus Christ has conferred on the Roman Catholic
church infallibility in declaration – this does not apply to all the things that the church
says, but does apply to general councils and since 1870 what has been declared by the
Bishop of Rome when speaking ex cathedra as the teacher of all Christendom.

That means, that officially defined Roman Catholic doctrine is irreformable – it is

impossible in terms of the system that what has been said by an Episcopal council or a
pope is wrong. It can be said that it is incomplete and needs amplifying, but you cannot
say that it is wrong. Anything that I have said that has struck you as wrong, this remains
as an intractable block in the path of achieving consensus.

4
 When the church has declared errors of its own to be infallible, there is nothing
you can do but go out and have a drink!

That is the fundamental difference.

2) The illusion of fixity

My wife and kids and I crossed the Atlantic in an ocean liner – a very stable ship
– I felt no rocking of the boat and to me it seemed completely stable. I had an illusion of
fixity about the smooth way that the boat was moving. My wife had a very different
experience. My wife spent the whole voyage seasick.

I am talking about the illusion of fixity. Until the middle of the 20th century,
Rome gave out that she never moved, never changed. She was the bastion of God-given
grace and that is all there is to be said. Protestantism changes. Rome never changes.

That is a by-gone era but in terms of the standing of the Church of Rome, it has
not changed. But in terms of stance, yes she has adapted in quite a startling way in light
of Vatican II. Whereas from the 16th to the mid-20th century, Rome had been dominated
by the siege mentality – Rome is under pressure, close the windows, draw the shutters –
with as little contact with Protestants as possible. Vatican II brought to birth a new
cooperative spirit amongst the Roman Catholic leadership, a spirit designed to pick up the
wisdom of Protestant ecumenicalism and Rome has been saying “we want to be part of
the total work of God,” while we don’t’ recognize Protestant churches as fully churches,
God’s wisdom and grace has been seen there.

Rome pitch-forked its way into the world of ecumenical cooperation. The
traditional fixity now appears as an illusion – Roman Catholic involvement with
Protestants is happening right, left and centre. But it is a change of stance, not of
standing.

What doctrinal disputes then, still continue between RCs and evangelicals?

Two areas where evangelicals rightly feel that there is pressure and want to see
adjustment on the Roman Catholic side.

1) Justification by Faith

The Roman Catholic faith fundamentally was defined by the Council of Trent –
1545-63. Trent affirmed a) the word “justify” and “justification” refer to the whole work
of God subjectively transforming sinners. Finding us guilty and making us Christ-like in
heaven. They were able correctly to plead Augustine’s authority.

Faith is necessary as a condition, but so are meritorious works – talking about

forgiveness and sanctification, then the further work of God in purgatory where one
works out the temporal punishment due to you for your sins in life and not until you had

5
worked off the temporal punishment would you get into glory – you would be receive
and finally perfected.

Thinking of the matter that way, you can see that Rome has taken the formulation
“Justification by faith” to be “justification by works.”

Nothing really has changed there. There has been an agreement between Roman
Catholics and Lutherans about some of the nuances of this. There has been a statement
by Evangelicals and Catholics Together along these lines, but the beliefs in purgatory and
indulgences both remain.

An indulgence is a freedom from so many years in purgatory working off the

sentence. You can buy some part of the treasury of the merits of the saints. Tetzel the
salesman – can buy them for yourself and your family members.

There you have an area of doctrinal tension that remains. If you are going to
think about Justification by faith as freedom from penal liability, then you can say things
on paper that Roman Catholic theologians will come along with. But Roman Catholics
bring in the rest of the process of justification that depends on merit. That problem has
not been faced in any ecumenical discussion and has not been solved.

Another area is the area of Mariology – belief about Mary and Mariolatry –
worship of Mary that is offered to all the saints. The point here is that you worship the
people who by reason of their remarkably sinless living have become front row occupants
of heaven already. There is a Treasury of Merit – the supererogatory works of the saints
over and above the work that was asked for. Invocation of Mary as a regular part of
Roman Catholic prayer pattern- Hail Mary and invoke her to ask her son to have mercy
on them.

Serious discussion hasn’t really begun. From an NT perspective, this should not
be done. As an Anglican I tell people that Mary takes her place at the head of the line of
saved sinners. She is a sinner who “rejoices in God my savior” as in the Magnificat.

What business have we worshiping Mary? Does she appreciate it? I don’t
believe so.

There is an overall quality about the devotional pattern that the RCC teaches its
members is off-key evangelically and it has to do at every point with the obtrusive role of
the church in the mediating of saving grace. It is as if instead of saying what we
evangelicals would hopefully say – come to Christ by faith and he will bring you into the
church.

Rome says “come to Church- the sacramental system and the church will link you
up with Christ” – and it feels quite different – you can see why it is that Roman Catholics
so often lack assurance – the basis of assurance is that one has come to Christ and Christ
has fulfilled his promise –one is treated as righteous for Jesus’ sake.

6
 The Roman Catholic message – tells you to be a faithful church member and the
church will put you in touch with Christ – leaves Christians out of trust with Christ and
generates a sense of residual guilt. Evangelicals and Catholics Together has not tackled it
yet.

So I present that situation to you. I tell you frankly that I see the Roman Catholic
church – a billion Christians – that makes some of our Protestant church affiliations
small. Anglicans have about 80 million nominal adherents.

The Roman Catholic Church a big and impressive institution – centralized on

Rome and we need not expect to see any end to Catholic-evangelical tensions in our
lifetime – most we can hope for is sustained dialogue.