Last night I watched the unedited edition of our forthcoming DVD of our September 16th event. The quality and sound are excellent and World Win Media did a very nice job of helping us produce this event in a video form. I will make information known about ordering this DVD soon, perhaps in the next few days. Stay tuned.

It was fun to watch the event for myself and to recall moments and points that we all made and then to see how we responded to each other and what I remember saying. (I do not trust my memory these days but my overall sense of the evening was confirmed by seeing it. It was an irenic conversation and one that I think should be seen by all who are truly interested in honest ecumenical dialog and friendship between faithful Christians.)

The question of authority was central to our differences. We agreed that the Bible was the primary witness to Christ and that the early church, the creeds and the developing Christian tradition all play a very important role. Where we differ […]

In our recent Catholic and Evangelical dialog one of the excellent questions that the Catholic theologians posed to us as evangelical Protestants was how we understood the doctrine and role of conversion in the Christian life. There can be no doubt that a defining centerpiece of evangelicalism is the doctrine and experience of conversion. At times it would seem that this is the defining experience for most evangelicals; i.e., a definitive (conscious and generally remembered as to the time and date) conversion experience.

So our Catholic friends expressed their dismay at how they often hear evangelical Christians use this conversion paradigm as their way of saying who is and is not a real Christian. They even referred to hearing some evangelicals say, “If you can’t date it, you’ve got to do it.” They stated that for them, as Catholics, this expression sounds very much like a work that we do in order to be a Christian. They asked us how we would explain the role of conversion in the Christian life.

First, their insights are noteworthy and important. Evangelicals too often […]

One thing is for sure when it comes to dialog between Catholics and evangelicals. There are Catholics and evangelicals who both think there should be no dialog. Dialog is compromise and compromise is bad, end of subject. You will see this time and time again by responses to my own posts on this subject. Everything is very clear to such people. They know the truth, completely and fully. Catholics are lost, heretical and need to come to faith in Christ and leave the Roman Catholic Church or they will be damned. These anti-Catholics have their Web sites, pamphlets, booklets and full length polemical books. This is a rather large cottage industry in America and some ex-Catholics are the leading proponents of it since they see nothing good in the Catholic Church that they left. But these Protestants are not alone. There are Catholics on the right, some of whom left Protestantism, who think any conversation that involves dialog without condemnation of all Protestant errors as intractable heresy or compromise. These Catholics will appeal, quite logically at times, to certain aspects of Catholic tradition and […]

The central points of divergence that surfaced in our recent Roman Catholic and Evangelical dialog were made very clear as our discussion proceeded. The most obvious one, put in the simplest manner, was our ecclesiology. I am not downplaying how serious this difference really is by putting it in one word. The doctrine of the church is at the very heart of our major theological differences.

Matthew 16:18-20 was discussed and we all four agreed that the best exegesis of this text leads us to conclude that Jesus is telling Peter the Church is rooted in the revelation of God to Peter and thus in his human person as well. Various Protestant attempts to explain away the text fail and thereby show that they are rooted in over-reaction to Roman Catholicism. But what we did not agree upon, very obviously, was whether or not Peter was the first pope, at least in the sense that he became the head of Christ’s Church on the earth and that this office, the papacy, continues down to the present day through the successors to the […]

The ACT 3 Catholic and Evangelical Forum moved from four opening presentations to serious questions about where we agreed and disagreed about subjects such as salvation and the doctrine of the Church. We also touched on issues like the doctrine of Mary, the sacraments and universal salvation, or salvation for those who do not have explicit faith in Christ as Lord and Savior. The pace was fast and engaging. The context allowed for us to talk in a dignified and courteous way. This was clearly not an old-fashioned “take no prisoners” debate with real winners and losers. Nor was it an evangelistic event, though I would like to think that unbelievers clearly heard enough good news to truly believe in Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior if they were so inclined by the Spirit’s gracious work in them. The gospel was presented and freely and openly discussed. 

Alan Krashesky, our moderator, began the middle section of our dialog (which was about forty minutes) with the following comment: “It seems obvious to me that you are all four comfortable with calling each […]