WIJWaH: What If Jesus Was Here?

I had a question submitted that I would like to respond to:

How would you respond to the claim that Catholics aren't Christians? It seems like a ridiculous accusation to make, but I continually hear it from friends and family.

I interestingly ran into this question in my Anglican days as well, because I knew people who were convinced Anglicans were not Christian then either. I always get really antsy when Christians start pointing fingers at others and saying "Well, they aren't Christian!" There are times when you have to go there cause this or that church or denomination has clearly removed itself from any formulation that would be in any orbit of being considered Christian belief or practice. I am talking about clearly denying the Resurrection of Christ and completely opening rejecting Holy Scripture and Holy Tradition. There is a lot of grey area, but there are clear black and white lines that do exist. I mean, if you reject the Trinity or the Nicene Creed or the idea that you need to be baptized...my only advice would be that you really need to rethink why you would even want to call yourself Christian at that point. I mean, if you want to go full stop Unitarian or whatever, then have at it. You as a group just need to be intellectually honest about it.

But, to answer your question, I suppose it would depend on the context of the conversation. If someone is just out there being uncharitable (to say the least) and bullheaded come hell or high water, there is really nothing you can do to convince them otherwise. At that point, that point has become a type of fundamentalism in the sense of that is a fundamental belief that can't be scrutinized or debated in any way, shape, or form. In that context, it is presented as a self justifying truth claim, and no amount of evidence, logic, or rhetoric is going to convince them otherwise.

In contexts of accusations of this level of vitriol, I usually apply what I call the WIJWaH rule to determine whether I should even get involved in the argument or just walk away: What If Jesus WAs Here? If Jesus walked into this conversation right here in real time (whether in person or in disguise) and said, "Catholics are Christians..." would those people be willing to even entertain what He was saying, or would they even dismiss His arguments out of hand?

I have found this is a very good thought experiment because it does force you to put yourself in their shoes but also to realistically assess probabilities. 1. Would they even hear him out (51% to 49% for or against)? If they did hear him out, what percentage do you think they would consider changing their minds (51% or better odds they might change their mind.) In other words, to use a sports betting analogy in this thought experiment, are you taking the over or the under on whether or not they would even listen to Jesus? If they are spitting uncharitable hate and vitriol and appear to not be open to even having a rational discussion, I think you have your answer on whether or not you should get sucked into the discussion or just say, "Well, God bless you..." and politely walk away.

Now, having said all that, if you apply the WIJWaH rule and determine that they are attempting to be charitable and willing to listen to arguments to the contrary of their thesis, then I think my arguments would be something along the lines of asking them exactly how they are defining what a Christian is. Listen closely to what definition they give you and structure your argument from that. Because usually the conversation will go something like this:

You have to believe in Jesus. Catholics aren't born again. Catholics worship Mary. Catholics engage in vain rituals. Catholics believe they can work their way into heaven. (The laundry list can go on and on, but those are usually the biggies, or accusations there unto.)

So, if you make a list of their criterion of what it means to be a Christian, then go down the list and prove by their own criterion that Catholics meet all those conditions. Now, you may have to play a little fast and loose on how they and we are defining those terms, but using the terminology that they understand, its actually pretty easy to pick apart their objections.

For instance:

1. We believe in Jesus. The entire Mass is two parts, both focusing on the centrality of Jesus in the Liturgy of the Word and the Liturgy of the Sacrament. That's a pretty easy one to give evidence for.

2. We believe we are born again in baptism. We are regenerated from Original Sin. We affirm at as adults at Confirmation. We reaffirm that every time we go to Confession because the priest is acting in the person of Christ. We have a different view of how salvation works, and that it's not a one time, give your life to Jesus at an altar call when you are at Bible Camp when you're 13 or whatever. Salvation is a life long process. But, you can honestly say we were saved at Baptism, we are being saved currently by the Sacraments, we will one day be saved on Judgment day.

3. We clearly don't worship Mary. Again, plenty of evidence and Catechism citations one can make on this point.

4. For sake of argument, do rituals somehow negate Salvation? If you believe you were saved when you were 13, how would going to a church that engages in vain rituals somehow negate that "being saved" theology, therefore making you no longer a Christian? That's even assuming Sacraments and Liturgy are vain. Clearly, they are not, but again, for sake of argument...You tell me the ritual of the altar call in Evangelical worship services isn't a prescribed ritual? Be careful playing that card, because that can make people lose their minds, but the point is to denude the argument that somehow public ritual makes one unChristian by their own theology is illogical.

5. We don't believe we gain salvation on our own works either. Works are a part of the Christian life. You can cite James or any number of Catholic documents to that effect. At the very least, if you say you are "saved" but there is zero evidence that you do anything charitable in terms of good works-something in your spiritual journey has gone very, very wrong. I think even the most ardent Justification by Faith Alone apart from Works people are going to get a little squirmy about that if you present it in the right way. They will usually start mumbling something about the fact that you were never really saved to begin, at which point that becomes a whole other can of theological worms, but you get the idea.

Again, I can go on and on about this. My point is in those discussions that pass the WIJWaH test, listen to what they are saying and make a list and then go down the list. And when you have check marked all their criterion, and therefore by your own definition, we seem to meet what is needed to be called "Christian," see what they have to say.