|
S i d e b a r
WHITE’S SCHOLARSHIP PROBLEMS—AND A MYSTERIOUS PH.D.
|
This Rock
Volume 4, Number 7
 July 1993 
|
|
|
IN The Fatal Flaw James White misrepresents
the Church's teaching. Here are a few examples.
White claims the Church teaches "[a] person enters into a state
of 'sanctifying grace' through baptism at the hands of the Roman
Church" (White, 27; emphasis added). This implies that the
Church says a person does not enter a state of grace if baptized by
a non-Catholic.
He tells us Catholics teach "[b]aptism is an absolute necessity
for salvation, for as Canon 5 of the Decree Concerning the Sacraments
from Trent says, 'If anyone says that baptism is optional, that is,
not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema'"(ibid.,
34f).
He says that, according to Catholic doctrine, absolution by a priest
is "an action which is absolutely necessary for salvation for
anyone who would commit a mortal sin after their baptism"(ibid.,
35).
The Church does not teach any of these things. It explicitly rejects
all of them in the very writings White quotes, the decrees and canons
of the Council of Trent.
The Church does not teach one must be baptized by a Catholic
to have a valid baptism. Protestant baptisms are valid. The Church
requires that its members believe de fide (as an article of
faith) that anyone can administer baptism whether Catholic or not
(see Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 358).
Trent explicitly teaches this in its fourth canon on baptism: "If
anyone says that the baptism which is given by heretics in the name
of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, with the intention
of doing what the Church does, is not true baptism, let him be anathema."
This is the canon immediately before the one White quoted when misrepresenting
the Church's teaching on the necessity of baptism.
Trent taught that, while water baptism is normatively necessary
for salvation, it is not absolutely necessary. There is a
difference between normative and absolute necessity. The first means
something which is normally required by rule ("norm"), but
to which there can be exceptions; the second admits of no exceptions
at all. Trent taught justification is impossible "except through
the laver of regeneration [water baptism] or its desire"
(Decree on Justification, 4; emphasis added). Water baptism
is thus not an absolute necessity since baptism of desire--even
an implicit desire--can suffice.
The Church does not teach that priestly absolution is an "absolute
necessity." The sacrament of confession, like the sacrament of
baptism, has only a normative necessity. Trent taught that a person
who has perfect contrition (love-motivated sorrow) is reconciled to
God even before the sacrament is received (Decree on the Sacrament
of Penance, 4).
These errors are so commonly refuted in Catholic works, even in the
conciliar documents White quotes, that one must conclude (a) he has
an exceptionally poor g.asp of Catholic theology, indicating a flaw
in his research methods, or (b) he is deliberately misrepresenting
what the Catholic Church teaches, indicating a flaw in his character,
or (c) he simply does not realize the implications of what he is writing,
indicating a flaw in his ability to articulate his research. Whichever
way one goes, White is shown to be a poor scholar.
(In correspondence with me, White denied he was ignorant of these
.aspects of Catholic theology. This would tend to eliminate the first
two options mentioned in favor of the third.)
A further tarnish on White's scholarship is his hang-up about the
word "Catholic." He refuses to refer to Catholicism by its
proper name (he calls it "Romanism"), to refer to people
as Catholics (they are "Roman Catholics" or "Romanists"),
to refer to the Catholic interpretation (it is "the Roman interpretation"),
or to the Catholic Church (it is "the Roman Catholic Church"
or "the Roman Church"). He often uses "Roman"
alone as a replacement for "Catholic."
Bart Brewer, ex-priest and one of the least scholarly anti-Catholic
authors, writes the introduction to White's book. He is listed as
"Bartholomew F. Brewer, Ph.D." When repeatedly asked by
Catholic Answers, Brewer has refused to identify the source of his
doctorate. He gives no reason for his refusal, which leads one to
believe he may be hiding something. Perhaps his degree is honorary
rather than earned. Perhaps it is from an unaccredited school. Worst
of all, perhaps it is from a mail-order diploma mill. We don't know,
and he just won't say. It is not a positive sign that White chose
such a man to introduce The Fatal Flaw.
|
Catholic Answers
