Is It Protestant VERSUS Catholic? | My Conversation with @TruthUnites

Is the current Catholic view of justification heretical?

We personally did not create all of these disagreements.

We inherit traditions that have disagreed, and all sides have sinned against one another.

As we engage, you know, again, Protestant -Catholic, what are some things you wish that Protestants knew?

Of course I would like people to embrace a Protestant perspective.

That would be a step towards Catholicity, actually.

You debated Trent on Sola Scriptura.

What was that experience like for you, being on stage against Trent Horn?

I just want to kind of jump in and hear a little bit about your background.

So I guess the first question that comes to mind for me, and I know some of my viewers too, is how did you get into, you know,

the academic field?

You know, how did you come up and become a pastor?

Tell us a little bit about your story.

Yeah, it's kind of fun to share this because I haven't gone into this in great detail, I don't think, on YouTube before.

But I originally felt a call to academia, or I don't

know if I could say felt a call.

I think it was actually kind of an idol.

I've always loved thinking.

I've always loved to study.

In late high school, early college, I began to enjoy studying more.

I started reading C .S. Lewis.

I started reading other things that kind of whet my appetite for the life of the mind and all of that.

And then I was in seminary and I was feeling a call to ministry and didn't know what that would look like.

My dream was to go to Princeton and study Karl Barth.

That was Princeton Seminary, not university.

That was my dream.

That's what I hoped to do.

And there's lots went into that.

And the short version of this story is basically the Lord kind of worked in

me and helped me to just go back to the simple verse in Mark 10 .45.

Even the son of man came not to be served, but to serve.

And I began to think more about, okay, it's not just about what I want to do or what I would find intellectually interesting.

I need to spend my life for the kingdom of God.

I felt the Lord was calling me to pastoral ministry and to just let go of the PhD thing.

So I've been in pastoral ministry pretty much consistently since around 2010.

But then I felt like God gave me that dream back.

And while I was a pastor, he opened up a door to do a PhD at Fuller Seminary.

And I had a great experience there.

And then since that time, I've just, God's been so good.

He's opened up doors for publishing and for academic things, conferences, things like that.

We have considered teaching at points, but at this point, I feel like the Lord's got me right where he wants me in terms of

this kind of ministry.

Right now, there's more doors opening up for online apologetics type ministry.

And that's interesting because that's kind of a third thing, different from both local church ministry and academic ministry.

So I'm finding my way in that world right now.

JG Wow.

I mean, could you maybe say a little bit more about online apologetics ministry?

I'm sure some of the ears of our viewers perked up there.

What does that look like?

CB Well, I never thought I would get into apologetics because I sometimes have some

hesitations about how apologetics can go.

Sometimes, not always, but sometimes it can be a bit triumphalist.

Sometimes it can be about just scoring points.

And there's just certain things about that personality that the personality God has given me isn't

necessarily what you would think of when you think of apologist.

I'm not someone who loves arguing.

I probably fit better as kind of a pastor scholar in terms of my natural temperament.

And yet, I actually think the needs of the times right now do call for apologetics that

is a little more human and has a little more of a compassionate touch to it.

So I do sense God calling me to just do everything I can to try to meet needs.

And there have been opportunities that have come up through my YouTube channel to try to meet needs, whether it be defending Protestant

beliefs, other beliefs, general Christian beliefs, trying to do things like theological triage,

which means ranking different doctrines and just trying to speak any way that I can genuinely

sense maybe this could meet some.

Needs.

That's really what I try to come back to.

I have my marching orders from a passage in Isaiah 58 that I feel like God's put in front of me that talks about

giving food to the hungry.

So every video I come back to and say, is this going to meet needs?

Is it going to help people?

That's what I want my whole life to be about.

That's so good.

It's funny you say that.

The way that my channel has sort of come up, so to speak,

is through debates specifically.

So I was a former debate teacher and I tried to think about providing some kind

of value that wasn't out there.

But I've always noticed, I'm very wary of promoting debates because,

I agree with you, we are so adversarial right now in our culture, in our society, in the way that we talk to each other

as people, believer and non -believer.

So whenever I put out another debate teacher reacts to the series, I'm always like, oh man,

I'm trying to be very careful because I don't think we should be debating, actually.

I think we should be loving each other.

We should be leading.

Our lead foot should be in love and caring concern and letting conversations flow

that.

Way.

So I appreciate what you said there.

Maybe we could talk about your heart behind Truth Unites, behind your ministry efforts there, and you already have

sort of said this a little bit, but especially when it comes to engaging Roman

Catholicism.

What is your heart behind it?

Is it merely to clarify false teaching behind Roman Catholicism, or is it to maybe one day unite

the Church again?

Hmm, yeah.

Well, this has come into greater clarity in my own heart and mind over time.

When I was in my first six months of my YouTube channel, I was still sort of feeling out what it would be like, and it's

actually surprised me that I've gotten pulled into Protestant versus, I'll just say the non -Protestant traditions

to encompass all of them out there as much as I have.

I've condensed my goal down to five words, and it's gospel reassurance through

theological.

Depth.

And so the idea there is that we're trying to go a little deeper into theology, and the purpose of that

being that we want to create an assurance in the gospel, clarity about the gospel, an assurance in

the gospel.

I just see that there's a huge amount of anxiety right now, and a lot of people are questioning things, and that's a

feature of the culture and the times in which we live.

And so I've just resolved that I want my YouTube channel to be something that people can go to, kind of the

imagery of food to hunger from earlier.

Another thing would be if you're walking up a steep staircase and there's the railing beside you, you can hold onto to help you

as you go.

I hope the resources I'm putting out there are like that.

I hope it's just a help and a stabilizing factor for people.

Our church prays for revival in our nation right now.

We pray for the third great awakening.

Right now, we're just in a time of massive secularization and de -churching

over the last 30 years.

The percentage of religiously unaffiliated people has gone from 5 to 30 or

more, from one out of 20 people to one out of three almost.

It's just crazy the time we live in.

And so in that sea change of anxiety, I'm just trying to speak hope and speak the gospel and speak the

love of Jesus as much as I can.

But I have gotten pulled into the Protestant stuff, and that really is my goal there.

So to your question of unity and that kind of thing, I would say in some respects, yes, I

do hope for as much unity as we can have, but of course, not at the expense of

truth.

So I also try to commend the truth, and that does mean defending Protestant beliefs as.

Well.

But I think we can try to do that in a gracious way where we try to remain friends along the way as

much as we can.

Yeah.

I mean, was it something that you ended up reacting to that

sort of caused you to start talking about that more, about sort of answering Roman Catholicism, or was it always

your plan to sort of go down this path in YouTube?

Totally caught me by surprise.

Never thought I would get into Protestant apologetics, you know, never.

It was never a point of emphasis in my past.

And the simple reason was trying to respond to needs.

I got onto YouTube, and I started to look around, and I realized we actually have a fair number of

general Christian apologists on YouTube, many of whom are doing really fantastic work.

You know, you think of people like William Lane Craig and his great ministry, Reasonable.

Faith.

He's out there.

He's doing stuff, and there's lots like that.

But what I discovered is there are apologists for

the non -Protestant traditions on YouTube who really occupy a significant space, and they're churning out a lot of

material, you know, arguing against Protestantism.

And there really hasn't been very much at all response to that on YouTube, and so I just got sucked in.

You know, you start addressing it a little bit, and then you feel all these needs coming at you, and you're getting emails every day from people

saying, hey, what about this?

Could you do a video on that?

And so you're just responding to the needs, and before I knew it, now I'm a Protestant apologist

to my own surprise.

Yeah, well, I think that's also a testament to, you know, the giftings that God has given you and your

obedience to develop those talents and skills, to be able to sit back and go, how can I best

fill in needs?

I'll go this way.

And what you've done is tremendous work.

I was saying this before we got started here, but I'm a huge fan of Truth Unites.

I try to catch all your videos.

If I can just encourage you, and I'm sure I'm speaking on behalf of your viewers as well, keep going.

It's a blessing.

You really are doing the Lord's work, so thank you.

Oh, thanks.

Thanks, that means a lot to me.

Yeah, well, so you mentioned non -Protestant apologists, so let's talk about Trent Horne just for a split second.

So you debated him.

You debated Trent on solo scriptura.

So I'm just curious, you know, especially for somebody like me, a former debate teacher, stuff like that, what

was that experience like for you, being on stage against Trent Horne?

Yeah, I'll be curious for your thoughts.

I mean, feel free to share your perspective as a former debate teacher.

I'll actually be fascinated at what you have to say, but I experienced it as a lot of fun.

So Trent is one of the people within that tradition that I enjoy interacting with because he's

professional and he's not—there's lots of people online who are just as provocative as possible,

or they will try to tear you down in all kinds of ways.

I mean, I actually do meet a fair amount of just outright hostility,

not from—the vast majority of people in any Christian tradition are not like that, but there is enough of

that that you meet that.

So whenever I meet people that I'm able to interact with and it feels like it's professional, it's productive, it's

above board, it's done with class, you're always grateful for that.

You try to maintain those relationships.

Matt Fradd at Pines with Aquinas does a great job hosting debates.

They're always very fair.

You can just tell they're trying to be honorable in how they go about things.

So I enjoyed the whole experience.

I enjoyed debating with Trent.

It was fun being in a live audience.

It was—the room didn't feel hostile.

I share your sentiments about debates.

I'm kind of ambivalent about them.

I see some benefits, but I also see some ways they can become a little bit toxic, a little bit about human ego.

It's about trouncing the other side.

And I think my biggest frustration with debates is the way a lot of people view them.

I finally figured out how to phrase this more in terms of the optics than the substance.

That's how I finally figured out how to phrase that.

I used to use the word rhetoric, but I think rhetoric is a great thing.

Rhetoric is good, so I don't want to use that word.

But I mean optics than substance.

Some people view it in terms of just this very surface -level

appearance of how something might have appeared at one moment and less so

the actual arguments, and that's just a feature of debates that can happen.

But a lot of people don't do that too, but that's just something you have to be aware.

Of.

But yeah, so the room, the mood of the room was very cordial.

It was fun.

Afterwards, we all hung out a long time, and that was great just to get to know people.

And even the next day, I was grateful we had a dialogue, some about Catholic versus

Protestant relationships, but also about atheism and where we can come together.

And that felt really healthy to be able to not hold back in a debate, but also supplement it

with a kind of dialogue about areas of common ground.

It just feels a little bit more human to be able to do both of those.

So that was a great experience too.

So yeah, no, I enjoyed it.

The only other thing I remember feeling is just how fast it flew by.

I mean, it was just like, and that's not a criticism of the time slots we gave because

even if we'd had longer ones, it probably still would have felt like that.

But it just absolutely flies by.

What I tried to do is a ton of preparation in advance so that I'd be ready to not have to think

in the moment any more than is necessary and just kind of be prepared to anticipate

whatever might come up.

So that's probably, to me, one of the key things in a debate is being ready for what might come about.

No, actually, that was the next question I was going to ask you.

First of all, I'm so sorry.

I actually have not seen the exchange yet.

I had always planned on doing it and I got caught up with work at the time and never

circled back around.

So I actually plan on watching it.

And yeah, I have excitement to see it

because Trent, he's a formidable opponent, but also you are incredibly

intelligent.

So I see that as a great match up there.

Having said that, though, I was going to ask you about your prep because, and this is something I try to relay in the debate videos, it is

incredibly important that you anticipate what your opponent is going to say.

Not in the wrong way.

You actually have to, and it's a skill, anticipate what they're actually going to say.

So I wanted to ask you, how did you do that?

How did you, in your mind, what were you telling yourself?

This is what Trent is going to say when I see him.

How did you figure all that stuff out?

Yeah, yeah.

It was a fun process to prepare and just read a bunch, first of all.

But then as you say, it's such a different skill set than just what you might do for

like writing an article on Sola Scriptura or something like that, or even giving a speech on Sola Scriptura.

I mean, that's like 5 % overlap, but then you move out and so much of it is anticipation.

And then you have to be mindful of rhetoric and soundbite as opposed to

hyper nuanced chain of argumentation, because you have five minutes or you have

seven minutes or whatever.

It is.

So yeah, I mean, nothing too complicated.

Basically just, you listen to Trent's treatment of Sola Scriptura a little bit.

I didn't do a super deep dive, but I watched a couple of videos where he's addressed that to try to learn his way of thinking about the

topic.

And then I looked at his chapter in the case for Catholicism, a book he wrote just where he

addresses.

I think he's probably got two chapters in there on Sola Scriptura.

So you become really familiar with the arguments.

And then it just takes a lot of time to just basically think through and type out.

You know, I think I just came up with maybe 10 or 12 different possible arguments at different points where you

can then basically just write out a paragraph response, kind of like a one paragraph

soundbite response and as clear and cogent as possible.

And then you just have those typed out and ready to go.

And so, yeah, so it's basically just a matter of study the topic really thoroughly and then anticipate

responses and then try to think through in terms of the structure of the debate, when those might come up,

how things might fall out.

And of course, it's always the case.

You just don't have enough time to say everything you want to say.

That's true.

Well, shoot.

I mean, as you list the things that you did, it sounds like maybe you'd done this before.

Did you have a background at all in debating in school or?

A little bit.

I don't consider myself a huge debater.

I did debate in high school.

So four years of debate in high school.

I did Lincoln -Douglas debate.

So where I went to high school in Georgia, it was policy debate.

But then I was the one person who really wanted to do Lincoln -Douglas debate, which for people watching this is just a different format

of debate, which I like because it's less reliance upon evidence that you're reading through really quickly.

As in policy debate, it's more focused upon the arguments.

And I just find that a little more profitable and more enjoyable myself.

So I did four years of debate in high school.

It wasn't my main focus.

I don't really consider myself an expert debater or something like that.

But I think I've learned enough to be able to do it.

You know, each time I have an opportunity, I'll pray through it and think through it.

And if I think it could be useful, I'll engage in that way.

I've done maybe five or six, you know, since I started my YouTube channel, formal debates, maybe.

I think that's right.

I think five or six.

So, yeah, it's a medium that I find limited, but not terrible.

And I think it has value.

But I think just going into it, understanding that it's not going to be the answer to truth,

that you're going to have to conjoin debate viewing with reading, dialogue,

reflection, your spiritual life, your prayer life.

You know, this is just one tool among others by which we can discern truth.

I think knowing that going into it helps.

But, yeah, I did do, I do have a little bit of a background in debate, enough that gives me a little bit of a sensitivity for that world and that

way of thinking.

Yeah, that's great.

Well, I look forward to checking it out, and I'm sure everybody in the audience is

tisking me for not having seen it.

Well, so maybe we can shift a little bit, and instead of talking about debating, maybe the better way to

say it is just engaging.

Again, one of the things that you're focused on at Truth Unites is engaging Roman

Catholicism.

And so, I guess maybe the question I could ask here is, like, what is the goal of engaging

Catholics, in your mind, as you think about Protestants doing this kind of a thing?

Are we merely just trying to make Catholics Protestant, or is there something else going on?

Well, I try, I find it helps me to have modest goals

and not think, if I go into every interaction thinking the goal is to just get

whoever I'm talking to to agree with me, that this is very unlikely

to succeed, and there will be more of a tendency for frustration.

But if you try, what helps me is to try to keep the bigger picture in mind.

And so, the main goal for me, others might feel called differently, the main goal for me is to help

viewers who might be struggling with anxiety or uncertainty about the topic, and to help them

understand what is a historic classical Protestant perspective, or if it's a different field, some

other topic.

It could be within Protestantism, a Baptist perspective or something like that.

So, I'm trying to help the viewer.

I'm trying to help, and that helps me to keep that in mind, because then I'm less tempted to go down into every

time, if somebody misrepresents you and you're tempted, should I respond to this or not?

And it helps me to remember a lot of times just let stuff go, because the average viewer out there just doesn't care.

If Gavin Ortlund was misrepresented in this tiny little thing or something like that, you got to keep your audience in front of you and say, I

don't want to serve, meet those needs out there.

And then another thing that actually has been surprising to me is, I think it is, of course, I would like people

to embrace a Protestant perspective, because I believe that that would be a step towards truth and

a step towards Catholicity, actually.

But I also have respect for people, and I know sincere, intelligent people will disagree and be of a

different perspective.

So, in the meantime, we can remain respectful to one another.

And just to have a civil dialogue is actually a witness to the gospel in our culture,

in my opinion.

To be able to talk without hatred, without contempt, I actually think that is countercultural,

sadly.

And I actually know atheists and agnostics and skeptics do watch the Protestant

versus Catholic versus Orthodox discussions.

And many of them, they're in dialogue with me, and they'll talk about, well, I think the Catholic side is better for this

reason.

And I'm fascinated by that, because I'm thinking, I'm surprised that you care at that

point, which of these two sides is right, but I respect their intellect and their

intelligence.

So, I do think, in other words, to model the ability to talk civilly, because we

share some foundational beliefs across these traditions.

One of those beliefs is that God became a baby.

So, if we all believe together that God became a baby, we should talk to each other with love and humility.

And that can be a testimony to the gospel to those watching along.

No, you're so right.

I love that.

What does that do to our conversations, Gavin?

So again, I mean, in thinking about engaging Catholics and trying to

remove that little bug inside a lot of us where we just want to close the deal, what

does that do to our conversations?

Does it spread them out over a period of weeks, months, and years, talking to

our Catholic neighbors, co -workers, family members, and maybe just trying to provide one nugget here, one nugget there?

Is that what that looks like practically?

What do you think?

Well, I think that is a very wise approach to have patience like that, because the truth is that

these differences that we inherit, that's actually kind of helpful for us to remember to

depressurize things a little bit, is we personally did not create all of these disagreements.

We inherit traditions that have disagreed, and all sides have sinned against one another.

And that comes to us today.

So we inherit these differences, and they're not simple.

They're complicated.

If they were simple, they probably would have been resolved or died out.

But the fact that hundreds of millions of people still disagree for centuries

about these things probably means that it's complicated.

And it is complicated.

And each side has a different range of values and presuppositions.

And so I think what you pointed out there in your question about patience and the need for

little bits at a time, and even yes, years, absolutely.

We're going to have to, I think, get used to the long haul and not expect a quick fix.

I think it's going to be years and years and years of talking to each other, sometimes before we fully understand, and

probably most significant progress will be the result of a longer process, it seems to me.

Yeah.

Which has an interesting relationship to debate.

One of the fundamental first things that you do is define key terms.

Why?

So that you can have a conversation with the person that you disagree with, because if you don't, and you don't share terminology,

you end up just talking past each other and stuff.

And in regular conversations, I mean, that just takes a while to be able to listen actively

and understand the person that you're talking to, their point of view, where they're coming from, how they

define certain things.

That does take time.

How can you help us, Gavin?

We don't apparently want to do anything longer than it takes to microwave popcorn.

So how do we instill this habit in us to just take our time and be patient?

Hmm.

Well, one value that might help us is cultivating curiosity

for the differences.

So that if you're thinking of Lewis and Tolkien at the pub, they're talking about their literature and maybe Catholic

versus Protestant differences come up.

Lewis and Tolkien are both pretty intelligent, pretty impressive thinkers.

And it would be curious to think if I could be a fly on the wall at a meeting of the

inklings and just sit there and just soak it in, that would be absolutely fascinating.

Well, there's a lot of people like that today where we can say, I'm curious.

I really want to understand a different way of thinking.

And I find a disposition of curiosity is so valuable to ask questions.

The ability to really say, like Atticus Finch in Kill a Mockingbird, how does it make sense to them?

I want to see the world through their eyes.

How does it make sense to them?

How is it satisfying and compelling to them?

And the thing is we live in these extremes where some people, they don't have

anything like that and we need to encourage them to that.

Other times though, people can think, oh yeah, we just need to be curious and understand and listen and dialogue.

And so there's no space for pushback or contending for what

you believe is true.

And so that's where that balance I think is needed to, especially when it comes to the more important issues, also

be okay in the patient process and along the way saying, you know, here is the conviction that God has led me

to and here's why that is important.

And I would like to share that and commend that along the way, even while I keep listening as well.

And so that way it steers it clear from being too squishy of an ecumenism too where we

sacrifice really contending for the truth, which when we sacrifice that, we don't.

Honor the importance of these issues.

Yeah, it's so good.

Curiosity is such a wonderful quality to have.

You know, I was a high school teacher before I became a pastor myself and that is the key to engagement with students is

creating an environment where we're all just trying to solve mysteries, you know, we're curious.

The Proverbs, Proverbs chapter 2, incline your heart towards understanding.

I mean, this takes curiosity in order to do something like that.

It's wonderful, I think.

That's wonderful advice, thank you.

As we engage, you know, again, Protestant -Catholic, what are some things you wish that

Protestants knew in order to better engage Catholics,.

Just from your vantage point?

Yeah, well, I'll give two really basic ones that are so basic that, you know, some people might say, well, of

course we already know that, but I have learned not to assume that, you know,

something that might seem basic might not, you know, it's still worth saying.

So sometimes Protestants may be guilty of failing to appreciate the

sincerity of the other side, but all sides can do this, but it can be this mentality of,

we wouldn't say this, but we can think if they really care about the truth and if they're

really seeking the truth, eventually, they're just going to see it just like I do and we fail to appreciate that someone might be

sincere and disagree or sometimes we maybe have seen a lot of

traditionalism in other traditions, maybe even some Protestant traditions, but some of the non -Protestant traditions and so we

assume that people don't really value, you know, personal vital

faith in Jesus day by day and that's just not true and people just need to understand there are people,

you know, I often say there are better Christians than I am in these other traditions and that's so obviously

true.

You just look around and you see there's some amazing people out there, so just that's so simple,

but you got to say it right up front is don't assume people are not sincere when they disagree with

you and don't assume they're disingenuous.

They may be completely sincere, so that's the thing and then another thing would be on the issue of justification

specifically.

I think a key problem I see is that because that issue has been so central to the Catholic versus Protestant

divide, I think that it is sometimes simplified and just as the Catholics will say against the

Protestants that you guys are all, you all believe in easy believism where because you believe in

justification by faith alone, therefore you're saying works are not necessary.

You can just believe and you're good and that's really a caricature, but similarly many Protestants

still labor under the caricature that Catholics are just pure works righteousness and they

don't understand grace and that really is a caricature and I think we

just need to be open to learning more of the nuances of where that disagreement falls out on justification

because that gets right to the heart of the gospel and too often I think there's been a mentality of they just completely

deny the gospel, whereas I would say it's not that simple and at the

very least, whatever conclusion someone comes to, they need to kind of wade into the nuances of that doctrine.

That's interesting.

One of the, so I hope you don't mind I put it out to some of the audience to

ask, you know, questions if they had any questions to send them your way and this was one of the questions, it

was related, is the current Catholic view of justification heretical and,

you know, I think you're already starting to talk about this a little bit, maybe if you wanted to say a few

more words about it, you know, Paul in Galatians says, you know, O foolish Galatians,

who has bewitched you, having begun in the spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh or something to that

effect?

So that's kind of the gist of the question that's coming at you, I mean, what do you

think about the Catholic view of justification?

This might be a left turn.

No, that's fine.

No, it's totally fine.

It's a great question and you're right, we've already kind of pushed into it a little bit.

So yeah, I mean, I'll be brief now but I will say I have a video on justification where I

unpack a longer response to this.

To briefly summarize, I would just say that I think we have to appreciate, first of all, I don't want to dismiss the

concern, you know, that it is possible for us to fall away from the

gospel into legalism that does happen in all of our traditions at times where we just

don't understand the gospel and we fall.

So I'm not, this is a very live concern that I'm not wanting to dismiss but in terms of the official Catholic

view and what is necessary to maintain, I just think we need to appreciate the differences between

the Judaizers' error that Paul is opposing in Galatians and Romans and

the current contemporary Roman Catholic theology which does have important differences in my opinion.

One of them will be that for initial, they make a distinction between initial justification and final justification.

So for initial justification to come into a state of friendship with God, Catholics don't believe you

need to do a bunch of good works before God will accept you or something like that.

You can be, you know, a complete sinner running away from God, come to your senses like the prodigal son,

run to Christ, have faith, repentance, get baptized and they really emphasize

baptism more than like some of our Protestant traditions would but still it's not the same as the Judaizers because

they think you're clean and in a state of friendship with God just at that point.

Now that where it gets really tough is then from there, you know, what the necessity of

confession, what happens after you commit a mortal sin.

So, you know, there's all kinds of important issues that I'm not trying to minimize but I'm just saying is this a scenario

where it's like the Judaizers where we have to give an anathema upon them and say they have a false gospel?

I would say no and I would say a caution for us would just be looking at church history where Catholic

terminology, the way they define the word justification as a process, that's common to the

medieval tradition, that's from Saint Augustine.

So if we don't want to, if we're too quick to say something's a false

gospel, we're going to be in a position where we may be saying that about

Anselm and Thomas Aquinas and Augustine himself and so I think that might

induce caution here to really slow down and work through this.

Well, I mean, that's very helpful.

Because what I'm thinking about as you talk about this is landmines.

So again, I mean, the focus of this whole entire discussion, especially for somebody like me, is effective

engagement.

How can we as Protestants engage our Catholic friends, our co -workers, and our

family members and do it in ways that are actually effective?

But now I'm starting to think about landmines and I think we're already getting there.

How do we avoid stepping on things that would be a big mistake?

And so in terms of engagement, what are some things that we should say

to Catholics and we should do, and what are some things that we should avoid doing and saying?

Hmm.

Yeah, well, one thing that I find very helpful is to get into, I'll say two things.

One is to get into the nature of the Church.

I think a lot of times the talking past each other happens because they're thinking of the Church more

institutionally and we're thinking of the Church more organically, and even though that's not a

complete antithesis, there's a difference of emphasis and that causes misunderstandings in both

directions.

And I think they misunderstand us a lot because all the time we hear this mentality of what are you saying that the

Baptist Church existed back in the 7th century and how can you think that and that kind of thing.

And I think they're not understanding how we think of the Church, that it is more

institution.

It is not restricted to one institution and there is greater flexibility in

where the one true Church of Jesus Christ can be instantiated from a Protestant perspective.

So we believe that today when Muslim communities have dreams of Jesus and convert to

Christianity and start practicing the sacraments and worshiping the triune God,

there's the potential for a totally valid Church that is part of Jesus building his body, the one true Church.

Even if they don't have any kind of institutional connection whatsoever and not only do they not have laying hands

from one bishop to another, they don't have any contact of any kind whatsoever.

It's just in a remote area and so that's an example of where we have this kind of different framework of

how we understand the unity of the Church and the transmission of the Church from one time and one place

to another and those without trying to solve all that right now, I'm just trying to flag it.

This is one of those areas where we need to try to listen and understand one another.

The other thing to avoid doing and to do instead of this is I think if we

just assume our own paradigm of how authority works and argue from that

paradigm, we will often make an appeal that will be utterly unconvincing to the other side

as opposed to engage at the roots of our different paradigms for how authority

works.

So for us as Protestants, that would be sola scriptura which doesn't mean the Bible is the only authority of any kind

but it's at the top.

It's the only infallible rule for the Church as such and it is the pinnacle authority

and then for our Catholic friends, they believe in the scripture and tradition

as interpreted by the magisterium and kind of a three -pronged approach and so I think going right to

that sometimes is a great way to start discussions and try to make progress because otherwise we're

talking up here at the surface and we haven't gone down to the roots and so we just won't be able to

maybe make an appeal that will pull someone over towards our side in any way because

we're not arguing within a paradigm that they recognize and I think that's another area where we just should be mindful

and I've just found it helpful to try to go into those deeper methodological issues of authority.

Yeah, that's really great.

I'm sure some in the audience are jotting this stuff down and then the next question naturally is well,

okay, maybe there's some kind of a book I can look into or something so I'm gonna set that on the table

and I'm gonna come back to this.

I might ask you about some resources, some things to go deeper just for that because I think

that's helpful.

Thank you.

Let's say again, engaging Catholics, let's say we actually have engaged someone and they decide

over time that, yeah, I think I should leave Catholicism.

Well, we don't want to leave them hanging, you know?

So what are some crucial next steps for us so that we can love and

guide this person well?

What's your thoughts there?

I think a lot of love and a lot of reassurance is going to be necessary along that journey.

Whenever we make a significant change, sometimes there will be a part of us that might look over our shoulder and wonder did I do

the right thing, did I not do the right thing for that particular change because to leave the Roman Catholic Church

is considered a mortal sin.

They may have a part in their heart that's wondering, oh my goodness, if I'm wrong about

this then that has eternal consequence for my soul and so we will want to do what

I mentioned at the beginning as the goal of my channel and that's gospel assurance.

We want to just, you know, communicate the love of Christ, communicate the promises of scripture

to this person over and over and just kind of, you know, inundate them with

the promise of the gospel.

To me, one of the basic imports from the New Testament is if the gospel does anything in our hearts, it gives us a

sense of our secure status within the love of God.

You think of Romans 5 .1, we have peace with God.

We're not in an uncertain relation to him.

We're now his friends, not his enemies through the blood of Christ.

Romans 8 .1, there is no condemnation for those in Christ.

Now yes, we must follow Christ and respond to him with obedience, taking up our cross, but we're doing that not from

a position of uncertainty in our relation to God and so I just want to give, I think unfortunately, I do think

Roman Catholic theology can give, can put some anxiety upon people and I want to give them lots

of love and assurance and just basic communication of the gospel.

Again, in the point of kind of not making any assumptions, I find that many people,

well, I'll use myself as an example.

We can always be reminded of the gospel.

You know, we need that reminder continually of what Christ has accomplished for us and how

that applies to our lives in different seasons and so I want to, I think the main thing, you know, there's lots of things

we could consider in terms of helping them understand how much there is to Protestantism, you know, the different traditions, helping

them think through their own convictions, but I think the main thing is just a lot of

assurance about their spiritual status and a lot of just gospel

infusion of gospel understanding, gospel promises, so that that is really real to

their heart.

Yeah, that's good.

You never outgrow the gospel, you just grow more and more into the gospel.

That's great.

We have a, it's already almost done, Gavin.

I don't know if you, it's been going really fast and I really appreciate you taking the time.

A couple more questions here, one from YouTube.

So this is, I'm just going to read it as it was asked, okay?

Sure.

What should a Baptist do if they find that they're not satisfied by the

low sacramentology of Baptist theology and feel drawn toward

more real interpretations of the Lord's Supper?

Yeah, I mean, maybe you can also add to that, you know, they want

to experience more of what's called high church, you know,.

Liturgy, things like that.

What do you think?

Yeah, a question like this is when I hear a great deal.

You know, there's lots of people who are thirsty for higher

liturgy and higher view of the sacraments, and I would say that's true for myself as well.

I really resonate with when liturgy is done well and also just a

high view of the sacraments of the Lord's Supper.

Charles Spurgeon said the Lord's Supper, he was a Baptist, the great

Baptist preacher in London, he said, the Lord's Supper is the closest we get to heaven in this life.

And I appreciate that quote.

I kind of resonate with it.

We're doing a study on the Lord's Supper right now, reading through Thomas Watson's book at our church, a great Puritan author on the

Lord's Supper and learning about that, trying to grow in that.

I think my basic appeal would be that it is actually a historic Baptist teaching that the Lord's

Supper, to have a kind of a view of real presence in the Lord's Supper and just to have a high view of the Lord's Supper.

So just to encourage someone that they don't need to assume that that would mean leaving

being a Baptist, but I also appreciate the sociological reality that that's not going to be a very common descriptive

of many Baptist churches today.

So this is where we need renewal in our Baptist churches to the extent that lower views are

kind of even a deviation from our own Baptist roots.

We need renewal and just education about the sacraments and what worship should look like.

So in the meantime, if the person is committed to Baptist theological distinctives

like credo baptism and the autonomy of the local church and separation of church and state and so forth,

but they want to have a richer view of the sacraments and liturgy, all I know that they can do is pray

for the right place that God can direct them and then join the rest of us in trying to seek reform and

renewal in Baptist churches, because a lot of us share that passion and there's a great group called the Center

for Baptist Renewal that they might want to check out their website, and there's a church directory there, there's great resources there that

might.

Be helpful to them.

Oh, that's excellent.

Well, so I mean, that is sort of the last question that I had were resources.

As listeners, viewers get through this interview, I'm sure they're getting excited writing stuff down, like where

should they go, what other books should they read, what other websites should they go to?

Theological Retrieval is a great book.

I read that over the summer, loved it, thought it was excellent.

So I guess I would propose Theological Retrieval, a book by Gavin Ortlund, available on Amazon.

But what are some other resources that you would suggest for.

Viewers?

Yeah, when it comes to the Protestant issues, I have a book coming out next

summer, so I'll just say August of 2024.

I don't know when people will be watching this, but so that's called What It Means to be Protestant, comes out

from Zondervan Reflective next August 2024, that might be useful.

I love to encourage people to read classical texts from church history.

And so when it comes to diving into church history, learning more about theology, the

Puritan Paperbacks and the Popular Patristics book series are cheap,

short, little paperback books, one giving you books by church fathers or other early Christians,

the others from Puritans.

Those are just fantastic ways to get in.

I mean, if somebody really wants a devotional read, reading through a book like Richard Sibbes' The Bruised Read.

He was a Puritan who talked, it's, you know, the Puritans would give these lengthy books on one tiny little

verse.

And this is from the verse in Isaiah that speaking of the Messiah says, a

bruised read he will not break.

It's all about the gentleness of Christ, that when we are broken, Christ is gentle to us, basically,

and just wonderfully devotionally rich and not that hard to read.

So I love to encourage people to get back into church history and read classics.

And then if there's any other specific genres you want me to speak to, I can.

People often ask about Protestant stuff, and there's not as much in that space.

One book I could mention is Jerry Walls and Ken Collins' Roman but not Catholic.

That's a more recent book that does a great job kind of responding to arguments against

Protestantism.

So that might be of use as well.

So those are a couple of things.

That come to mind.

Yeah, that's great.

Thank you.

Yeah, any, like in the area of apologetics as well, but with that sort of, and you say this well,

like ironic tone, what would be something that comes to mind?

Usually the one that always is thrown around is Tactics by Greg Kokel.

But any books along those lines, or website or resources along those lines?

Or maybe they just.

Don't exist.

No, well, I mean, Greg Kokel's stuff is great.

He's got a newer book out too.

What I find so helpful about his stuff is it helps you be prepared for everyday conversation.

Those are very practical books.

They're like, if they're, you know, when you get that question and you feel like a deer in headlights, what do you do in that moment?

His books are really helpful for those kinds of conversations.

I do have my own book on apologetics called Why God Makes Sense in a World That Doesn't.

That might be of interest to people.

I've mentioned William Lane Craig before.

I think he's a very gifted apologist.

It's a book of his like reasonable faith.

You know, it works through some standard arguments that are really great.

I like David Baggett's work.

He's done great work on the moral argument, for example.

He's teaches, he's a great philosopher.

He teaches, I think at Houston Christian University, it's now called.

He's got some fantastic books on moral argument, on other things.

So yeah, in general apologetics, there are a lot of good resources out there, and even on YouTube too.

So I don't know.

Those might be some good starting points at least.

Pastor, author, speaker, Gavin Ortland.

Definitely check out his channel Truth Unites.

Gavin, thank you so much for joining me today.

Hey, it's my pleasure.

Keep up the great work.

Nate, really enjoyed getting to know you.

Thanks for having me on.