Evangelicals and Catholics In Conversation | Interview with Dr. Brad Harper
| by Carl E. Olson | November 20, 2006
Evangelicals and Catholics In Conversation | Interview with Dr. Brad Harper
| by Carl E. Olson | November 20, 2006
http://www.ignatiusinsight.com/features2006/bharper_intervw_nov06.asp
I first met Dr. Brad Harper in 1999, while I was working on
my Masters in Theological Studies through the University of Dallas's IRPS
program. Dr. Harper, who had recently joined the staff at Multnomah Bible
College in Portland, Oregon, was invited to speak to our class about ecumenism,
specifically Catholic-Evangelical dialogue. At the time I didn't know what to
expect. My wife had attended Multnomah from 1991-1994, and although few of her
professors were openly anti-Catholic, Catholicism was not, from what I could
tell, a common or welcome topic.
When I met Dr. Harper in the parking lot (having
volunteered, as the eager ex-Evangelical, to show him to our classroom), I
immediately noticed a worn copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church tucked beneath his arm. "I see you have a copy of
the Catechism," I said after
introducing myself. "Yes," he said with a smile, "and I even read it." And, in
fact, his presentation that afternoon provided ample evidence of his knowledge
of and respect for Catholic doctrine and theology. It turns out that he had
received his doctorate of philosophy in historical theology at St. Louis
University, where one of his favorite professors was the noted author and
scholar Dr. James Hitchcock.
Since then I've touched bases with Dr. Harper from time to
time. Recently we corresponded about some matters relating to ecclesiology and
eschatology, and I asked him if he had any interest in being interviewed
about Evangelicalism, Catholic-Evangelical relations, and related matters. He
graciously agreed. This is part one of a two-part interview.
IgnatiusInsight.com: You received your B.A. from Biola
University, which once had impeccable Fundamentalist credentials, your M.Div.
from an Evangelical stalwart, Talbot Theological Seminary, and your Ph.D. from
a Jesuit institution, St. Louis University. Did you set out to confuse people,
or was there a method to your education?
Dr. Harper: Well,
there definitely were a few of my Evangelical friends who were puzzled by my
choice to go to SLU. They wondered if I might end up becoming Catholic, which
would not have been a positive development, in their opinion. But a lot has
changed in the twenty years since I began my studies there. My choice was based
on a couple of things. First, I wanted to study historical theology and, as
cheesy as it sounds, I figured I might as well study with the people who had
been there for all of it. Also, I simply wanted to study outside my own
tradition, partly for future marketability in the pursuit of teaching
positions, but mostly because I wanted to study with people who engaged
historic Christian orthodoxy from a perspective different from my own. I was
not concerned that studying in a Catholic institution would make me want to
abandon my Evangelical roots. Rather, I felt that a Catholic perspective would
bring richness to my theology and allow me to engage the world more
productively. I was not disappointed.
IgnatiusInsight.com: What did you study at SLU? What were
some of the essential things about Catholicism that you discovered there? Most
importantly, how many times have you read the Catechism of the Catholic
Church?
Dr. Harper: The
program at SLU is a Ph.D. in Historical Theology. Typical of the American
system, students are required to take courses from across the historical
spectrum, from early church to the modern world. My own major emphasis was on
the work of an Evangelical theologian named George Eldon Ladd and his theology
of the kingdom of God. He was a mediating figure who, along with other scholars
in the post-World War II Evangelical movement, wanted to reengage theological
traditions outside Fundamentalism. His instincts served to foster my own
interests in listening to voices from outside my own tradition, which led to my
ongoing dialog with the Roman Catholic Church.
Eight years in a Jesuit university taught me many things
about Catholicism, including the following: I discovered the breadth of
Catholic thought. At least at the academic level, Catholic theology is
certainly not monolithic. Among my Jesuit professors I found those who held to
a very conservative version of historic orthodoxy and others who were quite
liberal. Yet they all remain committed to their Catholic identity. It's a
phenomenon illustrated by the introduction my Presbyterian mentor at the
university gave to two Catholics scholars having a debate over an important
theological issue. He remarked, "The amazing thing about you Catholics is that
you can have serious disagreements over key theological issues, yet at the end
of the day you stay Catholic. When we Presbyterians disagree, we just start a
new denomination." At the risk of being simplistic, perhaps at the bottom of
all this is the fact that Evangelical theology is fundamentally rooted in ideas
while Catholic theology is always understood as a function of the church. Or,
to say it differently, for Evangelicals, theology created the church while for
Catholics, without the church, there is no theology. It was also at SLU that I
really began to encounter the connection between the church and social justice,
a connection that is birthed through seeing all theology as
incarnational.
Regarding the Catechism,
I'm not sure if I have read it cover to cover, but I actually read it often and
I have my students read it. It is one of the key sources I use in developing
and shaping my theology courses.
IgnatiusInsight.com: How did you get involved in
Evangelical-Catholic dialogue? What has been some of your ecumenical work over
the years?
Dr. Harper: Getting
into Evangelical-Catholic dialogue was really a product both of attending SLU
and living in St. Louis. St. Louis has a very high concentration of Catholics.
Most of my neighbors were Catholic and we often had good theological
discussions. And my next-door neighbor was part of the team that brought John
Paul II to St. Louis, allowing me the opportunity to hear the Pope first hand.
Also, there were many Catholics and ex-Catholics who attended the church I
pastored, which led to lots of lively discussions.
The ecumenical work I've been involved with started at the
local church level. After "Evangelicals and Catholics Together" (ECT) was
published in 1994, I wrote an article on it for my denomination and then
invited Dr. James Hitchcock, a professor at SLU and one of the signatories of
ECT, to come and lecture at my church in a class I was teaching on Roman
Catholicism. His ability, as a conservative Catholic, to show the many
connections Catholics have with Evangelicals at the level of historic orthodoxy
was a huge benefit to many of the class members, whose image of Catholicism was
shaped primarily by Fundamentalist stereotypes.
Also, as one of the early Evangelicals at SLU, I was
occasionally invited to Catholic events to lecture on theology as an
Evangelical who understood and appreciated Catholics. Since being at Multnomah
I have continued my engagement with the Catholic Church through lectures at
Catholic venues, teaching my students to listen to Catholic theology, and
through positive engagement with Catholic scholarship at conferences of
Evangelical scholars. More recently my ecumenical involvement has broadened
through our
Institute for Theology of Culture here
at Multnomah, allowing me to dialogue with Buddhists, Jewish Rabbis, and
secular humanists, as well as Roman Catholics.
IgnatiusInsight.com: From an Evangelical perspective, what
has changed the most in Evangelical-Catholic relations and dialogue over the
past twenty years? What are some issues you think should addressed further?
Dr. Harper: Let me
say first of all that I think, perhaps, the biggest changes have taken place at
the grass roots level, that is, in the relationships between everyday Catholic
and Evangelical Christians as opposed to Christian theologians. This is
especially true with the current generation of young Christians. These
"postmodern" Christian college students I'm with every day are generally
unconcerned about loyalty to a particular denomination. What they really care
about is an authentic Christianity, that is, they want to see Christianity
lived out not just in the life of their particular church but in culture as
well. And their engagement with culture, I believe, is having the effect of
pushing them towards a kind of "mere Christianity," to use C.S. Lewis' term. The
result is that many of them are much more likely to be drawn to a Catholic
displaying the love of Jesus in his daily life than to a Fundamentalist who
shares a similar theology but spends a lot of time bashing culture and creating
enemies. ECT was a grass roots movement, initiated by common Catholics and
Evangelicals working together, motivated by their love for Jesus, to protect
the unborn. These are the kinds of movement that have, in my opinion, created
the broadest environments for dialogue and partnership.
All this is not to say that nothing has happened among
theologians. Many scholars on both sides have responded to ECT, some positively
and some negatively. What I'm actually most encouraged by at this level is the
new willingness by many to drop "straw man" arguments and to let the other side
define its own terms. One of the great works in this area was done by Alistair
McGrath in his book Justitia Dei. Here
he demonstrated that in the nasty arguments surrounding the doctrine of
justification, for example, at least part of the problem has been definition of
terms. When Evangelical theology talks of justification, it refers to a one
time event, generally understood to be legal, which declares the believer
righteous. The idea of ongoing growth in righteousness is discussed under the
term "sanctification." Catholic theology, on the other hand, will often use the
terms justification and sanctification interchangeably, indicating both an
event and a process. This has major ramifications, then, for what part our
works of righteousness might play in the process beyond an initial acceptance
of Christ by faith. So this kind of work is encouraging as well but, to be
honest, I don't see much of this filtering down to the common Christian, at
least not in Evangelical churches.
IgnatiusInsight.com: I know that "Fundamentalism" is
difficult to define, but considered as a separatist, anti-ecumenical,
anti-Catholic movement, is it dying? Changing? Is it losing presence at
Evangelical colleges such as Multnomah?
Dr. Harper: You're
right, Carl. Fundamentalism is hard to define, especially vis-à-vis
Evangelical. Theologically and historically, what we typically call
Evangelicalism in American is rooted in Fundamentalism. On the other hand, it
began as a rejection of part of what Fundamentalism was about. Speaking
simplistically, Evangelicals wanted to keep much of the theology of Fundamentalism
but get rid of its attitude. But what really ended up happening is the creation
of a movement of people and churches, some who would be very close to
Fundamentalism and others quite far from it, but who all would call themselves
Evangelicals.
But to speak more specifically about Fundamentalism, it is
definitely not dead. In fact, Fundamentalism really experienced a resurgence
through Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and the Moral Majority. And, recently,
Falwell reconstituted the Moral Majority after years of it being officially
non-functional. I don't think Fundamentalist's main target is Catholics
anymore, although they would probably be dubious about Catholics being true
Christians. Their main impulses these days are political, working mostly to
elect candidates that support "family values," which generally means they are
pro-life, anti-gay, and generally anti-Democrat.
Thankfully, much of the separatist attitude of
Fundamentalism is gone at places like Multnomah. There are still plenty of Fundamentalist
Bible Colleges out there, but my take is that they tend to be declining. Both
our students and faculty today are becoming much more open to listening to
voices outside our traditional circles and partnering with other traditions for
the work of the kingdom.
In Part Two of this interview (coming soon), Dr. Harper discusses the
"emergent church" movement, Pope Benedict XVI, and his favorite Catholic
theologians.
Related IgnatiusInsight.com Articles:
• Has The Reformation Ended? | An Interview with Dr. Mark Noll
• Thomas Howard and the Kindly Light | IgnatiusInsight.com
• Objections, Obstacles, Acceptance: An Interview with J. Budziszewski | IgnatiusInsight.com
• Thomas Howard on the Meaning of Tradition | IgnatiusInsight.com
• Why Catholicism Makes Protestantism Tick | Mark Brumley
• Surprised by Conversion: The Patterns of Faith | Peter E. Martin
• Reformation 101: Who's Who in the Protestant Reformation | Geoffrey Saint-Clair
• The Tale of Trent: A Council and and Its Legacy | Martha Rasmussen
Dr. Brad Harper grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area and remains a devoted '49er fan. He committed
his life to Christ at age five. Before coming to Multnomah, Harper lived in St.
Louis, Missouri where he earned a doctor of philosophy in historical theology
at St. Louis University and also served for thirteen years as associate pastor
and church planting pastor at two Evangelical Free churches. His published work
includes articles on the church's role in social ethics, history of American
Evangelicalism, theology of culture, and Roman Catholic/Evangelical dialogue.
His current writing project is The Bride: An Ecumenical and Evangelical
Ecclesiology (Brazos Press, forthcoming 2007),
which he is co-authoring with Dr. Paul Louis Metzger.
Dr. Harper and his wife, Robin, have been married since 1984 and
have three children. He enjoys hiking, bird watching, and reading American
history.
If you'd like to receive the FREE IgnatiusInsight.com
e-letter (about every 1 to 2 weeks), which includes regular updates
about IgnatiusInsight.com articles, reviews, excerpts, and author appearances,
please click here to sign-up today!