Why White's Way is Wobbly

A fine brother directed my attention to this link (AOMIN, see A Wise Voice from the Past – which I recommend you skim before reading the rest of this post), these are my revised thoughts in response.

Thank you for calling my attention to this post. I wish I had the time to keep up with half of the websites that I have an interest in. I have no disposition of reticence toward listening to or reading those with opposing views, but in appropriating priorities, James White just doesn’t even approach the list of wise men in whom I have a deep interest. He does, however, have a following of sorts, and therefore questions to which his writings give rise certainly deserve attention.

First, allow me to dismiss the attempt to connect “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” with “Reformed Catholicism.” I did not give enough attention to ECT in its day to know whether or not ‘catholicity’ was a buzz-word back then, but regardless of such a matter, the true premise of ECT (though some elements of their efforts were beneficial) was “for one side to turn a blind eye toward Rome’s abominations and the other to ignore Protestant sectarianism in the interest of being nice to one another,” whereas the fundamental premise of Ref. Cath. is “to shun sectarianism in the pursuit of an historic and biblical, catholic ecclesiology, appreciating the Church’s heritage, while seeking complete reformation and conformity to the Word of God, without compromise.”

This first and very simple point alone should show White’s failure to discern the spirit of Reformed Catholicism. It is not wise to imagine that Bahnsen would have done anything other than fully embrace and whole-heartedly encourage the endeavors of Reformed Catholicism. Quite frankly, though I imagine Bahnsen and many other reformed saints who have died would have embraced Reformed Catholicism in their lives, they certainly would if they could call out from their graves now in support of any effort which seeks to biblically pursue a true catholicity within the Bride of Christ.

We reformed are fond of mentioning Rome’s abominations, but I would sooner see men in this present day repent of their blinding sectarianism, so that those who abhor Rome’s abominations might speak with one voice in calling covenantal brethren to corporate repentance and true catholicity.

“Ah, the good old days when Reformed folks were focused on the gospel and actually believed the Word spoke with power...! I sure don't see the rC's speaking like this, do you?” says James White. It does not appear that he has read one single word at the Reformed Catholicism website. If he checks in there regularly, he must do so with his eyes closed. His rhetoric is disappointing, but reflects well his own agenda which seems not so much focused on the gospel as on wrongfully representing brothers and seeking to ruin their credibility. White wrongly celebrates what he perceives as a victory over the “rC’s.” The reason he was asked to make a biblical argument is not because they were unable to answer his assertions, but because his assertions amount to nothing without a biblical case against their premise.

White can only appeal to misrepresentations of Bahnsen and the rC’s because an actual heads-up exchange of ideas would prove a futile pursuit for him. He would necessarily argue for something which Christ Himself denounced, sectarianism.

(UPDATE: Look for a debate between White and Wilson called "Are Roman Catholics Members of the New Covenant?" on November 5 this year, the opening day of White's Alpha Omega Ministries conference. It is beyond my imagination that White would consent to this; I am very much looking forward to a report on the results.)