A Book Review from Books At a Glance
by Leonardo De Chirico
Most Catholics were born Catholic. Their parents were Catholic, they were educated in a Catholic culture; therefore, wittingly or unwittingly, they find themselves to be Catholic from birth. Others become Catholic at an adult age. They embrace Catholicism as part of their religious journey. If asked why they identify as Catholics, they may provide a personal story. This is the case with the author of this book.
Matthew Levering (b. 1971) is one of the most prolific Roman Catholic theologians in the US context. He is author or co-author of some 35 books, mainly ranging from systematic to historical theology. In this book he tells the story of how he became Catholic and why he remains such. The book is therefore a “testimony” (42), full of autobiographical anecdotes and interspersed with quotes from “saints” venerated in Catholic and Orthodox traditions (and some protestant authors too, e.g., Bonhoeffer). According to Levering, they are “living voices, friends and mentors” (7).
Despite the fact that Levering is a first-class theologian, properly speaking, Why I am Roman Catholic is neither a theological analysis of the tenets of Catholicism nor an apologetic defense of it. Rather, it is the account of a conversion linked to a personal reflection on the “deep yearning and existential need to which Catholicism responds” (2). In the book Levering talks about why he is a Christian, why he is Catholic, what he has found beneficial and difficult about being Catholic, and finally, thinking of his US context, he ends with some thoughts about Catholics and ecumenism.
Levering grew up as a Quaker, then was exposed to a Methodist church (10), but did not make much of it. He shares about his chronic disease (17), the reality of suffering and the mystery of death (18), and the awareness of his fragility that led him to ask questions about God (21). It was in the Roman Catholic account of the “mystery of life (and death), Christ’s salvific cross, the goodness of God, the harmony of Scripture” (37) that he found existential and intellectual answers. He was then baptized at age 23 in 1995 (31). Influential voices in the journey were theologians like Bishop Robert Barron (to whom the book is dedicated), Thomas Joseph White, Brant Pitre, and N.T. Wright (37, 136). Apart from the last one, they are all conservative Catholic representatives of the “new evangelization,” i.e., a project that the Roman Catholic church launched under John Paul II and Benedict XVI to reach out to lapsed Catholics and nominal Christians. This concert of voices persuaded Levering about the truth of Catholic doctrine as well (40). Evidently, Levering is one of the fruits of the “new evangelization”.
Turning from story to experience, here is how Levering describes his appreciation of Roman Catholicism: “I love being Catholic: Ash Wednesday marked by the cross of ashes on the forehead, the priest lighting the Easter candle by the fire on a chilly Saturday evening, reading and praying with the saints, daily Bible reading, the sacrifice of the Mass, eucharistic adoration, the crucifix, the Benedictines and Franciscans and Dominicans and Jesuits, monasteries and abbeys, the homilies of a faithful priest, vestments and incense, nightly rosary and liturgy of the hours” (4).
Given the nature of the book, the language is experiential rather than doctrinal. It evokes a deeply felt sense of belonging and participation in rituals and practices of a historical religious community. For Levering, Catholicism touches on the deep cords of emotions couched in liturgical acts. Being a Catholic means “living within the graced rhythms of the eucharistic liturgy” (76). An evangelical reader has a taste of what it means for a devout Catholic to live out his religion within an imaginary-world full of symbols and how it differs from a biblically based and Christ-centered spirituality.
In expounding the reasons why he is Catholic, Levering mentions four critical areas: the papacy, the Virgin Mary, the Eucharist, and marriage (42). On the papacy he sees “no opposition between the authority of Scripture and the valuation of the church’s teaching office” (44-45). He is right; ideally, there should not be opposition. Yet the church did err in history and can err in the future. Therefore, recognizing the supreme authority of Scripture (as Reformation theology advocates for) is a necessity required of the Bible itself and does not disqualify the authority of the church in its proper limits. In referring to the Protestant sola Scriptura, Levering paints a straw man when he argues that “If it were a matter of sola Scriptura, there would be no reason to mention that the church is the pillar and bulwark of truth, or even to say much about the church at all” (45). No, as Paul says, the church is the pillar and bulwark of truth (1 Timothy 3:15), not because she is the absolute standard but because she was given the responsibility to defend and to proclaim the truth under the final authority of God in His Word and by His Spirit. In this respect, contrary to Protestant accounts of Scripture being above tradition, according to Levering, “Scripture and tradition inevitably proceed in one another and live in one another” (125).
Another false alternative is also at work in his ecclesiology. For Levering it seems that either you have the infallible teaching office of Rome or you don’t have the church at all. It is a false dilemma. Thankfully, the church is neither essentially papal nor redundant because Christ has established it. It is the Bible that qualifies what the church is and what she is supposed to do.
Even the view borrowed from John Henry Newman that “there can be no ecclesiastical unity without an infallible expounder” (49, 64) is exaggerated. Biblical unity is primarily spiritual and grounded on the finished work of Christ and the ongoing work of the Spirit, rather than dependent on a human institution, let alone an infallible teacher. Unity is guaranteed by the Trinitarian God rather than the Roman pope.
As far as the Virgin Mary is concerned, Levering is adamant in saying that “there is an emotional and spiritual dimension” attached to it (49). It is true that Catholicism has a theologically sophisticated account of Mariology (e.g., the Marian dogmas of the immaculate conception and bodily assumption), but the root of it is emotional rather than doctrinal. For evangelical readers, this is a reminder that when dealing with Mariology, emotional elements are at work more powerfully than theological ones.
As for the Eucharist, Levering argues that “Jesus willed to enable his followers to participate in his saving cross through his presence in a sacramental mode in the Eucharist” (54). Later, he further reinforces the point when he writes that “The mass is a participation in Christ’s dying” (67). Participating in his saving cross and participating in Christ’s dying. When hearing these words, evangelicals raise their eyebrows because they understand that the work of the cross is not considered to be final and accomplished but in need of further works by us. Giving the testimonial character of the book, Levering says that “Existentially the Eucharist is the very center of my life of faith” (64) and that he participates in the “perpetual adoration of Christ in the Eucharist” (73). Again, the stress is put on Catholic experiences as they are shaped by Catholic doctrines.
The sacramental view of marriage is another strong factor that attracted Levering to Catholicism. The Author is also honest about his concerns about present-day Catholic life. Post-Vatican II liberal trends (97), interior temptations to worldliness (99), and the clerical sexual abuse scandals (109) are problematic areas that make Catholicism open to ambiguities, contradictions, and hypocrisies. Levering does not have an idealized view of the global reality of Rome, although this awareness does not diminish his commitment to the Roman Church, its doctrine, and practices.
The final part of the book is dedicated to Catholics and ecumenism. Here Levering unfolds his vision of Christian unity and how to move forward in attaining it. As a Catholic, he argues that “Baptism serves generally as a principle of unity” (118). The elevation of baptism as the basis of Christian unity is something shared by Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and ecumenical Protestants, and that reflects their theologies of how one becomes a Christian. Evangelicals in general do not hold such a view. While there are different views of baptism within evangelicalism, unity is considered as stemming out of faith in Jesus Christ rather than the administration of the sacrament. So, the starting point of unity is different. Levering’s appeal to avoid “rhetorical bombast” (124) must be received, while the foundation of unity he puts forward is to be questioned.
In pursuing unity, while being open and willing to exchange gifts with non-Catholics, for Levering “It does not follow that Catholics can now renounce any dogma defined by the Catholic church” (129). That is to say that in ecumenical endeavors, no significant change is to be expected on the Catholic part. All the accrued non-biblical dogmas and practices will always remain integral to Catholic doctrine. Evangelicals should take notice of this: as much as Rome opens up to renewal in some sense, it does not change its fundamental faith commitments.
Observing how evangelicals deal with Catholics, Levering notes that “Evangelical Protestants have increasingly come to accept that Catholics believe in Christ and are not the unbiblical idolaters that they were once imagined to be” (131). Indeed, “Many evangelical Protestants now see much common ground with Catholics” (131). His evaluation is based on his experience in the “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” (ECT) initiative since 2004 (135) and his acquaintance with theologians he identifies as evangelical. This book shows that while there are many words shared by evangelicals and Catholics, their meaning is different because the core commitments are different, e.g. Scripture alone vs Scripture as tradition; Faith alone vs Faith as necessary but not sufficient; Christ alone vs Christ as encountered through the sacraments and mediated by the saints and Mary.
It is true that over the last few decades, evangelical perceptions of Catholicism have significantly softened in part because of an aversion toward doctrinal precision and theological integrity. Besides that, it needs to be said that some of the participants of ECT he mentions, e.g., Hans Boersma and Peter Leithart (135), can hardly be identified as representing mainstream evangelicalism. Boersma is an ecumenical Anglo-Catholic, while Leithart holds to the Federal Vision and has recently written a book concerning the end of Protestantism. This is to say that Levering has been dealing with some “evangelicals” whose identification with evangelicalism is extremely questionable.
In looking at the future of unity, Levering argues that the goal of ecumenism is to move towards “the fullness of catholicity to a greater degree” (140). No biblical reformation is envisaged here, but only the increase of Rome’s catholicity by way of becoming friends with other Christians, e.g., evangelical Protestants, asking them to stop “protesting”.
Why I am Roman Catholic is an honest and, at times, moving account of Levering’s embracement of Roman Catholicism. It is an open window into what he thinks are the benefits of being Catholic and the standing issues within and around Catholicism. For a deeper theological engagement on the issues sketched in the book, one must look at more academic works by Levering. This is a personal testimony that, while on the one hand, is an invitation into the author’s life, on the other, it nonetheless confirms that being Roman Catholic is grounded on deep commitments that are far from the gospel.
Leonardo De Chirico