« The Imminent Motu Proprio | Home | Canon Quote #249 »
Difference between Theology and Apologetics
Posted July 31, 2007 , By Joshua LeBlanc
My friends, I am not an apologist. No matter how much I try to be an apologist, I am not one — in the true sense of the word. Being an apologist, more often than not, requires you to memorize many bible verses and I just can’t do it. I can however, defend myself by finding scriptural passages, but I can’t simply respond to someone talking about Sola Fides by saying "look up James 2:24" (except for that one, but I had to double check and make sure that was the correct verse.) I think doing this is a true gift — a gift which, if I have, I have not been able to tap into.
I am however a theologian, which requires a different skill. Though they are similar they are radically different. As a theologian I am very good a thinking logically about the Church and her teachings. A theologian can tell you what the Church teaches, why She teaches it, and the reason why the teaching makes sense — an apologist can tell you where its found in scripture (assuming it is in scripture, but that’s a different blog post) and argue it quite well. While it may seem that being a theologian may be more difficult, I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. I think both positions have their place within the Church and that they both require a certain set of skill. For example, I know a few apologists who can quote scriptural passages of where Church teaching is in scripture but I know very few apologists who, when confronted with a Church teaching they aren’t aware of, can logically deduce what it is. The latter part, I can do. I don’t say this to boast but rather to make a point. Apoplogists have their place and theologians have their place and I think it often best that the two stick to what they do.
I have often attended Catholic events where an apologist is asked to speak on some teaching of the Church. I don’t necessarily have a problem with this as some apologists can be theologians and vice-versa but some individuals are one or the other — not both. I believe very often we think that because we’re an apologist that this qualifies us as a theologian and if we are a theologian it qualifies us to be an apologist. This sort of fallacial thinking is analagous to thinking that because I can build and know how a car works, I am therefore qualified to repossess them (think about that one for a minute.) The truth is that while some can be both, one does not qualify the other.
Again, when I attend these talks I often hear self-proclaimed apologists say thinking about theology that shouldn’t be said. I once heard an apologist give a talk where he said that at the wedding feast of Cana, Mary "was kicking Jesus out of the house telling him to go out on his own" — this line of thinking is foolish. On another occassion another apologist said that when asked by protestant friends whether we are saved or not to tell them "Yes" because "our hope in Jesus Christ will save us" — not only is this nonsensical, but it is completely contrary to Catholic teaching regarding redemption and salvation. To make the matters worse, this individual is an ordained Catholic cleric.
I don’t make these points so as to make these two individuals looks bad, but rather to make the point — Don’t do theology if you’re not a theologian. If you don’t know what the Church teaches on a particular issue, don’t try and deduce it yourself if you’re not a trained theologian. Even when I deduce something like this I always clarify that I am deducing and that I will have to do futher research for an accurate answer.
Again, I am no apologist. I am a theologian and so therefore I will stay in the realm in which God has given me the gifts he has given me. If I need an apologist, then I’ll give one a call. Until the day that God decides to give me the knack for remembering scripture verses by heart, then I will remain a theologian, studying and proclaiming to all the God that I love.
Topics: Commentary |
