William Lane Craig a little anti-Catholic?

This is taken from his website (www.reasonablefaith.org). It comes from the theological distinctives for forming a Reasonable Faith chapter (in other words, you have to agree with all the points to form a chapter):

  1. I believe that Jesus’ own teaching and his attitude toward the total truthfulness and supreme authority of the Bible, God’s inspired Word, make the Scriptures our final rule for faith and practice.


Now, Dr. Craig sounds like a good guy. But what should we, as Catholics, make of this? :shrug:


I’m not familiar with Craig, but what you quoted sounds like a standard Protestant view. Obviously, because it excludes Tradition and the teaching authority of the Church, its not a Catholic position.

In short, you cannot be a chapter member if you are Catholic. No big deal.

Personally I quite Like WLC; he even undertsands the fact that we don’t worship statues - something most protestants of his stripe don’t understand.

I’d be careful against using the term ‘anti-Catholic’. One could use to in reference to anything that’s NOT Catholic {in which it seems to apply here}. Or one could reserve the term for those things that are defiantly and purposefully anti-catholic {think Chick & his Eucharist tracts}

Not fundamentalist Anti-Catholicism, but Anti-Catholic for believing in the false doctrine of Sola Scriptura, which is what all Protestant Christians believe.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.