Book Reviews -- By: Anonymous

Journal: Christian Apologetics Journal
Volume: CAJ 04:2 (Fall 2005)
Article: Book Reviews
Author: Anonymous


Book Reviews

Mary: A Catholic-Evangelical Debate. Dwight Longnecker and David Gustafson. Brazos Press, 2003. 240 pp., $14.99 (softcover), ISBN 9781587430725.

Mary consists of a conversational debate between two friends from Bob Jones University—Dwight Longnecker, a writer who converted to Roman Catholicism, and David Gustafson, an Anglican lawyer. The subjects of the debate consist of various aspects of Marian doctrine taught by the Roman Catholic Church. These include Mary’s perpetual virginity, the immaculate conception, the glorious assumption, apparitions, veneration, the rosary, and the co-redeemer/ mediatrix controversy.

The arguments are presented more as a friendly, though serious, conversation between colleagues than a series of polemical attacks and defenses. Most of the discourse consists of e-mail style single paragraph repartee, and rarely does one writer get more than a single page before a response is given. A surprising amount of information still manages to be presented although this format would not seem to allow it. It would be well beyond the scope of this review to discuss the multitude of arguments and counter-arguments throughout

the book, but in general both sides present their cases as clearly as they would like and neither gives the impression that his case has not been heard.

One of the biggest strengths of the book is that neither author is willing to back down from what he considers the truth in the name of ecumenism. This concern is stated succinctly by Longnecker when he writes, “If I doubt the value of theological polemics, I’m also suspicious of that kind of sentimental ecumenical dialogue that doesn’t believe there is really a problem” (209). Although the authors are friends, neither is willing to deny that there are real differences between the two traditions, nor are they afraid to deal with whatever ramifications follow. If Marian dogma will keep the Church split down Roman Catholic and Protestant lines, then so be it.

Another strength is that both sides know each other’s position. This is not a strawman bashing conversation between two radicals. Rather, each admits the strengths and weaknesses of the other’s points, and even draws from the other’s tradition to reinforce his own position. Thus, the dialogue comes across in an intelligent and respectful manner. It does not seem that either side is taking unfair shots at the other.

The biggest weakness comes from the very nature of the debate itself. Although Gustafson is far from timid, most of the concessions in the debate come from his side. This is not surprising, for his is really the only side that is allowed to do...

You must have a subscription and be logged in to read the entire article.
Click here to subscribe
visitor : : uid: ()