Holiness Convinces Where Arguments Fail

Traditional Apologetics as Argument

While still a Cardinal, Pope Benedict XVI once remarked, ““The only really effective apologia for Christianity comes down to two arguments, namely the saints the Church has produced and the art which has grown in her womb.” In our wordy, noisy world, it is possible that holiness convinces where arguments fail.

Apologetics, in Protestant circles, often boils down to arguments. These conversations often focus on the existence of God, defenses of classic doctrines, and questions about God’s justice (known as theodicy). But if Benedict is right, an often neglected apologia is the lives of the saints themselves.

The Saints as Hermeneutic – and Apologetic – When Argument Fails

Biblical scholars will sometimes remark on the interpretive value of the saints. Someone like Bonhoeffer, for instance, teaches us about taking up taking up one’s cross. A martyr like Christian de Chargé reveals to us what Jesus means when he commands us to love our enemies. There is surely something to what we might call a hermeneutic of sanctity.

But this notion of saints as apologetic is quite striking. We know, of course, that the opposite is true. Christians who live in dramatic contradiction of the gospel – abusive priests, wealthy preachers of prosperity who prey on the poor, etc. – often function as tragically effective arguments against the truth claims of the church.

All the more reason, then, to highlight what could be named conspicuous sanctity. This occurs when exemplary holiness is observed in the lives of particular persons. As a result, God’s people have declared them to be saints. Christian communions vary in whether this is an official title or not. Billy Abraham offers a compelling account for why Protestants should take seriously the received canon of saints across the broad Christian tradition. With this broad notion in mind, we could speak of unofficial saints. Powerful witnesses like King, Bonhoeffer, and Dorothy Day, beyond those recognized by authorized organs of this or that church.

Learning from the Early Church

We are living in an age that is hyper-suspicious of all truth claims, especially those claiming some sort of grand narrative. In such a period, arguments alone are not sufficient. But transformed people are difficult to argue around. Those who can genuinely forgive, sincerely repent, joyously welcome, and humbly repent will stick out in a world of blame, shame, and tribal pride.

This, by the way, is in large part Alan Kreider’s case for how the early church grew. It wasn’t personal evangelism or seeker-friendly worship. According to the historian, the pre-Constantine church grew exponentially because the lives of the early Christians were compelling to outsiders:

“When Christians offered the world not just theological statements but embodied virtue…they attracted people who felt an irresistible pull to join them.” (35)

Conspicuous sanctity has apologetic – and evangelistic – value that is hard to quantify or program. Perhaps this is why so often the church prefers classes, workshops, and conferences. Holiness is hard to capture in a breakout session.

It turns out, though, that one of the most effective means of opening hearts and minds to truth of the gospel is people who are living it out. Speaking about Jesus’ interaction with Pilot before his crucifixion, Stanley Hauerwas observes, “the response to skepticism is not a theory but an exemplary life.” (The Character of Virtue, 198.) In our increasingly fragment world, it could be that holiness convinces where arguments fail.