Richard Gaillardetz, Murray/Bacik Professor of Catholic Studies at the University of Toledo, has recently published a theologically insightful article on Catholic apologetics ("Do We Need a New(er) Apologetics?," America, Feb. 2).

In the first part, Gaillardetz is largely critical of the approach taken by some of the Church's newest apologists, like Scott Hahn and Karl Keating, some of whom are converts to Catholicism from Protestant fundamentalism.

Gaillardetz faults them for their use of Catholic fundamentalism --- both biblical and doctrinal --- to combat Protestant fundamentalism, their tendency to make all church teachings equally important and equally binding, their us-versus-them approach to non-Catholic Christians, and their romanticized view of the church, as if it were only divine in character, and therefore perfect, and not at all human, and therefore weak and even sinful.

In the second part of the article, Professor Gaillardetz sketches a path that other Catholics might follow in developing a new apologetics, but without the drawbacks of the approach taken by the fundamentalistic types.

He suggests that, if an explanation and defense of the Catholic faith is going to have any claim to credibility, it needs to be, first, "passionate and positive." It ought to manifest some measure of love and even enthusiasm for the message, and to present it positively, but without romanticizing it.

On the other hand, a mere debunking of pre-Vatican II expressions without offering constructive alternatives is of little or no value.

Second, the approach has to be "dialogical," which means that it can neither demonize opposing views nor act as if all views are equally true. Dialogue does not require a compromising of one's convictions, but it does demand a respectful listening to the other's views and a readiness to change one's mind, to one extent or another, if that seems to be in order.

Third, the new apologetics, formulated in the light of the Second Vatican Council, must be "ecumenical" in character. The council's Decree on Ecumenism set aside the pre-Vatican II approach that viewed all Protestants as being in fundamental error, outside the "one, true Church." The only solution to their spiritual predicament is their "return" to the true faith and to the church that guards and proclaims it.

Over against this view, the council acknowledged that the division of the church happened because of faults committed on both sides, and affirmed that there is authentic Christian truth outside the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church, in its turn, must get its own household in order, for it is only by a return to the original spirit and moral demands of the Gospel that both sides can hope to come together again in unity.

Fourth, the new apologetics must be "historically responsible." It cannot present tradition as if it were "a perfectly seamless whole, an always unanimous testimony to the steady and organic development of Catholic truths."

The new apologetics must be able to admit that there have been dramatic discontinuities and even reversals in Catholic tradition. Slavery, for example, was once viewed as fully in accord with both natural law and divine revelation. The church's condemnation of usury (the charging of interest on a loan) falls into a similar category, and so, too, the inferiority of women in the natural order and the denial of religious liberty to non-Catholics.

Fifth, the Catholic apologist must be "culturally engaged." Catholic teaching cannot be reduced to "a set of museum pieces, with the apologist or catechist as curator." Church teachings, if true, have to make a difference in ordinary life, not just in the deepest recesses of the mind, as abstract truths, or in those limited moments, which Gaillardetz refers to as "religious time."

An effective apologetics will tap into the riches already present in culture and in human consciousness. It is a matter of recognizing them and drawing them out, just as St. Justin Martyr did in the second century when he engaged in dialogue with the non-Christian philosophers of his day.

Apologetics today, Gaillardetz insists, should look to political events, the visual arts, music, fiction and theater and film, with an expectation that it "will encounter there the drama of human salvation and...intimations of the divine."

If we are, indeed, to give a credible account of our faith and our hope, in the spirit of "gentleness and reverence," as the First Letter of Peter puts it (3:15-16), then a new Catholic apologetics must disavow triumphalism in whatever form and respect the integrity and good will of its conversation partners.

In the end, we are all "humble pilgrims eager for some company on the long journey ahead."

For this task, "Bible warriors" need not apply.

Father Richard P. McBrien is the Crowley-O'Brien Professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame.