Several years have passed since Mark Noll and Carolyn Nystrom co-authored, Is the Reformation Over? An Assessment of Contemporary Roman Catholicism (2005) but their recognition of Rome’s growing appeal to evangelical Protestants is no less true today than it was when the book appeared. In 2007 the president of the Evangelical Theological Society, Francis Beckwith, a philosophy professor at Baylor University (a Baptist institution in Texas), converted to Rome partly because the Roman Catholic church had history on its side and also because Rome apparently explained biblical teaching on justification as well as if not better than Protestantism. According to Beckwith, “I thought it wise for me to err on the side of the Church with historical and theological continuity with the first generations of Christians that followed Christ’s Apostles.” And part of the wisdom informing Beckwith’s decision, as Noll and Nystrom point out, is that Roman Catholicism takes more seriously the creeds, liturgy, and institutional church than born-again Protestants do.
The shift in Protestant attitudes to Roman Catholicism may seem remarkable. But going back to the first effort of “Evangelicals and Catholics Together,” a 1992 gathering of Protestants and Roman Catholics led by Richard John Neuhaus and Chuck Colson to arrive a common areas of theology and practice, evangelical Protestants have been indicating that they are tired of fighting Rome. This is an echo of the old Tareyton cigarette ad, “I’d rather switch than fight.” For some Protestants, especially those no longer willing to put up with the bad taste and triviality of megachurches, seeker-sensitivity, or emergent experimentation, they would rather become Roman Catholic than remain part of a loose, fragmented, and sometimes irreverent branch of Christianity.
Noll and Nystrom do raise an interesting point. If evangelicalism is the logical outcome of Protestantism, does it make sense to remain Protestant? If born-again Protestants are as unreliable on justification and Scripture as many supposed Rome to be, why not join a communion where a believer can receive a more comprehensive and coherent account of Christianity?
The problem with this view obviously is that going from one set of problems to another batch is hardly a solution. For all of evangelicalism’s problems its weaknesses do not constitute a reason to be Roman Catholic. In fact, most of the reasons for being Protestant, those articulated in the sixteenth century at the time of the Reformation, are as much at stake today as they were when Martin Luther first objected to Roman Catholic teaching on purgatory. What is more, those reasons for not being Roman Catholic are also good excuses for not being evangelical. Noll and Nystrom are correct to observe that the differences between Rome and evangelicalism are increasingly insignificant. But Reformed Protestants, Lutherans, Anglicans, and Anabaptists all still have good reasons for not being under the oversight of the Bishop of Rome. Those reasons will be the subject of future posts.
MM
I look forward to those future posts most anxiously. Many thanks.
Dec 22, 2010 @ 4:22 pm
Donald Philip Veitch
1. Excellent, am anticipating them.
2. When it comes to Romanism, I have no Protestant fatigue whatsover. Cranmer at Edward’s coronation, to wit, that “God be truly worshipped and idolatry destroyed, the tyranny of the Bishops of Rome banished from your subjects and images removed.”
3. Rome is still a lustful tyrant, truth be told.
Dec 22, 2010 @ 5:14 pm
Michael
Good post. In your future posts are you going to deal with the argument that Luther’s doctrine of justification was a historical novelty? In my experience it is this question that is most often cited as to why Protestants convert to Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. I think this is something that needs to be systematically treated by Protestants.
Dec 23, 2010 @ 11:13 am
Chris
Thanks so much. This is greatly needed. Looking forward to these future posts (and other resources).
Dec 23, 2010 @ 12:14 pm
John Bugay
For Dr. Hart: I know that you have written extensively about, frankly, some of the flaws and weaknesses of what evangelicalism has become over two-and-a-half centuries in America. And I agree with you that revivalism has not been a helpful historical phenomenon. But I wonder if your writing about Roman Catholicism here and now is just sort of an attempt to close the barn door after the horses have gotten out? Do you have some sense that your own writings may have pushed some unhappy evangelicals in the direction you are warning folks about here?
Dec 27, 2010 @ 12:53 am
Kepha
Thanks for your article. But, I suspect that one reason for Rome’s appeal is that Old Scarlet O’Harlot can act like a grown-up when so much of Evangliicaldom is beset with adolescent goofiness.
Dec 27, 2010 @ 9:31 am
Donald Philip Veitch
Dear Rev. Ferrari:
I found you website, as well as the youtube documentary on Reformation Italy. Although they are short clips, they are marvellous, necessary, and most commendable.
I lived in Naples 1997-1999 when with the U.S. military. I’ve been reading Romanist literature much since then.
I’ve been playing your clips repeatedly through the day with much encouragement that a Protestant, Reformed, Confessional, Calvinistic and “Truly Catholic Church” has been established in Milan.
I will squirrel a few dollars away and get to you, as able.
Your work is extremely important.
All best regards,
Donald Philip Veitch
Camp Lejeune, NC
USA
PS. Found the Heidelberger in Italian. I once had it memorized in English. Time to “buff up” my Italian and redo the HC in Italian, 2011.
Also, I hope you would publish more youtube clips, both in English and Italian.
Jan 02, 2011 @ 11:50 am