In 1868, Pope Pius IX issued an invitation to Protestants imploring them “to hasten to return to the only fold of Christ.” Presbyterians and others were invited to attend the upcoming Vatican Council as the first step in returning to “communion with the Catholic Church.”
At its next General Assembly, the Presbyterian Church in the United States responded to the pope’s invitation. In their response, they affirmed “it is the will of Christ that his Church on earth should be united” but provided “reasons which forbid our participation in the deliberations of the approaching Council.” The Assembly turned to its foremost theologian, Charles Hodge, to craft its response.
In his response, Hodge focused on four key issues that prohibit an ecclesiastical reunion:
- The Bible as the church’s only infallible authority.
- The right of private judgment.
- The universal priesthood of believers.
- A denial of the perpetuity of apostleship.
As far as Hodge and the Presbyterians were concerned, it was necessary for them as Protestants to continue their protest.
The current pope has not issued a plea for Protestants to reunite with Rome. But in his new book, “What It Means To Be Protestant,” Gavin Ortlund explains why this remains an impossibility, both biblically and theologically. Though Ortlund doesn’t reference Hodge’s letter, he brings these same issues to the forefront, including a robust defense of Scripture alone and faith alone.
There is a romantic allure to Rome. It presents itself as historic, global, and unified. In contrast, American Presbyterianism is portrayed as new, regional, and fractured. Rome offers a single certain voice while evangelicals squabble and divide over everything from modes of baptism to the length of creation days. Even the architecture and aesthetics of Catholic cathedrals draw admirers.
Ortlund examines the Catholic church and reveals it is not as historic or unified as its own narration would have you believe. In his new volume, Ortlund provides a helpful and accessible overview of the underlying issues that prevent reunification between Protestants and Catholics. He weaves together history, theology, and exegesis to address the problems of Catholicism and provide a framework for how Protestants can properly see themselves in relation to the historical church.
The Problem with Catholicism
The Church of Rome is like a half-demolished building. According to John Calvin, though much of the edifice has been pulled down, God has not permitted it to be leveled to the ground (“Institutes” 4.2.11). As a result, you can still find things to admire like their doctrine of the Trinity and their defense of the deity of Christ.
Even Hodge goes out of his way to affirm that Presbyterians “regard all doctrinal decisions of the first six ecumenical councils to be consistent with the Word of God, and because of that consistency, we receive them as expressing our faith.”
But Ortlund rightly focuses his book on what is missing from Catholic theology instead of what remains. And he concludes that the present conditions of the Roman Catholic Church make it uninhabitable. There are three areas where Ortlund devotes much of his attention:
1. The exclusivity of the church.
Rome abolishes the distinction between the visible and invisible church. According to Catholic doctrine, one becomes a member of the invisible church by being in good standing with the visible church. Ortlund refers to this as institutional exclusivism. The problem is that it runs counter to Christ’s teaching.
Christ’s disciples tried to stop a man from performing miracles in Jesus’ name “because he was not following us” (Mark 9:38-40). They found it impossible to believe that the power of Christ could be at work through people apart from the twelve disciples. Christ rebukes them for having a group-centered theology instead of a Christ-centered theology. As Jesus said, “The one who is not against us is for us.”
Rome makes the same mistake as the first disciples. Their doctrine doesn’t permit them to recognize anyone being in full fellowship with Christ without “following us.” As Ortlund points out, “Protestantism is prepared to discern the true church wherever Christ is present in word and sacrament … Protestantism offers the most promising pathways by which to cultivate and pursue catholicity” (37).
This is one reason why the PCA acknowledges the existence of other true branches of Christ’s church apart from our fellowship (“Book of Church Order” 2-2).
2. The authority of the church.
Roman Catholics do not believe the pope is incapable of sinning. But they do believe the pope, church councils, and even the body of bishops are infallible when declaring doctrine.
Ortlund is at his best when countering the church’s authority by defining the Protestant doctrine of “sola Scriptura,” Scripture alone as our only infallible authority. Anticipating the objections that are often raised against sola Scriptura, Ortlund explains,
The dispute is over whether Scripture alone is infallible. In other words, the fault line of difference between sola Scriptura and alternative descriptions is this: Does the church possess any rule other than Scripture that is infallible? Sola Scriptura is simply the conviction that this question must be answered in the negative: Popes, councils, and all other post-apostolic organs of the church are fallible (72).
Reformed Presbyterians believe there are other forms of authority apart from Scripture. In other words, sola Scriptura doesn’t mean Scripture is our only authority. Rather, it is the only infallible authority. Even in the PCA, members take vows to submit “to the government and discipline of the church.”
Though we acknowledge and even submit to other forms of authority, we believe “they are not infallible and therefore are placed under Scripture within a hierarchy of authorities” (73). Scripture does not hold this unique position because of value the church assigns to it. Rather, it serves as the church’s only infallible rule because of its very nature: it is the word of God.
3. The gospel of the church.
In Roman Catholic theology, our assurance comes not merely from the forgiveness of sins but also from “the renewal of the interior man” (61). Through faith, we initially experience the remission of sins and God’s acceptance. But, our ongoing confidence comes from our ability and commitment to remain in this state, with a special emphasis on making use of the church’s sacraments.
To be clear, Roman Catholicism preaches salvation is found through Christ. But the good news according to Rome is that as long as you keep your hands firmly grasped on Christ, you can have assurance. The problem is that we are, according to one hymn writer, “tempted, tried, and sometimes failing.” If our hope is in the constancy of our grip on Christ, then assurance proves elusive and impossible.
As Ortlund points out, the clear emphasis of Paul is not on our work of remaining in a state of grace and becoming righteous before God. Rather, the emphasis is on “the one who does not work, but believes in him who justifies the ungodly” (Romans 4:5).
In other words, justification is not the result of an inward transformation the believer achieves through grace-fueled effort. In Protestant theology, justification is the legal declaration of righteousness we receive by faith on account of the meritorious work of Christ and nothing else. Ortlund sounds a clear, articulate note on this subject while addressing the common objections raised against it.
The Posture of Protestantism
Though the problems with Catholicism may be clear, Protestants are not without fault. A significant amount of Ortlund’s book is focused on how Protestants see themselves. He is sensitive to the criticism that Protestants are schismatic heretics.
Hodge was sensitive to this same critique when he wrote, “We are not heretics. We cordially receive all the doctrines contained in that Symbol which is known as the Apostles’ Creed. Neither are we schismatics. We cordially recognize as members of Christ’s visible Church on earth, all those who profess the true religion together with their children.”
Instead of seeing ourselves as separatists, Ortlund wants Protestants to see themselves as part of a renewal and retrieval movement. As he puts it, “the Protestants understood themselves to be reforming an imperfect thing, not resurrecting a dead thing, or creating a new thing” (145-146). Ortlund turns to the writings of Calvin and Turrentin for support in proving this has been the self-understanding of Protestants from the beginning.
Ortlund acknowledges that most modern evangelicals do not see themselves as a renewal movement but as something innovative and disconnected from the Catholic tradition. But “we must distinguish between particular contemporary expressions of Protestantism versus Protestantism as such. Too often a criticism of the former is construed as a necessary rejection of the latter” (147).
When it comes to our posture, Ortlund wants Protestants to see themselves less as building a new home as much as trying to repair the half-demolished domicile Calvin referenced. It would help us unashamedly embrace the parts of the Catholic tradition that are also part of our own tradition. We should explore and appreciate the early church councils and patristic theology more than is common in our circles.
During the last quarter century, I have watched at least three ordained ministers leave the PCA to unite with the Catholic church, including one this year. My personal impression is these men became convinced Protestantism is thin and malnourished and find themselves drawn to the perceived thickness and weightiness of Rome. Ironically, it is the same reason many people leave non-denominational churches to join historically Reformed denominations.
It’s easy to identify and highlight the practical deficiencies of Protestantism, especially the current forms it takes in evangelical America. It is light on doctrine and shallow on history. These are points that David Wells and others have deftly chronicled. But turning to Rome isn’t the solution.
Ortlund believes Protestantism can and should offer something more robust than it has as of late. His vision is of a church governed by Scripture, centered on Christ, and informed by tradition. Our doctrines of Scripture and justification were not invented in the sixteenth century. They were articulated by the early church fathers, lost by the medieval church, and the Reformers set out to recover them.
The goal isn’t to build a separate house but to restore the house “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20).
This volume by Ortlund is clear and accessible. It is also positive, more focused on what Protestants are for than what they are against. He does an admirable job of integrating biblical exegesis and historical analysis as part of his argumentation without getting too technical. It’s a good book for church members who may find Rome (or Constantinople) attractive.
The good news is God saves people through the church and sometimes despite it. As Hodge stated in his response to the pope, “although we cannot return to the fellowship of the Church of Rome, we desire to live in charity with all men. We love all those who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity.”
Andy Jones is the editor of byFaith and assistant pastor of Rock Creek Fellowship in Lookout Mountain, Georgia.