The Problem with Protestantism

Introduction

The problem with Protestantism is that it cannot be defended by any apologetic method. This is due to the fact that the label itself has always been used by Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox. The fathers of the Protestant Reformation referred to themselves as “reformed” or “evangelical.” It was actually the Roman church who labeled them “Calvinist” or “Lutheran” or “Zwinglian,” in hopes of demonstrating that these were traditions of men, and not God. In other words, the term “Protestant” was a polemic label, a pejorative. Later on, many of these Protestants adopted these labels, the most notable being the Lutheran church and Calvinists. Herein lies the chief problem, that as time has passed, every tradition that is not Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox is called “Protestant.” In order to defend something, that thing needs a formal definition. Since the term Protestantism is applied so broadly, it cannot be defended specifically.

Churches within the New Apostolic Reformation, Calvinist Bible churches, Pentecostals, Independent Fundamentalist Baptists, and Methodists are all “Protestants.” If you know anything about these church traditions, you understand just how unhelpful the term “Protestant” is to describe these vastly different traditions. Unfortunately, the terminology is set, and there is very little any of us can do to change the fact that this label is applied so broadly. In this article series, I want to try and define what Protestantism is, and offer evidence to make the case that it is not actually Christianity according to any definition of the term.

This Isn’t Your Father’s Protestantism

In the first place, it is important to acknowledge that the theological tradition of the Protestant Reformation, the Reformed, is nearly dead in the United States and even abroad. While it is true that the label persists, the theological core is akin to an endangered species. The churches born out of the Protestant Reformation were clearly defined. There were counsels, creeds, and confessions. Blood was spilled by the Roman Catholic church in addition to the Protestants pursuing doctrinal purity (See Servetus). In short, the original “Protestants,” the Reformed, fought long and hard to carve out a specific doctrinal legacy for themselves. In the 17th century, when somebody used the term “Protestant,” it meant a specific tradition. Today, the term “Protestant” is just as vague as the term “Evangelical” or even “Born Again Christian.” It doesn’t actually mean anything specific.

This is due to the fact that Western Christianity has been hollowed out of its core doctrines, oftentimes in the guise of “Semper Reformanda.” The reality is, that the Western Christian church needs another Reformation, for she has fallen into the same sins as Rome in the 15th and 16th centuries, and even worse. For those that are not familiar with the Protestant Reformation, some of the chief catalysts were the selling of indulgences to improve the status of the soul, financial corruption of the Vatican, works based faith, spiritual laziness, and neglecting the eternal nature of the faith for the physical present, the sufficiency of Christ, among other things. In modern Christianity, we see parallels to all of this within the realm of “Protestantism” or “Evangelicalism.”

The Wayward Protestant Church

One of the primary sounding bells of the Reformation was the abuse of indulgences. Instead of focusing on inward spiritual transformation to improve the state of the soul, the Roman church was selling indulgences for the same effect. In short, one could purchase repentance with money. The most obvious parallel to this in the modern church is what is often called “The Prosperity Gospel.” In short, if you bless the church, God will bless you. According to Lifeway Research, 52% of churchgoers reported that their church teaches God will bless them if they donate more money. Some of the largest churches in the US teach the most radical form of this message, such as Lakewood Church (45,000 weekly attendees + broadcast), World Changers Church (25,000 weekly attendees + millions TV reach), Kenneth & Gloria Copeland Ministries (76 million households), Trinity Broadcasting Network (120M annual income), Yoido Full Gospel Church (830,000 members), just to name a few.

These numbers are so high, that when you meet somebody in the US that identifies as Christian, there is a more than 1 and 2 chance that they believe in some sort of prosperity Gospel. This is alarming, but the Prosperity Gospel isn’t the only problem in modern Protestantism. Another Lifeway Research study found that 55% of US Protestant pastors allow women to serve as senior pastor, 76% of churches Lifeway identifies as “Mainline Protestant.” Further, according to a Religion in Public survey (not Christian friendly FYI), they found that 1 in 4 Christians believed in ongoing prophecy and prophets.

Despite the fact that 2 out of 3 of Americans describe themselves as Christian, only 16% of self-identified Christians affirm a trinitarian doctrine, according to a very recent Barna Poll from the Cultural Research Center at Arizona Christian University. The overwhelming conclusion of these data points is that American Protestantism has evolved into something entirely different than Reformed Protestantism from the 16-19th centuries. If we take the Barna poll as representative, we can say that at the very most, 16% of American Christians would be considered orthodox by the original Protestants. This demonstrates my point that the term “Protestant” does not mean, “People who believe what the Protestant Reformers believed.” This term means today what it has always meant, which is, “Anybody who is not Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.”

What is American Christianity?

Well, it is certainly not the child of the Protestant Reformation, as many Roman Catholic apologists will tell you. It shares almost zero theological or traditional ties to the historic Reformation and Further Reformation. In fact, the modern American church believes in doctrines that the Reformers and post Reformation theologians wrote treatises against. The Protestants would have been fundamentally opposed at almost every level to what is called “Protestantism” today. Now, I am not saying that one must believed the Reformed were right about everything in order to be a Christian in America. What I am pointing out, is that American Christianity isn’t remotely close to the Protestant Reformation. It is something altogether foreign to historical, western Christianity.

So why does this matter? Well, this blog has been focused on defending the historical scriptures of the church. Who are the current stewards of the scriptures today? Western Christians. Modern Protestants. If the scholars that serve as stewards for the scriptures are represented by the data, then that means that most of them, even if they were to believe that we have scripture, wouldn’t believe what’s in scripture anyway. I have argued that this is related, though many people call me out for saying such things. Yet, I believe I am correct. If you believe that the Scriptures are not preserved and fully available, why would you think it reasonable that any doctrine is set in stone?

I will end the first article in the series with my answer to the question of, “What is American Protestantism?” American Protestantism, also called Western Evangelicalism, is something that very few would have even considered Christianity 100 years ago. It is an R.L. Stein Goosebumps novel of choose your own religious fancy. It is a build-your-own-avatar religion where you can check and uncheck doctrines, turn up or down various practices with a slider, or even add new customizations. There isn’t one Christianity in America, there are Christianities. So when a Roman Catholic says, “Protestants are leaving for the Catholic Church,” it doesn’t actually mean anything. What exactly are they leaving? They are leaving a choose-your-own-adventure religion that has nothing to do with historic Protestantism.

American Protestantism does not have a crisis of people leaving for Rome or Eastern Orthodoxy, it has a crisis of whether or not it’s Christianity in the first place.

6 thoughts on “The Problem with Protestantism”

  1. This was a great article. Will you be doing any articles on the King James Bible and how it runs parallel with the Reformation and the English Puritans, as well as its legacy to Christianity today?

    Like

  2. This is why it would be better to refer to ourselves as “catholics” with Calvin Luther, and the rest of the magisterial reformers. Or as “reformed catholics” with William Perkins and the early puritans. We hold to what the one true holy and apostolic church has always believed, the doctrines found in the word of God.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Interesting article, and one with which I am in agreement. Certainly, ‘Protestant’ and ‘evangelical’ have become terms that seemingly have little meaning and, sadly, when combined into ‘evangelical Protestant Christianity’, frequently fail on all three fronts. As a member of a conservative, main-stream Protestant denomination (is that an oxymoron?), increasingly I find myself having more in common with Roman Catholics and the Orthodox, than I do with ‘liberal Protestantism’.

    Many of the difficulties, though, are not so much predictable, as inherent in Protestantism. Like it or not, the centrality of the papacy and papal authority does lend to the Roman Church a level of stability in doctrine, liturgy and practice which could never be achieved following the splintering of the Reformation which occurred in the 16th century and beyond. Maybe we should hold the obstinacy of Luther and Zwingli at Marburg to greater account. Sometimes the desire for perfection really is the enemy of the good.

    Of its nature, and despite our denials, Protestantism is underpinned by a sense of personal interpretation of scripture. All the major magisterial reformers (rightly) rejected personal interpretation, but it was their (rightful) rejection of RC exegesis and practices which was the foundation of the Reformation. Unfortunately, I don’t see how this splintering of Protestantism, with its associated splintering of authority can be reversed. Referral to a simple doctrine of ‘biblical authority’ sounds good, but in practice, biblical authority tends to extend only as far as my own personal interpretation.

    I do genuinely look forward to where this blog is leading.

    Yours in Christ,

    Ken.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, the problem is that the magisterial church is right with their critique that the schism of protestantism has resulted in much chaos. They are wrong however in believing that it wasn’t necessary. The failure is of protestants to preserve and fight for purity, not in leaving Rome in the first place.

      Like

  4. Thx for your thoughts on this subject Taylor.

    I wonder if part of the problem is that the Academics, who often write the books, have mistaken the Institutional Church (Church of England, PCUSA, PCA, OPC, SBC etc) for the Church Christ is building, when He said “I will build My church.”

    If that were so, then one would expect the churches in Corinth or Ephesus or Colossae etc to be absolutely teeming with numbers of very astute Christians after 2000 years of being built by Christ. Of course, they disappeared in the dust a long time ago. Christ never was building man made institutions tied to a place or hierarchy, but He is building an ever growing body of believers throughout the world. In some generations there were more believers, in some generations less, depending on which part of the world you lived in and what time you lived.

    To build a christian church calls us to define what we mean by “Christian”. One short definition would be those who believe the propositions contained in the 66 books of the Bible to be true. It then becomes obvious that institutions cannot believe anything, only individual people can. Only individuals can be Christians.

    Like

Leave a comment