Catholicism, not Protestantism, represents the faith of the early church.
In Chapter 5 of Evangelicals, Catholics and Unity, Dr. Michael Scott
Horton, Vice Chairman of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, admits that
Protestants are not too much into history. He has proven the validity of this
statement — in regard to his own knowledge.
Dr. Horton claims that Protestantism has been the true faith since the
Church's inception. In chapter 2, Dr. Horton incredibly classifies himself and
other Protestants as members of the "early Catholic Church". He defines the
"early Catholic Church" by saying:
universal, and it refers to those truths that are, as St. Paul identified
them, to be held "without controversy" (1 Tim 3:16 KJV). It also refers to
that body of Christians who, distinct from the heretical and schismatic
sects that have plagued Christian unity throughout the ages, submit to the
doctrine and discipline of Christ as he mediates his prophetic, priestly,
kingly ministry in the visible church throughout the Scriptures."
also says, "It was the early Roman Catholic Church that successfully opposed the
Gnostics, Arians, Pelagians, and numerous other false movement, and we who count
ourselves evangelical Protestants belong to this Catholic Church today."
Dr. Horton believes that if the Catholic Church had not taken a disastrous wrong
turn in her doctrines, then all Christendom would be what Protestantism is
today. He says the time of the disaster occurred around the Middle Ages:
during the Middle Ages especially, the western branch of this Catholic
Church (which had already divided into an East-West schism) became
He mentions the
11th century as a time which by then the church was rampant with
"superstition, ignorance, the Crusades, the Inquisition, and an ambitious
and self-indulgent papacy."
But let us focus on two of Dr. Horton's points concerning the early Catholic
There was a time
when the whole Church believed "without controversy" certain fundamental
truths about the doctrines of the faith.
Catholic Church had successfully identified and opposed the numerous false
movements of the faith.
Since Dr. Horton acknowledges these two points about the "early Roman Catholic
Church", then let us examine:
The procedure the
early Catholic Church used to successfully confront and oppose the numerous
heresies of their day.
The set of
fundamental truths believed on by the entire church at the time prior to the
Dr. Horton notes, there were many heresies throughout the first 11 centuries of
the Church's existence. Whenever there was a major issue concerning matters of
faith and morals in the church, it seems the Church followed the pattern given
in Acts 15.
Even in the time of the apostles, the Church had to decide on matters of faith
and morals. There was a great schism developing between the Christian Pharisees
and other Christians. The Church had to come to agreement on the issue regarding
whether Gentile Christians were obligated to keep the law of Moses as Jewish
Christians had been doing. Here is how they decided the issue:
The apostles and
presbyters of various churches came together to discuss the issue.
All sides were
allowed to explain and defend their position.
St. Peter, the
apostles, and presbyters came to a consensus.
trusting that the Holy Spirit was guiding them, issued their declaration,
which was to be believed and obeyed by the faithful.
this particular instance, St. Peter first gave the parameters of what was
allowed in the discussion, and it was further fleshed out and discussed from
there. But the pattern remains basically the same.
What is done today? The bishops convene to discuss an issue, they reach a
consensus and if the Pope (as sitting in the chair of St. Peter) ratifies the
consensus of the bishops, the issue is believed to have been properly guided by
the Holy Spirit and decided. If the bishops hold a council and reach a decision,
but St. Peter does not ratify it, then nothing comes of the council.
Also, as we have already seen in Acts 15, if needs be, St. Peter can also issue
guidelines of allowable parameters of discussion by himself without a council.
But normally, a council is held and the consensus is given to St. Peter for his
This model has been used successfully for 2,000 years as the mechanism the
Church uses to squelch heresy.
think anyone can see this is a reasonable and proper manner for deciding matters
in the Church. It provides a reasonable venue to let all sides discuss the
matter and a system of checks and balances. When this procedure is used and the
outcome decided, it is to be believed that the Holy Spirit himself infallibly
guided the outcome; therefore it cannot be revoked at a later time.
This also serves to aid the Church, because now they can treat this decision as
infallibly given by God and can be used as a defense in further discussions on
other matters. This decision becomes part of clarifying the deposit of faith
once delivered to the Church by the apostles.
Anyone who would try to deny that this method works could only do so by
eviscerating God's power to speak to His own Church. Secondly, this method has a
proven track record of working for 2,000 years. Anyone who contends for another
method will be hard pressed to come up with a better method or one that has a
better track record.
Now, given that the Church adhered to this procedure to ascertain correct
doctrine from heresies, what doctrines were derived and held without controversy
prior to the schism in 1054?
The list below gives the doctrines "held without controversy" throughout the
Church prior to the 11th century.
doctrines "held without controversy" prior to the schism of the 11th century.
God the Son is of
the same substance and nature as God the Father.
God is a Triune
Jesus has a fully
human and a fully divine nature in one being
The Real Presence
of the Body and Blood of Christ exists in the Eucharist.
Succession of Bishops is essential to the preservation of the
Tradition together are rules of faith.
The Holy Spirit
infallibly guides the Church into all truths.
saved by the grace of God and their obedient faith.
lose their salvation through sin.
The Bible is
comprised of 27 books of the NT and 46 books of OT. (Deuterocanonical Books
are part of Scripture).
Primacy of the
Bishop of Rome among Bishops.
Veneration of Saints.
The prayers of
departed saints are effectual for us.
sins to a priest.
Penance should be
done for sins committed.
State of most of
the departed faithful are in a temporary holding place awaiting their final
judgment, although those who have lived a truly holy life on earth can go
straight to heaven.
Prayers for the
other departed faithful are effectual in helping them grow in grace.
Sacraments: Baptism, Confirmation, Confession, Communion, Marriage, Holy
Orders, and Extreme Unction
High honor and
veneration given to the Blessed Ever-Virgin Mary as the Theotokos (the
Mother of God—the New Eve).
Worship as the "Melody of Theology".
Images in worship
were admitted as a helpful means in worship.
These are not simply Catholic doctrines, but historical Christian
doctrines. How do we know this? Because in the 11th century when the Eastern
Orthodox Churches split from the Catholics, both sides kept these doctrines!
These doctrines were "held without controversy", to quote Dr. Horton (and St.
Paul) earlier. Regardless of their other differences, both sides believed, and
continue to believe to this day, that all of the above doctrines are part of the
deposit of faith given by the apostles to the Church.
Therefore, anyone who claims to be connected with historical Christianity would
certainly hold to these doctrines also. Protestants must answers the following
questions before Protestantism can be taken seriously:
the nature of Christ went on for centuries. Heresies such as Docetism,
Gnosticism, Adoptionism, Monarchianism, Arianism, Sabellianism,
Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, Monphysitism and Monotheletism were all
connected to the nature of Jesus. If Protestants believe the Holy Spirit
kept the early Catholic Church from falling into error during those times of
heresy, then why can't they accept the other doctrines that were decided
using the same procedures to combat the heresies? Why do they pick and
choose now what doctrines to believe? And who are they to pick and
choose now what all Christendom had previously agreed upon?
The whole concept
of Protestantism rests on Sola Scriptura. But in the councils
convened to discuss the heresies listed above, all sides argued from
Scripture to prove their point! Is it not obvious that there needs to be
some governing authority in Christianity that can decide which
interpretation is to be held? Would God leave us in a state where we could
not know with certainty what truths we are to hold?
Protestantism itself can exist now only because the Catholic Church
has successfully defined so much of Christian doctrine for Protestants to
borrow from. There is much less doctrine for the Protestants to argue about.
If the Church had to use the Protestant model from her inception, she would
have disintegrated into a meaningless morass of confused doctrines with no
means to pull herself out of the muck and mire. It only took 500 years for
Protestantism to disintegrate into 28,000 denominations. Imagine if the
Protestant model had existed for 2,000 years?
It is ironic that
most Protestants now deny almost all of the articles of faith that
historic Christians held! How would any religious organization that claims
to be historic deny the previously held historic beliefs and then invent
new doctrines that the historic Church had either never held or
previously rejected! The historic Church had rejected doctrines like
Sola Scriptura, Salvation by Faith Alone, and Eternal Security. In what
sense, then, can Protestants claim to be "historic"?
Let us also examine these points about Catholicism:
against the practices of the Church and introduced a new doctrine
of justification. The Catholic Church accepted his criticism about
the practices and changed them. But they denied his new doctrines
were sound, because they were against the "tradition of deposit of faith".
arrived at her decision against Luther's doctrines in the exact same way it
had fought Arianism and other heresies. (i.e., through councils, discussion,
study of Scripture, earlier council decisions, early church father's
writings, prayer, vote and St. Peter's ratification). So when Luther did not
"submit to the doctrine and discipline of Christ as he mediates his
prophetic, priestly, kingly ministry in the visible church…" (to quote from
Dr. Horton), then he became another of "the heretical and schismatic sects
that have plagued Christian unity throughout the ages".
Where does that leave us?
Dr. Horton can choose to join or reject the Catholic Church, but he cannot claim
Protestantism has any connection to historical Christianity. In fact, for Dr.
Horton to feel the need to write to his fellow Protestants and assure them that
they are connected to historic Christianity begs the point that Protestants
today do not feel they are part of historic Christianity. It is
absolutely clear that Luther broke with the historic doctrines of the
faith and created his own doctrines.
Luther did have many debates with clerics and theologians. He certainly did not
"overwhelm their opponents with citations from the Church Fathers as well as
from scriptures." In fact, Luther tried to remove the Epistle of St. James,
Revelation, and the Epistle to the Hebrews from the New Testament canon because
he felt they were at odds with his interpretation of Scripture.
Cardinal John Henry Newman was a prominent 18th century Anglican bishop who also
grappled with the problems between Protestantism and historical Christianity.
Unlike Dr. Horton, he did not try to rewrite Church history. Instead he saw the
fallacies Protestantism is built on, and converted to Catholicism. He wrote:
"And this one
thing is certain…the Christianity of history is not Protestantism. If there
ever were a safe truth, it is this. And Protestantism has ever felt it so…
This is shown in the determination…of dispensing with historical
Christianity altogether, and of forming a Christianity from the Bible alone:
men never would have put [historical Christianity] aside, unless they had
despaired of it… To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant."
Today, Protestants are continuing to come to the Catholic Church as they read
the early Church fathers for themselves. We respectfully request Dr. Horton to
do the same.
Marty Rothwell. "Catholics, Protestants, and History." Petersnet
September 4, 2002.
This article reprinted with permission from the author.
Marty Rothwell became a Christian in 1973. As he began
reading the early church fathers for a course he was teaching, it didn't take
him long to realize the discrepancies between what the early church believed and
what his Protestant denomination taught. He then began studying the differences
between the Orthodox and Catholic positions and, in spite of his strong
anti-Catholic bias was surprised to find that Catholicism had very well reasoned
arguments for the positions it held. In addition it was the first time he had
encountered a church that was intellectually vigorous and very pious
spiritually. It also, as Marty says, could make a refreshing claim no Protestant
church could, that it was there from the beginning. Marty and his family were
received into the Catholic Church in Dec 1999. Marty Rothwell is now a member of
St. Andrew the Apostle Catholic Church in Clifton, Virginia. He can be reached