9 Reasons I Never Became Protestant

A house divided is only half a house.

I have read a lot of articles from my Protestant friends and colleagues celebrating the 500th year of the Protestant Reformation this past year. They varied in timbre and tone—some were overtly triumphalistic while others offered a balanced treatment of the pros and cons.

Despite that, I was struck by how the Reformation just seemed to be taken for granted to be a universally good thing by virtually all Protestants, Evangelicals and Pentecostals. I guess it's to be expected that people wouldn't call into question the origins of their own movement. I was still taken aback by how it was simply taken for granted. Whether it is spoken outright or simply implied, the idea that the Reformation was simply a good thing seems embedded within the American consciousness, even at the secular level.

I'm not convinced. 

I have always seen the Protestant Reformation in zero-sum terms: It brought some good. It brought some bad. It's a very mixed bag. God has certainly showered on it many gifts. Still, it leaves me disappointed. It never truly surpassed Catholicism—the promise of the Reformation stalled and at best settled into a stalemate. So to go through all that effort to break off from Catholicism only to create somewhat parallel traditions without really raising the bar equates to a negative, in my book.

I've often been frustrated with my own Catholic Church and have been tempted to shop around. I have enjoyed visiting other churches but have always fallen short of joining. I have always come away from that search with the strong sense that I would only be exchanging one set of problems for a different set of new problems—and possibly worse ones. So why bother? At least I have history with my own church. 

Let me show you what I mean:

1. The Protestant Reformation opened the door for more diversity in religious approaches—a good thing! However, that came with a cost of disunity and outright conflict—a bad thing. This is a perfect example of a positive that arrived married to a negative through the Reformation. Not all reform movements break that way. The rest of this list tells a similar tale:

2. The Reformation was coupled with the rise of individualism, which is not inherently good or evil. It helps provide the framework for people to follow their conscience—a good thing! It also provides the framework for individuals to see themselves as the center of the universe—this is the cardinal sin of pride, a denial of sola gratis, the very pride that Protestantism arose to protest!

3. Protestantism is very "head" focused. This sometimes manifests as a beautiful intellectualism, and Protestants have been pioneers in academic theology. All too often, this head focus turns into a tedious obsession with hairsplitting concepts and doctrines. Protestantism has been very cold—when it hasn't been downright hostile—to the arts, liturgy and contemplative practices. It has been cold to an embodied faith.

4. Speaking of the arts, while we celebrate the intellectual Enlightenment that came along with the Protestant Reformation, we also cannot forget that this was coupled with the literal whitewashing of much of Europe's artistic heritage. The destruction of countless frescoes, statues and paintings all over Europe had all the darkness of the Inquisition. A movement that literally goes around destroying centuries-old sculptures with some groups forbidding dance and art for centuries is a Dark Age, not a Renaissance. 

5. Concerning the above, one person told me: "It wasn't my denomination that did that!" But therein lines a problem. When you have 40,000 denominations, who takes responsibility? Or does the whole movement have to take some collective responsibility for what happened as a result of it? For better and for worse, the structure of the Catholic Church kept a lot of this extremism in check over the centuries. When you tamper with that, you bear some responsibility for the fallout.

As a Catholic, I am often asked to answer for every sin that was ever done in the name of the Catholic Church, even sins committed hundreds of years ago on another part of the globe (like the Inquisition). Fair enough. But Protestants don't have to do that. They can simply close down one denomination and open a new one. But that does not clean up the mess. It reminds me of a corporation that can sidestep problems it has created by declaring bankruptcy and its members starting a brand new corporation with a new name and blank slate. It may exonerate the individuals of legal responsibility but not a moral one—the problems still exist and someone still has to do something to fix them.

6. For every denomination that is forward-thinking and progressive, there is another that is perhaps more regressive than the Catholic Church they were rebelling against. Remember the Puritans? How many reactionary, repressive cults have there been? Protestant fundamentalism? The horror stories that have come out of conservative fundamentalism are worse than anything I've seen in Catholicism, especially in the modern era. Stories of soul-crushing control and forced conformity abound among Protestants, Evangelicals and Pentecostals. It's hardly where I'd go to find "freedom." The same denominations that celebrate Luther would be quick to crucify young reformers in their own ranks. It is a timeless tale of human nature that certainly isn't limited to Protestants, but it begs the question: Why bother with the Reformation if you are just going to re-create the same mess elsewhere?

7. Luther's initial protest was as much about Church practices as it was theology. It was the corruption, power-grabbing, censorship, control and manipulation that were at the heart of Luther's initial concerns. He was right about much of that. However, when I look at Protestant, Evangelical and Pentecostal churches both today and throughout history, I also see corruption, greed, power dynamics, and every form of human drama under the sun. I also see bad theology everywhere. What was gained?

8. You can see abuse of power by bishops and priests in the Catholic Church. However, I don't find more freedom in Protestantism, as congregations regularly control their pastors by manipulating their financial offerings. Strong hierarchical control tempers this in the Catholic Church, although admittedly not nearly enough. While we in the Catholic Church are quick to blame the hierarch for all sorts of things, the grass isn't always greener on the other side. In Protestantism, there may be less hierarchical control but more congregational pressure. It is hard to preach to the same people who pay you.

9. Unmerited Grace. I have never grasped the Protestant fervor over sola gratis: By grace alone. I understand the theological point that we humans always get in trouble when we tip the apple cart and start taking credit for things that are of God. In principle, Catholicism agrees. After all, the Catholic Church's Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity and the Lutheran World Federation even signed a joined declaration on justification in 1999—supposedly settling the primary conflict of the Reformation. It's in the Bible; it's in Augustine and Aquinas. 

One of the worst theological slams a Protestant can say about a church is that it tries to merit grace through its own effort—i.e. the dreaded "works-based righteousness." This may be something Protestants believe in principle, but overall they certainly don't live it very well. Again, it's human nature. We often hate in others what we hate about ourselves. 

While Protestants profess to believe in a God who showers humankind with unmerited grace, many have no interest in showering unmerited mercy and grace on their fellow human beings in need. It's all "tough love" and "pull yourselves up by the bootstraps." Everyone earns their own worth by how hard they work. Unmerited grace is hard to find in their politics. For two hours every Sunday morning, they may hear a message about unmerited grace from the pulpit, but the other 166 hours of the week are consumed in works-based, merited righteousness. The standards for heaven and earth seem quite different indeed. Yet, Jesus prayed "on earth as it is in heaven."

Protestants take quite a bit of pride and boast of the "Protestant work ethic." What exactly is the Protestant work ethic? I define it as a tedious lifelong task of judging the worth of everyone around you by whether or not they "work hard enough." Bonus points if you can mask your condescension with an even more prideful faux humility. We try to mask this shame with pride, but pride is the absolute opposite of unmerited grace!

You could give me the theological run-around and say that the Protestant work ethic isn't a way to earn salvation but simply evidence of that freely-given salvation—the Calvinist twist. Step away from the theological double-speak for a second and see it for that it is: A system of works-based righteousness. Even more damaging, these thoughts lay the groundwork for the prosperity Gospel.

I prefer the very Catholic approach that we should love one another and not try to judge who is worthy. 

Case in point: A colleague of mine says that in his town a poor person can sometimes have a hard time getting help. Most of the soup kitchens and shelters have conditions on their charity.  In some, you have to be a member of their church, listen to a sermon or meet other criteria. If a person cannot or will not do that, they are advised to go to the Catholic outreach center "because they'll help anybody."  Unmerited grace.  We are accused of not preaching it, but I see us practicing it all the time. 

Summation

The Protestant Reformation serves as a cautionary tale whenever I've been tempted to jump ship. Other reform movements were able to open horizons of possibility while also sidestepping so many of these negatives. The reforms of Francis of Assisi comes to mind. His radical movement could have been the start of something like the Protestant Reformation. Francis was able to set in motion his reforms without creating a rival denomination and all the problems that entails.

The initial reformers themselves were fear-based people. Many were quite harsh, if not downright brutal. That's not exactly what I look for in a spiritual leader. Luther for example, was complex and relatable. I can appreciate his righteous anger at censorship and his zeal to hold the Church accountable. But there's something missing when I hold him up against Francis of Assisi. I don't know what's missing, but whatever it is is somehow essential. I can understand Luther, I can sometimes agree with Luther—but I would not follow Luther. I'd like to think I'd follow Francis. 

While there is so much good to celebrate in the Protestant Reformation, let's be clear that it was a colossal failure at peacekeeping, harmony and family unity—admittedly that sin is on both sides. Both the Reformers and the institution of the Catholic Church failed to resolve differences and stay together. It was an ugly time and few of the leaders on either side inspire me. Celebrating the Protestant Reformation is like celebrating a divorce—perhaps it had to happen but it's never a good thing. The only true winners were pride and ego—on both sides.

Perhaps the Protestant Reformation was a necessary stage in the evolution of human consciousness. If so, I don't think it's the final stage. What unfolded perhaps need to unfold, but it also opened a Pandora's box of other problems. 

To me, the Protestant Reformation is one of many movements within the life of the Church. It has value, as I hope I have illustrated above. But with almost each positive comes a negative, and I suspect there is something about the movement itself that lends itself to this. I see the Reformation more as a wound to be healed than as a pure victory. Now, Protestants and Catholics are separated but we are all still struggling over the same things we were struggling over before—the only difference is that now we are struggling apart from each other, which just adds to the tragedy of what happened. I'm reminded of the last verse of Wish You Were Here by Pink Floyd:

How I wish, how I wish you were here

We're just two lost souls

Swimming in a fish bowl

Year after year

Running over the same old ground

And how we found

The same old fears

Wish you were here

ADDED LATER: If you are going to have a "protest" movement, that means one of two things is true. You are either throwing out bad theology and practice to have a more streamlined, purer church—or you are throwing out half the wisdom of the church.  Given the zero-sum nature of the examples above, I suspect more of the latter may be true in the Protestant Reformation.

Why 'Works' Are Necessary

A recent Pew Research Center poll has reopened the old debate about faith vs works--the line of scrimmage of the Protestant Reformation. Whereas Martin Luther and the heirs of the Reformation have always held that it is through faith alone that salvation occurs, many Protestants and Catholics today have a blended view of the role faith and works--at least, according to this poll ("works" is defined differently by different denominations, but could refer to any effort on the part of humankind, whether it is doing good deeds or following any religious prescription that guarantees that God will act a certain way after we do it).

The controversy has famously raged for the last five centuries, but its roots go much deeper. St. Augustine and Pelagius went several rounds over very similar issues in the fifth century A.D. The question is peppered throughout Scripture, as well, sometimes in more subtle ways. It is one of those theological questions that never seems to go away.

The issue is riddled with problems of semantics. Catholics and Protestants often understand terms like "justification" and "righteousness" differently and therefore answer questions about them differently. There is also a difference between attaining salvation through works and simply seeing works as evidence of a healthy, living faith. Furthermore, the article above saying that "a historically Catholic position" is that "both good deeds and faith in God are needed to get into heaven" is a misleading statement. The Catholic position is much more nuanced than that. From the standpoint of church apologetics, it is both problematic that the poll asked misleading questions, and it's even more problematic how people answered those misleading questions.

Nevertheless, all this has been hashed out by theologians much more trained that me, and it's hard to  find a place in the "faith vs works" debate that hasn't already been explored vigorously. But I think I've found one such place. There is one point that is extremely significant, but it seems to get lost in the shuffle almost all the time in this debate. In fact, I would argue that the subconscious purpose of this debate is actually to make sure this issue gets lost in the shuffle. In all the debates about whether works are essential for salvation we forget one very crucial thing:

Works are essential for discipleship. Whether or not those works are essential for salvation is a very different question. 

Maybe this is obvious to some, but I don't think it is said nearly enough. 

In light of this, does it really matter how we understand the reasoning behind our actions? Maybe one person feeds the hungry believing it is a means to earn salvation while another feeds the hungry in gratitude for the free gift of salvation. So what? 

I have always believed that our theology matters. How we understand God, who we are and our relationship to God and the universe are all extremely significant. But we must not forget that there is an orthopraxy at work in our lives. We grow in wisdom by doing. After all, its much more biblically accurate to say that Christians follow the way of Jesus rather than subscribe to the conclusions of Jesus. The implication is that the Christian life is a journey to be undertaken rather than a test to get all the rights answers on.

I'm reminded of the famous poem by Dr. Kent M. Keith (with additions attributed to Mother Theresa), "Do It Anyway." It contains this line:  "If you are kind, people may accuse you of selfish, ulterior motives. Be kind anyway." [Both versions are included in the link.]

I find great wisdom in this. In light of the faith vs works debate, I interpret this line as saying it ultimately may not matter if our good deeds have the purest motivations or not. Perhaps we do good deeds because we think we are earning a reward or because we may mistakenly believe we can control God's award of salvation. However, doing good deeds is still a good thing to do. We ought to do good deeds anyway, even if our motives and our theological foundations are less than pure. In fact, they almost certainly will be less than pure, because 100% purity of heart is either impossible--or else extremely rare--in our world of limited, fallible human beings. We will grow in our wisdom while doing those deeds. We shouldn't wait to do good works until we have all the theology figured out, because we may need the praxis of doing them to properly form our theology in the first place!

In this broken world filled with human limitations, if we need 100% pureness before we do something, we will end up never doing anything.  

When I see people locked in debate on this issue, I just see people who have allowed themselves to be distracted. I understand why it's so easy to distract ourselves. Discipleship involves real change. It can be scary, especially when we are confronted with the self-sacrificial way of the cross preached by Jesus through both his words and deeds. It's so much easier to wax theological for hours on end and find that the time for putting those thoughts into action has simply slipped away while the debate raged on. You see, that was the whole point of the debate in the first place!  

Don't get me wrong, I understand why people think salvation is a big deal and very much worthy of their attention. If you think that your eternal life depends on getting a question right, I can understand the anxiety. But I also think debating theological minutiae is a clever way of distracting ourselves from the tasks of Christian discipleship. Jesus tells us to love one another, feed the hungry, turn the other cheek, forgive 70 x 7 times, love our enemies and so forth. He tells us over and over again to let go of anxiety over the future and simply follow his way--all shall be well. Yet, so many churches lock horns and obsess over doctrinal nuances.

In conclusion, all Christians should be dedicated to living out the commands of Jesus and following in his way. In practice, all Christians should look pretty much alike, even if they are motivated by very different theologies. A "faith alone" Christian should be working side by side with a "faith plus works" Christian. Whether they understand themselves as earning salvation by their good works or simply living out the requirements of a justified person growing in righteousness should not interfere with doing the good works required of discipleship. The tasks should be the same. They should be working just as hard doing the same things. This is what we seem to forget in this debate.

Addendum

While not the focus of this piece, it is worth pointing out that this issue has been largely settled by many of the key players of the Protestant Reformation. The Roman Catholic Church (through the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity) and the Lutheran World Federation signed a joint statement on justification in 1999. Other denominations have signed on since then, including the World Methodist Council and the World Communion of Reformed Churches. The Anglican Church is also expected to sign. To these signers, the faith vs works debate is over because a common understanding of this issue has been accepted. It is also worth pointing out that each of those denominations has detractors who don't support statement, as well.

Politically Correct Triumphalism

Luther burns the Papal bull in the square of Wittenberg year 1520

Karl Aspelin 1857-1922; WikimediaCommons

I have one request for my Protestant and Evangelical Christian friends:

When you remember the beginnings of the Protestant Reformation,

And talk about all the dirty, rotten practices and policies that were done in the name of the Catholic Church (and some that still continue to this day),

And triumphantly celebrate how the Reformers rose up out of it,

I ask that you keep in mind that in that Catholic Church there are real human beings with real feelings today. Catholics have great affection for their Church--it's their home and family. They consider it sacred, beautiful and full of Mystery.

Catholics are having to learn this, too. We have been guilty of a bit too much triumphalism when talking about the Jewish tradition. You could argue that Christianity is, among other things, a reformation of Judaism. Jesus spoke out against many Jewish practices. We read in the Gospels how Jesus was treated poorly by his Jewish contemporaries--there was even a conspiracy to kill him which succeeded. It can be all-too-easy for Christians to conclude that much of the Judaism is obsolete, archaic and even harmful. It's even in our language: Judaism represents the "Old Testament" and we are the "New."

Just stop for a minute and think about how that might sound to a Jewish person. 

Big-City Brother

Imagine you were born and raised on a farm in a small town and still live there today. Imagine you have a brother who moved to the city. Whenever that brother returns home for holidays, he continually talks about how much better city life is than the county and how glad he is that he left the farm. The impression he gives is that everything about city life is wonderful and sophisticated and everything about rural life is backwards and sterile. He can appreciate a few quaint details of farm life, but for the most part, he barely hides his pity for the people still stuck on the farm who haven't experienced all the "great things" he has experienced in the city.

Certainly, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and every opinion has a history behind it--perhaps he was mistreated in that small town. However, he's not just complaining about his own roots--he's also criticizing your current home. He left many years ago and isn't up-to-date on what's currently happening--just because he left doesn't mean that life and growth stopped happening on the farm. City living might work fine for him, but you may find farm life peaceful, healthy and enormously satisfying. You also wonder if, after a period of time, your brother may recognize that city life has problems of its own and come to appreciate rural life, again.

In the same way, Christians can act like Judaism is just a remnant of a bygone era that got surpassed by Christianity. Protestants and Evangelicals can think the same about the Catholic Church. We could easily appear to dance on the grave of these traditions.

However, neither Judaism nor Roman Catholicism is in the grave. The Jewish faith survived and  even flourished after the birth of Christianity. The Jewish tradition is not where it was 2,000 years ago, and the Catholic Church is not where it was 500 years ago. Just because a group broke away does not mean that the original has completely stalled out. While some regard Jewish Law and culture as cumbersome and even unfair, others find it enormously liberating and reassuring. The same is true for Catholicism.

"The Jews"

For centuries, Catholics pulled no punches in their disdain for the way Jesus was treated by his Jewish contemporaries. That sentiment spilled over into disdain for all Jewish people in all times and places, with catastrophic consequences. The refrain "the Jews" echoes throughout John's Gospel and rings like a battle cry--"the Jews" did this and "the Jews" did that, most of it with a negative connotation. That refrain haunted Medieval Europe and often erupted in epic violence. History is full of disturbing accounts of anti-Semitic prejudice, crippling segregation, torture, terrorism, imprisonment and the outright killing of Jewish people. The Inquisitions and Nazi holocaust are the most devastating consequences of centuries of bigotry and misplaced hatred. Anti-Semitism continues to have disturbing repercussions even to this day.

I'm not suggesting that Catholics are being persecuted as badly as the Jewish people. But I am saying that the way we all talk about each other has a real impact. Some of Europe's bloodiest wars have stemmed from religious intolerance between Catholics and Protestants. In some parts of the world, this fighting is still very fierce even to this day. Many Catholics, Protestants and Evangelicals have experienced violence and even death as a result of this bigotry. Even when the bigotry doesn't result in actual physical attacks, the psychological wounds can still be harmful.

The Catholic Church is learning how to be good neighbors to the Jewish people. We can celebrate the birth of Christianity while at the same time honoring and respecting the Jewish people and their incredible faith and tradition--a tradition which continues to produce amazing spiritual leaders and which brings inspiration to all of us worldwide.

Catholics are nowhere near done in our efforts to better relate to the Jewish people. We have documents of understanding. Popes and bishops work hard to promote reconciliation. Clergy are instructed in how to communicate respect from the pulpit. For example, check out this guide on the website of the US Catholic Bishops. It gives instructions for how to preach in relation to other faith traditions. Pages 3-4 give specific guidelines and stresses the importance of communicating respect and sensitivity about the Jewish history and faith.

It's an ongoing process. One apology is rarely enough.

Ongoing Reformation for Us All

History can be a tough teacher for all of us. The Protestant Reformation has had its dark side. We could all easily look at the specks in each others' eyes while neglecting the boulders in our own. Every church denomination has manifested the full range of human failings. Yes, the Reformers broke new and important ground that has enriched all of us; they also re-discovered many of the same sins all over again and perhaps generated new problems that were not there before. Every new moment begins with freshness and purity. After a while, we see the same old corruption, prejudice, appeals to power, gravitation toward money and political posturing creep into it. The act of reformation has to be ongoing.

Most educated Catholics are pretty upfront about the Reformation. We know there were embarrassing practices and much corruption in the 16th century. It was tragic to condemn the reformers who decided in their conscience to break away.

I believe the Catholic Church has done much to reconcile with the concerns of the Reformers. In fact, most (if not all) of Martin Luther's concerns have been adopted by the Catholic Church in some fashion. We can now recognize the Reformation leaders like Martin Luther, Menno Simon and John Calvin as children of the Catholic Church--we can claim their influence and legacy as part of our own. In the same way, many Jewish people today can recognize Jesus of Nazareth and Paul of Tarsus as being great leaders that arose out of the Jewish tradition.

As 41 year old raised in the Catholic Church, I cannot recall a single homily preached at Mass condemning the existence or practices of another religion or denomination. We're not where we were 500 years ago.  Perhaps, though, instead of patting ourselves on the back, we should instead ask the Jewish people, Protestants and Evangelicals if we have done enough to reconcile and soften our sharpness, rather than trusting our own judgment.

Triumphalism

Triumphalism can feel good. It's a great legacy when a group of people takes risks to stand up for what they feel is healthy reform. We all may be entitled to triumphantly celebrate from time to time. It's good to savor those stories. Just keep in mind how your triumph might sound to someone who is being triumphed over.

Christianity started as a small movement that was often persecuted by the Jews and Romans. Eventually, though, Christianity became the big kid on the block. Unfortunately, Christians used a short period of mistreatment by Jewish people to justify 2,000 years of much more serious persecution in return. We can't live in the past.

Likewise, a lot of Protestants and Evangelicals are living like it's still the year 1517. By celebrating the reformation of the past, are we neglecting to see the need for a reformation today in our own home?

Lastly, though it's not as much the focus of this piece, we should also remember that those who were left behind should also not be bitter or condemnatory. Divisions can hurt deeply, but people are entitled to follow their conscience and go their separate ways--especially when it may be your own narrowness and stubbornness that drove them to that decision in the first place!