Appendix A: Documented Issues in Rock and Sand

This appendix lists factual errors, faulty reasoning, and loaded language identified in Rock and Sand, section by section, from the Foreword through Appendix I of the book. Within each section, entries are arranged by category and numbered in page order. Page numbers refer to the third edition of Rock and Sand (2018). The footnotes of the review refer to these entries by chapter, category, and number.

Foreword

pp. xv–xvi

Logical Fallacies

1. p. xvi — “having been established only over the past several centuries”

Problem: Appeal to Antiquity. The Foreword concludes that certain church bodies stand on “unstable and shifting Sand” because they were established in recent centuries. Being recent does not by itself make a body unsound, and the Foreword gives no other reason. The parable it borrows, which supplies the book’s title, uses a different test: whether a person hears Christ’s words and does them. The Foreword acknowledges that this was the parable’s original point (p. xv) but then applies the image by a different standard.

Evidence: “Everyone therefore who hears my words and does them, I will compare to a wise person who built his house on a rock.… But everyone who hears my words and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house on the sand” (Matt. 7:24, 26, EOB).

Sources

The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament. Edited by Laurent A. Cleenewerck. Matthew 7:24, 26.

Introduction

pp. xvii–xxi

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. xvii — “America, the world’s most religiously diverse society”

Problem: The text states this as fact. The best-known international measurement of religious diversity does not place the United States first or near the top.

Evidence: The Pew Research Center’s Religious Diversity Index ranked the United States 68th of 232 countries and territories and classified it as “moderate” in diversity. Singapore ranked first (Cooperman and Lipka, 2014).

2. p. xix — “have now been widely discarded in Western academia”

Problem: The text says that the categories “Dark Ages,” “Middle Ages,” “Renaissance,” and “Reformation” have been widely discarded by Western scholars. This is accurate for “Dark Ages,” which most historians now avoid. It is not accurate for the other three, which remain standard terms in scholarship.

Evidence: The Introduction’s own main source on this period is titled The Reformation (MacCulloch, 2003; cited at p. xvii, n. 1). The book also relies on Pelikan and Hotchkiss’s Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the Christian Tradition (2003), whose relevant section is titled “Creeds and Confessions of the Reformation Era.” The Medieval Academy of America continues to publish Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies, founded in 1926.

3. p. xix, n. 3 — “a sexually immoral relationship with the nun Héloïse”

Problem: Héloïse was not a nun when the relationship began. The footnote misstates facts recorded in the very edition it cites.

Evidence: In his Historia Calamitatum, which is included in the Penguin edition cited in the footnote, Abelard states that he met Héloïse while lodging in the house of her uncle, Canon Fulbert, as her tutor. The two later married, and only afterward did Héloïse take the veil at Argenteuil, at Abelard’s bidding (chs. VI–VIII). See also: Logical Fallacies.

4. p. xx — “fabricated in order to place the ever-growing claims of papal arrogance and supremacy”

Problem: The text states that the False Decretals were forged in order to advance papal supremacy. Standard reference works describe a different main purpose and state that the forgeries did not come from Rome. The text is accurate that the collection was compiled in ninth-century France and that later popes made use of it.

Evidence: The Catholic Encyclopedia states that the forger’s immediate aim was to protect the authority of bishops, that papal rights appear mainly in the bishops’ interest, and that the forgeries were the private work of individuals rather than products of Rome (Saltet, 1909). Encyclopædia Britannica likewise identifies the main aim as freeing the church, and its bishops, from interference by the state and by more powerful archbishops (“False Decretals”).

5. pp. xx–xxi — “Orthodox Emperor Michael Cerularius”

Problem: Michael Cerularius was the Patriarch of Constantinople, not the emperor. The error misidentifies the recipient of Leo IX’s letter and the office he held.

Evidence: The Catholic Encyclopedia identifies the letter in which Leo IX cited the Donation of Constantine as addressed to Michael Cerularius, Patriarch of Constantinople (Kirsch, 1909).

6. p. xxi, n. 8 — “had rejected the Pope’s right to sell indulgences in their estates”

Problem: The note states, without a source, that the imperial electors had rejected papal indulgence sales since 1485. The book’s own narrative and the record of two leading electors contradict this.

Evidence: Albert of Brandenburg, Archbishop of Mainz and an elector of the Empire, was entrusted in 1517 with publishing the papal indulgence for St. Peter’s and employed Tetzel to preach it (O’Malia, 1907). The book itself describes Albert’s instructions for selling that indulgence (p. 4). Frederick the Wise, Elector of Saxony, promoted his Wittenberg relic collection with a printed catalogue (1510) stating that each relic offered a hundred days of indulgence (Art Institute of Chicago, 1948.111).

Logical Fallacies

1. p. xix — “Most examples of ecclesiastical histories authored in a Western context are distinctly biased”

Problem: Hasty Generalization. A sweeping judgment about most Western church histories is stated without a single example or supporting study. A broad conclusion drawn from no presented evidence fits this pattern. The claim also sits in tension with the book’s own method, which relies on Western-authored histories (MacCulloch, Duffy, Brecht, Oberman) for many of its facts, beginning in this Introduction.

2. p. xix, n. 3 — “A good example is Peter Abelard”

Problem: Hasty Generalization. The text claims that before the Reformation Western theology became detached from its ascetic setting and that theologians “became academics.” Its only support is one theologian’s sexual misconduct. A single case cannot establish a change across an entire period, and one man’s personal sin is not evidence of the institutional shift the text describes. Abelard himself later became a monk at St. Denis (Historia Calamitatum, ch. VIII). See also: Historical Inaccuracies.

Unsupported Assumptions

1. pp. xvii–xviii — “the Protestant’s lack of familiarity with traditional Christianity”

Problem: The phrase assumes that “traditional Christianity” means Orthodox Christianity and that Protestants are unfamiliar with it. Whether the Orthodox Church alone represents traditional Christianity is the main question the book sets out to argue. Treating it as settled in the opening pages assumes the book’s conclusion before any argument is given.

Assumption: Orthodox belief and practice is the standard that defines “traditional Christianity.” See also: Logical Fallacies.

2. p. xxi — “obtained a copy as a young theologian”

Problem: The text states that Luther obtained Nicholas of Cusa’s work exposing the forgeries and that it “certainly” influenced him. The supporting footnote (n. 7) does not mention Cusa. It states instead that Luther read Ulrich von Hutten’s edition of Lorenzo Valla’s treatise in February 1520. The claim about Cusa therefore rests on no cited evidence. The text is accurate that Cusa questioned these documents (Kirsch, 1909; Saltet, 1909).

Assumption: Luther knew and used Cusa’s work on the forgeries.

3. p. xxi — “more a land grab by the Protestant princes than about ecclesiastical renewal”

Problem: The text says that “a strong argument can be made” for this view, but it neither makes the argument nor cites anyone who does. The claim assigns a motive to an entire group of rulers and recasts the Reformation as chiefly a contest over property. The separate point that princely protection helped the Reformation survive is not at issue here.

Assumption: The Protestant princes acted mainly to acquire church property.

Evidence: The book’s own account points to broad popular demand that did not depend on princes. Luther’s Sermon on Indulgence and Grace was reprinted more than twenty times in two years (p. 6), and 390 editions of his writings were published in Germany in 1523 alone (p. 13, n. 48).

Biased Language

1. p. xx — “papal arrogance”

Problem: The word “arrogance” passes judgment on the character of the popes rather than describing their claims. It leads the reader to regard those claims with contempt before they are examined.

Neutral alternative: “claims of papal authority and supremacy.”

2. p. xx — “the innovative deceptions of successive popes”

Problem: The word “deceptions” implies that later popes knowingly deceived others. The same sentence states that these documents were generally believed authentic throughout the Western Middle Ages. Popes who relied on them would therefore have been misled themselves, not deceiving others.

Neutral alternative: “the claims of later popes.”

Double Standard

1. p. xx — [The Donation of Constantine is presented only as a forgery used to advance papal claims.]

Problem: The text treats the Donation as an instrument of papal deception. It does not mention that the same forgery was also accepted in the Orthodox East, where canon lawyers included it in their collections and used it to support privileges for the clergy of Constantinople. The text is correct that the Donation is a forgery and that its authenticity is now universally rejected.

Evidence: The Catholic Encyclopedia reports that the Donation appears in the canonical collection of Theodore Balsamon (twelfth century), that Matthew Blastares admitted it into his collection around 1335, and that it was valued in the Greek East as support for privileges claimed for the Byzantine clergy (Kirsch, 1909).

Sources

Abelard, Peter. Historia Calamitatum, chs. VI–VIII. Translated by Henry Adams Bellows. Christian Classics Ethereal Library. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/abelard/misfortunes.iii.ix.html. (Also contained in the Penguin Classics edition of The Letters of Abelard and Heloise cited at p. xix, n. 3.)

Art Institute of Chicago. Lucas Cranach the Elder, Wittenberg Reliquary Book (Wittenberger Heiligthumsbuch), printed by Johannes Grunenberg, 1510. Accession no. 1948.111. https://www.artic.edu/artworks/62565/wittenberg-reliquary-book-wittenberger-heiligthumsbuch

Cooperman, Alan, and Michael Lipka. “U.S. Doesn’t Rank High in Religious Diversity.” Pew Research Center, April 4, 2014. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2014/04/04/u-s-doesnt-rank-high-in-religious-diversity/

Encyclopædia Britannica. “False Decretals.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/False-Decretals

Kirsch, J. P. “Donation of Constantine.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 5. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05118a.htm

MacCulloch, Diarmaid. The Reformation. New York: Penguin, 2003.

O’Malia, M. J. “Albert of Brandenburg.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 1. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01262a.htm

Pelikan, Jaroslav, and Valerie Hotchkiss, eds. Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the Christian Tradition. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003.

Saltet, L. “False Decretals.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 5. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05773a.htm

Speculum: A Journal of Medieval Studies. Medieval Academy of America; University of Chicago Press, 1926–present. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/toc/spc/current

Chapter 1: The Life of Martin Luther, Founder of the German Reformation

pp. 1–17

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 9 — “This bull of excommunication”

Problem: Exsurge Domine (1520) did not excommunicate Luther. It condemned forty-one propositions drawn from his writings and gave him a period of sixty days to recant before excommunication would follow. The book itself states on p. 12 that Luther was excommunicated by a later bull, Decet Romanum Pontificem, on January 3, 1521. The text is accurate that Exsurge Domine censured forty-one propositions.

Evidence: The text of Exsurge Domine sets a sixty-day period for Luther to desist before he is to be condemned as a heretic (Leo X, Exsurge Domine, Papal Encyclicals Online).

2. p. 9, n. 34 — “saw to it that Luther’s denial of human freedom stayed out of formal confessions”

Problem: Luther’s position did not stay out of the formal Lutheran confessions. The Formula of Concord (1577), part of the Lutheran Book of Concord, explicitly endorses Luther’s Bondage of the Will on this subject. Even the Augsburg Confession (1530), written by Melanchthon and described by the book as moderating Luther’s views (p. 30, n. 101), denies that the unaided will can achieve spiritual righteousness.

Evidence: The Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article II, ¶44, states that Luther explained and supported this position thoroughly in De Servo Arbitrio and appeals to that work. The same paragraph denies that the human will cooperates in conversion. Augsburg Confession, Article XVIII, allows the will some freedom in civil matters but states that without the Holy Spirit it has no power to work the righteousness of God.

3. p. 14 — “was the only official Lutheran document written solely by Luther himself”

Problem: The Small Catechism is not the only document in the official Lutheran confessions written by Luther alone. The Large Catechism (1529) and the Smalcald Articles are also Luther’s own work and are also part of the Book of Concord.

Evidence: Encyclopædia Britannica lists “Martin Luther’s Small and Large Catechisms (1529)” among the contents of the Book of Concord (“Book of Concord”). It also states that Luther wrote the Smalcald Articles in 1536 and that they were later included in the Book of Concord (“Schmalkaldic Articles”).

4. p. 17 — “for the first time since the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215”

Problem: The Council of Trent was not the first multinational council convened by the papacy since 1215. Several general councils met in the intervening centuries, and the book’s own Introduction mentions two of them, Lyons (1274) and Ferrara-Florence (1438–9), on p. xix.

Evidence: The Catholic Encyclopedia lists the general councils between Lateran IV and Trent as Lyons I (1245), Lyons II (1274), Vienne (1311–1313), Constance (1414–1418), Basel-Ferrara-Florence (1431–1439), and Lateran V (1512–1517) (“General Councils,” 1909).

Logical Fallacies

1. p. 16 — “proved the absurdity of any dependence on the clarity of Scripture alone”

Problem: Non Sequitur. The text reasons that because Luther and Zwingli disagreed about the Eucharist at Marburg, reliance on the clarity of Scripture is shown to be absurd. Disagreement among interpreters does not by itself show that a text is unclear, since interpreters may err. The same reasoning would also count against churches that rely on Scripture together with tradition, which have likewise divided. The book itself reports that the participants at Marburg agreed on fourteen of fifteen articles (p. 50), so the colloquy also shows substantial agreement.

Evidence: The Russian Orthodox Church divided in the seventeenth century when the Old Believers rejected the liturgical reforms of Patriarch Nikon (Encyclopædia Britannica, “Raskol”; “Old Believer”). The book itself describes the East–West schism of 1054 between two churches that both appeal to tradition (p. xviii). See also: Double Standard.

2. p. 16, n. 61 — “This quote is assuredly devastating to contemporary Protestant Evangelicals”

Problem: Non Sequitur. The note argues that because Evangelicals admire Luther, his condemnation of those who deny the bodily presence in the Eucharist is “devastating” to them. Admiring a historical figure does not commit anyone to all of that figure’s views. Evangelicals do not regard Luther as a doctrinal authority, so his disagreement with them does not settle the question.

Cherry-Picking

1. p. 16 — “disavowed Luther’s teaching on the sacraments and church polity”

Problem: The text lists Martin Bucer among the leaders who rejected Luther’s teaching on the sacraments and describes Protestant disputes as irreconcilable. It leaves out that Bucer and other South German theologians later signed the Wittenberg Concord (1536) with Luther, an agreement on the Lord’s Supper. The text is accurate that Bucer sided against Luther at Marburg in 1529.

Evidence: The Wittenberg Concord was signed on May 29, 1536, by Lutheran and South German Reformed theologians, including Luther and Bucer, as a resolution of their differences over Christ’s presence in the Eucharist (Jensen, 2018; “Wittenberg Concord,” Wikipedia, citing McNeill, 1963).

Unsupported Assumptions

1. p. 15 — “did not take place until it was politically safe to effect”

Problem: The text states that Luther delayed his marriage until the death of Elector Frederick because the marriage was not politically safe until then. No source is given for this account of Luther’s motive. The close timing of the two events does not by itself show that one caused the other.

Assumption: Luther timed his marriage to Frederick’s death for political reasons.

Misuse of Scripture

1. p. 8 — “an assertion that contradicts scripture itself (Acts 15)”

Problem: The text claims that Luther’s view that general councils can err contradicts Acts 15. Acts 15 describes a single meeting of the apostles and elders in Jerusalem. It does not state that later general councils cannot err or that they share the authority of the apostles. Using it to establish the infallibility of later councils adds a teaching the passage does not contain.

Context: “The apostles and the presbyters gathered together to discuss this matter” (Acts 15:6, EOB). “It has seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to impose no greater burden on you than what is necessary” (Acts 15:28, EOB). In context, the decision concerns whether Gentile believers must be circumcised. It was made by a council that included the apostles themselves.

Sources

Augsburg Confession (1530), Article XVIII (Of Free Will). In The Book of Concord. https://thebookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession/article-xviii/

Catholic Encyclopedia. “General Councils.” Vol. 4. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04423f.htm

The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament. Edited by Laurent A. Cleenewerck. Acts 15:6, 28.

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Book of Concord.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/Book-of-Concord

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Old Believer.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/Old-Believers

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Raskol.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/Raskol

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Schmalkaldic Articles.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/Schmalkaldic-Articles

Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article II (Free Will), ¶44. In The Book of Concord. https://thebookofconcord.org/formula-of-concord-solid-declaration/article-ii/

Jensen, Gordon A. The Wittenberg Concord: Creating Space for Dialogue. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2018.

Leo X. Exsurge Domine. 1520. Papal Encyclicals Online. https://www.papalencyclicals.net/leo10/l10exdom.htm

“Wittenberg Concord.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wittenberg_Concord

Chapter 2: Lutheranism and Orthodoxy

pp. 19–37

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 24 — “all monasteries were dissolved in Lutheran lands”

Problem: Not all monastic houses were dissolved in Lutheran territories. Several women’s convents accepted the Reformation and continued as Lutheran communities, some to the present day. The text is accurate that most monasteries were closed and that Luther opposed arrangements that kept them open (p. 24, n. 85).

Evidence: Lüne Abbey near Lüneburg accepted the Protestant duke’s authority in 1535 but was not dissolved. It continued as a foundation for unmarried Protestant women, elected its first Protestant abbess in 1562, and remains an active Evangelical-Lutheran convent today (“Lüne Abbey,” Wikipedia, citing Brandis, 2017).

2. p. 24 — “There is no Church without monasticism”

Problem: The text states that the Orthodox Church has “always taught” that monasticism is essential to the Church. Monasticism as an organized way of life did not exist in the Church’s first centuries. Christians who practiced celibacy and voluntary poverty existed earlier, but they were not monks living under a monastic rule.

Evidence: The Catholic Encyclopedia states that monastic life “took definite shape in the fourth century” and dates the first monastery of Pachomius to about 318. It describes earlier Christian ascetics as forerunners rather than monks in the strict sense (Huddleston, 1911).

3. p. 27 — “He completely rejected the idea of an invisible church”

Problem: Luther did not completely reject the idea of an invisible church. He distinguished between the true, spiritual church known to God and the outward, visible church. The text is correct that Luther insisted the church is identified by outward marks such as the Word and the sacraments and did not treat it as a purely invisible body.

Evidence: In On the Papacy in Rome (1520), Luther distinguishes a “spiritual, internal Christendom,” made up of believers, from a “physical, external Christendom” (summary in LCMS New Jersey District, “On the Papacy and the Church”).

4. p. 36, n. 113 — “tens of thousands of Protestant denominations in America alone”

Problem: The number is far too high. Standard counts place the number of denominations in the United States in the low hundreds. The larger figure appears to count independent congregations, which are not denominations. The note also states that new denominations are registered with the government every week, but churches in the United States are not required to register or apply for tax-exempt status.

Evidence: The Hartford Institute for Religion Research reports that the Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches listed 217 denominations. It separately reports more than 35,000 independent or nondenominational congregations, citing the Religious Congregations and Membership Study (2010). IRS Publication 1828 states that churches meeting the requirements of section 501(c)(3) are automatically considered tax exempt.

Logical Fallacies

1. p. 22 — “as one-sided and heretical in his promotion of marriage”

Problem: False Analogy. The text equates Luther’s promotion of marriage with the early Gnostic teaching that attacked marriage. The two are not alike in the relevant respect. The Gnostic teaching condemned marriage itself, while Luther did not forbid celibacy. The book itself notes that Luther left the door open for those able to live it (p. 24), and Luther’s own treatise exempts those who remain unmarried for the kingdom of heaven.

Evidence: In The Estate of Marriage (1522), Luther names those who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Matt. 19:12) as one of three groups exempt from marriage (Luther’s Works, vol. 45, trans. Walther I. Brandt).

2. p. 24 — “was Jesus less than human?”

Problem: Straw Man. The text asks whether Luther’s views would make Jesus less than human, as if Luther held that every man must marry to be healthy. Luther’s own treatise allows for those who remain celibate by God’s gift, so the view being refuted is not the one Luther held.

Evidence: The Estate of Marriage (1522) exempts from marriage those who remain unmarried for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (Luther’s Works, vol. 45).

Cherry-Picking

1. p. 19, n. 66 — “immoderately ardent and violent in character”

Problem: The note cites Calvin only as a witness to Luther’s temper, in a chapter that asks whether Luther deserves to be regarded as a Christian hero. It omits Calvin’s well-known overall judgment of Luther, which was strongly favorable even when Luther attacked him. The text is accurate that Calvin acknowledged Luther’s vehemence.

Evidence: In his 1544 letter to Heinrich Bullinger, written after Luther’s attacks on the Swiss Reformers, Calvin writes that even if Luther were to call him a devil, he would still acknowledge him to be an illustrious servant of God. In the same letter he regrets Luther’s restless temperament (Calvin, Tracts and Letters; transcription by W. Travis McMaken).

2. p. 30 — “careful to avoid the controversial word ‘alone’”

Problem: The text implies that Melanchthon deliberately kept the word “alone” out of the Augsburg Confession’s teaching on justification. It is accurate that Article IV does not use the word. Two articles later, however, the Confession teaches salvation by faith alone, quoting a Church Father.

Evidence: Augsburg Confession, Article VI, quotes Ambrose as saying that whoever believes in Christ is saved “without works, by faith alone.”

Unsupported Assumptions

1. p. 23 — “Luther found it convenient to vilify the monastic estate”

Problem: The text claims that Luther attacked monasticism in order to justify breaking his own vows. The book’s own dates point the other way. Luther wrote Of Monastic Vows in 1521 (p. 23, n. 82), but he kept his monastic habit until 1524 (p. 13) and did not marry until 1525 (p. 15). No evidence is given that the treatise was written to excuse a later marriage.

Assumption: Luther’s teaching on vows was motivated by a desire to excuse his own conduct.

Evidence: As late as November 30, 1524, Luther wrote to Spalatin that he did not intend to marry, because he daily expected the death of a heretic (quoted in Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 7).

2. p. 23 — “Luther was not able to marry as long as Frederick lived”

Problem: The text again presents the timing of Luther’s marriage as caused by Frederick’s death, without a source. Recurs from Chapter 1.

Assumption: Luther delayed his marriage until Frederick’s death for political reasons.

3. p. 23 — “he himself did not attend the wedding”

Problem: The text states that Melanchthon stayed away from Luther’s wedding because he opposed it. The book’s own note (n. 83) reports that some sources say Melanchthon simply was not invited. The text gives no evidence for the motive it states. It is accurate that Melanchthon privately criticized the marriage as hasty.

Assumption: Melanchthon’s absence reflected his opposition to the marriage.

Evidence: Schaff reports that Luther kept the marriage secret from his friends, that Melanchthon was not invited to the private ceremony of June 13, 1525, and that he was invited to the public wedding feast on June 27 (Schaff, History of the Christian Church, vol. 7).

Biased Language

1. p. 24 — “In his self-justifying mania”

Problem: The phrase attacks Luther’s state of mind and motives instead of addressing his argument. “Mania” suggests mental disorder, leading the reader to dismiss Luther’s position before it is examined.

Neutral alternative: “In defending his position.”

2. p. 26 — “fanatically promoting the breaking of monastic vows”

Problem: The word “fanatically” labels Luther’s advocacy as irrational extremism instead of describing what he taught. It invites the reader to dismiss his position as fanaticism rather than weigh it.

Neutral alternative: “actively encouraging monks and nuns to leave their vows.”

3. p. 34, n. 110 — “Here we see the Protestant arrogance in full bloom”

Problem: The note describes the Lutheran theologians’ hope of persuading the Orthodox as arrogance. Seeking to persuade others of one’s convictions is ordinary in theological dialogue. The book’s own account shows that the Patriarch likewise argued point by point for the Orthodox positions (pp. 34–36), yet it applies the label only to the Lutherans. The phrase stirs resentment rather than informing the reader.

Neutral alternative: “The Lutherans hoped to persuade the Orthodox of their position.”

4. p. 35 — “rightly points out this hypocrisy”

Problem: Hypocrisy means professing one thing while doing another. The Lutherans openly stated which works they regarded as commanded by God and which they did not. That is a disagreement about which works are good, not insincerity. The word charges bad faith instead of describing a theological difference.

Neutral alternative: “points out what he saw as an inconsistency.”

5. p. 37 — “on a fast track to extinction”

Problem: The phrase overstates membership decline as imminent disappearance. It invites the reader to see Lutheranism as dying rather than conveying measurable facts.

Neutral alternative: “has experienced significant membership decline.”

Misuse of Scripture

1. p. 23, n. 81 — “the supremacy of consecrated celibacy is one of the most obvious teachings of the New Testament”

Problem: The note cites 1 Corinthians 7 and Matthew 19 as obvious proof of the supremacy of consecrated celibacy, and it then treats this as proof that monasticism is supreme. Paul does say that the man who does not marry “does better” (7:38). He frames this as a concession, ties it to a gift that not all have and to “the present distress,” and states that marrying is not sin. Neither passage mentions monastic vows or monastic communities.

Context: “Nevertheless, I say this by way of concession, not as a command. Indeed, I wish that everyone would be like me. However, each person has his own gift from God, one of this kind, and another of that kind” (1 Cor. 7:6–7, EOB). “I think that it is good, (in view of the present distress,) for a man to remain as he is” (1 Cor. 7:26, EOB). “But if you do marry, you have not sinned” (1 Cor. 7:28, EOB). In context, Paul is answering questions the Corinthians had written to him about marriage (7:1).

Double Standard

1. p. 33 — “only temporary and local theological standards”

Problem: The text faults Protestant confessions for becoming only temporary and local standards. It does not apply the same judgment to the Orthodox confessions of the same era. The book itself says those confessions have only uncertain authority today and doubts that most Orthodox have heard of them (p. 28). It also describes one of them, Peter Mogila’s Confession, as revised to reduce Latin influences and as the most Latinized statement ever adopted by an Orthodox synod (p. 94).

Evidence: The parallel is documented in the book’s own account of the Orthodox confessions of Mogila (1638–1640), Critopoulos (1625), and Dositheos (1672) (pp. 28, 94).

Other Misrepresentation

1. p. 32 — “the authors are at a loss for how to recommend fasting”

Problem: The text claims that the authors of the Augsburg Confession could not find a way to recommend fasting and ascetic discipline without making them mandatory. Article XXVI does exactly that. It urges bodily discipline at all times and states that it does not condemn fasting. It objects only to rules that bind consciences or treat such works as earning grace.

Evidence: Augsburg Confession, Article XXVI, ¶¶33–39, states that every Christian ought to train and subdue himself with bodily exercises, not to merit grace, and that “we do not condemn fasting in itself.”

Sources

Augsburg Confession (1530), Articles VI and XXVI. In The Book of Concord. https://thebookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession/article-vi/ and https://thebookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession/article-xxvi/

Calvin, John. Letter to Heinrich Bullinger, 1544. In John Calvin: Tracts and Letters. Partial transcription by W. Travis McMaken, quoted at https://challies.com/articles/how-calvin-responded-when-luther-went-full-out-luther

The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament. Edited by Laurent A. Cleenewerck. 1 Corinthians 7:1, 6–7, 26, 28, 38.

Hartford Institute for Religion Research. “Fast Facts on American Religion.” https://hirr.hartfordinternational.edu/?p=40

Huddleston, Gilbert. “Monasticism.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 10. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1911. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10459a.htm

Internal Revenue Service. Tax Guide for Churches & Religious Organizations (Publication 1828), rev. August 2015. https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf

LCMS New Jersey District. “On the Papacy and the Church (June 1520).” https://www.njdistrict.org/in-commemoration-of-the-reformation/on-the-papacy-and-the-church-june-1520

“Lüne Abbey.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%BCne_Abbey

Luther, Martin. The Estate of Marriage (1522). In Luther’s Works, vol. 45, translated by Walther I. Brandt. Philadelphia: Fortress Press. Excerpt: https://pages.uoregon.edu/dluebke/Reformations441/LutherMarriage.htm

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church, vol. 7, The German Reformation. https://ccel.org/ccel/schaff/hcc7/hcc7.ii.v.ii.html

Chapter 3: The Life and Teachings of Ulrich Zwingli

pp. 39–52

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 43 — “when Zwingli launched a series of commentary-style homilies”

Problem: The text dates the start of Zwingli’s continuous preaching through the Gospel of Matthew to 1522. Zwingli began that series on his first day as People’s Priest in Zurich, January 1, 1519, three years earlier. The text may be correct that no written record of his earlier sermons survives, but the series itself did not begin in 1522.

Evidence: Zwingli gave his first sermon in Zurich on January 1, 1519, and began preaching straight through the Gospel of Matthew (“Huldrych Zwingli,” Wikipedia). Encyclopædia Britannica likewise states that after his appointment he began a series of expositions of the New Testament (“Huldrych Zwingli”).

2. p. 45 — “participated in publicly eating cooked sausages”

Problem: Zwingli was present at the Lenten sausage meal of March 1522, but he did not eat the sausages. He afterward defended those who did, which the text correctly describes.

Evidence: Zwingli did not eat the sausages himself but defended the printer Froschauer, who served them, against charges of heresy (“Affair of the Sausages,” Wikipedia, citing Locher, Die Zwinglische Reformation).

3. p. 46 — “The monasteries, 350 of them, were dissolved”

Problem: The figure of 350 is the number the book gives for all the monasteries in the Diocese of Constance (p. 40). That diocese was the largest in the German lands and covered far more than Zurich. The Zurich council could dissolve only the religious houses in its own territory, so the number overstates the event.

Evidence: The book itself describes the Diocese of Constance as leading all German dioceses in size, with about 1,800 parishes and 350 monasteries, and Zurich as one part of it (p. 40).

Logical Fallacies

1. p. 44, n. 130 — “removing the speck from another’s eye”

Problem: Tu Quoque (Ad Hominem). The note answers Zwingli’s public denunciation of immoral priests and monks by pointing to Zwingli’s own conduct. Whether a criticism is true does not depend on the conduct of the person who makes it. The note turns attention from the clergy’s behavior to Zwingli’s character without assessing the criticism itself.

2. p. 46, n. 133 — “was living in fornication while he was articulating evangelicalism”

Problem: Ad Hominem. The note presents Zwingli’s private life as a reason to distrust the theology he was teaching. Whether Zwingli’s teaching was true or false does not depend on his personal conduct. The book itself describes the relationship as a secret union (p. 46), and historians describe it as a secret marriage in 1522 that was made public later.

Evidence: Zwingli and Anna Reinhart’s marriage was at first kept secret in 1522 (“Anna Zwingli,” Wikipedia, citing Potgieter, 2016).

3. p. 51 — “This is a highly suspect assertion”

Problem: Non Sequitur. The text rejects the view that Zwingli went to Kappel as a chaplain carrying a banner rather than weapons. Its only reason is that Zwingli had urged the war. Supporting a war does not show what a person carried or did on the battlefield, and the text cites no source on that question.

Cherry-Picking

1. p. 48, n. 140 — “Despite the fact that it is used this way by the Scriptures themselves!”

Problem: The note objects to Zwingli’s Thesis 27, which says Christians should call no one on earth “father,” and cites 2 Kings 2:12, Luke 1:73, and 16:24 to show that Scripture uses the title. It omits the passage the thesis plainly echoes, Jesus’ own instruction in Matthew 23:8–9. The texts it cites concern Elisha’s cry to Elijah and Abraham as an ancestor. Whatever one concludes about the title, the reader is not told that Zwingli was repeating Jesus’ words.

Evidence: Thesis 27 reads that all Christians are brothers of Christ and of one another and “ought not to call anyone father on earth” (Sixty-Seven Articles, trans. Peter Chapman). “But you are not to be called ‘Rabbi,’ for one is your teacher, the Christ, and all of you are brothers. Call no man on the earth ‘your father,’ for one is your Father, he who is in heaven” (Matt. 23:8–9, EOB).

Biased Language

1. p. 47 — “his newfangled Eucharistic service”

Problem: “Newfangled” is a dismissive word that mocks the service as a fad. It invites contempt rather than describing what the service contained, which the text describes accurately elsewhere on the page.

Neutral alternative: “his new order for the Lord’s Supper.”

2. p. 47, n. 135 — “Protestant theft on a grand scale”

Problem: “Theft” frames the civil confiscation of monastic property as common crime and extends the charge to Protestants generally. The note also assigns a single motive to all Protestants without evidence. The text is accurate that the Zurich authorities took over monastic lands and later used some of them for secular purposes, and it notes that the lands were first dedicated to charitable causes (p. 47).

Neutral alternative: “the confiscation of monastic property by the civil authorities.”

3. p. 50, n. 141 — “Zwinglianism is thoroughly gnostic”

Problem: Gnosticism was an ancient heresy that regarded matter as evil and taught salvation through secret knowledge. Applying the label to Zwingli’s view of the sacraments attaches a condemned heresy to a position that does not share those defining features. The effect is to discredit the view by association rather than to explain it.

Neutral alternative: “Zwingli denied that the sacraments convey grace through physical means.”

Misquoted or Unreliable Sources

1. p. 49 — “to fix a time for this is demonic”

Problem: The book’s version of Thesis 60 leaves out what Zwingli was condemning. The thesis objects to setting fixed periods of purgatory for sins and to lying for financial gain. Without that clause, Zwingli appears to condemn any fixed time of prayer for the dead, which changes the meaning of the thesis.

Evidence: Thesis 60 reads that seeking grace for the dead is not harmful, “but to set a fixed time for this (seven years for a mortal sin), and to lie for the sake of gain, is not human but diabolical” (Sixty-Seven Articles, trans. Peter Chapman).

Double Standard

1. p. 49 — “This was a complete novelty”

Problem: The text calls the Zurich council’s role in judging doctrine at the disputations a complete novelty typical of Protestant statism, and p. 52 adds that the arrangement had no precedent in Christian history. The book itself reports that, before the Reformation, Swiss civil governments already regulated church property, monastery funds, the behavior of clergy, and marriage laws (p. 41). It also does not acknowledge that Byzantine emperors acted in doctrinal matters. Emperor Justinian issued an edict condemning the Three Chapters before the Fifth Ecumenical Council, which the Orthodox Church recognizes, condemned them in 553. The roles are not identical: at Chalcedon, for example, imperial officials directed the proceedings but did not rule on doctrine.

Evidence: An edict condemning the Three Chapters was issued in Justinian’s name at the end of 543 or the beginning of 544, and the Second Council of Constantinople later condemned them (Bacchus, “Three Chapters,” 1912). At Chalcedon (451), imperial commissioners appointed by Emperor Marcian directed the order of business (Schaefer, “Council of Chalcedon,” 1908).

Other Misrepresentation

1. p. 48, n. 138 — “This is the great parenthesis presupposed by all the Protestant Reformers”

Problem: The note states that all the Reformers assumed the truth was absent or unclear from the death of the apostles until their own time. The Reformers did hold that the medieval church had fallen into serious errors, but they did not teach that the true Church or its truth had disappeared. The book itself reports that the Lutherans compiled patristic testimonies (p. 22, n. 79) and that Calvin read and quoted many Church Fathers (p. 76).

Evidence: Augsburg Confession, Article VII, opens: “One holy Church is to continue forever.”

Sources

“Affair of the Sausages.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affair_of_the_Sausages

“Anna Zwingli.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anna_Zwingli

Augsburg Confession (1530), Article VII (Of the Church). In The Book of Concord. https://thebookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession/article-vii/

Bacchus, F. J. “Three Chapters.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 14. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1912. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14707b.htm

The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament. Edited by Laurent A. Cleenewerck. Matthew 23:8–9.

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Huldrych Zwingli.” https://www.britannica.com/biography/Huldrych-Zwingli

“Huldrych Zwingli.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huldrych_Zwingli

Schaefer, Francis. “Council of Chalcedon.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 3. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03555a.htm

Zwingli, Ulrich. The Sixty-Seven Articles (1523). Translated by Peter Chapman. https://creedsandconfessions.org/sixty-seven-articles.html

Chapter 4: The Anabaptist Reformation and Its Triumph in America

pp. 53–68

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 54 — “By 1522, he was one of Luther’s most bitter opponents”

Problem: The chapter’s opening chronology is off by one to two years on two points. Thomas Müntzer’s public attacks on Luther were published in 1524, not by 1522. The text also dates the first signs of the peasants’ political radicalism to the spring of 1525, but the Peasants’ War began in 1524. The text is accurate that the uprising spread widely in the spring of 1525.

Evidence: Luther recommended Müntzer for a post at Zwickau in 1519, and Müntzer’s Sermon Before the Princes (July 1524) and Highly Provoked Vindication (late 1524) were his public attacks on Luther (“Thomas Müntzer,” Wikipedia). The war began in 1524 at Stühlingen, south of the Black Forest (“German Peasants’ War,” Wikipedia).

2. p. 55 — “Numerous invented and detailed schemes of eschatological drama”

Problem: The text places the “1000-year earthly millennium” among the novel, invented schemes that arose in Protestant circles, chiefly since the nineteenth century. Belief in an earthly thousand-year reign is not a modern invention. It was taught by second-century Church Fathers. The text is accurate that the detailed pre-, mid-, and post-tribulation rapture schemes are modern developments, and the early Fathers did not hold this view unanimously.

Evidence: Justin Martyr writes that he and other right-minded Christians are assured of “a resurrection of the dead, and a thousand years in Jerusalem,” while acknowledging that many true Christians think otherwise (Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 80, ANF vol. 1). Irenaeus describes the righteous reigning on the renewed earth after the resurrection (Against Heresies V.32, ANF vol. 1).

3. p. 56 — “Jan Mathijs served as the new ‘King David’ for six weeks”

Problem: Jan Matthys did not rule Münster as “King David.” He was killed on Easter Sunday 1534 while leading a small sortie out of the besieged city. It was his successor, John of Leiden (Jan Bockelson), who proclaimed himself the new King David and ruled until the city fell in June 1535.

Evidence: Matthys died on Easter Sunday 1534 after leading twelve followers out of the city. John of Leiden then took royal regalia and absolute power as successor of David, and the city fell on June 24, 1535 (“Münster rebellion,” Wikipedia).

4. p. 62 — “of which the largest number live in America”

Problem: The largest number of Mennonite and related Anabaptist church members do not live in America. Africa has led all continents in membership since the early 2000s. The worldwide total in 2018 was also about twice the “some one million” the text reports.

Evidence: In 2003 Mennonite World Conference reported that African members (451,959) had come to outnumber those of any other continent, including North America (451,180) (The Alabama Baptist, July 3, 2003). By 2018 worldwide membership had grown to 2,131,000, with 738,315 in Africa (Anabaptist World, “A growing church”).

Logical Fallacies

1. p. 62 — “the confession reproduces the language of the Council of Ferrara-Florence”

Problem: Non Sequitur. The text presents the Concept of Cologne as virtually the only Protestant confession not to embrace the filioque, and its evidence is that the confession reproduces the language of the Council of Ferrara-Florence. That council affirmed the filioque, so echoing its language cannot show that the doctrine was rejected. The phrase “through the Son” has older Eastern use, but the reason the text gives does not support its conclusion.

Evidence: At Florence the Greeks agreed on June 3, 1439, to recognize the procession of the Holy Spirit “from the Father and the Son as from one ‘principium’” (Van der Essen, “Council of Florence,” 1909).

2. p. 64, n. 171 — “There is no consistent age affirmed as appropriate for baptism”

Problem: Straw Man. The text describes the Baptist position as baptizing those mentally mature “enough” to decide, and the note faults Baptists for having no fixed age. Baptists do not make age or mental maturity the condition for baptism. The condition is a personal profession of faith, so the absence of a fixed age is not an inconsistency in their position.

Evidence: The Baptist Faith and Message (2000), Article VII, defines baptism as the immersion of a believer and as “an act of obedience symbolizing the believer’s faith.”

3. p. 67 — “It simply did not happen”

Problem: Argument from Silence. The text reasons that because the New Testament never records the baptism of an adult raised in a Christian home, such baptisms did not occur. The New Testament also never explicitly records the baptism of an infant, yet the text concludes that infants were baptized. The same kind of silence is treated as proof on one side and dismissed on the other. The New Testament narratives also cover only the first generation of the church, when few children of converts would have reached adulthood. See also: Misuse of Scripture.

Cherry-Picking

1. pp. 65, 67–68 — “a great measure of unanimity in church history and tradition”

Problem: The text claims a great measure of unanimity for infant baptism in church history (p. 65), but the section on its historical practice (pp. 67–68) cites no early sources. It omits well-known evidence that some Fathers advised delaying baptism and that several leading Fathers raised by Christian mothers were baptized as adults. The text is accurate that infant baptism is attested early. Cyprian’s Council of Carthage, for example, held that infants need not wait until the eighth day.

Evidence: Tertullian advises that “the delay of baptism is preferable; principally, however, in the case of little children” (On Baptism, ch. 18, ANF vol. 3). Gregory of Nazianzus advises baptizing children at once if in danger, but otherwise waiting “till the end of the third year” (Oration 40.28, NPNF2 vol. 7). Augustine records that his baptism was deferred although his mother had sought it (Confessions I.11). For early support of infant baptism, see Cyprian, Epistle 58 (ANF vol. 5).

2. p. 67 — “was not the practice of the first Christians”

Problem: The text claims that baptizing individuals one by one was not the practice of the first Christians and that household salvation was the usual pattern. It omits the individual baptisms the New Testament records alongside the household baptisms.

Evidence: Samaritan believers “were baptized, both men and women” (Acts 8:12, EOB). Philip baptized the Ethiopian official (Acts 8:38), and Saul “arose and was baptized” (Acts 9:18, EOB). See also: Misuse of Scripture.

Unsupported Assumptions

1. p. 61 — “the Anabaptist theological method in general is firmly a-historical”

Problem: The text asserts that the Anabaptists treated earlier generations’ work as irrelevant. Balthasar Hubmaier, whom the book calls the movement’s most able theologian (p. 57), compiled testimonies from earlier church teachers to support believers’ baptism. The text is accurate that Anabaptists did not treat tradition as an authority equal to Scripture.

Assumption: Rejecting tradition as a binding authority means disregarding the writings of earlier Christians altogether.

Evidence: Hubmaier’s Der uralten und gar neuen Lehrer Urteil (1526) is a collection of quotations from older and newer church teachers on baptism (“Hubmaier, Balthasar,” Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online).

2. p. 63 — “which is rooted in the New Testament”

Problem: The text asserts that the polity of diocese and bishop is rooted in the New Testament and uses this to fault Baptist congregational polity. No passage is cited. In the New Testament the words for “elder” and “overseer” (bishop) are used for the same leaders, appointed in the plural in each town or church. The text is accurate that bishops are clearly attested in the early second century, as it notes in discussing St. Ignatius (p. 44).

Assumption: The later office of a diocesan bishop over presbyters is found in the New Testament.

Evidence: Paul “called to himself the presbyters of the Church” of Ephesus and told them the Holy Spirit had made them “overseers” (Acts 20:17, 28, EOB). Titus is told to “appoint presbyters in every city,” and the next verses describe the same office as “the overseer” (Titus 1:5, 7, EOB).

Biased Language

1. p. 56, n. 154 — “the Protestant Princes could steal land at will from the papacy”

Problem: “Steal land at will” describes the princes’ confiscations as crime and generalizes the charge to Protestant princes as a group. It invites contempt rather than informing the reader. Recurs from Chapter 3.

Neutral alternative: “Protestant princes confiscated church lands, but the peasants’ demands were suppressed.”

2. p. 61 — “the rather naïve biblicism and disregard for traditional dogma”

Problem: “Naïve” and “disregard” dismiss the Anabaptists’ method as simple-minded and careless instead of describing it. The words lead the reader to discount their position before it is examined.

Neutral alternative: “the strict biblicism and rejection of tradition as an authority.”

Misuse of Scripture

1. pp. 66–67 — “leads to the undeniable conclusion”

Problem: The text cites household passages as proof that infants were baptized. None of the cited passages mentions infants. Two of them, Luke 19:9 and the blessing on Onesiphorus’ household, do not mention baptism at all, and the latter is miscited as 1 Timothy 1:16 rather than 2 Timothy 1:16. Several household passages, including one the text itself cites (John 4:53), state that the household members believed. The text is accurate that the New Testament records the baptism of whole households.

Context: “And he believed, along with his whole household” (John 4:53, EOB). “Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all those who were in his household”; afterward “he was filled with joy for believing in God, along with his entire household” (Acts 16:32, 34, EOB). “Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with his entire household” (Acts 18:8, EOB). “May the Lord grant mercy to the house of Onesiphorus” (2 Tim. 1:16, EOB).

2. p. 68 — “unless you are converted and become like children”

Problem: The text uses Matthew 18:3 to argue for infant baptism and against the Baptist position. In context, Jesus is teaching his disciples humility, not addressing baptism or the status of infants. The text also states that Baptists believe children must become like adults to be baptized and saved. Baptist teaching does not make baptism a condition of salvation, but treats it as an act of obedience by a believer.

Context: “Amen, I tell you that unless you change and become as little children, you will in no way enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. But whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven” (Matt. 18:3–4, EOB). The passage answers the disciples’ question, “Who then is greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven?” (18:1). On Baptist teaching, see Baptist Faith and Message (2000), Article VII.

Sources

The Alabama Baptist. “Africa leads in Mennonite membership.” July 3, 2003. https://thealabamabaptist.org/africa-leads-in-mennonite-membership/

Anabaptist World. “A growing church: a look at reported church members in 2018.” https://anabaptistworld.org/growing-church-look-reported-church-members-2018/

Augustine. Confessions, Book I, ch. 11. NPNF1 vol. 1. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/110101.htm

Baptist Faith and Message (2000), Article VII. Southern Baptist Convention. https://bfm.sbc.net/bfm2000/

Cyprian. Epistle 58 (To Fidus, on the Baptism of Infants). ANF vol. 5. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/050658.htm

The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament. Edited by Laurent A. Cleenewerck. Matthew 18:1, 3–4; John 4:53; Acts 8:12, 38; 9:18; 16:32, 34; 18:8; 20:17, 28; 2 Timothy 1:16; Titus 1:5, 7.

“German Peasants’ War.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_Peasants%27_War

Global Anabaptist Mennonite Encyclopedia Online. “Hubmaier, Balthasar (1480?–1528).” https://gameo.org/index.php?title=Hubmaier,_Balthasar_(1480%3F-1528)

Gregory of Nazianzus. Oration 40 (On Holy Baptism), section 28. NPNF2 vol. 7. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/310240.htm

Irenaeus. Against Heresies, Book V, ch. 32. ANF vol. 1. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103532.htm

Justin Martyr. Dialogue with Trypho, ch. 80. ANF vol. 1. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/01286.htm

“Münster rebellion.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnster_rebellion

Tertullian. On Baptism, ch. 18. Translated by S. Thelwall. ANF vol. 3. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0321.htm

“Thomas Müntzer.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_M%C3%BCntzer

Van der Essen, Léon. “Council of Florence.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 6. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06111a.htm

Chapter 5: The Life and Teachings of John Calvin

pp. 69–83

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 73 — “abolished Christmas day and made it a normal workday”

Problem: The text attributes the abolition of Christmas to the consistory and adds that Calvin’s hand was intimately involved in its decisions. The holy days were abolished by Geneva’s magistrates, and Calvin wrote that it was done without his knowledge or desire. The text is accurate that Christmas ceased to be a holiday in Geneva.

Evidence: In a letter to Johannes Haller, Calvin wrote that the abolition was “accomplished without my knowledge and without my desire” (quoted in Bruce Gordon, “The Grinch that Didn’t Steal Christmas: A Reformation Story,” ISM Review 3.1, 2016).

2. p. 79 — “including his immediate successor in Geneva, Theodore Beza, abandoned”

Problem: Theodore Beza did not abandon Calvin’s teaching on predestination. He developed it in an even stricter form, known as supralapsarianism, in which God’s decree of election and reprobation is considered logically prior to the decree to permit the Fall. The text is accurate that some later Reformed theologians moderated Calvin’s position.

Evidence: Beza is described as Calvin’s “alter ego” whose writings elucidate “a fundamental supralapsarian mode of thought,” and the Swiss delegates at Bern in 1588 judged his teaching orthodox (“Theodore Beza,” Wikipedia).

3. p. 80 — “argued that the Epistle of St. James should be removed from the canon”

Problem: Luther did not remove James from the canon. He questioned its standing, ranked it below the chief books of the New Testament, and placed it near the end of his translation with Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation, but he kept it in his Bible. The text also says Calvin “rails against” Luther on this point, but Calvin’s introduction to James simply accepts the letter without attacking anyone by name. The text is accurate that Luther judged James harshly and that Calvin accepted it.

Evidence: Luther’s 1522 German New Testament kept James, placing it with Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation as books that “have from ancient times had a different reputation” (“Luther’s canon,” Wikipedia, citing Das Newe Testament Deutzsch, 1522). Calvin writes that he is “inclined to receive it without controversy, because I see no just cause for rejecting it” (Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles, Argument to James).

4. p. 80 — “none of the major Reformed traditions could agree on the sacraments”

Problem: The major Reformed churches of Switzerland did reach a formal agreement on the sacraments in Calvin’s own lifetime. The text is accurate that disagreements remained with the Lutherans, and Bern did not accept the agreement.

Evidence: The Consensus Tigurinus, written by Calvin and Heinrich Bullinger in 1549, was accepted by the churches of Zurich, Geneva, St. Gallen, Schaffhausen, the Grisons, Neuchâtel, and eventually Basel (“Consensus Tigurinus,” Wikipedia).

5. p. 82 — “assumed by Luther and all traditional Christianity”

Problem: The ubiquity of Christ’s glorified body, which the book defines as its omnipresence (n. 204), was not held by all traditional Christianity. It was a distinctively Lutheran teaching developed in the sixteenth century, and the Roman Catholic Church regarded it as contrary to its teaching. The text is accurate that Calvin rejected it.

Evidence: The doctrine was formulated by the Lutheran Johannes Brenz at the synod of Stuttgart in 1559, developing Luther’s view of the communication of attributes, and was considered contrary to Catholic teaching (“Ubiquitarianism,” Wikipedia).

Logical Fallacies

1. pp. 76–77 — “too submissive to worldly powers”

Problem: Straw Man and Tu Quoque. In the quoted passage, Calvin says certain Fathers made concessions on free will out of a desire to please “the wise of the world,” meaning the philosophers. The text restates this as a charge that the Fathers were “too submissive to worldly powers.” It then answers with a list of Calvin’s personal failings: his marriage, his salary, his temper, and his comfortable death. Calvin’s actual claim concerns intellectual accommodation, and his personal conduct does not show whether that claim is true or false.

Biased Language

1. p. 76 — “Here is Calvin in all his arrogance and theological overconfidence”

Problem: The sentence passes judgment on Calvin’s character immediately after quoting him, instead of addressing what he argued. It invites the reader to dismiss the quotation as a display of arrogance before it is evaluated.

Neutral alternative: “Here Calvin criticizes some of the Fathers’ teaching on free will.”

2. p. 81 — “leading in this instance to very ugly Reformed church buildings”

Problem: “Very ugly” states a matter of taste as fact. It leads the reader to look down on Reformed worship rather than describing the plainness of its buildings.

Neutral alternative: “leading to plain and unadorned Reformed church buildings.”

Other Misrepresentation

1. p. 72, n. 188 — “This radical and unsubstantiated presupposition”

Problem: The note treats a single quotation as Calvin’s general view that each church may set up its own order because the Lord gave no directions. Calvin taught that the basic offices of the church were instituted by Christ, as the opening of his own Ecclesiastical Ordinances states. The freedom he allowed concerned outward arrangements, not the church’s fundamental structure.

Evidence: The Ecclesiastical Ordinances of 1541 begin: “First there are four orders of offices instituted by our Saviour for the government of his Church” (University of Oregon text of the Ordinances).

2. p. 77 — “imputing moral depravity where none objectively existed”

Problem: The text says Calvin imputed moral depravity to the Fathers to justify their “universal disagreement with him.” The quotation the text itself gives (p. 76) calls those Fathers “these good persons” and attributes their view to a desire not to offend philosophers, not to depravity. The book also states on p. 76 that Calvin admired Chrysostom’s commentaries and was a devotee of Augustine, so the Fathers did not universally disagree with him.

Evidence: The text’s own quotation of Calvin, p. 76, and its description of Calvin’s regard for Chrysostom, Augustine, Cyprian, and Athanasius on the same page. On predestination in particular, Augustine describes one of the two cities as predestined “to suffer eternal punishment with the devil” (City of God XV.1, NPNF1 vol. 2), so the Fathers were not unanimous against Calvin on this point.

3. p. 78 — “apart from any merit or fault of their own”

Problem: The text states that, in Calvin’s teaching, God chose those who would be damned apart from any fault of their own. Calvin taught that election is apart from merit, but he explicitly taught that the condemned perish through their own sin. The text is accurate that Calvin taught double predestination, which grounds reprobation in God’s will.

Evidence: Calvin writes that although the reprobate fall as God’s providence ordains, “the cause and matter of it is in themselves” (Institutes III.23.8). He also argues that if all are taken from a corrupt mass, “it is not strange that all are subject to condemnation” (Institutes III.23.3).

4. pp. 79–80 — “How sola scriptura justifies ordination without a laying on of hands”

Problem: The text faults Calvin’s principle of sola scriptura for ordination without the laying on of hands. The book itself reports that Calvin required the laying on of hands and that the Genevans rejected it (pp. 74, 79–80). Calvin taught that the apostles’ practice of laying on hands should be followed. The practice the text criticizes was the city’s decision, not Calvin’s teaching. The text is accurate that Calvin himself does not appear to have been ordained.

Evidence: In Institutes IV.3.16, Calvin writes that the apostles used no other ceremony than the laying on of hands, treats their constant practice as a rule for the church, and calls the rite useful provided it is not superstitiously abused.

5. p. 82 — “Calvin’s rejection of the traditional notions of real union with Christ and theosis”

Problem: The text states that Calvin rejected real union with Christ and theosis, the Orthodox teaching that believers come to share in the divine life. On p. 79 the book itself says that Calvin “greatly emphasized” the believer’s union with Christ. Calvin also described the goal of the Gospel in terms of deification, while denying any mixing of the divine essence with ours. Scholars debate how close his view is to the Orthodox doctrine, but “rejection” misstates it.

Evidence: Commenting on 2 Peter 1:4, Calvin writes that “the end of the gospel is, to render us eventually conformable to God, and, if we may so speak, to deify us,” explaining that “nature” here means quality, not essence (Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles, 2 Pet. 1:4).

6. p. 82 — “Calvin denied the reality of Christ’s descent into Hell”

Problem: Calvin did not deny the article of the Creed. He affirmed it as important to redemption, rejected the view that it merely repeats the burial, and interpreted it as Christ’s enduring the torments of a condemned soul. One may disagree with his interpretation, but the text presents a different reading as a denial and calls it an attack on the Gospel.

Evidence: Calvin states that the descent was “of no little importance to the accomplishment of redemption” and declines to treat it as a repetition of the burial clause (Institutes II.16.8). He explains that Christ “bore in his soul the tortures of condemned and ruined man” (Institutes II.16.10).

Sources

Augustine. City of God, Book XV, ch. 1. NPNF1 vol. 2. https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/120115.htm

Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles. Translated by John Owen. Argument to James: https://sacred-texts.com/chr/calvin/cc45/cc45018.htm; 2 Peter 1:4: https://ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom45.vii.ii.i.html

Calvin, John. Ecclesiastical Ordinances (1541). https://pages.uoregon.edu/sshoemak/323/texts/Calvin%20-%20Ecclesiastical%20Ordinances.htm

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Translated by Henry Beveridge. II.16.8–10: https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.iv.xvii.html; III.23.3, 8: https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.v.xxiv.html; IV.3.16: https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.vi.iv.html

“Consensus Tigurinus.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consensus_Tigurinus

Gordon, Bruce. “The Grinch that Didn’t Steal Christmas: A Reformation Story.” ISM Review 3.1 (Fall 2016). Yale Institute of Sacred Music. https://www.ismreview.yale.edu/volume-3-1-fall-2016/the-grinch-that-didnt-steal-christmas-a-reformation-story

“Luther’s canon.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luther%27s_canon

“Theodore Beza.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Beza

“Ubiquitarianism.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubiquitarianism

Chapter 6: Calvinism and Orthodoxy

pp. 85–96

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 85, n. 208 — “This was Calvin’s response to the Latin accusation”

Problem: The note presents the slogan ecclesia reformata et semper reformanda as Calvin’s own response to his critics. The note gives no source for this attribution, and the slogan is generally associated instead with seventeenth-century Dutch Reformed writers and was popularized in the twentieth century. The note’s charge that Calvin was a case of “do as I say, not as I do” rests on this attribution. The text is accurate that the slogan is widely used in Reformed churches today.

Evidence: The idea behind the variant phrase appears in Jodocus van Lodenstein’s Beschouwinge van Zion (Amsterdam, 1674–1678), and the phrase was popularized by Karl Barth in the twentieth century (“Ecclesia semper reformanda est,” Wikipedia, citing Michael Bush, “Calvin and the Reformanda Sayings,” 2008).

2. p. 86 — “the first Synod of the French Protestants in 1539”

Problem: The first national synod of the French Reformed churches was held in 1559, not 1539. The text is accurate that the French churches were organized on Calvin’s principles.

Evidence: “The first national synod of the Reformed Churches was held in 1559” (“Reformed Church of France,” Wikipedia).

3. p. 88 — “essentially ended episcopacy in Scotland altogether”

Problem: The Scottish Reformation did not end episcopacy for good. Bishops were restored under James VI, abolished again in 1638, and restored once more after 1660. Presbyterian government was settled only in 1690. The text is accurate that Scotland established presbyteries on a national scale and remains the mother country of Presbyterianism.

Evidence: James VI gradually restored bishops; the General Assembly of 1638 abolished them; episcopacy returned after the Restoration; and the settlement of 1690 guaranteed Presbyterian government (“Church of Scotland,” Wikipedia).

4. p. 89 — “Most of the churches in the early colonial times were established upon a Presbyterian model”

Problem: The Puritan churches of colonial New England were organized on a Congregational model, not a Presbyterian one. Elsewhere the Anglican Church was established in several colonies. The book itself notes that colonial Congregational churches were usually led by Puritan pastors (p. 63, n. 168). The text is accurate that New England Puritanism was Calvinist in doctrine.

Evidence: The Cambridge Platform (1648), which served as the church constitution of Massachusetts until 1780, set out a Congregational polity in which each local church governs itself (“Cambridge Platform,” Wikipedia).

5. p. 96 — “the person of Lucaris himself was not referenced”

Problem: The text states that Lucaris himself was not referenced by Patriarch Dositheos and the Confession, and it is uncertain why. The Acts of the 1672 Synod of Jerusalem, held under Dositheos, discuss Lucaris at length. They argue that he did not write the Confession issued under his name, defend him by quoting his own words and deeds, and add that even if he had written it, it would remain only the private opinion of a heretic. This answers the question the text leaves open. The text is accurate that the eighteen decrees refute the Confession point by point.

Evidence: The Synod’s acts deny that the Eastern Church ever held the opinions attributed to Lucaris and make “an elaborate attempt” to prove that he did not write the Confession (“Synod of Jerusalem (1672),” Wikipedia, summarizing J. N. W. B. Robertson, trans., The Acts and Decrees of the Synod of Jerusalem, 1899).

Logical Fallacies

1. p. 90 — “It is ironic that the study of the same Epistle by different Reformers”

Problem: Non Sequitur. The text again treats disagreement among interpreters of Romans as evidence against the clarity of Scripture. Disagreement does not by itself show that a text is unclear. The same chapter shows that reading Scripture together with tradition did not prevent serious disputes either: the Orthodox Church needed at least six councils between 1638 and 1691 to address the confession issued under its own Patriarch’s name (pp. 93–94). The Reformed confessions also never claimed that every part of Scripture is equally clear, only that what is necessary for salvation is. Recurs from Chapter 1.

Evidence: Westminster Confession of Faith 1.7: “All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all,” but “those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation, are so clearly propounded” that the unlearned may understand them. The book’s own definition of perspicuity is limited to “essential matters” (p. 16, n. 63).

Biased Language

1. p. 96 — “as Luther in his madness claimed”

Problem: “In his madness” is the author’s own wording, not the Confession’s, which speaks of “the followers of Luther.” The phrase attacks Luther’s state of mind instead of describing his view. It also attributes impanation to Luther himself, although the book’s own note states that the Lutheran Formula of Concord explicitly rejects impanation (p. 96, n. 226).

Neutral alternative: “nor, as the Confession says some of Luther’s followers held, by impanation.”

Evidence: The Confession of Dositheos, Decree XVII, as printed in the book’s own Appendix II (p. 208), rejects impanation “as the followers of Luther most ignorantly and wretchedly suppose.” See also: Other Misrepresentation.

Double Standard

1. p. 88 — “the divisions that always follow the embrace of Protestantism”

Problem: The text lists several Presbyterian bodies in Scotland as proof that division always follows Protestantism. It does not acknowledge that Orthodox churches have also divided. The book itself notes that the Orthodox in America remain divided along ethnic lines, holding up the Lutherans as an example to them (p. 37, n. 114). The word “always” also generalizes from a single country, and it omits that the major Scottish divisions arose largely from disputes over the state’s control of church appointments and that most of them were later healed.

Evidence: The Russian Orthodox Church divided in the seventeenth century when the Old Believers rejected the liturgical reforms of Patriarch Nikon (Encyclopædia Britannica, “Old Believer”). The book’s own note on Orthodox ethnic divisions in America appears at p. 37, n. 114. In Scotland, the secession of 1733 and the Disruption of 1843 followed from the Patronage Act of 1711, which let landowners appoint ministers; reunions followed in 1900 and 1929 (“Church of Scotland,” Wikipedia). See also: Logical Fallacies.

Sources

“Cambridge Platform.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Platform

“Church of Scotland.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Scotland

“Ecclesia semper reformanda est.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecclesia_semper_reformanda_est

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Old Believer.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/Old-Believers

“Reformed Church of France.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformed_Church_of_France

“Synod of Jerusalem (1672).” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Jerusalem_(1672)

Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), 1.7. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/anonymous/westminster3.i.i.html

Chapter 7: The Church of England

pp. 97–114

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 101 — “almost all of them were martyred for their Protestant faith”

Problem: The text says almost all of the Cambridge Protestant leaders were martyred and then lists them. Several on its own list were not martyred. Matthew Parker survived Mary’s reign and died as Archbishop of Canterbury in 1575. Nicholas Heath remained a Catholic: he became Mary’s Catholic Archbishop of York and died in retirement in 1578. Edward Foxe, Bishop of Hereford, died in 1538 and was not executed. The text is accurate that Cranmer, Latimer, Ridley, and Barnes were executed.

Evidence: Parker died at Lambeth on May 17, 1575 (“Matthew Parker,” Wikipedia). Heath was the last Catholic Archbishop of York, deprived in 1559 for refusing Elizabeth’s settlement, and died at Chobham in 1578 (“Nicholas Heath,” Wikipedia). Foxe died on May 8, 1538, and was buried in London (“Edward Foxe,” Wikipedia).

2. p. 101 — “without the words ‘church’ or ‘priest’”

Problem: Tyndale’s New Testament did use the words “priest” and “church.” He rendered the Greek hiereus, the word for a sacrificing priest, as “priest,” while translating presbyteros as “elder,” and he used “churches” for pagan temples in Acts 19:37. The text is accurate that Tyndale used “elder” and “congregation” where the traditional English versions had “priest” and “church.”

Evidence: Tyndale’s 1534 New Testament renders Matthew 8:4 as “go and shewe thy selfe to the preste” (Matt. 8:4), Acts 19:14 as “chefe of the prestes,” and Acts 19:37 as “robbers of churches” (Tyndale Bible, 1534).

3. p. 102 — “Cranmer convinced Henry VIII to put this Bible in all English churches”

Problem: The Bible ordered placed in English churches was the Great Bible of 1539, prepared by Myles Coverdale under commission from Thomas Cromwell, not the Matthew Bible. The text also says Tyndale placed Luther’s theology in the Matthew Bible, but that Bible was compiled by John Rogers and published in 1537, after Tyndale’s execution in October 1536. It used Tyndale’s earlier translations. The text is accurate that the Matthew Bible was licensed by the king and drew heavily on Tyndale’s work.

Evidence: The Matthew Bible was compiled by John Rogers under the name “Thomas Matthew” and published in 1537; Tyndale was executed on October 6, 1536 (“Matthew Bible,” Wikipedia). Cromwell directed the clergy to provide “one book of the Bible of the largest volume in English” for their churches, and the Great Bible, prepared by Coverdale, was produced for that purpose; Cranmer wrote the preface to its second edition (1540) (“Great Bible,” Wikipedia).

4. p. 103 — “professor at Cambridge until his death in 1549”

Problem: Martin Bucer died in 1551, not 1549. The book itself gives the correct year elsewhere (pp. 8–9, n. 33).

Evidence: Bucer died in Cambridge on February 28, 1551 (“Martin Bucer,” Wikipedia).

5. p. 104 — “She attempted to restore monastic lands, and alienated the nobility”

Problem: Mary’s reconciliation with Rome left the former monastic lands with their lay owners. This guarantee was a major concession that made the reunion possible. The text is accurate that the landholders’ interest in these properties was a serious concern during her reign.

Evidence: The confiscated monastic lands “were not returned to the church but remained in the hands of their influential new owners,” a concession by Mary and Pope Julius III (“Mary I of England,” Wikipedia).

6. p. 104 — “Based upon her father’s invention that the sovereign was head of the Church”

Problem: Mary did not act on the claim that the sovereign was head of the Church. She rejected that claim. She stopped using the title of Supreme Head, and under her the English church was returned to the jurisdiction of Rome.

Evidence: The title of Supreme Head was “repugnant to Mary’s Catholicism, and she omitted it after Christmas 1553”; Parliament then repealed Henry’s religious laws and returned the English church to Roman jurisdiction (“Mary I of England,” Wikipedia).

7. p. 105 — “Most were exiled for the sin of breaking their monastic vows”

Problem: The Marian exiles were not, for the most part, banished, and they were not mostly former monks. They were Protestants who fled to the Continent during Mary’s reign. The known exiles were chiefly gentry, clergy, and theological students, together with merchants and artisans. The text is accurate that several hundred English Protestants went abroad and that married clergy were separated from their wives.

Evidence: Of about 500 known exiles, 166 were gentry, 67 clergy, 119 theological students, and 40 merchants, with smaller numbers of artisans, printers, and others; the exiles are described as Protestants who “fled to continental Europe” during the reign of Mary and Philip (“Marian exiles,” Wikipedia).

8. p. 105 — “together with altars and the crucifix”

Problem: The Elizabethan settlement did not retain altars. Under the Act of Uniformity of 1559, the altar was replaced by a communion table, one of the most visible differences from Catholic churches. The text is accurate that traditional vestments were retained and that Elizabeth kept candles and a crucifix in her own chapel.

Evidence: The 1559 Act of Uniformity replaced the altar with a communion table, while Elizabeth was “happy enough to have such quintessential Catholic elements as candles and a crucifix in her own private chapel” (World History Encyclopedia, “The Elizabethan Religious Settlement”).

9. p. 106 — “Bishop Richard Hooker”

Problem: Richard Hooker was never a bishop. He was a priest whose posts included Master of the Temple in London and several parish livings. The text is accurate that he was the leading theologian of the Elizabethan church.

Evidence: Hooker was ordained a priest in 1579 and served as Master of the Temple (1585), subdean of Salisbury, and rector of Bishopsbourne (“Richard Hooker,” Wikipedia).

10. p. 110 — “In the 17th century, the Non-Juror bishops”

Problem: The text dates the Non-Jurors’ dialogue with the Orthodox to the seventeenth century and says it reached substantial theological agreement. The book’s own note dates the negotiations to 1716–1725, in the eighteenth century, and says they “came to nothing” (p. 110, n. 254). The text is accurate that the Non-Jurors did not accept the Seventh Council’s teaching on icons.

Evidence: The book’s own footnote, p. 110, n. 254.

11. p. 113 — “Neither the Roman Catholic nor Orthodox Churches have ever officially recognized”

Problem: Several Orthodox churches did officially recognize Anglican orders in the twentieth century, though with conditions. The text is accurate that the Roman Catholic Church has not recognized them and that these Orthodox recognitions did not lead to intercommunion or represent the position of every Orthodox church.

Evidence: In 1922 the Synod of Constantinople under Patriarch Meletios IV conditionally declared Anglican orders valid (“Meletius Metaxakis,” Wikipedia). The Patriarchate of Jerusalem (1923), the Church of Cyprus (1923), and the Patriarchate of Alexandria (1930) issued similar statements (texts compiled in “Official Eastern Orthodox Statements on Anglican Orders”).

Logical Fallacies

1. pp. 98–99, n. 233 — “a complete rejection of traditional Church hierarchy and apostolic succession”

Problem: Hasty Generalization. From a single statement by Cranmer, the note concludes that the Anglican tradition completely rejects traditional hierarchy and apostolic succession. One statement does not establish the position of a whole church. The Ordinal that Cranmer himself largely prepared kept the threefold ministry of bishops, priests, and deacons and affirmed that it dated from the apostles’ time.

Evidence: The preface to the Ordinal begins, “It is evident unto all men diligently reading holy Scripture and ancient Authors, that from the Apostles’ time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ’s Church; Bishops, Priests, and Deacons” (Book of Common Prayer, 1662, Ordinal). The 1550 Ordinal containing this preface was largely prepared by Cranmer (“Edwardine Ordinals,” Wikipedia).

2. p. 106, n. 248 — “In Hooker we see how inauthentic the Anglican affirmation”

Problem: Hasty Generalization. The note judges the Church of England’s official position on apostolic succession by the private opinion of one theologian. Hooker’s view of continental ministers did not change the Church’s formal rule, which required episcopal ordination for ministry in the Church of England.

Evidence: The preface to the 1662 Ordinal states that “no man shall be accounted or taken to be a lawful Bishop, Priest, or Deacon, in the Church of England” unless admitted by its form or having “had formerly Episcopal Consecration or Ordination” (Book of Common Prayer, 1662, Ordinal).

3. p. 113 — “to be a member of the Episcopal Church USA today means your faith is secularist”

Problem: Hasty Generalization. The text concludes that every member of the Episcopal Church holds a secularist faith and endorses the denomination’s positions, based on the decisions of its leadership and a few congregations. Membership in a denomination does not show that each member holds all of its official positions. The book’s own account of a lifelong Episcopalian who protested her church’s direction (p. 114) shows that members differed from their leaders.

Cherry-Picking

1. p. 99 — “in direct contradiction to scriptural injunction and canon law”

Problem: The text presents the papal dispensation for Henry’s marriage to his brother’s widow as directly contrary to Scripture. It cites the prohibition but omits the law of levirate marriage, which commands a man to marry his dead brother’s childless widow. Catherine’s first husband, Arthur, had died without children. Both passages were central to the debate over Henry’s marriage, so the question was not as one-sided as the text presents it.

Evidence: “You shall not uncover the nakedness of your brother’s wife” (Lev. 18:16, ESV). “If brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and has no son … Her husband’s brother shall go in to her and take her as his wife” (Deut. 25:5, ESV). The book itself refers to levirate law elsewhere (p. 25).

2. p. 112 — “St. Raphael’s judgment is that of Holy Orthodoxy”

Problem: The text presents St. Raphael’s 1912 judgment as the unchanged Orthodox position to the present day. It omits the later official Anglican–Orthodox dialogue, in which the Anglicans agreed with the Orthodox on one of the specific objections Raphael raised, the filioque. The text is accurate that significant differences remain and that no intercommunion has resulted.

Evidence: The 1976 Moscow Agreed Statement of the Anglican–Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Commission stated that “the Filioque clause should not be included in this Creed,” and the 1978 Lambeth Conference asked Anglican churches to consider omitting it (quoted in “The Filioque and Its Current Status,” North American Anglican).

Unsupported Assumptions

1. p. 102, n. 238 — “Cranmer was quite capable of trickery”

Problem: The note charges Cranmer with trickery, but the only support it offers is an account of Henry VIII persuading Parliament to restrict Bible reading to the upper classes. That account describes an action of Henry and Parliament and says nothing about any deception by Cranmer.

Assumption: Cranmer used deception to place the English Bible in the churches.

Biased Language

1. p. 98 — “the immoral wishes of a corrupt and vile king”

Problem: “Corrupt and vile” condemns Henry’s character instead of describing his actions, which the text describes elsewhere. The words invite contempt rather than informing the reader.

Neutral alternative: “Henry VIII’s desire to annul his marriage.”

2. p. 102 — “stealing all their treasure”

Problem: “Stealing” frames the Crown’s confiscation of monastic property as common theft. Recurs from Chapter 3.

Neutral alternative: “confiscating their property.”

3. p. 103, n. 244 — “He was a true puppet”

Problem: The note calls Cranmer “a true puppet,” says he “showed little conscience,” and concludes that for him “the ends often justified the means.” These are judgments of his character rather than descriptions of his actions, which the note also reports.

Neutral alternative: “At the king’s request, Cranmer declared these marriages null.”

4. p. 112 — “wandered so feverishly and fervently away from traditional Christianity”

Problem: “Feverishly and fervently” portrays doctrinal change as frenzy rather than describing what changed. The specific changes are listed on the following page.

Neutral alternative: “has departed further from traditional Christian teaching.”

5. p. 112 — “has become spiritually vacuous”

Problem: “Spiritually vacuous” pronounces an entire church empty of spiritual life. The evidence offered concerns membership and attendance, which do not measure the spiritual condition of those who remain.

Neutral alternative: “has seen a steep decline in membership and attendance.”

6. p. 113 — “has been in an out of control spiral ever since”

Problem: “Out of control spiral” describes a series of decisions by church bodies as a chaotic collapse. The decisions themselves are listed and can be evaluated without the image.

Neutral alternative: “its teaching on marriage and sexuality has continued to change since then.”

7. p. 113, n. 260 — “the secularized and lifeless shell of Christianity”

Problem: “Lifeless shell” dismisses the faith of an entire denomination with an image of death rather than identifying the doctrines in dispute.

Neutral alternative: “the positions of the Episcopal Church’s leadership.”

8. p. 113, n. 262 — “A rather unaccomplished homosexual San Francisco Supervisor”

Problem: The note belittles a public official as “unaccomplished” and identifies him by his sexuality in a way meant to discredit. This is a personal judgment rather than information.

Neutral alternative: “Harvey Milk, a San Francisco supervisor killed in 1978.”

9. p. 114 — “do not endorse the perversions of faith and practice”

Problem: “Perversions” labels the changes in Episcopal and English teaching as corruptions rather than describing them.

Neutral alternative: “do not accept the changes in teaching and practice.”

10. p. 114 — “the reckless abandonment of the traditional Christian faith”

Problem: “Reckless abandonment” and “zealous Episcopal endorsement of immorality” attribute heedlessness and zeal for wrongdoing to a church body instead of stating the decisions that led to the withdrawal.

Neutral alternative: “In response to the Episcopal Church’s changes in teaching on marriage and sexuality.”

Misquoted or Unreliable Sources

1. p. 111 — “a foul thing, vainly invented”

Problem: The quoted statement by St. Raphael gives the words of Article XXII as calling these teachings “a foul thing.” The Article says “a fond thing,” meaning a foolish one. The book prints the altered wording as the Article’s own words here and again in Appendix IV (p. 231) without correction. Whether the error began with Raphael or with the book, it makes the Article sound more hostile than it is.

Evidence: Article XXII states that the Romish doctrine concerning purgatory, pardons, images, relics, “and also invocation of Saints, is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of Scripture” (Articles of Religion, Book of Common Prayer, 1662).

Double Standard

1. p. 108 — “Here we see an expression of the Erastian nature of the Church of England”

Problem: The text treats Article 21’s statement that general councils are gathered by the will of princes as evidence of Anglican statism. The ecumenical councils the Orthodox Church accepts were themselves summoned by emperors. The text does not acknowledge this parallel.

Evidence: The Catholic Encyclopedia states that the convocation of the first eight general councils “was regularly issued by the Christian emperors.” Constantine summoned Nicaea (325), Theodosius II and Valentinian III convened Ephesus (431), and Marcian summoned Chalcedon (451) (“General Councils,” 1908).

Other Misrepresentation

1. p. 101, n. 237 — “Conveniently, but not honestly”

Problem: The note states that the NIV translates every reference to apostolic tradition as “teaching” and reserves “tradition” for man-made tradition, and it accuses the translators of dishonesty. The current NIV renders apostolic tradition as “traditions” in 1 Corinthians 11:2 and gives “traditions” as a footnote reading in other passages. The note is accurate that the NIV uses “teaching” in some of these passages.

Evidence: “I praise you for remembering me in everything and for holding to the traditions just as I passed them on to you” (1 Cor. 11:2, NIV). At 2 Thessalonians 2:15 and 3:6, the NIV text reads “teachings” and “teaching,” with footnotes giving “traditions” and “tradition.”

2. p. 104 — “Foxe skips to the Protestants”

Problem: The text says that after a few early martyrs, Foxe’s Book of Martyrs skips directly to the sixteenth century, implying a gap of more than a thousand years. Foxe’s work covers English martyrs from the fourteenth century onward, including the period before the Reformation.

Evidence: Encyclopædia Britannica describes the work as focusing primarily on English martyrs “from the 14th century up to the reign of Queen Mary I” (“The Book of Martyrs”).

3. p. 112 — “Seventy percent of English children are born outside of wedlock”

Problem: The figure is substantially overstated and no source is given. The official figure is a little under half. The same page states that only about one million people self-identify as members of the Church of England, while surveys show that several million do; the figure appears to reflect church attendance rather than self-identification. The text uses it as evidence of a moral crisis, so the error affects the argument.

Evidence: In 2017, 48.1 percent of live births in England and Wales occurred outside marriage or civil partnership (Office for National Statistics, Births in England and Wales: 2017). In the 2017 British Social Attitudes survey, 14 percent of British adults described themselves as belonging to the Church of England (Church Times, September 14, 2018).

Sources

Bishop Chandler Holder Jones. “Official Eastern Orthodox Statements on Anglican Orders.” March 28, 2026. https://bishopchandlerholderjones.substack.com/p/official-eastern-orthodox-statements

Book of Common Prayer (1662). Articles of Religion, Article XXII. http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1662/articles.pdf

Book of Common Prayer (1662). The Form and Manner of Making, Ordaining, and Consecrating of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, Preface. https://www.andrews.edu/~toews/classes/sources/modern/Thirty%20Nine%20Articles/ordinal/index.html

Catholic Encyclopedia. “General Councils.” Vol. 4. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1908. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04423f.htm

Church Times. “British Social Attitudes finds C of E respondents halved in 15 years.” September 14, 2018. https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2018/14-september/news/uk/british-social-attitudes-finds-c-of-e-respondents-halved-in-15-years

“Edward Foxe.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Foxe

“Edwardine Ordinals.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwardine_Ordinals

Encyclopædia Britannica. “The Book of Martyrs.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Book-of-Martyrs

The English Standard Version Bible. Leviticus 18:16; Deuteronomy 25:5. Wheaton, IL: Crossway.

“Great Bible.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Bible

“Marian exiles.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marian_exiles

“Martin Bucer.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Bucer

“Mary I of England.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_I_of_England

“Matthew Bible.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Bible

“Matthew Parker.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Parker

“Meletius Metaxakis.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meletius_Metaxakis

New International Version. 1 Corinthians 11:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:15; 3:6. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians%2011%3A2%3B%202%20Thessalonians%202%3A15%3B%202%20Thessalonians%203%3A6&version=NIV

“Nicholas Heath.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholas_Heath

North American Anglican. “The Filioque and Its Current Status [Commentary on Browne: Article V].” https://northamanglican.com/the-filioque-and-its-current-status-commentary-on-browne-article-v/

Office for National Statistics. Births in England and Wales: 2017. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/birthsummarytablesenglandandwales/2017

“Richard Hooker.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Hooker

Tyndale, William. New Testament (1534), Matthew 8 and Acts 19. https://textusreceptus.thekingsbible.com/Tyndale/40/8; https://textusreceptus.thekingsbible.com/Tyndale/44/19

World History Encyclopedia. “The Elizabethan Religious Settlement.” https://www.worldhistory.org/article/1565/the-elizabethan-religious-settlement/

Chapter 8: The Catholic Counter-Reformation

pp. 115–131

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 121 — “was elected Pope on Emperor Charles V’s wishes”

Problem: Paul IV was elected against the wishes of Charles V, not because of them. He was strongly anti-Habsburg, and his reign led to war between the Papal States and Spain. The text is accurate that he headed the Inquisition, refused to reconvene the Council of Trent, and oversaw the creation of the Index of Forbidden Books.

Evidence: Encyclopædia Britannica states that at Carafa’s election “even the veto of the Holy Roman emperor Charles V was ignored” (“Paul IV”). Carafa was elected “in the face of opposition from Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor”; his anti-Spanish policy led Philip II to invade the Papal States in 1556 (“Pope Paul IV,” Wikipedia).

2. p. 130 — “by some 95%”

Problem: The text states that the number of Roman Catholic monks, nuns, and members of religious orders in the United States has fallen by about 95 percent, without a source. The decline has been large, but well short of that figure. Religious sisters, by far the largest group, declined by about 72 percent between 1965 and 2014.

Evidence: The number of U.S. Catholic sisters fell “from roughly 180,000 in 1965 to about 50,000 in 2014” (Pew Research Center, citing the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate, Georgetown University, 2014).

3. p. 130 — “were educating some 6 million children before Vatican II”

Problem: The text states, without a source, that Catholic parochial schools educated about six million children before Vatican II and now educate about 25 percent of that number. Both figures overstate the decline. Enrollment peaked at a little over five million, and recent enrollment is about a third of that peak. The text is accurate that enrollment has fallen sharply.

Evidence: Catholic school enrollment peaked in the early 1960s at “more than 5.2 million students”; in 2014, 1.8 million students were enrolled (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Catholic Schools Fact Sheet”).

Biased Language

1. p. 115 — “as an answer to the Protestant aggression”

Problem: “Aggression” casts the Reformation as an attack rather than a religious movement, inviting the reader to see Protestants as aggressors before their claims are examined.

Neutral alternative: “as a response to the Protestant Reformation.”

2. p. 121 — “Paul IV was apparently something of a paranoid fanatic”

Problem: “Paranoid fanatic” is a psychological label applied to a historical figure, and the text gives no source for it. The facts that follow, his hostility to Protestants and his persecution of the Jews of Rome, can be stated directly.

Neutral alternative: “Paul IV was severe and suspicious toward those he considered threats to the Church.”

3. p. 129 — “banjos and guitars and architectural monstrosities”

Problem: The passage describes modern Catholic worship as “radically Protestantized, degraded,” and its buildings as “monstrosities.” These words express contempt and present matters of taste as fact, rather than describing the specific liturgical changes after Vatican II.

Neutral alternative: “Traditional chant and church architecture have often been replaced by contemporary music and modern building styles.”

4. p. 130, n. 286 — “fought valiantly against the legalization of same-sex marriage”

Problem: The note praises one side of a public controversy as “valiant” and describes its critics’ actions as “persecution.” Compared with the dismissive description of a San Francisco supervisor in the previous chapter (p. 113, n. 262), the wording assigns praise and blame by the side taken rather than by the facts.

Neutral alternative: “Cardinal Levada opposed the legalization of same-sex marriage and was criticized by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.” See also: Chapter 7, Biased Language.

Double Standard

1. p. 128 — “not ‘Take, parade’ or ‘Take, adore’”

Problem: The text argues that because Christ said “Take, eat,” carrying the consecrated Eucharist in procession and venerating it outside of Communion is a Latin abuse. The Orthodox Church itself carries the already consecrated Gifts in procession at the Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts, while the faithful make full prostrations. The text does not apply its own reasoning to this Orthodox practice. It is accurate that Corpus Christi processions and adoration in a monstrance are not Orthodox practices.

Evidence: In the Presanctified Liturgy, the presanctified Gifts are “brought into the holy altar in a procession resembling the great entrance” (Orthodox Church in America, “Vespers with Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts”), made “in absolute silence, while everyone makes a full prostration” (“Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts,” Wikipedia).

Other Misrepresentation

1. p. 124, n. 282 — “to be children of the Roman Church without even knowing it”

Problem: The note states that the Decree on Ecumenism explicitly affirms many non-Roman Christians to be children of the Roman Church. The decree does not say this. It calls baptized Christians outside the Catholic Church brothers of the Catholic faithful and describes their communion with the Catholic Church as real but imperfect. The note is accurate that the decree uses the language of “separated brethren” and grounds this in baptism.

Evidence: The Decree states that “all who have been justified by faith in Baptism are members of Christ’s body” and “are correctly accepted as brothers by the children of the Catholic Church,” and that such believers “are in communion with the Catholic Church even though this communion is imperfect” (Second Vatican Council, Unitatis Redintegratio, §3).

2. p. 128, n. 284 — “the unworthiness of a priest administering the sacraments does not nullify the sacraments”

Problem: The note defines ex opere operato as the teaching that a priest’s unworthiness does not nullify the sacraments. At Trent the phrase meant that the sacraments confer grace by the act performed, as opposed to faith alone in the divine promise; the minister’s unworthiness is addressed in a separate canon. The definition also obscures the actual disagreement, since the Lutherans agreed with Rome that an unworthy minister does not nullify the sacraments.

Evidence: Trent, Session 7, canon 8, condemns anyone who says that grace is not conferred “through the act performed, but that faith alone in the divine promise suffices”; canon 12 separately addresses a minister in mortal sin (Council of Trent, Session 7, Papal Encyclicals Online). Augsburg Confession, Article VIII, teaches that the sacraments are effectual “notwithstanding they be administered by evil men.”

Sources

Augsburg Confession (1530), Article VIII. In The Book of Concord. https://thebookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession/article-viii/

Council of Trent. Session 7 (1547), Canons on the Sacraments in General, canons 8 and 12. Papal Encyclicals Online. https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/seventh-session.htm

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Paul IV.” https://www.britannica.com/biography/Paul-IV

“Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liturgy_of_the_Presanctified_Gifts

Orthodox Church in America. “Vespers with Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts.” https://oca.org/liturgics/outlines/vespers-presanctified

Pew Research Center. “U.S. nuns face shrinking numbers and tensions with the Vatican.” August 8, 2014. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2014/08/08/u-s-nuns-face-shrinking-numbers-and-tensions-with-the-vatican/

“Pope Paul IV.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_Paul_IV

Second Vatican Council. Unitatis Redintegratio (Decree on Ecumenism). 1964. https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. “Catholic Schools Fact Sheet.” https://www.usccb.org/resources/Catholic-Schools-FACT-Sheet-Handout.pdf

Chapter 9: America’s Folk Religion: Evangelicalism and the Rise of Non-Denominationalism

pp. 133–150

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 134 — “the majority of evangelicals today have found the historical Protestant denominational structures wanting”

Problem: Most American evangelicals still belong to denominations. Nondenominational churches are a growing but minority share of the evangelical tradition, and a single denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention, is larger. The text is accurate that nondenominational churches have grown.

Evidence: In Pew’s most recent Religious Landscape Study (2023–24), conducted after the book appeared, evangelical Protestants make up 23 percent of U.S. adults; nondenominational evangelical churches account for 3 percent and the Southern Baptist Convention for 4 percent (Pew Research Center, “Evangelical Protestants”).

2. p. 135 — “The middle colonies were more closely tied to the Church of England”

Problem: The Church of England was established in the southern colonies, not the middle colonies. Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware had no established church and were known for religious diversity, including Quakers and many German Protestant groups. The text is accurate that New England was associated with Reformed churches and that Rhode Island had the first Baptist congregation.

Evidence: The Church of England was established in southern colonies “such as Virginia, the Carolinas, and Georgia,” and in Maryland from 1692; Pennsylvania, Delaware, and New Jersey had no official church (“Religion in the Thirteen Colonies,” Wikipedia).

3. p. 135 — “claimed to have been converted in heart after some time already as clergymen”

Problem: This is true of John Wesley, whose Aldersgate experience (1738) came years after his ordination. It is not true of George Whitefield or Jonathan Edwards, both of whom described their conversions before entering the ministry.

Evidence: Whitefield’s conversion took place while he was a student at Oxford, before his ordination as deacon on June 20, 1736 (“George Whitefield,” Wikipedia). Edwards’s conversion came during his last year at Yale, before his first pastoral service in New York in 1722–1723 (“Jonathan Edwards,” Wikipedia).

4. p. 140 — “at a house on Bonnie Brae Street, where Parham was staying”

Problem: Charles Parham was not staying at the Bonnie Brae Street house and was not in Los Angeles when speaking in tongues began there on April 9, 1906. The house belonged to Richard and Ruth Asberry, and the meetings were led by William Seymour. Parham first came to Azusa Street in October 1906. The text also places the house “in Azusa, CA”; Azusa Street and the Bonnie Brae Street house were in Los Angeles.

Evidence: The Bonnie Brae Street home belonged to Richard and Ruth Asberry; Parham had moved his headquarters to Houston and first came to Azusa Street in October 1906 (“Azusa Street Revival,” Wikipedia).

5. p. 143 — “The 19th century witnessed the conversion of more persons”

Problem: The twentieth century, not the nineteenth, saw the largest growth of Christianity in history, especially in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The book itself describes evangelical growth over the last century as “astronomical” (p. 133). The text is accurate that the nineteenth century was a great age of Protestant missions.

Evidence: The number of Christians worldwide grew from about 600 million in 1910 to more than 2 billion in 2010; in sub-Saharan Africa it rose from fewer than 9 million to more than 516 million (Pew Research Center, Global Christianity, 2011).

6. p. 143 — “Korea had surpassed America in the number of missionaries sent”

Problem: South Korea did not surpass the United States in the number of missionaries sent. The United States has remained by far the largest sending country. The text is accurate that South Korea became a major sending country relative to its size.

Evidence: In 2010 the United States sent about 127,000 missionaries, compared with 34,000 from second-ranked Brazil; South Korea ranked fifth per million church members (Center for the Study of Global Christianity, reported in Christianity Today, July 2013).

7. p. 144 — “the divorce rate of active evangelicals is higher than the average divorce rate for all Americans”

Problem: Studies of active, church-attending evangelicals find lower divorce rates than among nominal evangelicals and the unaffiliated. The claim that evangelicals divorce more often than average appears to rest on surveys that did not distinguish active from nominal members. No source is given.

Evidence: Sociologist Bradley Wright found that about 60 percent of evangelicals who never attend church had been divorced or separated, compared with 38 percent of weekly attenders. Brad Wilcox found that Americans who attend services several times a month were about 35 percent less likely to divorce than the unaffiliated (reported in “Christians question divorce stats,” Baptist Press, via Baptist & Reflector).

Logical Fallacies

1. p. 141, n. 302 — “both of these ethics stigmatize our Lord Jesus Christ as a sinner”

Problem: Straw Man. The note claims that total abstinence from alcohol implies that Christ sinned by drinking wine. Evangelicals who advocate abstinence generally ground it in the harms of alcohol today, not in a claim that drinking is sinful in itself or that Christ sinned. The book’s own tradition offers a parallel: Orthodox monastics abstain from meat for life without implying that Christ sinned by eating it.

Evidence: The Southern Baptist Convention’s 2006 resolution “On Alcohol Use in America” bases its call for abstinence on physical harm, highway deaths, family breakdown, and addiction; it does not claim that drinking is inherently sinful or mention Christ.

2. p. 148 — “evangelicals radically reject traditional Christian reliance on”

Problem: Hasty Generalization. The text states that evangelicals as a group radically reject patristic teaching, liturgy, and the Creed. On the same page, the book includes within evangelicalism “portions of all traditionally main-line denominations,” many of which use the historic creeds in worship. It also describes evangelical Anglicans within the Church of England (p. 109) and an evangelical theologian who calls for embracing the theology of the first four ecumenical councils (p. 147, n. 313). The book’s own description shows that the rejection is not general.

3. p. 150 — “evangelicalism is permeated by theological chaos”

Problem: Hasty Generalization. The text draws a conclusion about evangelicalism as a whole from four pastors who “at one time or another” held erroneous views of the Trinity. The book’s own note on John MacArthur acknowledges that his view changed (p. 150, n. 321). Four examples, some since corrected, cannot establish that a movement of some 70 million Americans (p. 146) is permeated by chaos.

Unsupported Assumptions

1. p. 138 — “Most have been baptized more than once, and some even many times”

Problem: The text states as fact that most evangelicals have been baptized more than once and do not know the day of their baptism. No source or data is given for either claim, and the conclusion that evangelicals have “very little respect for Holy Baptism” rests on them.

Assumption: Most evangelicals have been baptized more than once and do not know when they were baptized.

Biased Language

1. p. 134 — “the very worst form of denominationalism itself”

Problem: “In a vain effort” and “the very worst form of denominationalism” condemn independent congregations before any argument is made. The point that such congregations function as denominations of one could be stated without the superlative.

Neutral alternative: “These non-denominational congregations function, in effect, as single-congregation denominations.”

2. p. 138 — “some such intangible, pseudo-sacrament”

Problem: “Pseudo-sacrament” mocks evangelical conversion practices as counterfeits. Evangelicals do not regard the altar call as a sacrament, so the label also misdescribes their view.

Neutral alternative: “substitutes a conversion experience, such as responding to an altar call, for the role Orthodox teaching assigns to Baptism.”

3. p. 141 — “reek as the work of charlatans”

Problem: “Reek” and “charlatans” charge Pentecostal practitioners with fraud and invite disgust, rather than describing the practices or explaining why they are judged to be false.

Neutral alternative: “Some of these experiences and practices are judged by the Orthodox to be spurious.”

4. p. 146 — “the penchant of modern suburbanites for fast-food religion”

Problem: “Fast-food religion” and “pastors of this ilk” ridicule large evangelical churches and their members rather than describing their practices. The features listed after the phrase can be described without it.

Neutral alternative: “the preference of many suburban churchgoers for informal, low-commitment worship.”

5. p. 147 — “jumped into the naïve ocean of ‘non-denominationalism’”

Problem: “Naïve” dismisses the judgment of those who join non-denominational churches. Recurs from Chapter 4.

Neutral alternative: “Many have joined non-denominational churches.”

6. p. 148 — “No culture in the history of mankind has produced more religious quacks”

Problem: “Quacks” ridicules rather than describes, and the sweeping comparison with all of human history is offered without evidence. The sentence invites contempt for American religion in general.

Neutral alternative: “America’s religious freedom has produced many new religious movements.”

7. p. 149, n. 319 — “Gnosticism is expressed in many forms of Evangelical Christianity”

Problem: The label attaches an ancient condemned heresy to evangelical sacramental views that do not share its defining features. Recurs from Chapter 3.

Neutral alternative: “Many evangelicals do not regard the sacraments as the ordinary means of grace.”

Misquoted or Unreliable Sources

1. p. 150, n. 323 — “The internet is replete with documentation”

Problem: The note charges Chuck Smith with preaching “many heresies” on the Incarnation and the resurrection body, and its only support is that the internet contains documentation from former members. No statement by Smith is quoted and no source is named. An unspecified appeal to the internet cannot support a charge of heresy against a named person.

Double Standard

1. pp. 138–139 — “A tree can be judged by its fruits”

Problem: The text treats the divisions that followed the Great Awakenings as evidence that the revivalists’ conversions were not genuine, since true conversion leads to unity. The book does not apply this test to divisions within Orthodoxy, such as the Old Believer schism in the Russian Church, or to the East–West schism it describes in the Introduction. Recurs from Chapter 6.

Evidence: The Russian Orthodox Church divided in the seventeenth century when the Old Believers rejected the liturgical reforms of Patriarch Nikon (Encyclopædia Britannica, “Old Believer”).

Other Misrepresentation

1. p. 150, n. 321 — “Jesus is not the “co-eternal” Son of God”

Problem: The note says MacArthur taught a form of adoptionism in the first edition of his commentary on Galatians. MacArthur’s former view, called incarnational sonship, held that the title “Son” applied to Christ from the incarnation, while affirming that Christ is eternally God. Adoptionism denies Christ’s eternal deity, so the label misstates his view. The view appeared in his 1983 commentary on Hebrews, not Galatians. The note is accurate that MacArthur once held this view and later changed it.

Evidence: In “Re-examining the Eternal Sonship of Christ,” MacArthur states that he first published the incarnational sonship view in his 1983 commentary on Hebrews, that he always held an “unqualified and unequivocal commitment” to Christ being eternally God, and that he now affirms Christ’s eternal sonship (Banner of Truth).

Sources

“Azusa Street Revival.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azusa_Street_Revival

Baptist Press. “Christians question divorce stats.” Baptist & Reflector. https://www.brnow.org/news/Christians-question-divorce-stats/

Christianity Today. “The Surprising Countries Most Missionaries Are Sent From and Go To.” July 2013. https://christianitytoday.com/news/2013/july/missionaries-countries-sent-received-csgc-gordon-conwell.html

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Old Believer.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/Old-Believers

“George Whitefield.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Whitefield

“Jonathan Edwards (theologian).” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Edwards_(theologian)

MacArthur, John. “Re-examining the Eternal Sonship of Christ.” Banner of Truth. https://banneroftruth.org/us/?p=2081

Pew Research Center. “Evangelical Protestants.” Religious Landscape Study. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/religious-landscape-study/religious-tradition/evangelical-protestant/

Pew Research Center. Global Christianity: A Report on the Size and Distribution of the World’s Christian Population. December 19, 2011. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2011/12/19/global-christianity-exec/

“Religion in the Thirteen Colonies.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Thirteen_Colonies

Southern Baptist Convention. “On Alcohol Use in America.” Resolution, 2006. https://www.sbc.net/resource-library/resolutions/on-alcohol-use-in-america/

Chapter 10: An Orthodox Appreciation of Protestant Virtues

pp. 151–165

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 151 — “the 100-year correspondence between the Lutheran theologians of Tübingen”

Problem: The correspondence between the Tübingen Lutherans and Patriarch Jeremias II lasted only a few years, not a century. It began when the Lutherans sent the Patriarch the Augsburg Confession in 1575 and ended in 1581. The text is accurate that the exchange took place and that it was an important early contact between Orthodoxy and Protestantism.

Evidence: The Tübingen theologians presented the Augsburg Confession to Jeremias II on May 24, 1575, and “from 1576 to 1581 he conducted the first important theological exchanges between Orthodoxy and Protestants” (“Jeremias II of Constantinople,” Wikipedia).

2. p. 155 — “the seventy million Protestants of our land”

Problem: The figure of seventy million greatly understates the number of American Protestants. It matches the book’s own estimate of evangelicals alone (p. 146). Including mainline and historically black Protestants, the number of Protestant adults is well over one hundred million.

Evidence: Pew Research Center’s 2014 Religious Landscape Study counted about 62 million evangelical Protestant adults, about 36 million mainline Protestant adults, and nearly 16 million in historically black Protestant churches, out of an adult population of nearly 245 million (Pew Research Center, “America’s Changing Religious Landscape,” 2015).

Logical Fallacies

1. p. 154 — “He would be an Orthodox Christian or a heretic. Nothing else.”

Problem: Begging the Question. The argument assumes that every Christian community before the sixteenth century held the faith of today’s Orthodox Church, which is the point in dispute. The book’s own example undercuts the assumption. A Christian in eighth-century Gaul belonged to the Frankish church, whose Council of Frankfurt (794) rejected the Second Council of Nicaea’s decree on the veneration of icons. The book treats that decree as binding Orthodox teaching (p. 110, n. 255). The text is accurate that Lutheran, Reformed, and Anabaptist churches did not exist as institutions before the sixteenth century.

Evidence: The Council of Frankfurt overturned Nicaea II’s rulings on icons, “allowing that images could be useful educational devices, but denying that they were worthy of veneration” (“Council of Frankfurt,” Wikipedia).

2. p. 161 — “that teaching was authoritative and remains so”

Problem: Non Sequitur. The text cites the saying “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35) to show that Jesus’ unwritten teaching remains authoritative today. The saying is known only because Luke wrote it down in Acts, which is part of the canon. The example shows that the Gospels did not record everything Jesus said, which Scripture itself states (John 21:25). It does not show that any unwritten teaching can still be identified today, which is the point the argument needs.

Evidence: “There are also many other things which Jesus did. If they were all written, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written” (John 21:25, EOB).

3. p. 162 — “the Bible alone is the authority of the Church”

Problem: Straw Man. On p. 159 the text defines sola scriptura correctly, as the teaching that the Bible is “the only infallible rule.” Here and on p. 165, it restates the doctrine as the claim that the Bible is the only authority of any kind, and argues against that version. The Reformers did not hold it. They received the ancient creeds and gave councils and teachers a real but lower authority, tested by Scripture.

Evidence: The Formula of Concord (1577) states that the writings of earlier and later teachers “are in nowise to be equalled to the Holy Scriptures, but are all to be esteemed inferior to them,” and of the Apostles’, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds, “we publicly profess that we embrace them” (Epitome, Of the Compendious Rule and Norm, I–II). The Westminster Confession states that the decrees of synods and councils, “if consonant to the word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission” (31.3).

4. p. 163 — “Are we to suppose, as the sola scriptura theory would have it”

Problem: Straw Man. The text claims that sola scriptura would require first-century Thessalonians to ignore what Paul taught them in person. Protestant confessions do not teach this. They hold that the apostles’ oral teaching was authoritative while it was being given, and that Scripture is now the only infallible record of that teaching. The argument refutes a position its opponents do not hold.

Evidence: The Westminster Confession (1646) acknowledges that God revealed His will “at sundry times, and in divers manners,” and then committed it wholly to writing, “those former ways of God’s revealing his will unto his people being now ceased” (Westminster Confession of Faith, 1.1).

5. p. 165 — “each Reformer made himself a pope”

Problem: Hasty Generalization. The text claims that every Reformer made himself a pope. Its only support is one accusation by Luther’s Swiss opponents that Luther acted like a pope (n. 340). A single opponent’s charge against one Reformer does not establish a claim about all of them.

6. p. 165 — “Why could not Luther and Zwingli and the other Reformers agree”

Problem: Non Sequitur. The text again argues that disagreement among the Reformers proves that sola scriptura is false, and it concludes that the doctrine “has borne the fruit of division.” Disagreement among interpreters does not by itself show that a standard is wrong, and churches that accept tradition as an authority have also divided. Recurs from Chapter 1.

Evidence: The Russian Orthodox Church divided in the seventeenth century when the Old Believers rejected the liturgical reforms of Patriarch Nikon (Encyclopædia Britannica, “Old Believer”). The book itself describes the East–West schism between two churches that both appeal to tradition (p. xviii). See also: Double Standard.

Biased Language

1. p. 152 — “naïve theological peaceniks who assume that”

Problem: “Naïve theological peaceniks” ridicules those who take a less severe view of doctrinal division, and it assigns them a motive, that they “do not understand theology,” without evidence. It dismisses a group rather than answering its view.

Neutral alternative: “those who regard these theological divisions as less important.”

Other Misrepresentation

1. p. 159 — “all dogma must rest upon clear and explicit teaching of Scripture”

Problem: The text states that the Protestant confessions require every doctrine to rest on clear and explicit statements of Scripture. The major confessions also accept doctrines proved from Scripture or deduced from it by necessary inference. Stating the principle as “explicit teaching” only makes it appear narrower and easier to refute than it is.

Evidence: The Westminster Confession (1.6) includes what is “expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture.” The Thirty-Nine Articles (Article VI) exclude from required belief only what “is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby” (Book of Common Prayer, 1662).

2. p. 164, n. 339 — “possesses a self-sufficient power, higher than the Church”

Problem: The note says the Roman Catholic doctrine of the indelible character of ordination places the priest’s power above the Church. Catholic teaching holds that ordination cannot be repeated or undone, but that the Church can discharge a priest from his duties or forbid him to exercise them. The note is accurate that, in Catholic teaching, a priest cannot be returned to the lay state in the strict sense.

Evidence: The Catechism of the Catholic Church states that a validly ordained man can, for a grave reason, be discharged from the obligations and functions of ordination or forbidden to exercise them, “but he cannot become a layman again in the strict sense, because the character imprinted by ordination is for ever” (§1583).

Sources

Book of Common Prayer (1662). Articles of Religion, Article VI. http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/1662/articles.pdf

Catechism of the Catholic Church, §1583. https://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P4Y.HTM

“Council of Frankfurt.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Frankfurt

The Eastern / Greek Orthodox Bible: New Testament. Edited by Laurent A. Cleenewerck. John 21:25.

Encyclopædia Britannica. “Old Believer.” https://www.britannica.com/topic/Old-Believers

Formula of Concord (1577), Epitome, Of the Compendious Rule and Norm. In Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, vol. 3. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/creeds3.iii.iv.html

“Jeremias II of Constantinople.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremias_II_of_Constantinople

Pew Research Center. “America’s Changing Religious Landscape.” May 12, 2015. https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), Chapters 1 and 31. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/anonymous/westminster3.i.i.html

Chapter 11: The Heresies of Protestantism

pp. 167–185

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 168 — “articulated the double procession of the Holy Spirit without patristic precedent”

Problem: The text says Augustine introduced the double procession of the Holy Spirit without any earlier patristic support, and repeats this on p. 169. Earlier Western writers, including Ambrose of Milan, Augustine’s own teacher, had already spoken of the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son. The text is accurate that Augustine gave the doctrine its fullest early form and that it was not part of the Creed he confessed.

Evidence: Tertullian, Jerome, and Ambrose are among the Western writers before Augustine who spoke of the Spirit coming from the Father and the Son; Ambrose writes that the Spirit “proceeds from (procedit a) the Father and the Son” (“Filioque,” Wikipedia, citing Ambrose, On the Holy Spirit 1.11.120).

2. p. 170 — “formally anathematized the filioque doctrine as heresy”

Problem: The Council of Constantinople of 879–880 did not name or anathematize the filioque doctrine. It forbade any additions to or subtractions from the Creed. The text is accurate that the council forbade altering the Creed, and Orthodox writers have read that decree as a condemnation of the added clause. That reading, however, is an interpretation, not the council’s formal wording.

Evidence: The council’s decree condemns those who put forth “illegitimate words, or additions, or subtractions” to the Creed without naming the clause; it “implicitly condemned” the addition (“Fourth Council of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox),” Wikipedia).

Cherry-Picking

1. p. 169 — “Pope Leo III wrote a letter to these Western monks”

Problem: The text presents Pope Leo III as an example of papal humility on the filioque question, implying that he opposed it. It omits that Leo accepted the doctrine of the double procession, which the book calls a heresy. He objected only to adding the clause to the Creed. The text is accurate that Leo refused the addition and displayed the Creed without it on silver plaques.

Evidence: “Although Leo III did not disapprove the Filioque doctrine,” he held that the clause should not be included in the Creed, and in 810 had the Creed posted without it in Greek and Latin (“Filioque,” Wikipedia).

2. p. 174 — “who reiterated and continue to reiterate the filioque”

Problem: The text says Protestants continue to reaffirm the filioque. It omits that decades before this edition, the Anglican Communion, in official dialogue with the Orthodox, agreed that the clause should not be in the Creed and asked its churches to consider dropping it. The text is accurate that the Reformers kept the clause and that most Protestant churches still use it. Recurs from Chapter 7.

Evidence: The 1976 Moscow Agreed Statement of the Anglican–Orthodox Joint Doctrinal Commission stated that “the Filioque clause should not be included in this Creed,” and the 1978 Lambeth Conference asked Anglican churches to consider omitting it (quoted in “The Filioque and Its Current Status,” North American Anglican).

Biased Language

1. p. 171 — “a man-centered entertainment service”

Problem: The phrase describes the worship of Catholics and Protestants in general as entertainment rather than worship. It dismisses the worship of hundreds of millions of people with a single label and offers no evidence.

Neutral alternative: “changes in Catholic and Protestant worship.”

2. p. 171 — “a diabolical and heretical attack upon the Lord God Himself”

Problem: Calling a doctrine heretical states the author’s church’s judgment. “Diabolical,” along with “heinous teaching” (p. 172) and “emasculates the Father’s hypostasis” (p. 174), adds emotional force in place of the theological argument the chapter goes on to give.

Neutral alternative: “Why do the Orthodox regard the filioque as a serious heresy?”

3. p. 183 — “Common Protestant teaching on the sacraments is gnostic at its core”

Problem: “Gnostic” labels Protestant sacramental teaching with the name of an ancient heresy that taught matter is evil, which Protestants do not hold. Recurs from Chapter 9.

Neutral alternative: “Many Protestants deny that grace is conveyed through the sacraments.”

Misquoted or Unreliable Sources

1. p. 178, n. 360 — “Westminster Confession of Faith, VIII.5”

Problem: The quoted sentence (“Christ, by his obedience and death, did fully discharge the debt …”) is from Chapter XI, “Of Justification,” not Chapter VIII, “Of Christ the Mediator.” The text presents a sentence about justification as the Reformed doctrine of the atonement and calls it reductionistic. The Confession’s chapter on Christ’s work goes on to describe Christ “overcoming all their enemies by his almighty power and wisdom” (VIII.8).

Evidence: Westminster Confession of Faith, XI.3: “Christ, by his obedience and death, did fully discharge the debt of all those that are thus justified.” VIII.5 begins, “The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience, and sacrifice of himself … hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father.” See also: Other Misrepresentation.

Other Misrepresentation

1. p. 174 — “salvation is essentially a deliverance from the wrath of God”

Problem: The text states that in Protestant teaching salvation is essentially deliverance from God’s wrath, and on p. 176 that it is “reduced to being saved from God Himself.” The major Protestant catechisms describe salvation as deliverance from sin, death, and the devil as well. The text is accurate that Protestant theology places strong emphasis on justification and forgiveness.

Evidence: Luther’s Small Catechism says Christ has “purchased and won me from all sins, from death, and from the power of the devil” (Second Article). The Heidelberg Catechism (1563), Answer 1, says Christ “has set me free from the tyranny of the devil.”

2. p. 176 — “to fear and tremble about salvation is a sign of a lack of faith”

Problem: The text says that in most Protestant theology, fear about one’s salvation shows a lack of faith, and that once a Protestant is justified “there is not much left to fear.” This treats the belief that salvation cannot be lost as the Protestant norm. On p. 175 the book itself grants that Protestant confessions disagree on this point. Lutheran and Methodist confessions teach that a justified believer can fall from grace.

Evidence: The Augsburg Confession (1530), Article XII, condemns those “who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost.” The Methodist Articles of Religion, Article XII, state, “After we have received the Holy Ghost, we may depart from grace given, and fall into sin.”

3. p. 178 — “which ignored the traditional emphases on the conquering of death”

Problem: The text says Protestant teaching on the atonement ignored Christ’s victory over death and the demons. The Westminster Confession, which the text quotes, teaches Christ’s victory over all the enemies of His people, and Luther’s catechism names death and the devil among the powers from which Christ redeems. The text is accurate that Protestant theology gives central place to Christ’s satisfaction of God’s justice.

Evidence: Westminster Confession of Faith, VIII.8, describes Christ “overcoming all their enemies by his almighty power and wisdom.” Luther’s Small Catechism, Second Article, names deliverance “from death, and from the power of the devil.”

4. p. 178 — “the immense neglect of emphasis upon the heart of the New Testament teaching”

Problem: The text says Protestant teaching neglects salvation as union with Christ. Union with Christ is central in Reformed theology, beginning with Calvin. The text is accurate that the Orthodox doctrine of theosis is not a standard category in Protestant theology. Recurs from Chapter 5.

Evidence: Calvin opens Book III of the Institutes by stating that “so long as we are without Christ and separated from him, nothing which he suffered and did for the salvation of the human race is of the least benefit to us,” and that believers are “ingrafted into him” (Institutes III.1.1).

5. p. 180 — “The Protestant tradition has no saints”

Problem: The text states here and on pp. 178 and 183 that Protestantism has no saints. Protestant churches confess the communion of saints in the Apostles’ Creed, and the Church of England, which the book treats as Protestant (Chapter 7), commemorates holy men and women in its calendar, including figures after the Reformation. The text is accurate that Protestants do not invoke the saints or canonize them in the Orthodox or Roman Catholic manner.

Evidence: The Church of England’s calendar commemorates “Charles, King and Martyr, 1649” on January 30; the commemoration was restored in the Alternative Service Book (1980), and Common Worship (2000) provides a collect for it (“King Charles the Martyr,” Wikipedia). The Augsburg Confession, Article XXI, teaches “that the memory of saints may be set before us” as examples of faith and good works.

6. p. 181 — “the Protestant Reformers denied the four characteristics or marks of the Church”

Problem: The Reformers did not deny the four marks of the Church in the Creed. Their confessions affirm one holy, catholic Church, and they added the preaching of the Word and the sacraments as the means by which that Church is recognized. The book may argue that Protestant bodies fail to show the marks, but the Reformers did not reject them.

Evidence: Augsburg Confession, Article VII: “Also they teach that one holy Church is to continue forever.” The Westminster Confession (XXV.1) speaks of “the catholic or universal church.”

7. p. 183 — “without any association whatsoever with a concrete church community”

Problem: The text says the Protestant doctrine of the invisible church holds that people become members of Christ’s body without any connection to a church community, clergy, or sacraments. The confessions that teach an invisible church also teach the necessity of the visible church. Recurs from Chapter 2.

Evidence: The Westminster Confession describes the visible church as “the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation” (XXV.2).

8. p. 183 — “refusing to be governed by bishops and synods”

Problem: The text says Protestantism refuses to be governed by bishops and synods. Reformed and Lutheran churches are governed by synods, and the Church of England retained bishops, as the book itself states (p. 105). The text is accurate that most Protestant churches rejected apostolic succession as Orthodox and Roman Catholics understand it.

Evidence: The Westminster Confession states that “there ought to be such assemblies as are commonly called synods or councils” (XXXI.1). The book: “Bishops were maintained, together with a claim to apostolic succession” (p. 105).

9. p. 184 — “It has rejected monasticism”

Problem: The text says Protestantism has rejected monasticism and offers no consecrated path except marriage. Anglican religious orders of monks and nuns have existed since the 1840s. The text is accurate that the Reformers closed the monasteries and that most Protestant churches have no monastic tradition.

Evidence: Anglican religious life was revived in the mid-nineteenth century, including the Park Village Community (1845), the Community of St John Baptist, Clewer (1849), and the Society of St John the Evangelist (1866) (“Anglican religious order,” Wikipedia).

10. p. 184 — “It has rejected the traditional fasts of the Church”

Problem: The text says Protestantism has rejected the traditional fasts. The Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England prescribes Lent, the Ember Days, the Rogation Days, and all Fridays as days of fasting or abstinence. The text is accurate that many Protestant churches do not keep a fasting calendar.

Evidence: The 1662 Book of Common Prayer, “A Table of the Vigils, Fasts, and Days of Abstinence,” lists the forty days of Lent, the Ember Days, the three Rogation Days, and “All the Fridays in the Year, except Christmas Day.”

Sources

“Anglican religious order.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglican_religious_order

Augsburg Confession (1530), Articles VII, XII, and XXI. In The Book of Concord. https://bookofconcord.org/augsburg-confession/

Book of Common Prayer (1662). “A Table of the Vigils, Fasts, and Days of Abstinence.” https://www.andrews.edu/~toews/classes/sources/modern/Thirty%20Nine%20Articles/info/tables/rules.html

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion, III.1.1. Trans. Henry Beveridge. https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.v.ii.html

“Filioque.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filioque

“Fourth Council of Constantinople (Eastern Orthodox).” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Council_of_Constantinople_(Eastern_Orthodox)

Heidelberg Catechism (1563), Question and Answer 1. Christian Reformed Church in North America. https://www.crcna.org/welcome/beliefs/confessions/heidelberg-catechism

“King Charles the Martyr.” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Charles_the_Martyr

Luther, Martin. Small Catechism, The Creed, Second Article. In The Book of Concord. https://bookofconcord.org/small-catechism/

North American Anglican. “The Filioque and Its Current Status [Commentary on Browne: Article V].” https://northamanglican.com/the-filioque-and-its-current-status-commentary-on-browne-article-v/

United Methodist Church. Articles of Religion, Article XII. https://www.umc.org/en/content/articles-of-religion

Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), Chapters VIII, XI, XXV, and XXXI. Orthodox Presbyterian Church. https://www.opc.org/wcf.html

Appendix I: On the Use of the Word “Heresy/Heretic” in the Scriptures and in the Holy Orthodox Church

pp. 187–192

Historical Inaccuracies

1. p. 191 — “the Synodikon of the Seventh Ecumenical Council”

Problem: The Synodikon of Orthodoxy was not issued by the Seventh Ecumenical Council (787). It was composed by Patriarch Methodios for the restoration of icon veneration in 843, and later additions, beginning in the eleventh century, condemn heretics who lived long after 787. The text is accurate that the Synodikon upholds the Seventh Council’s teaching and is proclaimed on the first Sunday of Great Lent.

Evidence: At the Council of Constantinople in 843, the people recited “the Synodikon of Orthodoxy, a short profession of the validity of icon veneration which was authored by Patriarch Methodios”; the council was convened to reinforce the decisions of the Second Council of Nicaea (787), and the Synodikon received additions starting in the mid-eleventh century (“Council of Constantinople (843),” Wikipedia).

Cherry-Picking

1. p. 188 — “one of the characteristics of heresies is that they are often named”

Problem: The text treats being named after a founder as a mark of heresy and lists “Lutheranism” and “Calvinism” as examples. It omits that these names were given by opponents and that Luther himself rejected the use of his name. The text is accurate that many ancient heresies were named after their founders.

Evidence: Johann Eck is credited with coining the term “Lutheran” at the Leipzig Debate of 1519. Luther wrote, “I ask that people make no reference to my name; let them call themselves Christians, not Lutherans” (A Sincere Admonition to All Christians to Guard Against Insurrection and Rebellion, 1522, Luther’s Works, vol. 45, p. 70; quoted in “What’s in a Name?” Gottesdienst, 2018).

Sources

“Council of Constantinople (843).” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_of_Constantinople_(843)

Luther, Martin. A Sincere Admonition to All Christians to Guard Against Insurrection and Rebellion (1522). In Luther’s Works, vol. 45, p. 70. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1962. Quoted in “What’s in a Name?” Gottesdienst, November 3, 2018. https://www.gottesdienst.org/gottesblog/2018/11/3/whats-in-a-name