What do you think?
Rate this book
Is the Reformation Over?: An Evangelical Assessment of Contemporary Roman Catholicism
For the last few decades, Catholics and Protestants have been working to heal the wounds caused by centuries of mistrust. This book provides an evaluation of contemporary Roman Catholicism and the changing relationship between Catholics and evangelicals. The authors examine past tensions, post-Vatican II ecumenical dialogues, and social/political issues that have brought Catholics and evangelicals together. While not ignoring significant differences that remain, the authors call evangelicals to gain a new appreciation for the current character of the Catholic Church. Written by Mark Noll, one of the premier church historians of our day, and Carolyn Nystrom, this book will appeal to those interested in the relationship between evangelicals and the Catholic Church.
272 pages, Hardcover
First published July 1, 2005
9 people are currently reading
168 people want to read
About the author
Mark A. Noll
124 books214 followersMark A. Noll (born 1946), Francis A. McAnaney Professor of History at the University of Notre Dame, is a progressive evangelical Christian scholar. In 2005, Noll was named by Time Magazine as one of the twenty-five most influential evangelicals in America. Noll is a prolific author and many of his books have earned considerable acclaim within the academic community.
The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind
, a book about the anti-intellectual tendencies within the American evangelical movement, was featured in a cover story in the popular American literary and cultural magazine, Atlantic Monthly. He was awarded a National Humanities Medal in the Oval Office by President George W. Bush in 2006.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
October 5, 2013
This is a compelling analysis of Roman Catholicism through an evangelical Protestant perspective. While the authors acknowledge that the various strands of Protestantism make a unified assessment difficult (for instance, Anglicans will be more accepting of Catholic ecclesiology and liturgy than Pentecostals, Pentecostals tend to be more open to the supernatural, charismatic element of Catholicism than Anglicans), they do an excellent job of appreciating the nuances of Protestant thought in relation to Rome. They address historical developments that have improved Catholic-Protestant relations, especially the momentous achievements of Vatican II and explore how Catholics and evangelicals have been able to come together towards the common goal of proclaiming Christ crucified. Near the end of the book, the authors give a succinct summary of the main difference between Catholics and Protestants; while Catholics think foremost as the church as being made up of believers, Protestants think foremost as believers making up the church.
Read
August 4, 2011This book’s title is misleading: it seems to suggest that the authors answer in the affirmative and suggest everyone return to Father Pope and Mother Mary. That is not what they argue, however. They trace American evangelicalism’s opinion and political reaction to Roman Catholicism from the Puritan era until the present day. Much attention is given to Vatican II, the Catholic Catechism, and the various Evangelical and Catholics Together (ECT) statements. Some final thoughts will be why evangelicals “convert” to Roman Catholicism.
Not surprisingly, America’s reaction to Roman Catholicism in the early days was hostile, given the quasi-Puritan foundation of the Republic. The reasons why early Americans were hostile to Catholicism is far more interesting. American religious thinkers perceived a connection between democratic government and Protestant theology (here the terms “democracy,” “republic,” and “liberal democracy” are being used interchangeably. I understand the nuances but for ease of the review will ignore them). A corollary to this is a connection between monarchy and Catholicism. The final conclusion all American protestants drew was that Catholics could not be good republicans (Noll and Nystrom 2005: 45). The most famous example of this concerns President Kennedy’s election. Many feared he would take orders directly from the Pope. This is just one example, but it illustrates a very real tension in American politics.
Attitudes changed in the twentieth century as evangelicals and Catholics realized they had more to fear from the power state and secularism than they did from one another. Another change is that each benefited from the other’s strengths. Catholics began to study the bible in earnest and Evangelicals began reading authors who could actually write (e.g., Tolkien and Chesterton).
Noll and Nystrom have a good chapter outlining the major theology of the Catholic Catechism. This demonstrates what evangelicals and catholics do have in common, what Catholics actually believe, and why any actual “reunion” will not take place in the near future. Noll and Nystrom argue (correctly) that the differences between Catholics and Evangelicals is not simply that one worships Mary and bones and holy places, while the other simply worships the simple Jesus. Rather, it is a fundamental difference in how the church is perceived. As they note, “It is a different conception of how God fashions the body of Christ” (233).
The authors spend several chapters on the various ECT documents spanning from the early 1990s until the mid 2000s. Originally, it was conceived as a way for Catholics and Evangelicals to live together in the public sphere without tension and animosity. The earlier documents dealt with social ethics and political morality. The documents then shifted to key Reformation distinctives. Many Calvinists soon took aim at these documents with R.C. Sproul wailing that Evangelicalism is “tottering on collapse” and the light of the gospel will soon vanish forever (this kind of stuff is the reason nobody takes Reformed theologians seriously anymore). While the critics of ECT were correct that any real union between Rome and Wheaton is impossible because the issues are mutually exclusive, the critics of the critics were able to seriously rebut every theological point aimed at them.
What makes a life-long evangelical leave “the faith of his fathers” to convert to Roman Catholicism? What does he or she gain, and what does he or she lose? Noll and Nystrom survey several popular evangelical and catholic authors who made the switch: Peter Kreeft, Scott Hahn, and a few others. Noll and Nystrom, following the work of Scott McKnight (2002) identify several key issues: certainty, history, unity, and authority (Noll and Nystrom, 205). Evangelicals convert because they want a certain faith, and this is understandable. If the bible alone is the ground of my certainty, then how does one steer out of the numerous contradictory interpretations? To say it another way: how can I be sure of my faith when the ground of theology is subject to several hundred thousand interpretations?
Other evangelicals are drawn to the ancient history. The Holy Spirit is not a light flashing on and off in history: flashes on during the apostles, flashes off at Constantine, flashes back on at Nicea, flashes off for the next 1200 years, flashes back on during the Reformers, flashes off again, flashes back on during the Kentucky revivals. Some evangelicals want a historically recognizable faith that takes seriously the claim that the “faith was once for all delivered to the saints” and that Jesus wouldn’t leave his church. The test is quite simple: go into a liturgical church and also visit an evangelical church. Which liturgy is closer to the ancient church?
Other evangelicals want unity. Many bemoan the fact that the unified church is actually 300,000 denominations. As one evangelical wag put it, “it is one long line of protestors protesting against their fellow protestors” (qtd. in Noll and Nystrom, 206). The final principle is authority. While this seems to some as simply “turning one’s brain off and accepting everything the Pope says,” it does reveal a sane and understandable impulse: the Christian faith is not simply a set of propositions of which one is absolutely forced to know all things about them. The world is not going to end if one cannot figure out everything about Scripture.
This book is a barometer of where Evangelicalism is at the moment. Most of these analyses of Evangelicalism are not pretty. Noll and Nystrom are frank about the situation, but the sky is not falling. Evangelicals and Catholics can continue to work together and learn more about one another. The book has its limitations, though. The authors dealt only with one subsection of American culture and Catholicism as it relates to that culture.
Not surprisingly, America’s reaction to Roman Catholicism in the early days was hostile, given the quasi-Puritan foundation of the Republic. The reasons why early Americans were hostile to Catholicism is far more interesting. American religious thinkers perceived a connection between democratic government and Protestant theology (here the terms “democracy,” “republic,” and “liberal democracy” are being used interchangeably. I understand the nuances but for ease of the review will ignore them). A corollary to this is a connection between monarchy and Catholicism. The final conclusion all American protestants drew was that Catholics could not be good republicans (Noll and Nystrom 2005: 45). The most famous example of this concerns President Kennedy’s election. Many feared he would take orders directly from the Pope. This is just one example, but it illustrates a very real tension in American politics.
Attitudes changed in the twentieth century as evangelicals and Catholics realized they had more to fear from the power state and secularism than they did from one another. Another change is that each benefited from the other’s strengths. Catholics began to study the bible in earnest and Evangelicals began reading authors who could actually write (e.g., Tolkien and Chesterton).
Noll and Nystrom have a good chapter outlining the major theology of the Catholic Catechism. This demonstrates what evangelicals and catholics do have in common, what Catholics actually believe, and why any actual “reunion” will not take place in the near future. Noll and Nystrom argue (correctly) that the differences between Catholics and Evangelicals is not simply that one worships Mary and bones and holy places, while the other simply worships the simple Jesus. Rather, it is a fundamental difference in how the church is perceived. As they note, “It is a different conception of how God fashions the body of Christ” (233).
The authors spend several chapters on the various ECT documents spanning from the early 1990s until the mid 2000s. Originally, it was conceived as a way for Catholics and Evangelicals to live together in the public sphere without tension and animosity. The earlier documents dealt with social ethics and political morality. The documents then shifted to key Reformation distinctives. Many Calvinists soon took aim at these documents with R.C. Sproul wailing that Evangelicalism is “tottering on collapse” and the light of the gospel will soon vanish forever (this kind of stuff is the reason nobody takes Reformed theologians seriously anymore). While the critics of ECT were correct that any real union between Rome and Wheaton is impossible because the issues are mutually exclusive, the critics of the critics were able to seriously rebut every theological point aimed at them.
What makes a life-long evangelical leave “the faith of his fathers” to convert to Roman Catholicism? What does he or she gain, and what does he or she lose? Noll and Nystrom survey several popular evangelical and catholic authors who made the switch: Peter Kreeft, Scott Hahn, and a few others. Noll and Nystrom, following the work of Scott McKnight (2002) identify several key issues: certainty, history, unity, and authority (Noll and Nystrom, 205). Evangelicals convert because they want a certain faith, and this is understandable. If the bible alone is the ground of my certainty, then how does one steer out of the numerous contradictory interpretations? To say it another way: how can I be sure of my faith when the ground of theology is subject to several hundred thousand interpretations?
Other evangelicals are drawn to the ancient history. The Holy Spirit is not a light flashing on and off in history: flashes on during the apostles, flashes off at Constantine, flashes back on at Nicea, flashes off for the next 1200 years, flashes back on during the Reformers, flashes off again, flashes back on during the Kentucky revivals. Some evangelicals want a historically recognizable faith that takes seriously the claim that the “faith was once for all delivered to the saints” and that Jesus wouldn’t leave his church. The test is quite simple: go into a liturgical church and also visit an evangelical church. Which liturgy is closer to the ancient church?
Other evangelicals want unity. Many bemoan the fact that the unified church is actually 300,000 denominations. As one evangelical wag put it, “it is one long line of protestors protesting against their fellow protestors” (qtd. in Noll and Nystrom, 206). The final principle is authority. While this seems to some as simply “turning one’s brain off and accepting everything the Pope says,” it does reveal a sane and understandable impulse: the Christian faith is not simply a set of propositions of which one is absolutely forced to know all things about them. The world is not going to end if one cannot figure out everything about Scripture.
This book is a barometer of where Evangelicalism is at the moment. Most of these analyses of Evangelicalism are not pretty. Noll and Nystrom are frank about the situation, but the sky is not falling. Evangelicals and Catholics can continue to work together and learn more about one another. The book has its limitations, though. The authors dealt only with one subsection of American culture and Catholicism as it relates to that culture.
June 4, 2012
Not bad, the chapters on the Catechism of the Catholic Church and what Catholics believed made reading this worth it. There were chapters covering the relations of the Church and the civil-authority that were excellent, and then there were chapters I felt were a waste of paper.
Of note was that the Catholics predicted in the early 1800s and late 1700s that American and French experiments in democracy would lead to a godless state, which I found interesting. Also of note was Catholic antagonism to the American public school system in the late 1800s, believing that it would lead to a teaching of non-Christian dogmas.
Of note was that the Catholics predicted in the early 1800s and late 1700s that American and French experiments in democracy would lead to a godless state, which I found interesting. Also of note was Catholic antagonism to the American public school system in the late 1800s, believing that it would lead to a teaching of non-Christian dogmas.
July 17, 2016
Very academic book regarding the relationship between Roman Catholics and Protestants. Noll was very objective in his thinking and presented historical facts pertaining to both sides in a scholarly way. So is the Reformation over? I have no idea! This was my first book on the subject so I need to read some more!
April 3, 2020
I was pleasantly surprised by how enjoyable and helpful a read this was. Noll writes as a historian tracing the (mostly) recent history of Catholics and Evangelicals (mostly in North America). Although I think one can detect that he is largely sympathetic to Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT), he is balanced and fair in his analysis of where than can be consensus and where there are significant differences. Regardless of where you stand on the issues, I think you'd find this book helpful and fair in understanding how contemporary Evangelicalism and Catholicism have moved closer together and can find common ground and where there remain stark and important differences. Noll, I assume, is more optimistic and supportive of ECT and its aims than I am, but this was well-written, well-researched, and balanced that I greatly appreciated it and grew in my understanding (and convictions, btw).
July 5, 2025
Total time spend on this book: 8 hours and 3 minutes. Days reading this book: 5.
Chapter 5: The Catholic Catechism and Chapter 8: An American Assessment I found useful and worthwhile. I skipped Chapter 7: Reactions from Antagonism to Conversion and skimmed through the final chapter which is just a summery of the rest of the book Chapter 9: Is the Reformation Over?
This is a good read if you're interested in Roman Catholic-Evangelical relations the past 100 years.
Chapter 5: The Catholic Catechism and Chapter 8: An American Assessment I found useful and worthwhile. I skipped Chapter 7: Reactions from Antagonism to Conversion and skimmed through the final chapter which is just a summery of the rest of the book Chapter 9: Is the Reformation Over?
This is a good read if you're interested in Roman Catholic-Evangelical relations the past 100 years.
December 5, 2025
Published by Baker Academic, Noll and Nystrom have offered an excellent analysis of the historical tensions between Catholism and Evangelism. The middle of the book ( ie chapters 5,6and 7) was a fascinating and insightful take on the potential for greater unity within the universal church. I pray that God gives each of us who consider ourselves as believers of the Christ, the wisdom, courage and love necessary to make this dream a reality!
June 23, 2025
a remarkable book that lays out the 21st century question on whether the Reformation is over. It provides an extremely well balanced take on both sides, Evangelical and Catholic.
September 14, 2009
It will be interesting to see how people respond to this book. It is irenic, charitable, hopeful, and encouraging in its description of the fruitful dialogues which have taken place and continue to take place between evangelicals and Catholics, particularly since Vatican II. Noll is an historian, so you will be disappointed if you read this searching for biblical exegesis. But taken for what it is, there are some extraordinary reflections. Their analysis of the political and social factors affecting evangelical and Catholic tensions in American history was brilliant (particularly his chapter, “An American Assessment”). Their linguistic typology of the four major Christian traditions was very helpful, but not totally convincing. However, a couple of reservations: (1) The authors nowhere wrestle significantly with the condemnation of Protestantism in the Council of Trent. Far, far more attention is given to the excessive and abusive treatment of Catholics by evangelicals. It seems disingenuous to “assess” Roman Catholicism without laboring over these realities. (2) The ongoing problem of the sine qua non of papal authority for Catholicism, as represented, for example, in Pope Pius XII’s encyclical Munificentisssumus Deus (mentioned, but not really struggled with), is given short shrift in my estimation. If opposing a papal dogma such as the bodily assumption of Mary is still viewed as incurring “the wrath of Almighty God”, there is much, much work to be done before for Catholic-evangelical dialogue can be seen as so hopeful. But Noll and Nystrom do seem to be right that the fundamental divide between Protestants and Catholics is ecclesiology. I highly recommend reading this book.
January 9, 2015
Though parts of this book might seem tedious, its message and purpose are profound. I never know whether something that I read is moving to me based on previous reading or based on itself alone. This seems a necessary statement in the case of this excellent book. Instead of a long analysis of the book���s pros and con, I will quote a piece of its summary. For those who get the allusion, it will be a strong lure to read the book and explore its timely message:
��� Not so very long ago Catholics and evangelicals looked upon each other as orcs and elfs and were as repelled by orc-speech and elf-speech as it was possible to be. Today, it is more like ents and hobbits, not yet speaking the same language and certainly misunderstanding much that the other says but nonetheless communicating quite well and actually learning from the apparent idiosyncrasies of the other tongue. Might God do even more? Look around. Listen. It is happening right before our eyes and ears. Soli Deo Gloria.���
��� Not so very long ago Catholics and evangelicals looked upon each other as orcs and elfs and were as repelled by orc-speech and elf-speech as it was possible to be. Today, it is more like ents and hobbits, not yet speaking the same language and certainly misunderstanding much that the other says but nonetheless communicating quite well and actually learning from the apparent idiosyncrasies of the other tongue. Might God do even more? Look around. Listen. It is happening right before our eyes and ears. Soli Deo Gloria.���
July 19, 2012
Short Review - I very much like Mark Noll as an author. I have read very little by him that is not worth reading. Even the dull parts (in this case the recounting of the various discussions between Catholics and different Protestant denominations) are important. If you are interested in the real differences between Catholics and Protestants, this is a valuable book.
My longer review is on my blog at http://bookwi.se/is-the-reformation-o...
My longer review is on my blog at http://bookwi.se/is-the-reformation-o...
Read
July 24, 2011Much to think about but you have to like reading history and care about what you are reading. Great discussion starter.
February 1, 2017
A nice balanced overview of the ecumenical dialogue that has taken place in recent years.
March 14, 2018
Great collection of different perspectives/opinions, some very deep, between the two groups. Thought provoking.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews