What do you think?
Rate this book
Still Protesting: Why the Reformation Still Matters
In this book, D. G. Hart investigates what was at stake in the sixteenth century and why Protestantism still matters. Of note is the author's recognition that the Reformers addressed the most basic question that confronts all human beings: How can a sinner be right with and worship in good conscience a righteous God who demands sinless perfection? Protestants used to believe that this question, along with the kind of life that followed from answers to it, was at the heart of their disagreement with Rome. Still Protesting arises from the conviction that the Reformers' answers to life's most important questions, based on their study of the Bible and theological reflection, are as superior today as they were when they provided the grounds for Christians in the West to abandon the bishop of Rome.
- GenresTheology
224 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 2018
6 people are currently reading
61 people want to read
About the author
D.G. Hart
36 books31 followersDarryl G. Hart (Ph.D., Johns Hopkins University) directs the honors programs and faculty development at the Intercollegiate Studies Institute and serves Westminster Seminary California as adjunct professor of church history. He has written or edited more than fifteen books, including Defending the Faith, a biography of J. Gresham Machen. He is coeditor of the American Reformed Biographies series.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews
March 19, 2020
D.G. Hart does not disappoint in his lucid, focused, and helpful theological critique of Roman Catholicism and defense of Protestantism. His purpose was to present the enduring strengths of Protestantism as a critique of the decaying Western church of the late Middle Ages. The first part of the book covers the essential aspects of Protestantism and Christendom. The second part of the book refutes common/popular objections to Protestantism from proponents of (and converts to) Roman Catholicism. He is exceedingly (even excessively) careful to present an undiluted theological critique of Romanism, to the exclusion of any political critique. Instead, he focuses on the "theological, liturgical, and ecclesial faultlines" (14).
Strengths:
- He rightly distinguishes between latitudinarian/liberal and confessional/classical expressions of both Protestantism and Romanism. Insofar as we are able to distinguish and define matters, the issues are theological/creedal, not cultural, social, psychological, or political.
- Throughout the book, he provides correctives to both Romanism and downgraded Evangelicalism.
- He makes important historical observations. For example, he makes the important polemical point that "Scripture is both early church and word of God" (110). That is, we must not fail to recognize that the New Testament record of the early church is true history, and ought to regulate subsequent church history.
- In discussing the apparent unity of the Roman Catholic Church, Hart remains focused on the complexities of language(s), polity/government, and big historical contingencies (e.g. the rise of Islam). He makes the insightful observation that unitarian polity breeds division when powerful leaders are flawed (127-8).
- In comparing Protestant and Roman Catholic aesthetics, he relates austerity/plainness in architecture to profundity in piety. Protestants were/are committed to "serving God in the common affairs of life" (142), "an affirmation of the common" (143), and "a recovery of the ordinary" (144).
- Through a consideration of Vatican II, he dismantles the illusion of the Roman Catholic Church as a unified, conservative voice (180).
Weaknesses:
- Though arguably outside of the scope of this volume, Hart fails to address the appeal of Eastern Orthodoxy. I mention this as a weakness because he brings up Eastern Orthodoxy without commenting on its appeal and shortcomings (114-5).
- He fails to contrast religious externalism/formalism and true heart/experimental religion.
- His discussion of music (145-6) lacks positive commentary on Protestant masters of music. Instead, he generically attacks Roman Catholic music.
- He overstates political/politicized Protestantism (151, 155, 163). In fact, there were thoroughgoing Protestant theological critiques of Romanism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
- He fails to acknowledge true degrees and differentials of holiness from one Christian to another (192; compare to WCF 13 & 17).
- He gives no discussion at all to "evangelical Catholics," "Jansenists," or the possibility/anomaly of being a sincere follower of Jesus Christ and yet a member of the Roman Catholic Church. Is this possible? Hart does not give a clear answer, though one would be justified in thinking that his answer is "no."
Strengths:
- He rightly distinguishes between latitudinarian/liberal and confessional/classical expressions of both Protestantism and Romanism. Insofar as we are able to distinguish and define matters, the issues are theological/creedal, not cultural, social, psychological, or political.
- Throughout the book, he provides correctives to both Romanism and downgraded Evangelicalism.
- He makes important historical observations. For example, he makes the important polemical point that "Scripture is both early church and word of God" (110). That is, we must not fail to recognize that the New Testament record of the early church is true history, and ought to regulate subsequent church history.
- In discussing the apparent unity of the Roman Catholic Church, Hart remains focused on the complexities of language(s), polity/government, and big historical contingencies (e.g. the rise of Islam). He makes the insightful observation that unitarian polity breeds division when powerful leaders are flawed (127-8).
- In comparing Protestant and Roman Catholic aesthetics, he relates austerity/plainness in architecture to profundity in piety. Protestants were/are committed to "serving God in the common affairs of life" (142), "an affirmation of the common" (143), and "a recovery of the ordinary" (144).
- Through a consideration of Vatican II, he dismantles the illusion of the Roman Catholic Church as a unified, conservative voice (180).
Weaknesses:
- Though arguably outside of the scope of this volume, Hart fails to address the appeal of Eastern Orthodoxy. I mention this as a weakness because he brings up Eastern Orthodoxy without commenting on its appeal and shortcomings (114-5).
- He fails to contrast religious externalism/formalism and true heart/experimental religion.
- His discussion of music (145-6) lacks positive commentary on Protestant masters of music. Instead, he generically attacks Roman Catholic music.
- He overstates political/politicized Protestantism (151, 155, 163). In fact, there were thoroughgoing Protestant theological critiques of Romanism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
- He fails to acknowledge true degrees and differentials of holiness from one Christian to another (192; compare to WCF 13 & 17).
- He gives no discussion at all to "evangelical Catholics," "Jansenists," or the possibility/anomaly of being a sincere follower of Jesus Christ and yet a member of the Roman Catholic Church. Is this possible? Hart does not give a clear answer, though one would be justified in thinking that his answer is "no."
June 5, 2019
500 years ago the Reformation was transforming Europe. Politics and nation-states would be affected, but the relationship of the average Christian to the Church was forever altered. Protestant Evangelical Christians look back on the Reformation with gratitude. The Reformation recovered the Christian Gospel of grace after all. But the contemporary Church has wandered far from the faith of its fathers, and more than ever before calls for denominational unity and even ecumenical togetherness with Rome are hitting home. Secularism is a threat to Catholic and confessing Protestant alike, so why not band together? How big, after all, are the points that separate us? Didn’t the Roman Catholic Church reform in the wake of the Reformation too?
It is these questions and this concern that D. G. Hart addresses head on in his recent book "Still Protesting: Why the Reformation Matters" (Reformation Heritage, 2018). Hart expertly unfolds the history of the Reformation and evaluates key evangelical truths (including the important “5 Solas”) as compared to the historical Roman Catholicism of that day. He goes on to examine whether the Roman Catholic Church has truly changed in its stance on these points over time. In his case against Rome, Hart also finds liberal Protestantism and lackadaisical evangelicalism at fault as well. He argues that the Reformation is still needed and a return to the faith of our fathers may well help American Christianity as it faces its own cross-roads.
An intriguing feature of the book is his examination of conservative political theory in America in relation to “anti-Catholic” sentiment. Historically, Protestants looked at the “golden age” of America as an advance in the history of the West (almost a postmillennial viewpoint) and lauded the rise of democracy and liberty. However “Roman Catholics saw those same developments negatively, as declension from an ideal time when church, government, society, and culture coexisted harmoniously under the sacred canopy of Christian influence” (p. 152). As progressive politics moved on to promote social change and “progress” in general – Catholicism’s opposition to unfettered equality and freedom became more in-step with conservatism’s resistance to progressive politics. For those who have wanted to “dissent from the logic and momentum of progressive politics” more help is found “for political conservatism in Roman Catholic sources” (p. 159). This leads to the pain-point that Hart is addressing: many political conservatives today claim that to be a true conservative, you must become a Roman Catholic. In response, Hart points to Abraham Kuyper (an evangelical leader and Prime Minister of The Netherlands) and J. Gresham Machen (founder of Westminster Theological Seminary) as examples of Protestant contributions to conservatism.
What sparked my interest in that section of the book was his point that American Protestantism had developed a “form of patriotism that unhealthily equated the faith with democracy and liberty” (p. 159). Protestantism’s fight against Catholicism mirrored democracy’s fight against the Monarchy. The founders of our country very much fit in with this patriotic version of faith. Indeed, this patriotism must have enabled the onset of the “social gospel.” Today’s patriotic, “God and Country” version of evangelical “faith,” which is “unhealthy” and unbiblical, has a long history indeed.
Those well-versed in the Reformation are sure to find new insights and connections in the pages of this book. Readers less familiar with the Reformation will also be helped. Anyone interested in what really separates Protestants from Catholics will find this book useful. I highly recommend it.
Disclaimer: This book was provided by the publisher. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a positive review.
It is these questions and this concern that D. G. Hart addresses head on in his recent book "Still Protesting: Why the Reformation Matters" (Reformation Heritage, 2018). Hart expertly unfolds the history of the Reformation and evaluates key evangelical truths (including the important “5 Solas”) as compared to the historical Roman Catholicism of that day. He goes on to examine whether the Roman Catholic Church has truly changed in its stance on these points over time. In his case against Rome, Hart also finds liberal Protestantism and lackadaisical evangelicalism at fault as well. He argues that the Reformation is still needed and a return to the faith of our fathers may well help American Christianity as it faces its own cross-roads.
An intriguing feature of the book is his examination of conservative political theory in America in relation to “anti-Catholic” sentiment. Historically, Protestants looked at the “golden age” of America as an advance in the history of the West (almost a postmillennial viewpoint) and lauded the rise of democracy and liberty. However “Roman Catholics saw those same developments negatively, as declension from an ideal time when church, government, society, and culture coexisted harmoniously under the sacred canopy of Christian influence” (p. 152). As progressive politics moved on to promote social change and “progress” in general – Catholicism’s opposition to unfettered equality and freedom became more in-step with conservatism’s resistance to progressive politics. For those who have wanted to “dissent from the logic and momentum of progressive politics” more help is found “for political conservatism in Roman Catholic sources” (p. 159). This leads to the pain-point that Hart is addressing: many political conservatives today claim that to be a true conservative, you must become a Roman Catholic. In response, Hart points to Abraham Kuyper (an evangelical leader and Prime Minister of The Netherlands) and J. Gresham Machen (founder of Westminster Theological Seminary) as examples of Protestant contributions to conservatism.
What sparked my interest in that section of the book was his point that American Protestantism had developed a “form of patriotism that unhealthily equated the faith with democracy and liberty” (p. 159). Protestantism’s fight against Catholicism mirrored democracy’s fight against the Monarchy. The founders of our country very much fit in with this patriotic version of faith. Indeed, this patriotism must have enabled the onset of the “social gospel.” Today’s patriotic, “God and Country” version of evangelical “faith,” which is “unhealthy” and unbiblical, has a long history indeed.
Those well-versed in the Reformation are sure to find new insights and connections in the pages of this book. Readers less familiar with the Reformation will also be helped. Anyone interested in what really separates Protestants from Catholics will find this book useful. I highly recommend it.
Disclaimer: This book was provided by the publisher. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a positive review.
May 7, 2019
I listened to the audio recording from Christian Audio, and followed along in a printed copy. This was a fantastic book. The English style is enjoyable. The scholarship and reasoning are very good. The chapter on austerity vs. beauty in church architecture is particularly valuable as a bit of Reformation wisdom that still resides in some conservative Confessional Protestant circles but is largely lost to the free church American Evangelical tradition. The heritage of the Reformation and the Puritans is claimed by many who reject their wisdom in such things. Hart does a wonderful job commending a small part of that wealth of wisdom to us, and (as he does throughout the book) implicitly challenges those of us who are staunchly opposed to Catholicism to examine ourselves and discover that we may be more in danger of their same errors than we thought.
This book is not deeply exegetical. It would not be my first choice for a method of approaching Roman Catholicism. But the specific purpose it returns to over and over again-- addressing the temptations that cause some to abandon Protestantism and the Biblical Gospel and enter the communion of the Roman Catholic Church--this it succeeds at superbly well. The Roman Catholic Church makes a pretense of being the one united church which Christ founded. Hard challenges those assertions and finds them wanting.
More than that, this book invites the author to a deeper understanding and a fuller appreciation of the Biblical gospel, and the insights of the Reformers.
This book is not deeply exegetical. It would not be my first choice for a method of approaching Roman Catholicism. But the specific purpose it returns to over and over again-- addressing the temptations that cause some to abandon Protestantism and the Biblical Gospel and enter the communion of the Roman Catholic Church--this it succeeds at superbly well. The Roman Catholic Church makes a pretense of being the one united church which Christ founded. Hard challenges those assertions and finds them wanting.
More than that, this book invites the author to a deeper understanding and a fuller appreciation of the Biblical gospel, and the insights of the Reformers.
May 7, 2021
More history than theology. This book provides a straightforward comparison of the major doctrinal differences between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism and then outlines the historical events/councils/etc of how both lines of Christianity came to hold the doctrines they currently profess. Worth the read for anyone who cares about the how and why of what he believes.
+1 to D.G. Hart for actually being a readable writer for his target audience (in this case, laypeople). I've never read him outside an academic context so this book improved my opinion of him as an author.
+1 to D.G. Hart for actually being a readable writer for his target audience (in this case, laypeople). I've never read him outside an academic context so this book improved my opinion of him as an author.
August 12, 2024
I didn’t disagree with anything in this book, but it wasn’t what I expected. It was more of a historical account of the Reformation whereas I thought there would be more application of Reformation principles to the contemporary context.
April 3, 2023
Methinks he doth protest too much.
While I am generally in agreement with all of Hart's arguments, they are made in an overly repetitious point.
As with many other Reformed writers, all other Protestant sects are treated with little (if any) understanding and depth), though the book primarily focuses on Catholicism rather than differences between Hart's Reformed tradition and other Protestant traditions. This ignores the fact that the Reformed make up only one part of a much larger conversation, with other Protestant sects shaping and forming much of modern Christianity.
Hart's critique of Catholicism boils down to two points:
1. That it is not a bastion of arch-conservatism that many "traditionalist" converts to Catholicism claim it to be.
2. That the veneration of saints is an unacceptable accretion and reflects a Catholic tradition of theological error.
The first point is true, but Hart also spends half the book conceding that the Protestant world is equally prone to the leftward shift seen in the Catholic church.
The second point is also true, but could have been reached much more quickly and concisely if presented in a non-polemical form, to say nothing of the fact that non-Reformed Protestants like myself would point to many of the doctrines of the Reformed tradition as coming from dubious prolegomena and reflecting innovations brought by people like Augustine that don't reflect the traditional orthodoxy of the church, such as a determinism absent in both Judaism and early Christianity, but which was definitely present in Augustine's gnostic influences and which forces the Reformed to come up with the idea of "problem passages" such as in Jeremiah where the prophet proclaims that the wickedness of Israel had not "even entered his mind" or when David consults God to get an answer that Saul will come to the city he is residing in, only for this not to happen after David leaves the city that challenge ideas of God as pre-ordaining everything rather than simply having the covenants and general plan of salvation in mind before the time of creation.
In the end, while Hart seems to make many efforts to be fair and nuanced, he fails to really provide a clear justification for why the Reformed tradition is important in modern Christian life, rather than that it is an improvement over Catholicism. However, Wesleyans, Anabaptists, and other groups that Hart explicitly excludes from his defense of the Reformed tradition might very well disagree with Hart on his reasoning on why the Reformation matters given the lack of any desire to strive for any unique strength of the Reformed tradition over other Protestant movements.
In short, Hart is quick to diminish the prestige and contributions of Protestants outside his own tradition, reducing the entire Reformation to a battle over sainthood in his conclusion. The problem is that the benefits that he claims from the Reformation are essentially accidental, rather than essential, to the Reformation, and in particular focus on Calvinist distinctives at the expense of broader Christian orthodoxy.
While I am generally in agreement with all of Hart's arguments, they are made in an overly repetitious point.
As with many other Reformed writers, all other Protestant sects are treated with little (if any) understanding and depth), though the book primarily focuses on Catholicism rather than differences between Hart's Reformed tradition and other Protestant traditions. This ignores the fact that the Reformed make up only one part of a much larger conversation, with other Protestant sects shaping and forming much of modern Christianity.
Hart's critique of Catholicism boils down to two points:
1. That it is not a bastion of arch-conservatism that many "traditionalist" converts to Catholicism claim it to be.
2. That the veneration of saints is an unacceptable accretion and reflects a Catholic tradition of theological error.
The first point is true, but Hart also spends half the book conceding that the Protestant world is equally prone to the leftward shift seen in the Catholic church.
The second point is also true, but could have been reached much more quickly and concisely if presented in a non-polemical form, to say nothing of the fact that non-Reformed Protestants like myself would point to many of the doctrines of the Reformed tradition as coming from dubious prolegomena and reflecting innovations brought by people like Augustine that don't reflect the traditional orthodoxy of the church, such as a determinism absent in both Judaism and early Christianity, but which was definitely present in Augustine's gnostic influences and which forces the Reformed to come up with the idea of "problem passages" such as in Jeremiah where the prophet proclaims that the wickedness of Israel had not "even entered his mind" or when David consults God to get an answer that Saul will come to the city he is residing in, only for this not to happen after David leaves the city that challenge ideas of God as pre-ordaining everything rather than simply having the covenants and general plan of salvation in mind before the time of creation.
In the end, while Hart seems to make many efforts to be fair and nuanced, he fails to really provide a clear justification for why the Reformed tradition is important in modern Christian life, rather than that it is an improvement over Catholicism. However, Wesleyans, Anabaptists, and other groups that Hart explicitly excludes from his defense of the Reformed tradition might very well disagree with Hart on his reasoning on why the Reformation matters given the lack of any desire to strive for any unique strength of the Reformed tradition over other Protestant movements.
In short, Hart is quick to diminish the prestige and contributions of Protestants outside his own tradition, reducing the entire Reformation to a battle over sainthood in his conclusion. The problem is that the benefits that he claims from the Reformation are essentially accidental, rather than essential, to the Reformation, and in particular focus on Calvinist distinctives at the expense of broader Christian orthodoxy.
March 10, 2022
I have a lot of thoughts about this book so I will keep it as brief as I possibly can.
Overall, I really enjoyed this book and I would recommend both Protestants and Catholics to read it. It was very accessible and well organized and not weighed down with theological jargon. Though I disagree with the Protestant position, I think this book did a great job of presenting it in a way that is often overlooked by modern Catholic apologists. For example, I think the best chapter of the book was the one on modern Catholicism, particularly the issues of Vatican II and contemporary sainthood among other issues. Us Catholics have to admit that the Church has indeed changed in many ways, and navigating those changes in the next decades will be Catholicism’s greatest challenge. I also think the author (D.G. Hart) was fair in critiquing the blind spots of Mainline Protestantism and presenting classical, Reformed Christianity as the viable alternative.
That being said, I had three overall main issues with the book:
1. Though Hard does address arguments of some modern Catholic apologists, he never once addresses the points of older Catholic works and figures who argued against Protestantism, such as St. Alphonsos Ligouri, Francis De Salles,Belarmine, etc. I think working with those figures plus their Protestant opponents would give each side a better understanding of each others’ traditions.
2. Hart acknowledges certain Protestant converts to Catholicism and some of their reasons for doing so, both good and bad. Yet he never once addresses some of the contemporary heavyweight Catholic apologists who used to be Protestant, such as Dr. Scott Hahn, Dr. Peter Kreeft, and Trent Horn, among many others. I would have appreciated Hart’s take on the conversion of these men.
3. The last problem, and probably the most interesting, are the strange comments Hart makes regarding Eastern Orthodoxy. There are multiple times where Hart demonstrates how the logic used by Catholics against Protestants could also be used by Orthodox Christians against Catholics, and seemed to almost implicitly support the Orthodox position. This then leads me to wonder what Hart’s objections are to Eastern Orthodoxy that cause him to remain a confessional Presbyterian.
In short, though this book has flaws, I would recommend it to be read and to utilize the books and works it cites for further reading. I intend to read some of the early Reformers’ work at some point. After all, if we at UD can see the value in reading the books of pagan philosophers, then we shouldn’t be afraid to hear what non- Catholic Christians have to say.
Overall, I really enjoyed this book and I would recommend both Protestants and Catholics to read it. It was very accessible and well organized and not weighed down with theological jargon. Though I disagree with the Protestant position, I think this book did a great job of presenting it in a way that is often overlooked by modern Catholic apologists. For example, I think the best chapter of the book was the one on modern Catholicism, particularly the issues of Vatican II and contemporary sainthood among other issues. Us Catholics have to admit that the Church has indeed changed in many ways, and navigating those changes in the next decades will be Catholicism’s greatest challenge. I also think the author (D.G. Hart) was fair in critiquing the blind spots of Mainline Protestantism and presenting classical, Reformed Christianity as the viable alternative.
That being said, I had three overall main issues with the book:
1. Though Hard does address arguments of some modern Catholic apologists, he never once addresses the points of older Catholic works and figures who argued against Protestantism, such as St. Alphonsos Ligouri, Francis De Salles,Belarmine, etc. I think working with those figures plus their Protestant opponents would give each side a better understanding of each others’ traditions.
2. Hart acknowledges certain Protestant converts to Catholicism and some of their reasons for doing so, both good and bad. Yet he never once addresses some of the contemporary heavyweight Catholic apologists who used to be Protestant, such as Dr. Scott Hahn, Dr. Peter Kreeft, and Trent Horn, among many others. I would have appreciated Hart’s take on the conversion of these men.
3. The last problem, and probably the most interesting, are the strange comments Hart makes regarding Eastern Orthodoxy. There are multiple times where Hart demonstrates how the logic used by Catholics against Protestants could also be used by Orthodox Christians against Catholics, and seemed to almost implicitly support the Orthodox position. This then leads me to wonder what Hart’s objections are to Eastern Orthodoxy that cause him to remain a confessional Presbyterian.
In short, though this book has flaws, I would recommend it to be read and to utilize the books and works it cites for further reading. I intend to read some of the early Reformers’ work at some point. After all, if we at UD can see the value in reading the books of pagan philosophers, then we shouldn’t be afraid to hear what non- Catholic Christians have to say.
February 21, 2022
A decent introduction on differences between Romanism and Protestantism along with critiques, polemics, and an appeal for a continuing Reformation. This book is addressed with a clear audience in mind. Those are not only those who are tempted to convert to Roman Catholicism, but those who may simply throw their hands up stating, "what's the difference? That stuff was 500 years ago!"
On a positive note, Hart is a succinct and clear writer which bolsters his cases and arguments. Several of the questions he poses and defenses he gives are quite adept such as the nature of Vatican II for the Roman Church or answering the charge that Protestantism is responsible for modernism and post-modernism. These are the good areas of the book. However, on a negative note, Hart does result to strawman fallacies at times or not answering the strongest arguments from Rome. For instance, one charge that Romanists will often level towards Protestants regarding Sola Scriptura is that nowhere does the Bible explicitly command Sola Scriptura (I am a Protestant and convinced of this position based on 2Tim.3:16 and John 10:35); Hart does not discuss this in his work. Keep in mind this work is an introduction, and not a fully orbed critique of Romanism. He also does not cite nor interact with major Catholic sources such as Aquinas, Bonaventure, Erasmus, Molina, Bellarmine, or other major theologians of Rome. Rather, he interacts with blog posts and internet articles from Romanists all over the spectrum. It is better to interact with a stronger, proven theologian who is versed in a position rather than a popular level blogger.
All that to say, the book isn't terrible, but it's not great either. I'd recommend it for a young person looking into Romanism or someone who is considering swimming the Tiber. After they read this I'd move them on to something more thorough.
On a positive note, Hart is a succinct and clear writer which bolsters his cases and arguments. Several of the questions he poses and defenses he gives are quite adept such as the nature of Vatican II for the Roman Church or answering the charge that Protestantism is responsible for modernism and post-modernism. These are the good areas of the book. However, on a negative note, Hart does result to strawman fallacies at times or not answering the strongest arguments from Rome. For instance, one charge that Romanists will often level towards Protestants regarding Sola Scriptura is that nowhere does the Bible explicitly command Sola Scriptura (I am a Protestant and convinced of this position based on 2Tim.3:16 and John 10:35); Hart does not discuss this in his work. Keep in mind this work is an introduction, and not a fully orbed critique of Romanism. He also does not cite nor interact with major Catholic sources such as Aquinas, Bonaventure, Erasmus, Molina, Bellarmine, or other major theologians of Rome. Rather, he interacts with blog posts and internet articles from Romanists all over the spectrum. It is better to interact with a stronger, proven theologian who is versed in a position rather than a popular level blogger.
All that to say, the book isn't terrible, but it's not great either. I'd recommend it for a young person looking into Romanism or someone who is considering swimming the Tiber. After they read this I'd move them on to something more thorough.
October 5, 2022
A brief, direct book about the current status of Protestant-Catholic relations.
Hart opens with recent overtures of reconciliation between liberal-leaning Protestants (mostly Evangelical and Lutheran) and Rome. I expected Hart to mention Evangelicalism's increasingly Catholic aesthetic - e.g. sacerdotal worship - but he restricts himself to joint statements and testimonies of converts from Protestantism to Rome. It's still enough to establish the relevance of the topic.
Hart then summarizes the Reformation's main objections to Rome. The following chapters hang a series of essays on those pegs. These essays emphasize the continued disagreement between Protestants and Catholics, answer the polemics of Catholic apologists, and expose the inconsistencies in the claim of ex-Protestant converts. In general Hart's argument is that reconciliation between Protestants and Rome is premature - Catholics have not given ground on any of the core issues of the Reformation. The Reformation "still matters", as the title says.
Hart is an academic (and usually very acerbic), but this is clearly for general audiences. A good primer - or refresher, as the case may be.
Hart opens with recent overtures of reconciliation between liberal-leaning Protestants (mostly Evangelical and Lutheran) and Rome. I expected Hart to mention Evangelicalism's increasingly Catholic aesthetic - e.g. sacerdotal worship - but he restricts himself to joint statements and testimonies of converts from Protestantism to Rome. It's still enough to establish the relevance of the topic.
Hart then summarizes the Reformation's main objections to Rome. The following chapters hang a series of essays on those pegs. These essays emphasize the continued disagreement between Protestants and Catholics, answer the polemics of Catholic apologists, and expose the inconsistencies in the claim of ex-Protestant converts. In general Hart's argument is that reconciliation between Protestants and Rome is premature - Catholics have not given ground on any of the core issues of the Reformation. The Reformation "still matters", as the title says.
Hart is an academic (and usually very acerbic), but this is clearly for general audiences. A good primer - or refresher, as the case may be.
May 4, 2025
Hart really adds a lot of insights to the debates and differences between Protestantism and Romanism. I particularly enjoyed his rebuke of the adoration of Romish imagery from Protestants, although I feel that J.C. Ryle has done a better job at exposing the carnal nature of Roman worship. This book wasn't what I expected, and offers more depth than the average book debating these issues. On the other hand, Hart does take some frustrating positions at times, and I wish he would put more of his own theology forward.
September 2, 2018
I thought Dr. Hart did an admirable job in debunking Catholicism's claims in light of what the Protestant Reformers were trying to accomplish. Hart engages the Catholic converts, apologists and scholars with historical argument, debunking the myths that Protestant faith is new, divided, and responsible for modernity.
August 6, 2019
Excellent account of the differences between Reformed theology and practice with that of Roman Catholicism. Hart not only traces the historical split but brings us to the present to show Protestants that Rome is not the answer to their quest to find the one, true church.
February 11, 2020
Fantastic book on understanding the fundamental differences between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. Protestants who are tempted to convert to Roman Catholicism need to understand these differences and that they have eternal consequences. This book is helpful to that end.
January 25, 2021
Primer on the current differences between Rome and Protestantism. The early chapters were repetitive for me because I know the history of the Reformation pretty well, but the last few chapters were worth the price of the book.
January 4, 2020
Great church history overview and the importance of the Reformation
September 30, 2020
A good book that concisely identifies the differences between Protestants and Roman Catholics. He simplifies it to the gospel, worship, sacraments, and ecclesiology.
August 11, 2024
The sassiest (parenthetical comments) ever.
March 15, 2019
Good synopsis of the differences between Catholicism and Protestantism with sources
Displaying 1 - 18 of 18 reviews