Where Protestants Are Closer to the Church Fathers

Truth Unites exists to promote gospel assurance through theological depth.

Gavin Ortlund (PhD, Fuller Theological Seminary) serves as senior pastor of First Baptist Church of Ojai.

SUPPORT:

FOLLOW:

MY ACADEMIC WORK:

PODCAST:

DISCORD SERVER ON PROTESTANTISM

CHECK OUT SOME BOOKS:

[robertcampbell]

Gavin just released a video, cue 100 Roman Catholic channel creating 1 hr videos each to rebut his 2 talking points.

[calebpearce]

Withholding the cup to the laity is perhaps the issue that gives the strongest testimony against the claims of Rome. Especially since Catholic apologetics right now is so incredibly Eucharist-centric. The fact is that, even though they now give the cup to the laity, it is still infallible church doctrine that the consecrated bread alone contains the Body, BLOOD, soul, and divinity of Christ. There is no scriptural or patristic support for this contrived reasoning that makes the cup superfluous. IF transubstantiation is true, you had better give both bread and cup at all times.

[danielhixon]

It seems to me that the entire Roman Catholic system ultimately boils down to the question of magisterial authority. There are numerous topics where it is clear that post-Trent teaching is not the same as patristic teaching. But the Roman Catholic reply is always “well, the early saints didn’t have to believe this, but now that it has been defined by magisterial/papal authority, all good Christians have to believe it”. This raises the question of why a church that is guided by charity would ever create new dogmas with anathemas attached to them, since this has the practical effect of making it harder for people to be saved. But you see that, the fundamental belief at the root of all else is that Christian’s must believe whatever the magisterial authority led by the pope teaches. If they can be shown to be incorrect (and I think they can) about even one thing that they have taught, supposedly infallibly, then the entire system comes crashing down

[jacobklug]

Please do more together! This is awesome.

[joeoleary]

I was raised Catholic and have little understanding of Protestantism. For those like me who are curious about the question "why Protestantism, where did it come from" might join me in reading Will Durant's great history book The Reformation. It's a huge book but very well written and fascinating, and gives the Big Picture on the changes in Christianity in the late MIddle Ages. Your library probably has it.

[ProfYaffle]

4:10 That's interesting, that the Catholics claim there should be doctrinal development, as a way to get around the accretions. But that then accepts there are accretions.

[AndrewKendall]

It also reveals the expedient arguments from Catholics. Their positions is "it's the earliest church" and "it's the church founded by Jesus, " using the age and history of the church as the principal basis for Catholicism being the true church, but the accretions (an accurate term) are much later. Then their argument changes. And those arguments didn't stand in the first place. The earliest church had to be corrected so often, the apostles visited and wrote the NT to confront the constant slide into, or preference for, error. Every church has that ongoing need, including Catholics. But they've got this doctrine (or dogma?) of infallibility to guard against criticism. Not humble, not biblical. Proud and self-justifying.

[jamesaustin]

Pretty good video, but I don't think the Roman Catholic Church was withholding scripture from the vernacular. They certainly didn't see translating the Bible as a priority, as the first complete Roman Catholic Bible in English didn't come out until after the Reformation, but there were German translations before the Reformation.

[tomc]

Thank you for this video. Can we also add Eucharist adoration (giving worship to the bread and wine as if it were Christ himself) as a late development? And perhaps the one that most risks committing idolatry.
I’m very grateful for your channel 👍🏻

[apologeticsa-zasiteforseek]

Hi Dr. Ortlund,

I would question some of your 12 examples.

1. Transubstantiation. This is not a medieval doctrine. It was taught clearly by St. Cyril of Jerusalem in the fourth century, in his "Lectures on the Christian Sacraments: The Procatechesis and the Five Mystagogical Catecheses":

"Since He Himself has declared and said of the bread: This is My Body, who shall dare to doubt any more? And when He asserts and says: This is My Blood, who shall ever hesitate and say it is not His Blood? … if Christ could change water into wine, can He not change wine into His own Blood? … They do not remain in their original condition, they have been changed, though the senses cannot tell us this … Do not think it mere bread and wine, for it is the Body and Blood of Christ, according to the Lord’s declaration."

That's all the doctrine says: what was bread and wine is now no longer bread and wine, but the body and blood of Christ. Only the appearances remain. Catholics are not obliged to believe in Aristotle's metaphysics of substance and accident. All they have to believe is that there's a distinction between appearance and reality, in the case of the Eucharist. This is common knowledge.

2. Seven sacraments. The Orthodox Church agrees that there are seven "major sacraments, " though it also counts lesser acts, such as the consecration of a church, as being sacraments in some way. The seven sacraments are also accepted by Oriental Orthodoxy, including the Coptic Orthodox Church, Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, and the Armenian Orthodox Church. That means that the idea of seven sacraments must go back to around the fifth century.

3. Masses for the dead to reduce time in purgatory. This practice goes back to Pope Gregory the Great (c. 600 A.D.). See here:


4. Communion under one kind. Communion under both kinds was certainly the norm until the twelfth century. However, even in the fourth century, people used to often take the consecrated host back to their homes and reserving it there for private worship, but they never took the chalice. Also, communion to the sick was usually given under the species of bread alone.

5. Bible in the vernacular. There is no evidence of any official ecclesiastical decision in the Middle Ages to universally prohibit translations of the Bible into the vernacular. Certain heretical translations were prohibited, but the practice of translating into the vernacular was never forbidden as such. St. Bede translated the Gospel of John into Anglo-Saxon English shortly before his death in 735. Around 990, a full and freestanding version of the four Gospels in idiomatic Old English appeared, in the West Saxon dialect. Most religious texts were available in English by the eleventh century.

6. The elaborate role of Mary in daily piety. Let me quote from the "Axion Estin, " an Orthodox hymn to Mary. The second part, which was composed by St. Cosmas the Hymnographer (d. 773), reads as follows: "More honorable than the cherubim, and beyond compare more glorious than the seraphim, who without corruption gavest birth to God the Word, the true Theotokos, we magnify thee." In Rome, the Basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore was built under Pope Celestine I (422–432). St. Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444), in his Homily IV, speaks of Mary as "the one through whom heaven is exalted, through whom angels and archangels are delighted, through whom demons are banished, through whom the tempting devil fell from heaven, through whom fallen human nature is assumed into heaven, through whom all creation, possessed by the madness of idolatry, came to a full knowledge of truth, through whom holy baptism came into being for all faithful, through whom is the oil of exultation, through whom the churches have been founded for all the world..." The cult of Mary certainly goes back to the fifth century.

Legalism in monasteries and the complete loss of Church discipline are not doctrinal issues. Many Catholics today would cheerfully grant your point on these questions. Cheers.

[GR-dkju]

1) 0:29 The system of salvation with indulgences and the treasury of merit.
2) 0:37 Transubstantiation as the particular mechanism for real presence.
3) 0:47 Papal infallibility.
4) 0:50 That there are seven sacraments particularly.
5) 1:00 The veneration of images.
6) 1:07 Masses for the dead to reduce time in purgatory.
7) 1:14 Withholding communion in both kinds.
8) 1:16 Withholding Scripture to the vernacular.
9) 1:18 Violence as justified by official church theology and magisterial teaching.
10) 1:24 The elaborate role of Mary in daily piety.
11) 1:29 Legalism in monasteries.
12) 1:32 The complete loss of rigor in church discipline.

[danmillar]

Sam Shouman would destroy Gavin Oatland.

He doesnt have a fancy phd or master's but hes the best Catholic Apologist out there, even lightyears ahead of Trent Horn.

James White n Gavin Orland tremble in their boots on the thought of dialogue with Sam Shouman

[JustinWalker-ppgt]

@TruthUnites, I love the church fathers, but their writings are ubiquitous. When you release a video like this, can you also post a list of the patristics you used to come up with it? I ask because you mention transubstantiation in this video, but I did a paper on transubstantiation in protestant seminary and I can tell you that it's a bit misleading to call transubstantiation an accretion because the seeds were WELL planted. And although the term might be medieval, the concept is not at all (also it's quite biblical in Jesus own words). I'd also like to know what you think of Eucharistic miracles like a bleeding host? If those aren't true, would you attribute those to demonic activity?

[myselfpoker]

Dr. Walter Martin many years ago did a number debates and talks with different cults including the romanists. They are all on YouTube and worth watching.

[ProfYaffle]

Complete loss of rigour in church discipline? What's that?

[jonathanbohl]

I find it interesting that in Carholicism communion under both kinds is a discipline. Also its interesting that agape feasts were instituted by the apostles and fell out of favor meaning they were a discipline as well.

[billyhw]

Enough material on this topic for a 5 minute video!

[gardengirlmary]

3:39 many practices post trent do not have patristic precedent

Then the argument becomes

It doesn't matter that these practices arent in the early chuch, because of there was doctrinal development

This is how i see it. Is there a longer video on this? It is excellent

[david_porthouse]

I watched this Protestant shindig on TV which involved the new King of England promising to be a faithful Protestant in the presence of another man’s wife whom he brought along to be his Queen. The Archbishop who crowned him has had the Freemasons in his cathedral. What were they up to? What would the early Christians make of this?

[geordiewishart]

I fail to understand the importance that some people place on the church fathers.

Apostasy was at work even during the time of the apostles.

So why should we expect the perfect faith to be practiced in 50-100-200 years after the resurrection?

And how certain can we be that the opinions etc voiced by the church fathers actually mirrored the beliefs held by the rank and file?

Imagine if certain ministers or bishops of today were selected and asked to write down their beliefs and practice of worship.

If someone were to read these writings in two hundred years time, would they get an accurate reflection?