![\"Protestantism:](\"https:\/\/davearmstrongbooks.store\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/cover_protestantism-critical-reflections.jpg\")
<\/a>\nDave Armstrong\u2019s *Pens\u00e9es*-style critique of Protestantism \u2014 272 numbered \u201csayings\u201d across ten chapters, plus five appendices (including five John Henry Newman essays). A loving but vigorous in-house critique from a brother in the Lord who was Protestant for the first 32 years of his life.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n
Dedication I Sola Scriptura<\/i>: The Bible as Ultimate Authority Appendix 1 John Calvin on Protestant Divisions Apostolical Tradition<\/i>, 1836 The numbered structural format of this book is modeled after the classic work by the French mathematician, physicist, and Catholic apologist Blaise Pascal, Pensees <\/i>(\u201cthoughts\u201d \u2013 1662). My intention is to critique various aspects of Protestantism, in the manner of \u201csayings\u201d (272 total) \u2013 a literary technique used to great effect by our Lord Jesus Christ, St. Francis of Assisi, Confucius, Martin Luther, and Socrates, among many others. The generalizations used in this method are not meant to imply that there are no\u201dexceptions to the rule.\u201d They are simply broad observations of Protestant ideas and tendencies.<\/p>\n My intention is not to insult or to excite needless quarreling. This material is not meant to be an attack on the merit and personal character of present-day Protestants, but rather a very straightforward and critical examination of various aspects of Protestant theology and the formal principles of Protestantism, as well as some of its negative tendencies in practice.<\/p>\n I wish to emphasize that I have much respect for many, many Protestants, and the great deal of truth and noble, praiseworthy goals and aspects of their beliefs. This is a loving (if vigorous) \u201cin-house\u201d critique from a brother in the Lord, not a \u201chit piece\u201d by an \u201cenemy.\u201d I was, after all, a Protestant for the first thirty-two years of my life, and I fondly remember that time.<\/p>\n Deep feelings of partisanship and allegiance are, of course, present in all seriously committed Christians. I only ask the Protestant reader to accept my good faith and to believe that I bear no ill will towards non-Catholics in general. I simply \u2013 as a Catholic \u2013 disagree with some things. I hope that I can be received as an honestly critical \u201cfriend\u201d and fellow Christian, albeit across a rather large and unfortunate chasm.<\/p>\n True ecumenism, to which I am passionately committed, does not \u201cpaper over\u201d profound disagreements in a delirious, \u201cwarm fuzzy\u201d atmosphere of self-deluded bliss. Rather, the profundity of authentic ecumenism is fellowship despite<\/i> major differences, in a special and delightful environment of mutual respect. I maintain a deep love and respect for my \u201cseparated\u201d Christian brethren. And I offer these reflections in that spirit.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\n 13. The Bible doesn\u2019t teach that it is the final authority in Christianity, in terms of it being in opposition<\/i> to apostolic Tradition and the Church. All the teachings of the Bible are true, and Catholics (and Orthodox) affirm them. It is the unnecessary, unscriptural, and illogical step from these affirmations to the proposition of sola Scriptura<\/i> with which we disagree, since the Bible itself speaks explicitly of both a true divine, \u201creceived\u201d Tradition and of the binding authority of the universal, institutional Church, and the very canon (the \u201cstuff\u201d) of the Bible was authoritatively determined by the Church. Therefore, the three interrelated concepts cannot be separated, any more than can the three dimensions of a cube, even in a hypothetical scenario in which all we had for \u201cdata\u201d was the Bible.<\/p>\n 51. I think God cares enough about doctrinal truth to guarantee its continued existence in some incarnated Body of Christ, through history. I don\u2019t think God is a doctrinal relativist, enthralled with doctrinal \u201cdiversity.\u201d That is pure liberalism. It\u2019s one thing to have honest differences that we work through as Christians; quite another to start saying that such differences are normative, to be expected, and actually condoned by both Scripture and the early Church.<\/p>\n 102. To entirely blot out sin, God would have had to prevent the fall itself, and start the human race all over. Once sin is allowed into human existence, then there will be corrupt popes, just as there were corrupt Bible-writers (Peter, Paul, David, Moses: a betrayer, three murderers and an adulterer).<\/p>\n 113. It is said that those who convert to Catholicism based on historical considerations interpret Church history for themselves as they go through the process of conversion. To an extent this is true, but no more (in essence) than the Fathers when they said \u201cthe Church has always taught thus-and-so, and if you deny that you are a heretic.\u201d It is an acceptance of a certain set of teachings that has been passed down through history (and can be verified), as opposed to determining what one will believe about doctrines x,y,z, as if that were permissible, given the history of doctrine. The convert is accepting what has been passed to the Church and them, not making up their own mind at every turn. We don\u2019t reinvent the wheel every generation in the Church.<\/p>\n 150. One can readily accept the distinctions among early Protestants (Anabaptist vs. Reformed\/Lutheran), and acknowledge that the former were much more anarchical from the start, whereas the latter maintained some semblance of Tradition and apostolic continuity (albeit \u201cskeletal\u201d from our vantage-point). On the other hand, we can also maintain (as I strongly do) that the principles which made rampant sectarianism historically inevitable (perspicuity, private judgment, absolute supremacy of the conscience, sola Scriptura<\/i>, a certain anti-sacerdotal and anti-episcopal bent, iconoclasm, philosophical nominalism, etc.), were indeed consciously present from the beginning and can be regarded as initial causes for the later history.<\/p>\n 158. By and large, Catholics think the Scriptures are clear, yet need a binding interpreter in the end, and that the Fathers are largely clear, but need a Church and councils to determine where they are wrong in particulars. Many Protestants, on the other hand, seem to think that the Fathers are very unclear, and the Scriptures very clear, without a need for a binding Church authority. Yet they can\u2019t come to an agreement.<\/p>\n 184. Calvinists say it is the human\u2019s fault that he is damned by God from all eternity, and it is grace and mercy for God to save any from such a horrible fate, since they are all in the same boat. So which is worse (or more plausible): a human\u2019s fault that he is damned, while his friend can go to heaven, neither having any choice in the matter at all, or a human\u2019s fault that he doesn\u2019t choose (by God\u2019s grace) to accept the grace God freely offers to all? God cannot cause evil, and fallen man cannot save himself.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\n
Introduction<\/p>\nContinue reading (3 more)<\/summary>\n
II Doctrinal Diversity and the Invisible Church
III The \u201cPure\u201d Church, Devoid of Sinners
IV Private Judgment
V Church History
VI The Perspicuity (Clearness) of Scripture
VII Predestination, Calvinism, and Arminianism
VIII \u201cDead\u201d Catholics and Rituals, Etc.
IX Martin Luther and Protestant Origins
X Faith and Works<\/p>\n
Appendix 2 The Agony of Luther, Melanchthon, and
Bucer Over the State of Early Protestantism
Appendix 3 Luther\u2019s Assertions of His Own Authority
Appendix 4 Erasmus on Luther and Protestantism, and
Luther on Erasmus
Appendix 5 John Henry Newman on Protestantism<\/p>\n
On the Abuse of Private Judgment<\/i>, 1837
Private Judgment<\/i>, 1841
St. Athanasius\u2019 Rule of Faith<\/i>, 1844
Faith and Private Judgment<\/i>, 1849<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\nContinue reading (4 more)<\/summary>\n
Continue reading (6 more)<\/summary>\n
![\"Dave](\"https:\/\/davearmstrongbooks.store\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/wordmark_3_cropped.png\")
<\/span><\/a>\n