Jump to ratings and reviews
Rate this book

The Reformation's Conflict With Rome: Why it must continue

Rate this book
Foreword by R. C. Sproul. Written in an inoffensive yet honest way, Robert Reymond has studied the essential divisions between Roman Catholics and the Reformed church to find out the real issues and points of conflict.
Reymond looks at historical watersheds of doctrine, the development of Roman Catholic authority and contemporary attempts at rapprochement (including 'Evangelicals and Catholics Together' and Robert Sungenis' 'Not by Faith Alone'). In doing so he helps us understand the great truths of salvation worked out through the sacrifice of Jesus, the Messiah.

160 pages, Paperback

First published March 21, 2001

25 people want to read

About the author

Robert L. Reymond

31 books10 followers
Dr. Reymond received his B.A., M.Div., and Ph.D. from Bob Jones University. He has in the past taught at BJU, Covenant Seminary, and Knox Theological Seminary, and pastored several different churches. He is currently serving as the organizing pastor for Holy Trinity Presbyterian Church (OPC).

Ratings & Reviews

What do you think?
Rate this book

Friends & Following

Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!

Community Reviews

5 stars
1 (25%)
4 stars
0 (0%)
3 stars
2 (50%)
2 stars
1 (25%)
1 star
0 (0%)
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
Profile Image for Randy.
136 reviews13 followers
August 6, 2011
About six months ago I walked into my pastor's office to discuss our denomination's position regarding the Roman Catholic Church. He is the editor of our monthly publication which is published across the United States and Canada, so I trusted that he would fairly represent the consensus of thought on the subject. I recall two things he mentioned that supported his conclusion that the Roman Catholic Church was a bona fide Christian church. One was the 1999 document "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification" (JDJ), signed by representatives of the Lutheran World Federation and the Roman Catholic Church. The other was the fact that he could recite the Apostles' Creed together with a Roman Catholic.



Robert Reymond, in this short book of 141 pages, addresses these and some wider Protestant-Catholic issues. In the foreward to the book, Dr. Nick Needham notes that "the doctrine of forensic justification through faith alone in Christ alone was at the heart of the Reformation." The Reformers felt that herein lay the heart of the Gospel; they were convinced that Scripture did not allow any synergism between God and man in our salvation. God and God alone saves sinners; we cling to Christ and his finished work on the cross by faith alone. Any Gospel that claimed there was anything we did that contributed to our own salvation the Reformers recognized from Scripture was no gospel at all and thus would not save anyone from their sins. The stakes were such that they could not continue in fellowship with Rome when Rome made it clear it would have nothing to do with "sola fide", a gospel of faith alone.



Fast forward to today. What of this document, JDJ? Is there now a consensus in basic truths between Lutherans and Catholics on the issues of justification? If so, one of two things has to be the case. Either Rome has changed and embraced sola fide, or Lutherans have rejected sola fide and embraced Rome's sacramental system. An examination of the document reveals, however, that neither of these conclusions is to be arrived at. Nothing has changed since the days of the Reformation, except the ability of many theologians to think clearly.



The document says that they can agree on justification because both parties agree that somehow justification is by God's grace through faith. As long as you can say "we are saved by God's grace through faith" that's all that matters. How you explain it, that's your business. But this will not do: we need to understand how we are justified by grace, and what is missing from the formula is the word "alone". The Reformation was fought over the word "alone."



Consider the following statement: "Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ's saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to do good works." On the surface, this sounds pretty good. The problems arrive when we try to figure out just what is being said in this statement, but we are not told. "By grace alone" is not the same as "by faith alone." "Not because of any merit on our part" does not exclude merit produced by the Spirit of God (that is, by us, while in a state of grace). Finally, how "we receive the Holy Spirit" is not defined here.



Trent (the 16th century Roman Catholic council that responded to the Reformation and systematized much of modern Catholic dogma) never denied that justification comes by grace alone. Trent did, however, deny that we receive this grace by faith alone, insisting that justifying faith must be clothed with love, that there are necessary works we must do in addition to having faith, before we can be justified. Rome also believes that the Holy Spirit is called down in the waters of infant baptism; this is Roman sacramentalism and baptismal regeneration which Christians do not accept.



So you can say all day long "I'm justified by grace alone" but if you deliberately do not use careful language and refuse to define terms, you haven't said anything. Rob Zins, speaking on the subject, puts it this way: "We are asked to swallow the language of spin and equivocation. What this amounts to at the end of the day is absolute sheer obfuscation. It is a total distortion and muddle of the Gospel of Jesus Christ." Robert Reymond comes to the following conclusion: "In sum, there is no consensus on the doctrine of justification in the Declaration but rather only an expressed willingness to overlook one another's "errors," presumably because church unity is to take precedence over doctrinal truth."



Let me just quickly address the second thing my pastor said that morning in his office, that it was enough that he could say the Apostle's Creed with a Roman Catholic. The early creeds of the church were focussed on the person of Christ but had very little to say about the work of Christ, and it is primarily this latter subject that is at issue. Reymond argues that "according to Paul there is no saving value in holding to an 'orthodox view' of the person of Christ if one is at the same time also holding to an 'unorthodox' view of the work of Christ." What follows from this is that "one can believe from his heart that every statement of the Apostles' Creed" and all the other ancient creeds "is true and still be lost, if in order to be saved he is trusting to any degree in his own character, and/or if he believes that he must contribute at least some good works toward his salvation, and/or if he is trusting in Christ plus anyone or anything else."



Robert Reymond urges us not to ignore or downplay the Protestant Reformation; instead he gives us good reasons "why it must continue." Martin Luther called "sola fide" the doctrine by which the church stands or falls. May we consider these things before we make an idol of ecumenism and declare peace where there is no peace.
Profile Image for Charlie.
412 reviews52 followers
June 21, 2013
A thoroughly underwhelming book that reiterates standard Calvinist complaints about Catholic theology. The author engages very little with contemporary Catholic theology (Rahner, Ratzinger, Vatican II) and has an odd habit of citing rather old historical sources (D'Aubigne, Schaff, Warfield, Cunningham) rather than recent scholarship. He does, however, engage with bargain basement Catholic apologists such as Robert Sungenis.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews

Can't find what you're looking for?

Get help and learn more about the design.