The Misrepresentation of Protestants: William Goode on the Early Church Fathers

J. Neil Daniels

Introduction

The charge is frequently made in theological polemics that evangelical Protestants disregard or even scorn the Church Fathers. Especially in contemporary ecumenical and high-church contexts, it has become common to portray defenders of sola Scriptura as “ultra-Protestants,” individuals who have allegedly severed themselves from the rich soil of Christian antiquity. But such accusations are often not only unfair but demonstrably false. One 19th-century Anglican theologian who responded forcefully to this tactic was William Goode. His words, still relevant today, offer both clarity and correction. In The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, Goode writes:

“There has been much very extraordinary misrepresentation upon this point in the writings of our opponents, against which I would here at the outset caution the reader. Language has been used implying that all those who do not take their views hold the Fathers in utter contempt, and look upon the great lights of the primitive church only with scorn, and they are held up to public derision under the name of ‘ultra-protestants.’ Such language is wholly unjustifiable, and reflects discredit only upon those who use it. The hasty and ignorant remarks of individuals who know nothing of the Fathers are not to be charged upon a whole body of men for the purpose of bringing their sentiments into disrepute. It may be convenient in controversy to impute to your adversary extreme views, and is often an argument very effectual with the popular mind, which generally inclines to extremes. But it is merely throwing dust in the eyes of the reader, to blind him to the real question. Our opponents must be quite aware, that there are multitudes of those who differ from them, who have no sympathy with men who talk contemptuously of antiquity and the early Fathers.”
(The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, p. 79)

William Goode and the Protestant Mind

William Goode (1801–1868) was a prominent English evangelical clergyman and theologian in the Church of England during the Victorian era. A man of deep conviction and erudition, he was known for his robust defense of the Protestant character of Anglicanism. Goode held several important ecclesiastical positions, including the rectorship of St. Antholin’s in London and later the Deanery of Ripon. He participated actively in theological disputes of his time, particularly those surrounding the growing influence of the Oxford Movement and Tractarianism, which sought to reassert Catholic elements within Anglicanism.

Goode’s writings aimed to articulate and defend the evangelical understanding of Christianity, particularly its commitment to the sufficiency of Scripture. In The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice, which stands among his most significant theological contributions, he sought to demonstrate through historical and theological reasoning that Scripture alone constitutes the final authority for faith and conduct. He addressed both the theoretical and practical implications of this doctrine, while directly engaging the claims of those who elevated tradition, and especially the Church Fathers, to a near-parity with Scripture.

Respect, Not Rejection

The passage cited above illustrates Goode’s desire to set the record straight. He does not deny that there are individuals who speak carelessly or ignorantly about the Fathers. But he takes great pains to distinguish between such individuals and the many thoughtful Protestants who honor the Fathers’ witness without conceding to them an authority above or alongside Holy Scripture. To lump all Protestants together and accuse them of scorn for the early Church is, in his words, a misrepresentation used more for rhetorical advantage than for honest theological engagement.

Goode’s concern is not simply with academic fairness; it is with truthfulness in controversy. To misrepresent one’s opponent is not merely bad scholarship. It is a breach of Christian charity and a hindrance to theological clarity. The genuine Protestant tradition, as Goode represents it, has always acknowledged the value of the Fathers, especially when they faithfully echo apostolic teaching. But Protestants resist the idea that patristic consensus, or any form of ecclesiastical tradition, can serve as a final court of appeal equal to Scripture.

Why It Still Matters

Goode’s defense remains strikingly relevant. In current debates between evangelicals and Rome, or even within Protestantism itself, appeals to the Fathers are often weaponized. Those who uphold the final authority of Scripture are frequently accused of arrogance, novelty, or historical ignorance. But as Goode reminds us, it is possible to study and esteem the Fathers, to learn from them and quote them, while nonetheless maintaining the Reformation’s core conviction that Scriptura sola stands above all other voices.

The Protestant rejection is not of the Fathers themselves, but of their elevation to an infallible or quasi-infallible status. Goode’s words should caution those who caricature their interlocutors and should encourage evangelical believers to read the Fathers with discernment and appreciation—not as authorities equal to the Word of God, but as fellow witnesses to the truth that Scripture alone reveals infallibly.

Source 

Goode, William. The Divine Rule of Faith and Practice. 2nd ed. London: Hatchard and Co., 1853. Accessed August 2, 2025. https://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupid?key=olbp53039.

A direct link to volume 1 hosted on archive.org is: https://archive.org/details/divineruleoffait01good.