In this episode of New Persuasive Words, Bill and Scott respond to a recent post by Neo-Baptist theologian Dave Fitch, taking up his critique of Protestant power, ecclesiology, and the legacy of the 16th-century Reformers. While appreciating Fitch’s concern for faithfulness, witness, and the dangers of Constantinian Christianity, Bill and Scott argue that his reading of Luther, Calvin, and the broader Reformation tradition collapses important distinctions—and ends up shadowboxing with a caricature.

They explore how the Reformers understood authority, vocation, and the limits of political power, pushing back against the claim that magisterial Protestantism simply baptized coercion or state control. Drawing on theology, history, and contemporary church debates, the conversation probes whether Neo-Baptist critiques mistake tragic compromise for theological intent—and whether the Reformers’ insights might actually offer better resources for resisting domination than Fitch allows.

Along the way, Bill and Scott reflect on the ongoing temptation to narrate church history as a morality play, the risks of flattening complex traditions into cautionary tales, and what it means to retrieve the Reformation without turning it into either a golden age or a villain. The episode closes with a larger question: does the future of the church require abandoning the Reformers—or reading them more carefully?