What do you think?
Rate this book
Acts of the Council of Trent with the Antidote
John Calvin (French: Jean Calvin or Jehan Cauvin; 10 July 1509 – 27 May 1564) was an influential French theologian and pastor during the Protestant Reformation. He was a principal figure in the development of the system of Christian theology later called Calvinism. Originally trained as a humanist lawyer, he broke from the Roman Catholic Church around 1530. After religious tensions provoked a violent uprising against Protestants in France, Calvin fled to Basel, Switzerland, where he published the first edition of his seminal work Institutes of the Christian Religion in 1536.
In that year, Calvin was recruited by William Farel to help reform the church in Geneva. The city council resisted the implementation of Calvin and Farel's ideas, and both men were expelled. At the invitation of Martin Bucer, Calvin proceeded to Strasbourg, where he became the minister of a church of French refugees. He continued to support the reform movement in Geneva, and was eventually invited back to lead its church.
Following his return, Calvin introduced new forms of church government and liturgy, despite the opposition of several powerful families in the city who tried to curb his authority. During this time, the trial of Michael Servetus was extended by libertines in an attempt to harass Calvin. However, since Servetus was also condemned and wanted by the Inquisition, outside pressure from all over Europe forced the trial to continue. Following an influx of supportive refugees and new elections to the city council, Calvin's opponents were forced out. Calvin spent his final years promoting the Reformation both in Geneva and throughout Europe.
Calvin was a tireless polemic and apologetic writer who generated much controversy. He also exchanged cordial and supportive letters with many reformers, including Philipp Melanchthon and Heinrich Bullinger. In addition to the Institutes, he wrote commentaries on most books of the Bible, as well as theological treatises and confessional documents. He regularly preached sermons throughout the week in Geneva. Calvin was influenced by the Augustinian tradition, which led him to expound the doctrine of predestination and the absolute sovereignty of God in salvation of the human soul from death and eternal damnation.
Calvin's writing and preachings provided the seeds for the branch of theology that bears his name. The Reformed and Presbyterian churches, which look to Calvin as a chief expositor of their beliefs, have spread throughout the world.
In that year, Calvin was recruited by William Farel to help reform the church in Geneva. The city council resisted the implementation of Calvin and Farel's ideas, and both men were expelled. At the invitation of Martin Bucer, Calvin proceeded to Strasbourg, where he became the minister of a church of French refugees. He continued to support the reform movement in Geneva, and was eventually invited back to lead its church.
Following his return, Calvin introduced new forms of church government and liturgy, despite the opposition of several powerful families in the city who tried to curb his authority. During this time, the trial of Michael Servetus was extended by libertines in an attempt to harass Calvin. However, since Servetus was also condemned and wanted by the Inquisition, outside pressure from all over Europe forced the trial to continue. Following an influx of supportive refugees and new elections to the city council, Calvin's opponents were forced out. Calvin spent his final years promoting the Reformation both in Geneva and throughout Europe.
Calvin was a tireless polemic and apologetic writer who generated much controversy. He also exchanged cordial and supportive letters with many reformers, including Philipp Melanchthon and Heinrich Bullinger. In addition to the Institutes, he wrote commentaries on most books of the Bible, as well as theological treatises and confessional documents. He regularly preached sermons throughout the week in Geneva. Calvin was influenced by the Augustinian tradition, which led him to expound the doctrine of predestination and the absolute sovereignty of God in salvation of the human soul from death and eternal damnation.
Calvin's writing and preachings provided the seeds for the branch of theology that bears his name. The Reformed and Presbyterian churches, which look to Calvin as a chief expositor of their beliefs, have spread throughout the world.
- GenresTheologyChurch History
164 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 11, 2011
8 people are currently reading
37 people want to read
About the author
John Calvin
1,700 books540 followersFrench-Swiss theologian John Calvin broke with the Roman Catholic Church in 1533 and as Protestant set forth his tenets, known today, in
Institutes of the Christian Religion
(1536).
The religious doctrines of John Calvin emphasize the omnipotence of God, whose grace alone saves the elect.
* Jehan Cauvin
* Iohannes Calvinus (Latin)
* Jean Calvin (French)
Originally trained as a humanist lawyer around 1530, he went on to serve as a principal figure in the Reformation. He developed the system later called Calvinism.
After tensions provoked a violent uprising, Calvin fled to Basel and published the first edition of his seminal work. In that year of 1536, William Farel invited Calvin to help reform in Geneva. The city council resisted the implementation of ideas of Calvin and Farel and expelled both men. At the invitation of Martin Bucer, Calvin proceeded to Strasbourg as the minister of refugees. He continued to support the reform movement in Geneva, and people eventually invited him back to lead. Following return, he introduced new forms of government and liturgy. Following an influx of supportive refugees, new elections to the city council forced out opponents of Calvin. Calvin spent his final years, promoting the Reformation in Geneva and throughout Europe.
Calvin tirelessly wrote polemics and apologia. He also exchanged cordial and supportive letters with many reformers, including Philipp Melanchthon and Heinrich Bullinger. In addition, he wrote commentaries on most books of the Bible as well as treatises and confessional documents and regularly gave sermons throughout the week in Geneva. The Augustinian tradition influenced and led Calvin to expound the doctrine of predestination and the absolute sovereignty of God in salvation.
Calvin's writing and preaching provided the seeds for the branch of Protestantism that bears his name. His views live on chiefly in Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, which have spread throughout the world. Calvin's thought exerted considerable influence over major figures and entire movements, such as Puritanism, and some scholars argue that his ideas contributed to the rise of capitalism, individualism, and representative democracy in the west.
The religious doctrines of John Calvin emphasize the omnipotence of God, whose grace alone saves the elect.
* Jehan Cauvin
* Iohannes Calvinus (Latin)
* Jean Calvin (French)
Originally trained as a humanist lawyer around 1530, he went on to serve as a principal figure in the Reformation. He developed the system later called Calvinism.
After tensions provoked a violent uprising, Calvin fled to Basel and published the first edition of his seminal work. In that year of 1536, William Farel invited Calvin to help reform in Geneva. The city council resisted the implementation of ideas of Calvin and Farel and expelled both men. At the invitation of Martin Bucer, Calvin proceeded to Strasbourg as the minister of refugees. He continued to support the reform movement in Geneva, and people eventually invited him back to lead. Following return, he introduced new forms of government and liturgy. Following an influx of supportive refugees, new elections to the city council forced out opponents of Calvin. Calvin spent his final years, promoting the Reformation in Geneva and throughout Europe.
Calvin tirelessly wrote polemics and apologia. He also exchanged cordial and supportive letters with many reformers, including Philipp Melanchthon and Heinrich Bullinger. In addition, he wrote commentaries on most books of the Bible as well as treatises and confessional documents and regularly gave sermons throughout the week in Geneva. The Augustinian tradition influenced and led Calvin to expound the doctrine of predestination and the absolute sovereignty of God in salvation.
Calvin's writing and preaching provided the seeds for the branch of Protestantism that bears his name. His views live on chiefly in Presbyterian and Reformed denominations, which have spread throughout the world. Calvin's thought exerted considerable influence over major figures and entire movements, such as Puritanism, and some scholars argue that his ideas contributed to the rise of capitalism, individualism, and representative democracy in the west.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
August 18, 2021
Amazing book, short but potent. Calvin thoroughly dismantles the sophistry of the Fathers of Trent, I especially enjoyed the sections on tradition, assurance, indwelling sin in the believer, and the sacraments.
Would highly recommend to all.
Would highly recommend to all.
September 29, 2021
Justification:
“But let us see for a little whether the words of Paul allow themselves to be so easily wrested. "The gospel," he says, (Romans 1:16) "is the, power of God to every one believing unto salvation; for therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith." Who sees not that here the beginning and the end are alike included? Were it otherwise, it would have been said, from "faith to works," as they would finish what faith begins. To the same effect is the testimony of Habakkuk, "The just shall live by faith." (Habakkuk 2:4.) This would be improperly said did not faith perpetuate life. In the person of Abraham the chief mirror of justification is held forth. Let us see, then, at what time faith is declared to have been imputed to him for righteousness. (Genesis 15:6; Galatians 3:6.) He was certainly not a novice, but having left his country, had for several years followed the Lord, so that he was no common exemplar of holiness and all virtue. Faith therefore does not open up an access to him to righteousness, in order that his justification may afterwards be completed elsewhere. And Paul at length concludes that we stand in the grace which we have obtained by faith. (Romans 5:2.) As far as a fixed and immovable station is from a transient passage, so far are they in this dogma of theirs from the meaning of Paul […] I presume, it is already super-abundantly clear, that the completion, not less than the commencement of justification, must be ascribed to faith. […] For when he asserts after David that righteousness is imputed without works, he declares what is the perpetual state of believers. (Romans 3:27; 4:2.) In like manner David exclaims, that himself and all the other children of God are blessed by the remission of sins, not for one day, but for the whole of life. (Psalm 32:1.) Nor does Peter, in the Acts, speak of the justification of a single day, when he says, "We believe that through the grace of Jesus Christ we are saved, as did also our fathers." (Acts 15:11.) […] And justly; for, as Paul says, the promise will not be secure unless it depends on the grace of God and on faith. (Romans 4:16.) Will they pretend that he is here, too, speaking of preceding merits? Nay, he declares that the greatest saints can have no assurance of salvation, unless it repose on the grace of Christ. He therefore abolishes faith who does not retain his as the only righteousness, which exists even until death. We are justified freely, they say, because no works which precede justification merit it. But when Paul takes away all ground of glorying from Abraham, on the ground that faith was imputed to him for righteousness, he immediately subjoins by way of proof — where works are, there a due reward is paid, whereas what is given to faith is gratuitous. Let us observe that he is, speaking of the holy Patriarch. Paul affirms, that at the time when he renounced the world to devote himself entirely to God, he was not justified by any works. If these spurious Fathers object, that it was then only he began to be justified, the quibble is plainly refuted by the context of the Sacred History. He had for many years exercised himself in daily prayer to God, and he had constantly followed the call of God, wherein was contained the promise of eternal life” (94-95).
“We maintain that faith is voluntary, because God draws our wills to himself. Add, that when we say a man is justified by faith alone, we do not fancy a faith devoid of charity, but we mean that faith alone is the cause of justification. […] It is therefore faith alone which justifies, and yet the faith which justifies is not alone: just as it is the heat alone of the sun which warms the earth, and yet in the sun it is not alone, because it is constantly conjoined with light. Wherefore we do not separate the whole grace of regeneration from faith, but claim the power and faculty of justifying entirely for faith, as we ought” (119-120).
“we deny not, that sometimes after the guilt is forgiven, God chastises us, but it is in the way of admonition and correction — not vengeance. Their idea that punishment is exacted by the justice of God is therefore a profane fiction. All are not punished in the same way, nor in proportion to their faults; but just according as God knows the application of the rod to be necessary, in order that each, under the training of discipline, may act more wisely in future” (127).
Sacraments:
“He who separates faith from the Sacraments, does just as if he were to take the soul away from the body. Therefore, as we exclude not the doctrine of the gospel when we say that we obtain the grace of Christ by faith alone, so neither do we exclude the Sacraments, the nature of which is the same, as they are seals of the gospel […] We acknowledge that the Sacraments are intended, not only to maintain but to increase faith. […] the Sacraments are nothing but instrumental causes of bestowing grace upon us, and are beneficial, and produce their effect only when they are subservient to faith […] yet that they are not empty and naked signs of a distant grace. […] For in Sacraments God alone properly acts; men bring nothing of their own, but approach to receive the grace offered to them. Thus, in Baptism, God washes us by the blood of his Son, and regenerates us by this Spirit; in the Supper he feeds us with the flesh and blood of Christ. What part of the work can man claim, without blasphemy, while the whole appears to be of grace? The fact of the administration being committed to men, derogates no more from the operation of God than the hand does from the artificer, since God alone acts by them, and does the whole. […] For if we grant their postulate — that grace is procured in the Sacraments opere operato — a part of merit is separated from faith, and the use of the Sacraments is in itself effectual for salvation. But if the same thing is to be affirmed of the Sacraments as of the word, then the Apostle is a witness that they are of no avail unless received by faith” (140-142).
Baptism:
“there is a twofold grace in baptism, for therein both remission of sins and regeneration are offered to us. We teach that full remission is made, but that regeneration is only begun and goes on making progress during the whole of life” (62).
“I interpret [John 3:5], however, as added by way of epithet to express the nature and power of the Spirit. Nor can they make out that water here means baptism, any more than that fire means some sacrament, when it is said, "In the Holy Spirit and fire." (Matthew 3:11.)” (84).
“Man is merely the hand; it is Christ alone who truly and properly baptizes. […] We, too, acknowledge that the use of Baptism is necessary that no one may omit it from either neglect or contempt. In this way we by no means make it free (optional.) And not only do we strictly bind the faithful to the observance of it, but we also maintain that it is the ordinary instrument of God in washing and renewing us; in short, in communicating to us salvation. The only exception we make is, that the hand of God must not be tied down to the instrument. He may of himself accomplish salvation. For when an opportunity of Baptism is wanting, the promise of God alone is amply sufficient. (145).
“Those who hold that sins are effaced by the mere remembrance of Baptism, do not mean a bare or frigid remembrance, but are conjoined with faith and repentance. Such also is the primary view of Baptism. For we ought to turn our thoughts not only to the sprinkling of water, but to the spiritual reality which begets the confidence of a good conscience by the resurrection of Christ, as Peter speaks. (1 Peter 3:21.) Such remembrance, I say, not only makes sins venial, but altogether obliterates them. Whenever the question relates to the forgiveness of sins, we must flee to Baptism, and from it seek a confirmation of forgiveness For as God reconciles us to himself by the daily promises of the gospel, so the belief and certainty of this reconciliation, which is daily repeated even to the end of life, he seals to us by Baptism. We were indeed baptized once, but there is a perpetual testimony of pardon and free propitiation in Christ […] they restrict the promises of Baptism to the past, and the moment any one has sinned, burying all remembrance of Baptism, they enjoin him to rest in the fictitious Sacrament. of Penance — as if Baptism were not itself a proper Sacrament of Penance” (147).
Calvin’s view of baptism seems virtually indistinguishable from the Lutheran view here.
Papacy:
“the Roman bishop did not possess the right of calling [ecumenical councils]. The Emperor, along with others, summoned them by his edict. That this was the case not only with what are called the four great Councils, but also with very many others, is attested by ancient acts still extant, and by all history. Let them not here allege that the validity of such summoning was questionable. This is disproved by the letters of Leo, in which he humbly begs the Emperors Theodosius, Valentinian, and Marcion, that they would be pleased, of their imperial authority, to intimate a day and place for the bishops. Gregory long after begged the same of Mauricius” (37).
“[If the legates of the Pope are necessary for a Council], the Council of Nice was not duly assembled, since it only gave the Legates of the Roman Church the fourth place. What is to be said of the Council of Aquila, which, though it was held in Italy, and was a general Council, makes no mention of the Roman bishop? If a Council is not duly constituted unless the Legates of the Pope preside, what answer will the African bishops give who assigned the last place to Philip and Asellus, the two Legates of Boniface, because they were only presbyters and not of the episcopal order?” (38).
“And that the Pope may not be prevented by modesty from boldly exercising the power, they confirm him in the title of Universal Bishop, which Gregory calls nefarious, blasphemous, abominable, and the forerunner of Antichrist, while they leave nothing more to the Bishops than to be his Vicars. Where is that equality which Jerome heralds when he compares the Bishop of Rome to the Bishop of Eugubium? (Hierom. ad Evag.) Where is the doctrine of Cyprian that the Bishopric of Christ is one, and part of it is held entire (in solidum) by each Bishop? (Cyp. de Simplic. Prelat.) Bernard writes that it was a common complaint in his time, that the Churches were maimed and mutilated, because the Roman Bishop by drawing all power to himself confounded orders, (Bernard. de Consid. ad Eng. lib. 3.)” (151).
“But let us see for a little whether the words of Paul allow themselves to be so easily wrested. "The gospel," he says, (Romans 1:16) "is the, power of God to every one believing unto salvation; for therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith." Who sees not that here the beginning and the end are alike included? Were it otherwise, it would have been said, from "faith to works," as they would finish what faith begins. To the same effect is the testimony of Habakkuk, "The just shall live by faith." (Habakkuk 2:4.) This would be improperly said did not faith perpetuate life. In the person of Abraham the chief mirror of justification is held forth. Let us see, then, at what time faith is declared to have been imputed to him for righteousness. (Genesis 15:6; Galatians 3:6.) He was certainly not a novice, but having left his country, had for several years followed the Lord, so that he was no common exemplar of holiness and all virtue. Faith therefore does not open up an access to him to righteousness, in order that his justification may afterwards be completed elsewhere. And Paul at length concludes that we stand in the grace which we have obtained by faith. (Romans 5:2.) As far as a fixed and immovable station is from a transient passage, so far are they in this dogma of theirs from the meaning of Paul […] I presume, it is already super-abundantly clear, that the completion, not less than the commencement of justification, must be ascribed to faith. […] For when he asserts after David that righteousness is imputed without works, he declares what is the perpetual state of believers. (Romans 3:27; 4:2.) In like manner David exclaims, that himself and all the other children of God are blessed by the remission of sins, not for one day, but for the whole of life. (Psalm 32:1.) Nor does Peter, in the Acts, speak of the justification of a single day, when he says, "We believe that through the grace of Jesus Christ we are saved, as did also our fathers." (Acts 15:11.) […] And justly; for, as Paul says, the promise will not be secure unless it depends on the grace of God and on faith. (Romans 4:16.) Will they pretend that he is here, too, speaking of preceding merits? Nay, he declares that the greatest saints can have no assurance of salvation, unless it repose on the grace of Christ. He therefore abolishes faith who does not retain his as the only righteousness, which exists even until death. We are justified freely, they say, because no works which precede justification merit it. But when Paul takes away all ground of glorying from Abraham, on the ground that faith was imputed to him for righteousness, he immediately subjoins by way of proof — where works are, there a due reward is paid, whereas what is given to faith is gratuitous. Let us observe that he is, speaking of the holy Patriarch. Paul affirms, that at the time when he renounced the world to devote himself entirely to God, he was not justified by any works. If these spurious Fathers object, that it was then only he began to be justified, the quibble is plainly refuted by the context of the Sacred History. He had for many years exercised himself in daily prayer to God, and he had constantly followed the call of God, wherein was contained the promise of eternal life” (94-95).
“We maintain that faith is voluntary, because God draws our wills to himself. Add, that when we say a man is justified by faith alone, we do not fancy a faith devoid of charity, but we mean that faith alone is the cause of justification. […] It is therefore faith alone which justifies, and yet the faith which justifies is not alone: just as it is the heat alone of the sun which warms the earth, and yet in the sun it is not alone, because it is constantly conjoined with light. Wherefore we do not separate the whole grace of regeneration from faith, but claim the power and faculty of justifying entirely for faith, as we ought” (119-120).
“we deny not, that sometimes after the guilt is forgiven, God chastises us, but it is in the way of admonition and correction — not vengeance. Their idea that punishment is exacted by the justice of God is therefore a profane fiction. All are not punished in the same way, nor in proportion to their faults; but just according as God knows the application of the rod to be necessary, in order that each, under the training of discipline, may act more wisely in future” (127).
Sacraments:
“He who separates faith from the Sacraments, does just as if he were to take the soul away from the body. Therefore, as we exclude not the doctrine of the gospel when we say that we obtain the grace of Christ by faith alone, so neither do we exclude the Sacraments, the nature of which is the same, as they are seals of the gospel […] We acknowledge that the Sacraments are intended, not only to maintain but to increase faith. […] the Sacraments are nothing but instrumental causes of bestowing grace upon us, and are beneficial, and produce their effect only when they are subservient to faith […] yet that they are not empty and naked signs of a distant grace. […] For in Sacraments God alone properly acts; men bring nothing of their own, but approach to receive the grace offered to them. Thus, in Baptism, God washes us by the blood of his Son, and regenerates us by this Spirit; in the Supper he feeds us with the flesh and blood of Christ. What part of the work can man claim, without blasphemy, while the whole appears to be of grace? The fact of the administration being committed to men, derogates no more from the operation of God than the hand does from the artificer, since God alone acts by them, and does the whole. […] For if we grant their postulate — that grace is procured in the Sacraments opere operato — a part of merit is separated from faith, and the use of the Sacraments is in itself effectual for salvation. But if the same thing is to be affirmed of the Sacraments as of the word, then the Apostle is a witness that they are of no avail unless received by faith” (140-142).
Baptism:
“there is a twofold grace in baptism, for therein both remission of sins and regeneration are offered to us. We teach that full remission is made, but that regeneration is only begun and goes on making progress during the whole of life” (62).
“I interpret [John 3:5], however, as added by way of epithet to express the nature and power of the Spirit. Nor can they make out that water here means baptism, any more than that fire means some sacrament, when it is said, "In the Holy Spirit and fire." (Matthew 3:11.)” (84).
“Man is merely the hand; it is Christ alone who truly and properly baptizes. […] We, too, acknowledge that the use of Baptism is necessary that no one may omit it from either neglect or contempt. In this way we by no means make it free (optional.) And not only do we strictly bind the faithful to the observance of it, but we also maintain that it is the ordinary instrument of God in washing and renewing us; in short, in communicating to us salvation. The only exception we make is, that the hand of God must not be tied down to the instrument. He may of himself accomplish salvation. For when an opportunity of Baptism is wanting, the promise of God alone is amply sufficient. (145).
“Those who hold that sins are effaced by the mere remembrance of Baptism, do not mean a bare or frigid remembrance, but are conjoined with faith and repentance. Such also is the primary view of Baptism. For we ought to turn our thoughts not only to the sprinkling of water, but to the spiritual reality which begets the confidence of a good conscience by the resurrection of Christ, as Peter speaks. (1 Peter 3:21.) Such remembrance, I say, not only makes sins venial, but altogether obliterates them. Whenever the question relates to the forgiveness of sins, we must flee to Baptism, and from it seek a confirmation of forgiveness For as God reconciles us to himself by the daily promises of the gospel, so the belief and certainty of this reconciliation, which is daily repeated even to the end of life, he seals to us by Baptism. We were indeed baptized once, but there is a perpetual testimony of pardon and free propitiation in Christ […] they restrict the promises of Baptism to the past, and the moment any one has sinned, burying all remembrance of Baptism, they enjoin him to rest in the fictitious Sacrament. of Penance — as if Baptism were not itself a proper Sacrament of Penance” (147).
Calvin’s view of baptism seems virtually indistinguishable from the Lutheran view here.
Papacy:
“the Roman bishop did not possess the right of calling [ecumenical councils]. The Emperor, along with others, summoned them by his edict. That this was the case not only with what are called the four great Councils, but also with very many others, is attested by ancient acts still extant, and by all history. Let them not here allege that the validity of such summoning was questionable. This is disproved by the letters of Leo, in which he humbly begs the Emperors Theodosius, Valentinian, and Marcion, that they would be pleased, of their imperial authority, to intimate a day and place for the bishops. Gregory long after begged the same of Mauricius” (37).
“[If the legates of the Pope are necessary for a Council], the Council of Nice was not duly assembled, since it only gave the Legates of the Roman Church the fourth place. What is to be said of the Council of Aquila, which, though it was held in Italy, and was a general Council, makes no mention of the Roman bishop? If a Council is not duly constituted unless the Legates of the Pope preside, what answer will the African bishops give who assigned the last place to Philip and Asellus, the two Legates of Boniface, because they were only presbyters and not of the episcopal order?” (38).
“And that the Pope may not be prevented by modesty from boldly exercising the power, they confirm him in the title of Universal Bishop, which Gregory calls nefarious, blasphemous, abominable, and the forerunner of Antichrist, while they leave nothing more to the Bishops than to be his Vicars. Where is that equality which Jerome heralds when he compares the Bishop of Rome to the Bishop of Eugubium? (Hierom. ad Evag.) Where is the doctrine of Cyprian that the Bishopric of Christ is one, and part of it is held entire (in solidum) by each Bishop? (Cyp. de Simplic. Prelat.) Bernard writes that it was a common complaint in his time, that the Churches were maimed and mutilated, because the Roman Bishop by drawing all power to himself confounded orders, (Bernard. de Consid. ad Eng. lib. 3.)” (151).
November 9, 2014
This is Calvin at some of his polemical best: to the modern ear that prefers peace even at the cost of truth, it might sound like a harsh response to Trent; but considering the rhetoric of the day, it is quite an excellent and appropriate response to the rather pompous canon set out by the Council.
This is highly recommended for learning more about the issues Rome had with the Protestants, and what one of the most remarkably gifted Protestants had to say in response. In comparison with Calvin's biting witticisms and obviously superior knowledge of both Scripture and the Church Fathers, the Council sounds like ignorant men more concerned with holding on to their control by making tiny concessions and condemning whoever disagrees with them.
It was very clear from Trent's acts that they really didn't understand what the Reformation was about. The Protestants were claiming Scripture as the authority and were making appeals to it over and against Rome. The Trentian leaders on the other hand, persisted in saying, essentially "believe this because we tell you." In doing so, they utterly (and providentially) failed to counteract the Reformation. Soli Deo Gloria!
Oh by the way, Calvin is really funny and witty in some of his criticisms, it surprised me how much I laughed at his rebuttals.
This is highly recommended for learning more about the issues Rome had with the Protestants, and what one of the most remarkably gifted Protestants had to say in response. In comparison with Calvin's biting witticisms and obviously superior knowledge of both Scripture and the Church Fathers, the Council sounds like ignorant men more concerned with holding on to their control by making tiny concessions and condemning whoever disagrees with them.
It was very clear from Trent's acts that they really didn't understand what the Reformation was about. The Protestants were claiming Scripture as the authority and were making appeals to it over and against Rome. The Trentian leaders on the other hand, persisted in saying, essentially "believe this because we tell you." In doing so, they utterly (and providentially) failed to counteract the Reformation. Soli Deo Gloria!
Oh by the way, Calvin is really funny and witty in some of his criticisms, it surprised me how much I laughed at his rebuttals.
February 12, 2018
Punchy, profitable and concise. Calvin at his polemical best. Suggest having the articles of Trent on hand to compare.
April 5, 2023
haven't red it yet, wehy the heck you asking me to rate it yet, gosh
April 17, 2023
Legendary. Also, Calvin's insults are hilarious.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews