What do you think?
Rate this book
Rome Examined: Part 1
Dive into the heart of the Reformation’s theological battleground with Martin Chemnitz’s Examination of the Council of Trent, a masterful critique that challenges the Catholic Church’s decrees with unparalleled scriptural rigor.
This abridged translation unveils a pivotal work that shaped Protestant thought and remains a beacon for understanding the clash of faith and doctrine in the 16th century.
Martin Chemnitz (1522–1586), often hailed as the “Second Martin” for his pivotal role in consolidating Lutheran theology after Martin Luther’s death, was a German theologian, reformer, and superintendent in Braunschweig. Educated under Luther and Melanchthon at Wittenberg, he authored key works like the Formula of Concord (1577), which unified Lutheran doctrine amid internal disputes.
The Council of Trent (1545–1563), convened by the Roman Catholic Church in response to the Protestant Reformation, was a landmark ecumenical council that clarified Catholic teachings on Scripture, tradition, original sin, justification, sacraments, and other doctrines, issuing decrees and canons to counter Reformation critiques.
Chemnitz’s Examen Concilii Tridentini (Examination of the Council of Trent), published in Latin between 1565 and 1573, is a thorough, four-volume Lutheran critique of Trent’s decrees, systematically analyzing them against Scripture and early church fathers to defend Reformation principles.
This edition presents an English translation of an 1884 German abridgement, prepared by R. Benedixen with assistance from Christoph Ernst Luthardt, focusing on Part One of Chemnitz’s work. It condenses the original while preserving its core arguments, making this seminal text accessible for modern readers studying the Reformation’s theological divides.
This abridged translation of Martin Chemnitz’s Examination of the Council of Trent is a treasure for scholars, theologians, and students of Reformation history, offering a concise yet incisive look into one of the most significant theological critiques of the 16th century. Chemnitz’s rigorous engagement with the Council of Trent’s decrees showcases his profound scriptural knowledge and unwavering commitment to Lutheran doctrine, making this work a cornerstone of Protestant apologetics. By dissecting Trent’s positions on Scripture, tradition, justification, and more, Chemnitz not only defends the Reformation’s core tenets but also provides a timeless model of theological precision and fidelity to biblical authority. This accessible rendering by Benedixen and Luthardt ensures that Chemnitz’s intellectual legacy continues to illuminate the enduring debates over faith, grace, and ecclesiastical authority.
Javier Perdomo has added extensive footnotes with quotations from the Church Fathers, making this volume an indispensable part of every theological library.
This abridged translation unveils a pivotal work that shaped Protestant thought and remains a beacon for understanding the clash of faith and doctrine in the 16th century.
Martin Chemnitz (1522–1586), often hailed as the “Second Martin” for his pivotal role in consolidating Lutheran theology after Martin Luther’s death, was a German theologian, reformer, and superintendent in Braunschweig. Educated under Luther and Melanchthon at Wittenberg, he authored key works like the Formula of Concord (1577), which unified Lutheran doctrine amid internal disputes.
The Council of Trent (1545–1563), convened by the Roman Catholic Church in response to the Protestant Reformation, was a landmark ecumenical council that clarified Catholic teachings on Scripture, tradition, original sin, justification, sacraments, and other doctrines, issuing decrees and canons to counter Reformation critiques.
Chemnitz’s Examen Concilii Tridentini (Examination of the Council of Trent), published in Latin between 1565 and 1573, is a thorough, four-volume Lutheran critique of Trent’s decrees, systematically analyzing them against Scripture and early church fathers to defend Reformation principles.
This edition presents an English translation of an 1884 German abridgement, prepared by R. Benedixen with assistance from Christoph Ernst Luthardt, focusing on Part One of Chemnitz’s work. It condenses the original while preserving its core arguments, making this seminal text accessible for modern readers studying the Reformation’s theological divides.
This abridged translation of Martin Chemnitz’s Examination of the Council of Trent is a treasure for scholars, theologians, and students of Reformation history, offering a concise yet incisive look into one of the most significant theological critiques of the 16th century. Chemnitz’s rigorous engagement with the Council of Trent’s decrees showcases his profound scriptural knowledge and unwavering commitment to Lutheran doctrine, making this work a cornerstone of Protestant apologetics. By dissecting Trent’s positions on Scripture, tradition, justification, and more, Chemnitz not only defends the Reformation’s core tenets but also provides a timeless model of theological precision and fidelity to biblical authority. This accessible rendering by Benedixen and Luthardt ensures that Chemnitz’s intellectual legacy continues to illuminate the enduring debates over faith, grace, and ecclesiastical authority.
Javier Perdomo has added extensive footnotes with quotations from the Church Fathers, making this volume an indispensable part of every theological library.
Paperback
First published January 1, 2025
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
June 25, 2026
Truly a tour de force of theological sense. Chemnitz addresses at their root the most crucial theological issues separating Lutherans and Roman Catholics, including the view of Scripture, Justification, and Faith.
Is it complicated theological nonsense? No, not really!—it’s only complicated because Rome made it complicated. The Lutheran effort is theological triage, not theological knot-tying. In fact, *all* good theology, and philosophy, is merely triage, a zero-sum game in one sense: for it corrects, by correspondingly great complexity, whatever *bad* theology and philosophy have built up, though it does not build anything up; it only elaborates the Truth, which from the beginning was always beautifully simple. This is why we have the Creeds: because they were responses to false ideas spreading among the cities of the ancient world; it is also why Abraham was justified by his Faith even before the New Testament had been revealed. The Lutheran aim is not toward philosophizing but toward that wonderfully simple truth that even little children know: that Christ has saved us: believe in Him: end of story.
I think Chemnitz’s whole Lutheran argument against Roman teachings here boils down to that point, and that the Roman misunderstandings amount to a refusal to ascribe all merit, all satisfaction, all goodness to God alone, rather than to ourselves:
“What intervenes, for which reason God becomes gracious to the sinner where he has merited wrath and eternal damnation? What should the conscience consider to be the essential reason why we are granted the gift of sonship? Wherein can trust rest secure that we will partake of eternal life? Is it the Son of God and mediator, who with His obedience, with His satisfaction, and His merit achieves this? Or is it we ourselves who must demonstrate such?”
When the RCC argues that justification is worked through God’s enabling the regenerate to perform good works to merit their salvation, they nevertheless imply that our salvation is ultimately to rest upon our own shoulders: and this destroys our assurance, because we shall fail. The Lutheran church observes from Scripture, rather, that our assurance of salvation rests in the perfect atonement of Christ alone, who cannot fail. This is the true Faith, for it is not doubting, but “the assurance of things hoped for.” It is not mere intellectual assent, but a robust confidence, trust, and hope in God’s promises. And true hope in and love for God must flow from this assurance of God, not stand alone as if separate from Faith and not entailed by it, for hope and love are made all the more strong because they are confident in God’s promise. That is, one cannot fully love God if one is not confident that He loves him.
There are a number of other issues to be mentioned, including the fact that the Roman view of Scripture and the authority of tradition and the papacy is circular, in that it relies on Scripture for the office of the papacy but relies on the papacy for the interpretation of Scripture; the view that the regenerate are capable of satisfying God’s law in this life for the sake of divine reward, despite the wealth of biblical evidence against this; and the view that the RCC has the authority to declare new doctrines, without Scriptural support, that are binding to the believer.
Overall, very rich and illuminating, especially with the inclusion of long excerpts from the Council of Trent and about 100 pages of extensive endnotes from Scripture and the church fathers. I will be using this as a handbook, I am sure, for years to come. Let us hope and pray that the two churches come to unity and agreement in the future.
Is it complicated theological nonsense? No, not really!—it’s only complicated because Rome made it complicated. The Lutheran effort is theological triage, not theological knot-tying. In fact, *all* good theology, and philosophy, is merely triage, a zero-sum game in one sense: for it corrects, by correspondingly great complexity, whatever *bad* theology and philosophy have built up, though it does not build anything up; it only elaborates the Truth, which from the beginning was always beautifully simple. This is why we have the Creeds: because they were responses to false ideas spreading among the cities of the ancient world; it is also why Abraham was justified by his Faith even before the New Testament had been revealed. The Lutheran aim is not toward philosophizing but toward that wonderfully simple truth that even little children know: that Christ has saved us: believe in Him: end of story.
I think Chemnitz’s whole Lutheran argument against Roman teachings here boils down to that point, and that the Roman misunderstandings amount to a refusal to ascribe all merit, all satisfaction, all goodness to God alone, rather than to ourselves:
“What intervenes, for which reason God becomes gracious to the sinner where he has merited wrath and eternal damnation? What should the conscience consider to be the essential reason why we are granted the gift of sonship? Wherein can trust rest secure that we will partake of eternal life? Is it the Son of God and mediator, who with His obedience, with His satisfaction, and His merit achieves this? Or is it we ourselves who must demonstrate such?”
When the RCC argues that justification is worked through God’s enabling the regenerate to perform good works to merit their salvation, they nevertheless imply that our salvation is ultimately to rest upon our own shoulders: and this destroys our assurance, because we shall fail. The Lutheran church observes from Scripture, rather, that our assurance of salvation rests in the perfect atonement of Christ alone, who cannot fail. This is the true Faith, for it is not doubting, but “the assurance of things hoped for.” It is not mere intellectual assent, but a robust confidence, trust, and hope in God’s promises. And true hope in and love for God must flow from this assurance of God, not stand alone as if separate from Faith and not entailed by it, for hope and love are made all the more strong because they are confident in God’s promise. That is, one cannot fully love God if one is not confident that He loves him.
There are a number of other issues to be mentioned, including the fact that the Roman view of Scripture and the authority of tradition and the papacy is circular, in that it relies on Scripture for the office of the papacy but relies on the papacy for the interpretation of Scripture; the view that the regenerate are capable of satisfying God’s law in this life for the sake of divine reward, despite the wealth of biblical evidence against this; and the view that the RCC has the authority to declare new doctrines, without Scriptural support, that are binding to the believer.
Overall, very rich and illuminating, especially with the inclusion of long excerpts from the Council of Trent and about 100 pages of extensive endnotes from Scripture and the church fathers. I will be using this as a handbook, I am sure, for years to come. Let us hope and pray that the two churches come to unity and agreement in the future.
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review