Rock and Sand: An Orthodox Appraisal of the Protestant Reformers and Their Teachings

by Josiah Trenham, Michael Monos (Editor), Nitsa McClatchey (Editor)

This book has been written for three purposes. First, to provide the Orthodox reader with a competent overview of the history of Protestantism and its major traditions, from its beginnings in the 16th century to the present day. This overview relies heavily upon the Reformer's own words as well as the creeds of various Protestant faiths, in order to avoid misrepresentation and caricature. Second, to acquaint Orthodox and non-Orthodox readers with a narrative of the historical relations between the Orthodox East and the Protestant West. Finally, to provide a summary of Orthodox theological opinion on the tenets of Protestantism.

Genres: Theology, Christianity, Religion, History, Nonfiction, Church History, Christian

420 pages, Paperback

First published April 1, 2015

About the author

Archpriest Josiah Trenham, Ph.D., is a native Southern Californian. He was ordained to the Holy Priesthood in 1993, and was awarded the Ph.D. in Theology from the University of Durham, England, in 2004. He has served as pastor of St. Andrew Orthodox Church in Riverside, Ca. since 1998.

Father Josiah is the founder and director of Patristic Nectar Publications, a company dedicated to “nourishing the spiritually thirsty with the sweet teachings of the Holy Fathers” in quality audio recordings. PNP produces both recordings of patristic works as well as recordings of lectures and homilies available in direct download formats. Father Josiah’s weekly homilies and additional theological reflections are published weekly and listened to by thousands all over the globe on The Arena podcast on Ancient Faith Radio.

Father serves as an instructor in and on the Board of Advisors of the Ss. Cyril and Athanasius Orthodox Institute in San Francisco. He is an adjunct professor of theology at St. Katherine College in Encinitas, Ca. (2010-present), and was an Adjunct Professor of History at California Baptist University (2003-2010). He is a member of the Orthodox Theological Society of America, and participates in yearly academic forums and symposia. Since 2004 he has served on the Mayoral Environmental Committee (GAP) of the City of Riverside. Father Josiah has also served as a member of the Secretariat of the Assembly of Orthodox Bishops in the United States since its inception in May, 2010. Father Josiah was married in 1988, and has ten children.

Father Josiah’s books and articles have been published by St. Herman Press, New Rome Press, Zoe Press, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Journal, Logos: A Journal of Eastern Christian Studies, The Journal of the Institute on Religion and Democracy, CIVA: The Journal of Christians in the Visual Arts, Divine Ascent, The Word Magazine, OrthodoxyToday.org, American Orthodox Institute, Sourozh, Pemptousia.com (Vatopaidi Monastery), Eastern Churches Review, and more.

Father Josiah has been interviewed by Fox News, Voice of Russia Radio (VR), Russian Television (RT), Ancient Faith Radio, Culture Shocks: The Radio Show of Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, and numerous local news outlets: ABC, NBC, KTLA, 590 AM talk radio, and more.

Father Josiah has conducted interviews for his own podcast with numerous religious leaders of Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Protestant traditions including Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone of San Francisco, Metropolitan Kallistos Ware of Oxford, England, Pastor Jim Garlow of Skyline Church, San Diego, and Prof. Wesley Hill of Trinity Seminary, PA.

Father Josiah has conducted numerous diocesan, parish, and clergy retreats and seminars for every Orthodox Christian jurisdiction in America and in Canada. He has also spoken at numerous colleges and universities including Westmont College, St. Katherine College, Holy Cross Greek Orthodox School of Theology, St. Vladimir’s Orthodox Theological Seminary, St. Paul University, California Baptist University, San Jacinto Community College, and more.

Reviews

[Michael O'Brien · Rating 5 out of 5]

Probably the best explanation yet that I have seen yet on the differences between the history and various doctrinal positions of Protestantism and Orthodox Christianity. Very thorough, easy to read and to understand.

The author, Fr. Josiah Trenham, adeptly explains the circumstances --- religious, ecclesiastical, and political -- forming the genesis of the Reformation ---- as well as the backgrounds of the Reformers, such as Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin themselves among others. Certainly, as a former Evangelical, there is much that I was not told about --- the personal issues of these men, their personalities, and the many ways each was absolutely certain that their innovations were inspired by the Holy Spirit, yet each contradicted the other.

Trenham does a good job at calling balls and strikes evenhandedly in areas where the Reformers got things right with respect to traditional Christianity as understood in the Eastern Church and to where they erred. Luther seems in some ways to be at variance, condemning the Papacy for formulating "doctrines of men", yet then in his own right, making doctrinal pronouncements as dogmatically as any of the Popes he condemned.

Zwingli seems almost a nihilist, indiscriminately casting out the good with the bad of long held Christian traditions and practices --- but then himself seemingly shocked at he had wrought, turning upon the Anabaptists who took the logical implications of his approach to doctrine and took them yet further. Ironically, Zwingli would fall in battle against other Swiss reformist pastors.

Calvin seems to have practically turned Geneva into the city -state version of an Islamic republic --- regulating every phase of citizens' lives in a way his Roman Catholic predecessors never had, interestingly enough

The history is interesting enough, and must be understood so as to understand the subsequent course of events that Protestantism took, especially once it developed further in America. The denial of such doctrines as strong church government and authority, and long held doctrines in Christianity --- often based as much as the charisma and leadership ability of a given Protestant leader as any logical derivation from ancient Christianity --- such as with the Eucharist, baptism, and salvation would have profound implications, resulting in such a chaotic explosion of various denominations, sects, and cults such that the term "Christian" is oft too vague to tell anyone what someone adopting that term actually believes.

This books was absolutely fascinating --- it is as clear a writing on how the Orthodox Church sees the Protestant Reformation, and why it holds to the beliefs and structure it does in comparison with her counterparts in the Protestant and Roman Catholic parts of Christendom. Definitely, a recommended read for those into Church history and theology.

[Nathan Duffy · Rating 5 out of 5]

In examining the nature of the Protestant Reformation, and the lives of the Reformers, and evaluating it all from an Orthodox perspective, Fr. Josiah provides a most crucial text for converts, inquirers, catechumens, and protestants.

Refreshingly, this text doesn't make a pretense of some supposed academic 'neutrality', but lays all the cards on the table. Where the Reformers and their churches took a turn for the better -- rejecting various medieval papal innovations, for instance -- they are praised, and where they erred and departed from the common apostolic, orthodox deposit of faith, they are chastened. Though much of the text simply relays the historical development that gave rise to the various movements and churches, as well as the personalities of the Reformers.

One aspect of the book I found particularly exhilarating were in some of its critiques of the Reformation that are often ignored or under-emphasized. For instance, Fr. Josiah's taking to task Luther for his staunch anti-monasticism and degrading of the celibate life, along with his promotion of marriage to an extent out of accord with traditional Christianity, is fascinating. Here we see the Reformers rejecting, not a papal innovation, but universal Christianity which has an explicit Scriptural basis. Not only that, but we see how this aspect of the Reformation has borne bad fruit in modern Protestantism, which has no monasticism or expressly celibate vocation.

This is in addition to more traditional critiques of Protestantism, but those also find unapologetic, straightforward, and clear presentation that is rather rare in our more politically correct, diverse modern context.

Some of the most interesting and memorable material appears in small asides or footnotes. These divergences pepper the book with flavor and keep the historical main thrust from becoming too dry.

Highly recommended reading for Orthodox (especially in America or traditionally Protestant lands), and Protestants looking to better understand themselves.

[Franklin · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rock and Sand: An Orthodox Appraisal of the Protestant Reformers and Their Teaching, by Fr. Josiah Trenham is a very good start on what I hope are more books to come in this same vein. Rock and Sand is in many ways very insightful and helpful. I write this review as a former Protestant and agree with the substance of Fr. Josiah's appraisal of the Reformers and Protestant tradition as a whole. The Reformation movement and its Churches, and their petulant offspring, remain today, as then, ultimately, as to their theological claims, incoherent and self defeating. As to their claim to the Apostolic inheritance, illegitimate.

First of all Fr. Josiah is a very good writer. The narrative recap of each of the major Protestant Reformers was nicely written in my opinion. That takes up roughly ¾ of the book. He weaves in critique here and there in the historical narrative, showing the inconsistencies and quite honestly, hypocrisies of the Reformers, despite their best intentions. It strikes me that in each case the Reformer ended up as his own 'Pope' wielding authority and making decisions just as grave as the Pope whom they condemned. But that is what happens when love for the Body of Christ is not really guiding actions and the dialectic of action/reaction is. Protestants can say "the truth was at stake" as much as they want, but St Paul subsumes 'truth' within the fold of love when he says 'love rejoices in the truth'. Truth is important, but only as a scalpel in the hand of love. As I have heard it said, "Love without truth is seduction. Truth without love is destructive." The Reformers fell to what we all at times fall to: a faultfinding spirit - with its concomitant sin: self love, vainglory and pride. It is a particularly devastating cycle to get into which reflects the Lord's admonition "judge not lest you be judged. For as you pass judgment so that same judgment will be passed to you." And so the Reformers, thinking they were reforming the church rather deeply disfigured it blinded by a faultfinding spirit and blindness with regard to their own sins. Instead of teaching the world how to love by laying down their lives in the manner of our Lord, and of his Apostles, they thought, as many of us think, even in the Orthodox Church, "we can do it better". Ahhh. But that is surely foolishness. That is simply a rationalization to avoid laying our lives down by taking up the cross of our Lord and Master Teacher Jesus. We claim to be disciples = learners, of Him, of "the Way". Behold the fruit of self love, pride and vainglory. When will we ever learn?

Fr. Trenham notes the many inconsistencies. I fleshed one of them out (above). His critiques are peppered throughout the narrative shedding some light that perhaps many of us who have been traditioned in Protestant communities have failed to see. It is difficult to watch the reality of the situation unfold and especially difficult to take in the indisputable facts: the Reformers are, in reality, acting with no less presumption in their shepherding of their 'flocks' than the Pope whom they despise. What in fact they did was to 'cut off their nose to spite their face' and 'cut out their legs from under themselves'. There were errors in the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, but instead of laboring in love for their correction, the Reformers became of the mind that they could 'do it better.' Rock and Sand shows without a doubt just how wrong they were - and the Western world has lived with the fallout ever since. The Reformation, despite all the protestations of Protestants, is quite clearly a repudiation of our Lord's prayer and desire that we might all "One" as he is in the Father, and the Father is in him, as he and the Father are One - with the result that, as Jesus prays, "the world may believe that you have sent me". O the ingenuity of self love and pride masquerading as a servant to help God get things done. But as Samuel said to King Saul, "To obey is better than sacrifice." A directive that I find rather as difficult at times as the Reformers apparently did.

The last ' of the book consists of an appraisal of Protestant doctrine. For the most part I thought it was well done. I found the section on the filioque the most unsatisfying. I felt he should have brought the Scriptures to his aid, which he didn't. That left me puzzled a bit. The most clear affirmation of the procession of the Spirit from the Father alone is John 15:26 "But when the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father . . ." Fr. Trenham mainly marshals doctrinal arguments from tradition and the writing of St. Photius. While I don't disagree with what Fr. Trenham wrote, it would have more gravitas, in my opinion, if the arguments made were rooted in Scripture as well.

His critique of the Protestant doctrine of the many 'Sola' slogans of the Reformers and particularly of 'Sola Scriptura' is quite good. He points out the utter irony of claiming that Scripture alone solves the problem of error - for them particularly the errors they saw in the Roman Catholic Church, while at the same time actually CHANGING what the Scripture says in order to conform to their own prejudices: 'Sola Fides' (by faith alone) being an example. Fr. Josiah rightly shows that one cannot prove FROM SCRIPTURE the doctrine of 'sola Scriptura'. Scripture is the core and touchstone of what the Orthodox call 'Holy Tradition'. And 'Holy Tradition' is the environment, or the ethos, if you will, the phronema - mindset/perspective - that enlightens us to interpret the Scripture rightly. One only experiences Holy Tradition in the Church of Jesus Christ and his Apostles, and one can only interpret the Scripture faithfully from within the One Catholic and Apostolic Church. This is easily understandable if one simply looks at their own family culture, or ethos and use of language, manner of expressing their view of themselves and the world around. If your family left a text full of your families peculiar rules and traditions, it is very likely that many of them would not be understandable by those on the outside of your family, some even if you tried to explain your families customs and traditions. Sometimes the only way to understand is by living them oneself.

A few times I felt a few statements had a tinge of triumphalist sentiment. Perhaps some would disagree. I can only say how a few passages came off to me. It seems to me that so often we, the Orthodox, have such confidence of our truthfulness in contrast to others that we slip into a rather boasting posture. I find this so saddening its hard to put in words. That we know the truth certainly has nothing to do with us, our intelligence, or our worthiness, and everything to do with the kindness and mercy of God. Having said that, I wouldn't say that is the general tenor of the book. Not at all.

I was very grateful that Fr. Trenham dedicated a whole chapter to the "Orthodox appreciation of Protestant Virtues". In the chapter he very graciously and generously affirmed their "high value of the text of Scripture", their "zeal for missionary work", their "deep and costly commitment to Christian education" and their "aggressive commitment to cultural engagement with Christian values". I agree with him on every point. I've experienced each of these personally. I find that Protestants generally take Jesus' words to be salt and light in their world much more seriously. Too often we seek to push 'Orthodoxy' on others. It seems to me that we should be sharing the love of Christ with others without shame as Saint Paul wrote, "I preach Christ and him crucified" with hearts full of the love of Christ. As St. Paul testified of his own motive for action - "the love of Christ constrains me". How many of us can say that in our interaction with those who are our neighbors and friends outside of the Apostolic inheritance of the Faith, that we are "constrained" by "the love of Christ" to serve them and minister to them the healing presence of Christ, the meek and lowly One?

I found the 4 appendices very helpful for understanding how the Orthodox have responded to Protestants in previous interactions. Fr. Josiah occasionally touched on this in his narrative as well.

In conclusion I found myself very encouraged and enlightened. I very much enjoyed Rock and Sand. I think everyone would benefit from reading the narrative on the Reformers. Some might find the sections on doctrinal critique a bit hard going if they are unfamiliar with the more intimate details of Orthodox doctrine. Thank you Fr. Josiah for your labor in bringing this book to print. I hope it will inspire more works in the same vein so that more might come into the fold of the Church of Christ which is "the Pillar and ground of the Truth" - the "truth as it is in Jesus" - who find themselves "blown to and fro by every wind of doctrine". May the Lord grant us all his peace.

[Jeremy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Notes:

+ Summary
1. The Orthodox catholic faith of the Christians was once for all delivered to the saints, revealed and pure
2. Heresy is a parasitical innovation, an alteration of the true faith, and is always incoherent and deficient. It is reductionistic, which is expressed in its being named often after its founder
3. Heresy is almost always a deliberative deviation from the apostolic norm due to sin. Common motivations are a love of the new, discontent, pride, indiscreet curiosity, love of power, and greed for ecclesiastical office
4. Heresy develops under the providence of God and is the fulfillment of New Testament prophecies. Christians should not be surprised nor scandalized by the appearance of heresies, and should accomplish God’s work in opposing them. This work includes the love of the heretic and efforts at his recovery, as well as the acknowledgement of, and affixation to those leaders of the church who are approved

+ Categories of heresy
1. Authority
2. Theology
3. Soteriology
4. Ecclesiology

+ Pope Leo III on the Filioque
- Wrote to western monks in 808 that they were forbidden to use the filioque in the creed
- Wrote to Charlemagne denouncing the interpolated creed, saying that not even he himself would presume equality with the authority of the fathers, as the Frankish synod had presumed to do
- Had the Greek original without the filioque and a Latin translation inscribed on silver plaques and set up in St. Peter’s in Rome



Potent Quotables:

Where is the reality of Sola Scriptura and the perspicuity of scripture if even those bound by faculty, friendship, politics, and faith cannot agree on the meaning of the central Christian act of worship - the Holy Eucharist?

Extra-biblical words like “trinity” and “hypostatic union” could be judged inappropriate by the rather naive biblicism and disregard for traditional dogma of the Anabaptists.

The issue of slavery divided the various Baptist churches, and the SBC [Southern Baptist Convention] actually formed itself in order to defend white supremacy and the validity of slavery. In 1995, the SBC adopted a resolution to renounce its racist roots.

Theological criticism of infant baptism could equally be applied to infant circumcision and thus be a criticism of God’s ancient institutions.

Were not the 318 Nicene fathers bishops? Did they not believe that the Eucharist was the very body and blood of Jesus Christ? Did they not celebrate the liturgy, honor monasticism, venerate relics, make holy pilgrimage, express devotion to the Holy Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary, pray for the departed, invoke the saints, obey sacred canons, and read scripture in accord with the tradition? The answer, of course, to these questions is yes. And so, the reformers and their descendants have this question to answer: Why do they demand adherence to the trinitarian positions of the holy fathers while explicitly or implicitly degrading these same holy fathers by their Protestant criticisms? How can Protestant teachers be consistent in demanding an adherence to the dogmas of the fathers of the early councils when these same fathers believed the Holy Eucharist to be the very body and blood of Christ, worshiped liturgically, prayed to saints, venerated the Mother of God, insisted on the governance of the church by bishops, and interceded for the repose of departed souls? Why accept the creeds of these councils but reject their canons - something that the fathers of the councils themselves explicitly forbade? This dilemma remains unsolved even for Protestants today. Protestants say they wish to preserve the fundamental teachings of Christianity, yet denigrate the lives of those Christians who articulated these fundamental teachings.

It is a particular irony and illustrative of what a low view of the church and ordination Calvin had, that he himself never appears to have been ordained by anyone. How Sola Scriptura justifies ordination without a laying on of hands by a person in appropriate ecclesiastical authority, when that same Scriptura everywhere witnesses to this reality, is illogical.

While studying the Epistle to the Romans, [Arminius] came to disbelieve the Calvinist doctrine of predestination. It is ironic that the study of the same epistle by different reformers led them to such differing conclusions, despite their affirmation that scripture is clear and interprets itself without the necessity of the Holy Fathers.

Since Vatican 2, a Latin ecclesiology of Protestants as “separated brethren” and not as “anathematized heretics” has come to be the official Catholic teaching.

We confess that the Eucharist was given to us by Jesus Christ to be consumed, not to be paraded with outside of the divine service, as in Latin Corpus Christi processions, nor to be placed in a monstrance and adored by the faithful in holy hours. This is, in fact, a Latin abuse of the Eucharist itself. Our Lord's words are “take, eat,” not “take, parade” or “take, adore.”

To be born again is to be born of water and the spirit in Holy Baptism. The Evangelical notion of being born again places that experience definitively outside of the realm of true Christian baptism, and substitutes a tent revival, altar call, or some such intangible pseudo-sacrament for the mystery of Holy Baptism.

The Protestant reformers threw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. They rejected the innovations of the papacy by becoming still greater innovators. They rejected the pope, and each reformer made himself a pope, and demonstrated great indignation at those Protestants who did not follow in theological lock-step.

Why do Lutheran, Calvinistic, Zwinglian, and Anabaptist creeds all differ on fundamental points if the Bible alone is the only authority of the reformers?

The church is a historical body, and has been on the earth for thousands of years. One need simply ask this question of one’s Christian community: Who founded my church? If the answer is someone whose name is not Peter, Paul, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Thomas, Matthew, James, Thaddeus, Simon the Zealot, or Matthaeus, then be assured you are not in the one holy, catholic, and apostolic church.

Why must Mormons maintain a belief in the first three paragraphs of the creed to be Christian, but the Protestants can reject the fourth paragraph of the creed with impunity? Essential Christian teaching required to be a member of the church involves not just an affirmation of the teaching on the father, son, and Holy Spirit, but also on the church, as expressed in the fourth paragraph of the creed. Protestantism is neither one, nor holy (for it is without saints), nor catholic, nor apostolic.

Protestantism has been unable to control, in any cohesive way, the new hermeneutic of individualistic authority it established in its efforts to shake off papal dominance. Protestantism has been a runaway theological train from the beginning.

[Christopher · Rating 2 out of 5]

Disappointingly lacking. "Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy" by Andrew Stephen Damick treats the topics better and more thoroughly.

[Tessa · Rating 3 out of 5]

Pros:
--Useful for viewing the Protestant Reformation from an outside lens
--Beautiful book with gorgeous formatting. A pleasure to read from a physical perspective
--The chapter on modern non-denominationalism was well done
--The cover has a painting of the wise man and the foolish man parable and my toddler absolutely loved that and has spent a lot of time looking at it and listening to the "uh oh house" song

Cons:
--So biased lol (not that it pretended to be anything else!)
--Holds Protestants and Catholics to a standard that it doesn't hold Orthodox clergy to (particularly in regard to clergy using political influence, which all three churches have done)
--Mocks Protestant martyrs who were burned at the stake (very poor taste regardless of whether or not you agree with them)

[Kim Coleman · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is really unique because the author has a Protestant background (before becoming an Orthodox priest) and approaches the topic with much respect. And since it is from an Orthodox standpoint, he deals with both sides of the Reformation. He’s really an unbiased 3rd party as much as anyone can be. I think the most important question this book asks is: if you were transported to the early church, how would your faith be viewed? They didn’t have many categories. You were a Christian who held to the teachings of the Apostles or you were a heretic. Would they recognize your worship on a Sunday? Would you recognize and be able to participate in theirs? Otherwise lots of good historical information and analysis, spoken with grace and charity.

[Adonis McReynolds · Rating 5 out of 5]

As a former Protestant of 16 years who recently converted to Orthodoxy, this book was in my opinion the best breakdown of the difference between a religion made on the backs of scholars vs a religion established by the Lord Himself through His saints. Unbelievable work by Father Josiah Trenham. To God be the glory!

[J. Michael · Rating 4 out of 5]

Mostly great.
Even as a Protestant, I thought the treatment of Luther, Zwingli, the anabaptist movement, and evangelicalism was fair and superb.
While I don’t romanticize Calvin, I did think that his criticism of Calvin was harsher than the rest. The assessment of Calvin’s views on the Eucharist and baptism seemed inconsistent with what I’ve read of Calvin in institutes and other writings.
Overall, this was solid work and one that most Protestants should read. Warning to Protestants: if you’re staunchly reformed, your blood will boil in spots but push through. The book is worth the time and generally weighs the good with the bad fairly.

[Isabella Lash · Rating 4 out of 5]

4.5

[Katherine · Rating 5 out of 5]

Really concise, fair book about the reformers and the Orthodox response to their teaching. I liked that it was very heavy on quotations from the reformers themselves rather than the author presenting caricatures of their work (which I see a lot from people who have no experience with reformed theology). As a convert from a reformed denomination to Orthodoxy myself, this was a helpful guide to rearrange some theological furniture and answered a lot of questions I didn’t know were still lingering. I just wish it had been more detailed! I wanted each chapter with the Orthodox response to be longer because I found them very helpful.
A note on the tone, which seems to have turned many off: I did not find the tone to be uncharitable or unloving — but it was very firm. Orthodox theology and reformed theology are unavoidably in conflict and Fr. Josiah makes this clear (and writes unmistakably like a former Calvinist, for better or worse.) At the same time, my understanding is that this book is by an Orthodox convert (from a reformed tradition) for Orthodox converts and NOT primarily for Protestants who are still protestant in order to persuade them of error. Fr. Josiah is very clear about where the Reformers and reformed theology differs from the teaching of the Orthodox Church, but people who have left reformed traditions need a clear understanding of what it is they left behind! This book would likely not be a comfortable read for Protestants and I would suggest that that is because it is not primarily for them. It does have a lot to offer them and it is an easily digestible breakdown/jumping off point of what the Orthodox response to reformed theology is, if that is what someone is looking for.

[Tanner Goldsmith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good and convincing, however, doesn’t account for the endless nuances of Protestantism. Fr. Trenham does a fine job at expressing the ineffectiveness of painting with a broad brush, but I found myself at points arguing with him regarding my former reformed/Puritan/baptistic convictions that he was misrepresenting it. Not really his fault, though, but the fault of Protestant chaos.

[Andrew · Rating 5 out of 5]

A good and helpful overview to the topic

[Vanessa Munro · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a very interesting, informative and thought provoking book that once read you need time to process and evaluate the impact this should have on your life!!! Very well written and researched.

[John Steadman · Rating 5 out of 5]

Concise, fair, accurate, and overall excellent. Highly recommend.

[Nicole Bimber · Rating 5 out of 5]

A must read for all believers.

[Christian · Rating 4 out of 5]

A Pointed Appeal

NOTE: I listened through the audiobook version, narrated by the author.

AT A GLANCE:
If you haven't guessed by the title, the "Rock" represents the stability of Orthodoxy while the "Sand" represents the ever-changing nature of Protestant theology. This is a polemical work, and unashamedly so.

CONTENT:
The Protestant reformers are examined individually, with most of the time naturally going to Luther and Calvin's magisterial reformations. We are given a decent amount of historical context for each and clearly informed where their teachings diverge from historic Christian orthodoxy. The accounts are generally well-sourced and the arguments display a high degree of scholarship. Though combative, this is less a "Syllabus of Errors" and more like a selection from John Damascene. There is a clear admiration for Protestant evangelism and their high view of Scripture. The book ends with a set of letters and treatises on the topic dated 1672 - 1912.

NARRATOR:
Fr Trenham is an academically-accomplished archpriest in the Orthodox Church in America (OCA) with a focus on Patristic studies, especially St John Chrysostom. He was once a Calvinist and this is often apparent in his style; his tone is biting and his rhetoric forceful. His popular work and teaching engages American culture from a highly traditional perspective, framing Orthodoxy as a bedrock of reason free from modernist leanings and the development of doctrine. One of his stated goals is to avoid triumphalism and he succeeds at first, though beginning around Chapter 14 this goal is largely abandoned.

OVERALL:
If you've ever wondered what the historical Eastern Orthodox position is towards Protestantism, this is an excellent resource. It is unfettered by modern ecumenical tendencies and follows lines of argument supported by saints in the author's tradition. Granted, many Orthodox will take issue with his tone and how the emphasis strays from focus on Christian unity; nonetheless, I appreciate that Fr Trenham is willing to stare headlong at real ideological differences and bring them into the open rather than concealing or glossing over them.

[Dan · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book itself is beautifully designed and printed. I loved the inclusion of full color paintings and portraits of the rapid fire names, icons, and places described throughout the book.

The most fun that I had with this book was hearing an outsider’s perspective on Lutheran history and theology that wasn’t Roman Catholic or Reformed. I admit, I learned a lot, even if Trenham was simply doing a bunch of book reports for this project.

It was really funny to read someone who also doesn’t like the yoke of Rome, describing the RCC and its abuses. However, his criticisms of Luther were not well researched and ended up similar to RCC criticisms, usually simple ad hominem attacks, etc.

I really enjoyed his histories and critiques of the various Protestant religions, and I tip my hat at his reference to American Evangelicals simply as “American Folk Religion.”

After reading the book I looked up the author and was disappointed. I guess he’s your typical Reformed Protestant who went all the way East in search of tradition and mystery. It really took a lot of air out of the high and mighty position he speaks with in the book, as though he’s born and raised orthodox….
Regardless, he also seems to want to become some sort of e celebrity, rolling together Jordan Peterson, Jonathan Pageau, and whoever else.

The book is written with the crass/frank hammer way of speaking that one finds in EO writing. Very very sectarian, alienating to anyone but his brand of Eastern Orthodoxy. It’s entertaining to read, but nothing that could convince a Christian with his head in his shoulders.

The criticisms are the same old same old tired ones: filioque, Theosis, sola Scriptura, oh my! Never heard those before ;)

I also found his disgruntled responses to Luther’s attacks on monasticism very funny. It seemed like Luther agitated a seared conscience 500 years away ;)

[Lisa · Rating 5 out of 5]

A clear and thorough explanation of the Protestant reformation and the consequences thereof, as well as the Orthodox Christian understanding of those events and the people involved.

As I said in one of my comments as I was reading, I wish I could read this with a Protestant friend who would be willing to give honest answers to the questions this book raises for non-Orthodox Christians.

It is clear that many Protestants do not (and maybe cannot in some cases) have a clear understanding of how much of True Christianity the reformers rejected in their attempts to rectify the abuses of the western church.

Fr. Josiah writes in a loving, non-judgmental way, presenting the facts in a well researched, clear manner. He enumerates and describes the Protestant heresies without apology, while at the same time not hesitating to show those areas in which Protestants and Orthodox are in agreement. He even has an entire section devoted to praising Protestant virtues and acknowledging the positive things that many Protestants have done and continue to do.

Rock and Sand has helped me tremendously by giving me a better understanding of both how and why the Orthodox Christian faith differs from that of the heterodox. The gracious spirit with which it is written encourages compassion and understanding while defending the truth rather than an attitude of pride and accusation.

[Dcn Peter Markevich · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book gives a concise historical overview of the Reformation and its legacy, interspersed with critiques of various fallacies, heresies, and errors of each reformer or denomination. Following the historical narrative are two contrasting chapters on the virtues and heresies of Protestantism as a whole. Throughout the historical narrative the author repeatedly hits home two points: first, that the reformers' vociferous disagreements on the most fundamental points of ecclesiology and soteriology belies their common belief that the meaning of the Bible is clear to all who read it and that no external authority is necessary for its interpretation; and second, that the Reformer's well-intentioned revolt against the excesses and errors of the papacy should have led them back to the unaltered Ancient Orthodox Church from which Rome itself split. Instead, each reformer became his own pope by seeking the true faith outside the true Church.

This book is much needed for Orthodox pastors, seminarians and catechumens. It fills a long-existing gap in Orthodox scholarship in the English language and is wonderfully suited for seminary courses in Comparative Theology or Church History, if the course delves into events in western Christendom after the Great Schism.

[Nat (Photini) C. · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hands down one of the most concise, gracious and enlightening historical account of the Protestant Reformation. I was not expecting it to be as gracious and loving as it was.
Not and in-depth, exhaustive dive into each Reformer but very historical and explains plenty to be able to understand all of what happened and why.
Definitely explained why I was taught the stuff that I was and it shook me at how terrible the foundation is of the Protestant church. Men who loved God who did a horrible job with their theology and abandoning of tradition and interpretation of Scripture.
If you’re a Protestant, this will greatly challenge and grow you, I prayer, closer to Christ and His Church.

[Jaden Weatherly · Rating 4 out of 5]

Definitely enjoyed this book more the second time around. Trenham spends a great deal of time going through the history of the major players in the reformation, the subsequent RC counter reformation, and the rise of evangelicalism. i think he gives a fair critique of the reformers while mentioning the things he appreciates them for.

i appreciate his time spent affirming the good he sees in protestantism. his critiques of protestantism are classic, nothing that hasn’t been brought up in the past, but nonetheless good points that, at the very least, should be considered by any protestant.

[mpsiple · Rating 1 out of 5]

not serious

[Ana Aurora · Rating 5 out of 5]

I feel I was walking around blind before reading this book. This is an absolute must-read that helps you understand the divide between the Orthodox Church and all the others. Even if you are a well-meaning but slightly confused Orthodox Christian, by the end of the book you may realize how much you may have been marinated in Protestant theology without even knowing it. You see how human innovation leads the faithful astray, how the seemingly most inoffensive heresy can become a dangerous slippery slope, and you come to understand the sadness of stepping away from true Christianity, and that of being refused the beauty of its mystery and truth.

I did not find it to be an easy-to-read book—not because of the writing style, but because of its rich historical content and especially the fact that, being a novice in such readings, I was unfamiliar with many theological terms. I wished the book had a few pages of short definitions at the end (so that I would not have to stop for research on every page), but then I didn’t. The footnotes, especially in the history-dense part of the book, are on the heavy side, so anything else may have been too much. And why not acknowledge that the personal effort going into it was a brilliant example of pain as the only way to achieve anything meritorious…

However, I chose to do this research on the side. You can definitely read the book without this extra effort and still get a lot from it.

The effort was so worth it, however. The book gives you a solid foundation from which you can then go and learn more about both the history of Christianity and Christian dogma. In fact, Rock and Sand is not a book you want to borrow from the library. It’s one you want to buy, read, and then keep as reference material, so that you can return to it whenever you need a refresher or are ready for some deeper understanding.

The inclusion of The Confession of Patriarch Dositheos was a brilliant decision. It made for a very illuminating read, even though I chose a slow, satisfying progress over quick reading.

Beyond the fact that the book is permeated with faith and the author manages to be respectful and considerate while straightforward, the volume is also a thing of beauty. It is obvious that much love and care went into it. I like making notes on the edge of my books, but I simply could not do it with this one. It felt almost like a sacrilege to defile its beautiful pages, so this volume remains in pristine condition.

[Will Wilson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Rock and Sand: An Orthodox Appraisal of the Protestant Reformation and Their Teachings is a book written by Fr. Josiah Trenham, an Orthodox Christian priest who offers a critical analysis of the Protestant Reformation and its theological implications. In the book, Fr. Trenham explores the history of the Protestant Reformation, its theological developments, and its impact on modern Christianity.

The book is divided into three parts, with the first part focusing on the historical context of the Protestant Reformation. Fr. Trenham begins by tracing the origins of the Reformation to the late medieval period, exploring the theological debates that led to the division between the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant Reformers. He then examines the key figures of the Reformation, including Martin Luther, John Calvin, and Ulrich Zwingli, and their contributions to the development of Protestant theology.

In the second part of the book, Fr. Trenham offers a detailed critique of Protestant theology, focusing on the doctrines of sola scriptura, sola fide, and sola gratia. He argues that these doctrines have led to a fragmentation of Christian theology and a rejection of the sacramental tradition of the early Church. Fr. Trenham also critiques the Protestant emphasis on individualism and the rejection of the authority of the Church, arguing that this has led to a loss of the unity and catholicity of the Church.

The final part of the book focuses on the implications of the Protestant Reformation for modern Christianity. Fr. Trenham argues that the fragmentation of Christian theology has led to a loss of the Gospel message and a confusion about the nature of the Church. He calls for a return to the sacramental tradition of the early Church and a rejection of the individualistic and subjective approach to theology that characterizes Protestantism.

Overall, Rock and Sand is a thorough and thoughtful critique of the Protestant Reformation and its theological implications. Fr. Trenham offers a unique perspective as an Orthodox Christian priest and his analysis provides a valuable contribution to the ongoing theological dialogue between different branches of Christianity. The book is recommended for anyone interested in the history of the Protestant Reformation and its impact on modern Christianity.

[Readius Maximus · Rating 5 out of 5]

It's a great honor to be catechized by the author who is even more amazing in person then he is in his writings.

This is a very gentle but firm explanation and evaluation of Western Christianity from an Orthodox view point.

Even when I was a protestant I found myself allergic to Protestant theology and even while reading this I found myself getting lost in the buzz saw of hermeneutic free for all that that was the constant result of the movement. I didn't realize how important the political situation was to these reform movements and indicates to me that the will to power was from its very inception a large part of the movement including biblical interpretation.

Reading this was deeply embarrassing and convicting. From the 3 tradition not only did I come from the most innovative and radical but being part of the American evangelical scene and even in the charismatic movement for a few years I was part of the worst of the worst.

It is amusing that American Christians who specialize in being ahistorical even in regards to their own origins blame the woke tyrants of our day for being ahistorical.

Luther, Zwingli, and Henry the 8th seem to be the main first wave of reformers with Calvin having a gigantic influence as a second wave reformer.

After 500 years of constant chaos I don't know how this movement has any life left in it at all other then it speaks the language of the age or more likely created the radical subjectivist age we live in. How no protestant has seen the connection between themselves and existentialism is truly a monumental act of self deception for it seems to be right their in front of their faces. However man has never been a very perceptive animal.

One thing I was shocked to find out is that almost all Protestants except for 2 tiny groups have adopted the filioque clause in the creed.

Fr. Josiah Trenham also points out that the Protestants failed to correct many papal errors including papal supremacy where they either made themselves popes or made everyone popes.

I find Protestant theology very tedious and boring but Fr. Josiah did a good job summarizing the different revolutions.

[Brad Bevers · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have two friends who have recommended a few books about the orthodox branch of Christianity, but this is the first that I picked up. The main reason is that at one point in the book the author argues that 'Sola Scriptura' is heretical . . . that was enough for me to want to read his take. (Note: the author believes that scripture is inerrant, but also that the church has a role in passing on traditions as well. While his argument was not fully convincing, it definitely makes me want to read more both for and against his view.)


I found this book to be very well written and a great introduction into some of the largest differences between the Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox churches. It is very biased (as the author plainly states) and is very critical of protestant thinkers, including Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli.

I loved how the author wasn't willing to pull any punches, and also talk about the positives of the Catholic and Protestant faiths that he sees. I don't agree with everything in this book, but I am very glad that I listened to it. I bought a hardcover copy and plan to go back through certain sections again and take more times with them. The chapters on the 'solas', whether church traditions should rank in importance, the apocrypha, and thoughts on baptism specifically.

Reading a book like this is challenging, and not something I would recommend to everyone. I plan to read other books both supporting and criticizing some of the arguments the author makes and if you aren't prepared to read multiple books, I wouldn't recommend reading this one either. This is my favorite kind of reading now, a book that I agree with 80-90% of but there is also enough there to wrestle with that it doesn't feel like you already read the same book ten times.

[Yuri Zbitnoff · Rating 5 out of 5]

When I set out to find a spiritual home, I had already ruled out Protestantism and Roman Catholicism from the start. While this may seem like a case of myopia, an ill-informed choice or entrenched bias, the truth is that it was a perfectly logical and reasonable conclusion for two simple reasons. 

First, both churches, Protestantism especially, have largely capitulated to the contemporary political zeitgeist. I reached the conclusion long ago that I was on the Wrong Side of the culture war and any allegedly Christian faith that was parroting the talking points and symbols of the progressive establishment was a nonstarter.  If your belief in God is in perfect accord with everything espoused by atheists, Satanists and Democrats, then chances are good that you are participating in a coopted church. Especially if you're making the progressive catechism the centerpiece of your faith. Sure, there are Protestant groups and confessions that uphold traditional values, but these are dwindling fast. If Redeemed Zoomer's Calvinist Minecraft ministry, Jordan Cooper's professorial Lutheranism, Gavin Ortlund's neo-iconoclast crusade, or Paul Vanderklay's crypto-gnosticism are the best Protestantism has on offer for a revival of Christianity, I'm not interested.

Second, everyone I knew who grew up Protestant eventually became a card-carrying atheist or a "progressive" Christian. In other words, someone who is very vocal about their "lack of belief" in God but is equally vocal about their unshakable moral conviction in everything espoused by progressives. A variation on this theme is the perennial "I'm spiritual not religious" Christian. In either case, their personal interpretation of scripture is also somehow in perfect accord with everything Democrats are saying. Most tellingly, all nations who were historically Protestant majorities no longer are or are in demographic decline. Not a good sign of the durability of those confessions.

As a sidebar, I often wonder how many metal musicians who push aggressively anti-Christian and Satanic images and lyrics are just in a state of arrested adolescence rebelling against their evangelical Protestant or traditional Roman Catholic parents.  My money's on most.

But I digress.

Protestantism had just as much if not more baggage than even the Roman Church.  Whenever progressives want to beef about how stupid and backwards Christianity is, there's seemingly always a convenient target to be found in Protestantism. Whether it's Pat Robertson, Joel Osteen or the latest right-wing evangelical boogeyman, Protestantism is the gift that keeps on giving when it comes to providing validation for the progressive worldview.

I don't blame progressives for using them as an ideological punching bag. Protestantism is a veritable cornucopia of pure cringe.  Its widespread embrace of everything in the progressive playbook hasn't exactly bolstered its appeal either. A casual search on social media will reveal innumerable examples of Protestantism Gone Wild/Woke.  If this is your cup of tea, then the world of modern Protestantism has many seats available in their parishes and Zoom services.

Aside from the truth value of Protestantism, there's just the simple question of "How did we get here?" Long before I converted to Orthodoxy, I wondered why are there so many Christian denominations?  Whether you're interested in the theological analysis or the historical trajectory of Protestantism in the West, Fr Josiah Trenham's book is an invaluable resource.

There are two main takeaways from the entire Protestant Reformation narrative. First and foremost, Luther's reform project was a reaction to the abuses and corruption of the Roman Church. He saw his reforms as a restoration of the Roman Church's "original" faith, but never sought a return to Holy Orthodoxy. Neither did he seek the creation of a new church, yet that's the direct consequence of his dissent. It was Luther himself who was forced to quell the flames of rebellion he set into motion and become a new pope without the miter.  His call for bloody suppression of the uprising he fomented, Against the Murderous, Thieving Hordes of Peasants, would undoubtedly be quite unpopular if uttered in Lutheran circles today. If nothing else, it shows that Protestantism has always had a worldly orientation and made common cause with establishment authorities.

The second and most important point is that once the reform genie was out of the bottle, each subsequent generation of reformers wrought whole new deformations of the faith that resulted in a modern-day manifestation of Christianity that bears little resemblance to its original form and content.  While Calvin and Zwingli articulated very specific articles of faith and in the former case, a highly systematized theology, these confessions became either malleable or disposable. The net effect was to set Protestantism in perpetual opposition to the historical apostolic deposit of tradition. This gradual whittling of the faith has resulted in a modern Protestantism that is united by a nominal notion of sola scriptura (if even that) and little else.

The Roman Counter Reformation was an attempt to diffuse the spread of Protestantism but was ultimately ineffectual. After 18 tumultuous years of an intermittently meeting Council of Trent, the Roman Church had seemingly shored up the ramparts of its embattled house of faith. Rome attempted to make nice with the Lutheran prodigals at the Peace of Augsburg, but it was short lived as evidenced by the exorbitant death toll of the 30 Years War. Since then, the schism between Rome and its Protestant rivals only became more pronounced. Henry VIII decision to separate from Rome and form the Church of England was another inflammatory side dish in what was already a deeply fractured Western Christendom.

Contrary to the claims of popesplainers everywhere who assert a singularly unifying power in the office of the papacy, the roots of disaffection at the heart of Protestant Reformation lie squarely at Rome's feet.

Rock and Sand is not merely a polemic. Fr Josiah goes to great lengths to be as charitable as possible to the areas where the Protestant witness is exceptional. The vehemence of his denunciations is matched equally by enthusiastic praise for Protestant virtues, public policy advocacy, higher education and where applicable, a genuine appreciation for Holy Scripture.

Ultimately, Rock and Sand is intended to be pedagogical for Orthodox Christians and Inquirers alike. Not only does it put the trajectory of Western Christianity in perspective, it makes a vigorous case for the vitality and eternality of the One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church.

[Brady Friedkin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Generally enjoyed learning more about Orthodox practice and belief, as well as hearing a telling of Protestant history and theology from a group that was not directly related to the Reformation or its leaders. I did not enjoy the lack of generosity the author gave to Protestantism and evangelicalism. It seemed that the author's critiques of each movement focused only on the worst of the groups or the leaders. Examples to this would be that it felt that his critique of evangelicalism was a focused only on the worst of the mega-church movement, not on the great movements within evangelicalism to be more liturgical, sacramental, and historically-minded. The same can be said of his criticism of Anglicanism and the English Reformation. The author criticized the low-points and the lives of the monarchs of the reformation, relegating Thomas Cranmer to, what felt like, a sub-point. Then his conversation regarding the Anglican Church of today was focused only on the more theologically liberal areas of Anglicanism, not in the great swaths of faithful Anglicans around the world.

Overall, I enjoyed the book, it was good to see and understand how Protestantism and areas within it are understood by those Christians in other denominations and churches, but it felt very tightfisted and unwilling to say very much good and positive about Protestantism (at least not without a quick jab following any compliment). While I think it would be worthwhile for a Protestant to read this work, one who does should be ready going in that their membership in and involvement with Protestantism and their denomination or movement is not going to affirmed or supported in this reading.

[Andrew Howell · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was a decent critique of mainline evangelicalism and its errors. However, the book did not meet its stated thesis. It was not a fair appraisal of the Protestant Reformers and their teachings. It was quite disappointing that the author misrepresented and confused reformed teaching with general evangelicalism.


For example, he states:
"Protestantism is neither one, nor holy (for it is without saints), nor w catholic, nor apostolic. Many Protestants today hold to the "invisible church" theory, which we believe to be aptly named since it does not exist. This theory affirms that individuals become members of the Body of Christ simply by "receiving Jesus into their hearts" or "praying the sinner's prayer" as an act of faith, without any association whatsoever with a concrete church community, a clergyman, or sacraments. Common Protestant teaching on the sacraments is gnostic at its core, denying that the grace of God is communicated in and through the mysteries." (pg 183)

The reformed do not use language of "receiving Jesus into their hearts" or "praying the sinner's prayer" as an act of faith. The reformed confessions explicitly teach that the grace of God is conferred and exhibited in the sacraments.
Westminster Confession of Faith 28.6 "6. The efficacy of baptism is not tied to that moment of time wherein it is administered; yet, notwithstanding, by the right use of this ordinance, the grace promised is not only offered, but really exhibited, and conferred, by the Holy Ghost, to such (whether of age or infants) as that grace belongeth unto, according to the counsel of God’s own will, in his appointed time."