# The Council of Trent



## Quickened (Apr 3, 2009)

I did do a brief search on the board and found some good resources on the church as a whole but are there any particular books that tackle the council from a reformed perspective?


----------



## Prufrock (Apr 3, 2009)

He was Lutheran, but Martin Chemnitz's _Examination of the Council of Trent_ was _hugely_ important (for both the Lutheran and Reformed) in the years following Trent. It has been published in English several times. It is a masterful work.

*Edit*
It's lengthy--a four volume behemoth, in fact--, so it may not be useful if you want something to read straight through.


----------



## Whitefield (Apr 3, 2009)

Calvin's Antidote


----------



## DTK (Apr 3, 2009)

Prufrock said:


> He was Lutheran, but Martin Chemnitz's _Examination of the Council of Trent_ was _hugely_ important (for both the Lutheran and Reformed) in the years following Trent. It has been published in English several times. It is a masterful work.
> 
> It's lengthy--a four volume behemoth, in fact--, so it may not be useful if you want something to read straight through.


Chemnitz's volumes are very useful, but his patristic citations and references are not as useful for accuracy as something for which one would hope from such a massive work. For example, he cites one particular quote, alleged to be from the pen of Jerome, some four times in vol. 1 of his _Examination of Trent_ which is, to my knowledge, non-existent in the extant corpus of that ancient church figure.

But one should not avoid Chemnitz's work on that account. However, if I had to choose between the two, I prefer Turretin to Chemnitz. Though he does not confine his treatment to Trent, Turretin's _Institutes of Elenctic Theology_ (3 vols.) would serve one better than Chemnitz, given that it is just as massive (if not more so) and from a truly Reformed perspective rather than Lutheran. I have both works, but I realize that not everyone has the funds to spend on both.

DTK


----------



## Prufrock (Apr 3, 2009)

Pastor King,

Good suggestion. There is surely little (if anything) in Trent not addressed somewhere by Turretin.

-----Added 4/3/2009 at 11:52:26 EST-----



DTK said:


> Chemnitz's volumes are very useful, but his patristic citations and references are not as useful for accuracy as something for which one would hope from such a massive work. For example, he cites one particular quote, alleged to be from the pen of Jerome, some four times in vol. 1 of his _Examination of Trent_ which is, to my knowledge, non-existent in the extant corpus of that ancient church figure.



Also, thanks for that note about Chemnitz. If you're still around, do you find his Patristic citations significantly less accurate than a majority of the other works from the early and mid-1500s? One of the areas I'm currently studying is patristic use in the early reformers, so your note above is of particular interest to me.

Also, do you know the Jerome quotation to which you referred (or location in Chemnitz) off-hand?

Thanks.


----------



## DTK (Apr 4, 2009)

Prufrock said:


> If you're still around, do you find his Patristic citations significantly less accurate than a majority of the other works from the early and mid-1500s? One of the areas I'm currently studying is patristic use in the early reformers, so your note above is of particular interest to me.
> 
> Also, do you know the Jerome quotation to which you referred (or location in Chemnitz) off-hand?
> 
> Thanks.


Yes, Chemnitz's patristic citations are *usually* accurate, though his documentation is not always so helpful. Now, to be sure, this was characteristic of many in his day, but Concordia (the publisher) could have provided much more help with this, say (for example) in the same manner that James T. Dennison provided for the present day Turretin edition, with which many of us are familiar.

As for the "Jerome" citation I referenced in particular, it is found (in varying degrees of length) on pp. 31, 39, 126, 152 of Vol. 1 of Chemnitz, and is as follows: "That is the doctrine of the Holy Spirit which is set forth in the canonical books. If the councils pronounce anything against this, I consider it wicked." When one offers such a citation some four times, one would expect for it to exist in the extant works of Jerome. At least, I would feel obligated personally to be sure it could be found there.

One other example that comes readily to mind is an alleged citation attributed to Augustine near the top of p. 307 of Vol. 1 of Chemnitz. It is from the pseudo-Augustine work of _Questions on the Old and New Testaments_, and is as follows: "If we are to look back to long custom or to antiquity alone, then also murderers and adulterers, and similar persons can defend their crimes in this way, because they are ancient." Sadly, Kevin J. Vanhoozer, in his otherwise very helpful book, _The Drama of Doctrine_ (p. 163), repeats this quote directly from Chemnitz uncritically.

DTK


----------



## Prufrock (Apr 4, 2009)

Thank you for taking the time to locate this. I'll have to look into his (potential) source for the Jerome quote some day. I find it very interesting to look at what patristic and medieval sources various early Protestant theologians had available to them, and how this influenced their theological formulation.


----------

