The Revolution of the Saints: A Study in the Origins of Radical Politics

by Michael Walzer

English History & Studies, Political Studies

Genres: History, Politics, Philosophy, Religion, Sociology, Nonfiction

Paperback

First published January 1, 1965

About the author

Michael Walzer is a Jewish American political philosopher and public intellectual. A professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey, he is editor of the political-intellectual quarterly Dissent. He has written books and essays on a wide range of topics, including just and unjust wars, nationalism, ethnicity, economic justice, social criticism, radicalism, tolerance, and political obligation and is a contributing editor to The New Republic. To date, he has written 27 books and published over 300 articles, essays, and book reviews in Dissent, The New Republic, The New York Review of Books, The New Yorker, The New York Times, and many scholarly journals

Reviews

[Matthew Welker · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a solid read. This book is an exploration of the reformation period from the 16th century and tying into the English Civil War. So a lot of information about religion and the rise of Protestant denominations.

It’s heavy on Calvin which then relates to how the Puritans rise from this. I like that it treated what we know as the reformation as being more of a revolution. Treating the people who lead the way in that as “saints” was also an interesting perspective as someone who is Catholic. Yet I can see why someone like Calvin, if I was Protestant, could get out on the level as like a Thomas More or any person who has been deemed a saint.

It could meander a bit at times, but I think the author really brought it all home in the conclusion. I’m a believer that in any non-fiction book, the conclusion can greatly improve upon the work especially with how it’s summarizes everything and provides a final analysis, this one did. Also felt that for a book published in the 1960s, its analysis of Calvinism & Puritanism with relation to the modern day is still relevant even in 2025.
Plus this book introduced me to this idea of some form of progressive/liberal conservatism. Men like Cromwell who were Puritan, were radical individuals who uprooted the status quo which imo makes them sort of liberal. Yet in the modern age we view Puritanism as sort of “conservative” or at least that’s how I see it. Which I think we see in the modern age especially with the “religious right” in America. Although I think those people are a bunch of frauds and hypocrites.

[Harrison Helms · Rating 3 out of 5]

Walzer is coming at the build-up to the English Civil War from the angle of religion. He sees Puritanism as a method attractive to the English gentry for the sense of self-control and merit it gave them in a period of upheaval and transition. Certainly not Marxist, but also explicitly anti-Weberian. Yet Walzer still sees an arc of modernization in the spread of Puritanism and the Civil War.

[PG Pariseau · Rating 4 out of 5]

Dense with information on the development of political Calvinism and the growth of the party of "saints" before the English Revolution. A melding of ego and conscience was forced on the exiles who fled the Marian counter-reformation; they returned to England stripped of their place in the traditional hierarchy but with a message and a discipline tailored to others who were unsure of their place in the modernizing kingdom, be they gentry under pressure or workers striving for subsistence.
The monarchy's failures to accommodate these men made revolution possible when the monarchy was unable to competently manage its affairs. Men with a godly plan stood ready to take the reins. And so they did.
Well worth reading for anyone with an interest in revolutionary politics or psychology, the English Civil War, or religion and its interaction with the wider political world.

[Hyland]

We in the 1960s were exactly like John Knox. Where does the justification of revolutionary action come from? God, through out conscience. So why weren't we exactly in the Puritan tradition?