What do you think?
Rate this book
The Reformation as Renewal: Retrieving the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church
A holistic, eye-opening history of one of the most significant turning points in Christianity, The Reformation as Renewal demonstrates that the Reformation was at its core a renewal of evangelical catholicity. In the sixteenth century Rome charged the Reformers with novelty, as if they were heretics departing from the catholic (universal) church. But the Reformers believed they were more catholic than Rome. Distinguishing themselves from Radicals, the Reformers were convinced they were retrieving the faith of the church fathers and the best of the medieval Scholastics. The Reformers saw themselves as faithful stewards of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church preserved across history, and they insisted on a restoration of true worship in their own day. By listening to the Reformers' own voices, The Reformation as Renewal helps readers This balanced, insightful, and accessible treatment of the Reformation will help readers see this watershed moment in the history of Christianity with fresh eyes and appreciate the unity they have with the church across time. Readers will discover that the Reformation was not a new invention, but the renewal of something very old.
1008 pages, Hardcover
Published June 6, 2023
127 people are currently reading
825 people want to read
About the author
Matthew Barrett
52 books118 followersMatthew Barrett (MDiv, PhD, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary) is associate professor of Christian theology at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary and the executive editor of Credo Magazine. He is the author of numerous books, including God's Word Alone, 40 Questions about Salvation, Reformation Theology, John Owen on the Christian Life, and Salvation by Grace. He is also the host of the Credo podcast where he talks with fellow theologians about the most important doctrines of the faith. He lives in Kansas City.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 39 reviews
August 12, 2023
When we consider the reformation, what should be cast and what should we renew? If you are anything like me having been raised within the “oppositional narrative” you might be surprised.
Dr. Matthew Barrett has written a fabulous historical account of the Reformation stretching from Medieval Times through the Council of Trent and onward. Reformation as Renewal is clearly history yet does not shy away from deep dives into theological controversies, mischaracterizations of reformers, and how we should resist the “oppositional narrative” many have of the reformation today.
I am thankful to have contributed to this project as an early-late manuscript editor and fact checker.
Dr. Matthew Barrett has written a fabulous historical account of the Reformation stretching from Medieval Times through the Council of Trent and onward. Reformation as Renewal is clearly history yet does not shy away from deep dives into theological controversies, mischaracterizations of reformers, and how we should resist the “oppositional narrative” many have of the reformation today.
I am thankful to have contributed to this project as an early-late manuscript editor and fact checker.
July 5, 2023
Good debunking of the “oppositional narrative”, although a bit late to the game and heavily dependent on secondary sources that have already tackled this issue. This would normally be excusable if it was intended to be an accessible book for the layman, however this volume is much too long and tedious to fill that role. Somewhat disjointed also, and repeats a lot of material, as if it is a compilation of essays; it needed an editor to cut it down by a lot. I caught a surprising number of typos too.
Intriguingly distinguishes between creedal/confessional Protestant view of the Reformation vs. the Papist, Fundamentalist, and Liberal/Progressive views. Barrett’s emphasis in ch. 2 on the unity of theology and piety was refreshing and pivotal; he did not pit scholasticism over and against piety as is commonly seen in other sophomoric presentations. Early chapters do a good job of providing an overview of Medieval theological trends setting the context for the Reformation, and giving some examples of standard Reformed viewpoints evident in the Medievals. This was the strength of the book.
However, Barrett overemphasizes Reformed continuity with the Medievals and neglects to highlight some major points of discontinuity. The author fails discuss the Reformers’s view of the Papacy as the Antichrist and the mass falling away by it as prophesied by Scripture (e.g. 2 Thes. 2)—a big oversight considering how foundational this was for the Reformation. At times the reader would conclude such terminology as simply Luther’s extreme rhetoric rather than a well reasoned theological/eschatological impetus for reform. A few other particulars were presented as continuity with Medieval theology when they were not as ubiquitous as presented or were even minority views among Protestants, such as the Quadriga, Thomas’s view of God’s antecedent will, Luther’s normative principle of worship and moderation with regard to certain iconoclastic endeavors.
3/5 stars. Worth reading, but tedious at times, and yet not nuanced enough at other times where there is diversity within Protestantism.
Intriguingly distinguishes between creedal/confessional Protestant view of the Reformation vs. the Papist, Fundamentalist, and Liberal/Progressive views. Barrett’s emphasis in ch. 2 on the unity of theology and piety was refreshing and pivotal; he did not pit scholasticism over and against piety as is commonly seen in other sophomoric presentations. Early chapters do a good job of providing an overview of Medieval theological trends setting the context for the Reformation, and giving some examples of standard Reformed viewpoints evident in the Medievals. This was the strength of the book.
However, Barrett overemphasizes Reformed continuity with the Medievals and neglects to highlight some major points of discontinuity. The author fails discuss the Reformers’s view of the Papacy as the Antichrist and the mass falling away by it as prophesied by Scripture (e.g. 2 Thes. 2)—a big oversight considering how foundational this was for the Reformation. At times the reader would conclude such terminology as simply Luther’s extreme rhetoric rather than a well reasoned theological/eschatological impetus for reform. A few other particulars were presented as continuity with Medieval theology when they were not as ubiquitous as presented or were even minority views among Protestants, such as the Quadriga, Thomas’s view of God’s antecedent will, Luther’s normative principle of worship and moderation with regard to certain iconoclastic endeavors.
3/5 stars. Worth reading, but tedious at times, and yet not nuanced enough at other times where there is diversity within Protestantism.
January 30, 2024
I really like this book! I think Barrett’s attention to the Reformers’ motivations is extremely helpful. The Reformers desired to renew, not innovate. However, this books is way too much. There is so much historical description throughout the book that does not contribute to the thesis. It felt like this was two different books smashed together.
August 20, 2025
A truly amazing masterpiece. To read Church History is to be Catholic. After reading this book I couldn’t agree more with this statement, however, not Roman Catholic, but rather part of the One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic church across the globe and all ages.
July 7, 2023
What is the Reformation?
When I was a young Christian, I was under the impression that the Reformation was the revival of a dead church, and an elevation of Scripture (and only Scripture) as the sole authority for the church. Needless to say, this runs into many problems, not least that the Reformers themselves would have vehemently disagreed.
Barrett argues persuasively against multiple charges, including that the Reformation was a radical break from the historic and universal church and that the Reformation paved the way for postmodernism and appeals to 'conscience'. Instead, the Reformers were clearly rooted in and standing on the shoulders of the historic church, and their unified assertion was that it was Rome that had departed from the historic, apostolic, catholic church. The Reformers had a high view of Scripture, but the Reformation was (Barrett submits) not a clash between Scripture and tradition, but rather a clash between two views of tradition: magisterial (and equal to, if not over Scripture) and ministerial (to Scripture). The Reformers argued for the latter, and sought to demonstrate that the early church fathers were of the same mind. Indeed, as Calvin opines (and as cited by Barrett), "if the contest were to be determined by patristic authority, the tide of victory—to put it very mildly—would turn to our side."
While the Reformers were clear in their appeals to patristics, Barrett also value-adds to this area of scholarship by submitting that the Reformers were (consciously or unconsciously) indebted to the early middle ages and great scholastics as well, including Anselm and Aquinas. This is despite the Reformers writing against what they termed "scholastics", which, upon closer examination, were actually the scholastics that came later towards the end of the middle ages, one of the prominent ones being Gabriel Biel. Barrett dedicates multiple chapters towards exploring their theology and demonstrating how Aquinas, Anselm, and Augustine were in the same vein, and how Biel and, eventually, formal Roman Catholic theology (as articulated in the Council of Trent) broke from that stream. As Barrett opines, "Trent's condemnation of the Reformation was in fact a condemnation of the Augustinian-Thomist tradition".
All in all, a great book for the student of church history and theology.
When I was a young Christian, I was under the impression that the Reformation was the revival of a dead church, and an elevation of Scripture (and only Scripture) as the sole authority for the church. Needless to say, this runs into many problems, not least that the Reformers themselves would have vehemently disagreed.
Barrett argues persuasively against multiple charges, including that the Reformation was a radical break from the historic and universal church and that the Reformation paved the way for postmodernism and appeals to 'conscience'. Instead, the Reformers were clearly rooted in and standing on the shoulders of the historic church, and their unified assertion was that it was Rome that had departed from the historic, apostolic, catholic church. The Reformers had a high view of Scripture, but the Reformation was (Barrett submits) not a clash between Scripture and tradition, but rather a clash between two views of tradition: magisterial (and equal to, if not over Scripture) and ministerial (to Scripture). The Reformers argued for the latter, and sought to demonstrate that the early church fathers were of the same mind. Indeed, as Calvin opines (and as cited by Barrett), "if the contest were to be determined by patristic authority, the tide of victory—to put it very mildly—would turn to our side."
While the Reformers were clear in their appeals to patristics, Barrett also value-adds to this area of scholarship by submitting that the Reformers were (consciously or unconsciously) indebted to the early middle ages and great scholastics as well, including Anselm and Aquinas. This is despite the Reformers writing against what they termed "scholastics", which, upon closer examination, were actually the scholastics that came later towards the end of the middle ages, one of the prominent ones being Gabriel Biel. Barrett dedicates multiple chapters towards exploring their theology and demonstrating how Aquinas, Anselm, and Augustine were in the same vein, and how Biel and, eventually, formal Roman Catholic theology (as articulated in the Council of Trent) broke from that stream. As Barrett opines, "Trent's condemnation of the Reformation was in fact a condemnation of the Augustinian-Thomist tradition".
All in all, a great book for the student of church history and theology.
August 21, 2023
It took me about two months, but I've finally finished "The Reformation as Renewal".
I hate ratings, but I'd have to give this a 5/5 stars ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
The most enlightening part of the book was Barrett's defense of ancient Platonic and Aristotlean Christian philosophy that would essentially be anathematized by large swaths of those in Rome in the late medieval period but cherished by the first and second generation of Reformers.
The book is not without emotion either. There were plenty of stories of Christian martyrs in the context of being a part of the one Holy catholic church that left my soul truly hurting for what they persevered. John Hooper's tragic martyrdom was particularly impactful for myself.
Overall, I am quite a bit more confident today in calling myself Reformed catholic in the history of Christ's church than I was two months ago.
If you're a Christian, you should read this book.
I hate ratings, but I'd have to give this a 5/5 stars ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
The most enlightening part of the book was Barrett's defense of ancient Platonic and Aristotlean Christian philosophy that would essentially be anathematized by large swaths of those in Rome in the late medieval period but cherished by the first and second generation of Reformers.
The book is not without emotion either. There were plenty of stories of Christian martyrs in the context of being a part of the one Holy catholic church that left my soul truly hurting for what they persevered. John Hooper's tragic martyrdom was particularly impactful for myself.
Overall, I am quite a bit more confident today in calling myself Reformed catholic in the history of Christ's church than I was two months ago.
If you're a Christian, you should read this book.
March 6, 2024
Every serious Roman & Protestant believer needs to wrestle with the first 1/3 of this book. This volume challenges any Roman claim of doctrinal invention as a part of the Reformation. Barrett does a masterful job of walking the reader through theological and philosophical development from the early to late Middle Ages all while keeping the Patristics in near view. Simply, Protestants have a significantly clearer claim to Catholic heritage than the Nominalist Romans. Aquinas & Augustine know nothing of the Pelegian inventions of Biel & Ockham.
Luther sought moral and doctrinal calibration and had every historical reason to do so.
Scripture lays revelatory waste to the Romish system and Barrett has now laid historical waste to it in addition. Highly recommend
Luther sought moral and doctrinal calibration and had every historical reason to do so.
Scripture lays revelatory waste to the Romish system and Barrett has now laid historical waste to it in addition. Highly recommend
April 27, 2024
Barret's defense of the catholicity of the Protestant tradition shifted my perspective significantly. His interaction with primary sources and helpful summary of the complex socio-political dynamics in the sixteenth century provided an accessible introduction to the context in which the Reformers worked to bring reform. This volume is definitely in my top three books read during the sophomore year at Bethlehem College!
September 1, 2024
“They allege that we have fallen away from the holy church and set up a new church…But…we are the true ancient [catholic] church…You have fallen away from us.” - Martin Luther
Reading Matthew Barrett’s book was a labour of love. I started it thirteen months ago, taking this long to finish it due mostly to my slow reading speed but also its length and heavy content. It’s probably not a coincidence that stamped on the back is ‘TextbookPlus’ :) Indeed, for many this will probably be a solid reference book rather than a straight read-through. And though at times it felt like swimming through concrete, I’m glad I did read it through. Barrett offers readers a tremendous breadth and depth to the context of the Protestant Reformation, arguing throughout its pages that historic Protestantism is in continuity with the church catholic throughout time, and is in actuality its true and faithful daughter, contra the Roman church.
Many of the early pages are focused on the intellectual formation of the Church, such as the impact of Plato and Aristotle on early Christian thought, and the theological/philosophical categories of voluntarism, univocity, and nominalism. As I never took Philosophy in university, I confess I struggled during some of these passages and had Google open next to me to cross-reference definitions! As the book progresses, the contributions of great medieval theologians with whom too many Protestants have no acquaintance are presented; for eg. Bonaventure, Anselm of Canterbury, and a substantial chapter on Thomas Aquinas. Further chapters are dedicated to the impact of Proto-Protestant figures such as Wycliffe and Hus. In the later half of the book, historical events surrounding the Reformation proper start to take centre stage, and the atmosphere gets exciting. I was downright emotional reading about Zwingli shedding tears at the Marburg Colloquy as he and Luther grappled over the nature of the Lord’s Supper, ultimately never reaching an agreement and the Reformed and Lutheran branches never uniting. Barrett then delves into the reformations across Europe in great detail, including in Germany, Switzerland, England and Scotland. The amount of information presented was like drinking from a fire hydrant at times, but it was SO good to garner an understanding of these events. The book closes with the Roman Counter-Reformation, and Barrett’s conclusion is summarized: that the Protestant Church stands united with the church catholic.
His last paragraph of the book speaks for itself:
“If Protestants today desire fidelity to the history of their own genesis, then they should listen to one of the Reformation’s heirs, Abraham Kuyper: “A church that is unwilling to be catholic is not a church, because Christ is the saviour not of a nation, but of the world…We cannot therefore, without being untrue to our own principle, abandon the honourable title of ‘catholic’ as though it were the special possession of the Roman Church.” What defines a true adherence to Protestantism? To be Protestant is to be catholic. But not Roman.
Amen.
4/5 stars.
Reading Matthew Barrett’s book was a labour of love. I started it thirteen months ago, taking this long to finish it due mostly to my slow reading speed but also its length and heavy content. It’s probably not a coincidence that stamped on the back is ‘TextbookPlus’ :) Indeed, for many this will probably be a solid reference book rather than a straight read-through. And though at times it felt like swimming through concrete, I’m glad I did read it through. Barrett offers readers a tremendous breadth and depth to the context of the Protestant Reformation, arguing throughout its pages that historic Protestantism is in continuity with the church catholic throughout time, and is in actuality its true and faithful daughter, contra the Roman church.
Many of the early pages are focused on the intellectual formation of the Church, such as the impact of Plato and Aristotle on early Christian thought, and the theological/philosophical categories of voluntarism, univocity, and nominalism. As I never took Philosophy in university, I confess I struggled during some of these passages and had Google open next to me to cross-reference definitions! As the book progresses, the contributions of great medieval theologians with whom too many Protestants have no acquaintance are presented; for eg. Bonaventure, Anselm of Canterbury, and a substantial chapter on Thomas Aquinas. Further chapters are dedicated to the impact of Proto-Protestant figures such as Wycliffe and Hus. In the later half of the book, historical events surrounding the Reformation proper start to take centre stage, and the atmosphere gets exciting. I was downright emotional reading about Zwingli shedding tears at the Marburg Colloquy as he and Luther grappled over the nature of the Lord’s Supper, ultimately never reaching an agreement and the Reformed and Lutheran branches never uniting. Barrett then delves into the reformations across Europe in great detail, including in Germany, Switzerland, England and Scotland. The amount of information presented was like drinking from a fire hydrant at times, but it was SO good to garner an understanding of these events. The book closes with the Roman Counter-Reformation, and Barrett’s conclusion is summarized: that the Protestant Church stands united with the church catholic.
His last paragraph of the book speaks for itself:
“If Protestants today desire fidelity to the history of their own genesis, then they should listen to one of the Reformation’s heirs, Abraham Kuyper: “A church that is unwilling to be catholic is not a church, because Christ is the saviour not of a nation, but of the world…We cannot therefore, without being untrue to our own principle, abandon the honourable title of ‘catholic’ as though it were the special possession of the Roman Church.” What defines a true adherence to Protestantism? To be Protestant is to be catholic. But not Roman.
Amen.
4/5 stars.
November 9, 2025
I’ve read longer books. And I’ve read more difficult books. But this was the longest difficult book I’ve ever read. Appreciate Barrett accepting the challenge of writing this tome and making the case for the Reformers’ commitment to the apostolic, catholic church. It is my hope and prayer that the church would be the “one body” of Scripture.
Want to read
May 14, 2024London Lyceum commentators. Here are the review comments by Cross, Ward, Mattox, and Opitz. Barrett declined to respond.
Read
August 22, 2023Whether Barrett set out to or not he has proven, with exhaustive documentation, that the magisterial reformers can’t be blamed for what modern American evangelicalism has become.
In the conclusion Barrett writes the following:
“To manifest his catholicity, Luther proposed ten reasons (proofs) why the Reformation aligns with the creed when it says, we believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. They included the sacrament of baptism, the sacrament of the altar, the right exercise of the keys, the purity of preaching, adherence to the Apostles' Creed, devotion to the Lord's Prayer, obedience to temporal authority, honoring marriage, suffering, and prayer and fasting.” 881-882
These are all good things! But would Barrett a professor at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary accept Luther’s baptism, his sacramentology of baptism, his belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist and etc.? Luther rejected transubstantiation not because he didn’t think the bread and the wine were not really transformed. He rejected it because he believed the concept did not express the transformation strongly enough. Would most evangelical and Baptistic churches accept much of the above?
Ultimately the book is a fascinating catalogue of what the magisterial reformers thought and believed. They absolutely did not think they were starting a new church but that’s, arguably, what happened. Almost immediately the anabaptists were on the scene and since then Protestantism has seen a steady advance away from the historical roots of what once united all Christians.
In the conclusion Barrett writes the following:
“To manifest his catholicity, Luther proposed ten reasons (proofs) why the Reformation aligns with the creed when it says, we believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church. They included the sacrament of baptism, the sacrament of the altar, the right exercise of the keys, the purity of preaching, adherence to the Apostles' Creed, devotion to the Lord's Prayer, obedience to temporal authority, honoring marriage, suffering, and prayer and fasting.” 881-882
These are all good things! But would Barrett a professor at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary accept Luther’s baptism, his sacramentology of baptism, his belief in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist and etc.? Luther rejected transubstantiation not because he didn’t think the bread and the wine were not really transformed. He rejected it because he believed the concept did not express the transformation strongly enough. Would most evangelical and Baptistic churches accept much of the above?
Ultimately the book is a fascinating catalogue of what the magisterial reformers thought and believed. They absolutely did not think they were starting a new church but that’s, arguably, what happened. Almost immediately the anabaptists were on the scene and since then Protestantism has seen a steady advance away from the historical roots of what once united all Christians.
October 4, 2025
Top tier. Re reading sections often. 2 years after first reading coming back to his section on Aquinas.
Filled to the brim with detail, examples, great footnotes. Highly, highly recommend.
Filled to the brim with detail, examples, great footnotes. Highly, highly recommend.
August 25, 2024
I think the star-ranking system is a little silly. Only five different levels to rank all the books? Whatever. It’s the system we have.
Some people (optimists, I guess), think books start with five stars and might slowly lose one or two if the author writes something they disagree with. I think five stars should only be given for the greats, those truly brilliant books that set a new standard.
Most books won’t rise to that level. A good book that will soon be out of print is three stars. At best. There are more books in a small-town public library than any one of us could possibly read in our lifetime, and it’s best if we all help each other along. When I think about reviewing a book here, I’m thinking: If one of my very busy friends asked me if they should read this book, what would I say?
One star means it’s not worth your time. Doesn’t mean it’s terrible or the worst. It just means I don’t think it’s worth it. Barrett’s book is solidly one star. Skip it. It’s certainly not worth 900 pages.
I’m not an expert in the topic or the time period, so I can’t judge the factual claims Barrett makes. For that, I recommend the London Lyceum review symposium (https://thelondonlyceum.com/the-refor...) that at the very least calls into question Barrett’s presentation of the material.
What I can say is that the book is badly organized and tediously written. Barrett’s purpose was to sustain an argument, but the majority of the book is duly listing one Reformation event after another. At the end of most chapters, it’s like he remembered why he was writing and tried to shoehorn his thesis back into all the material. It really doesn’t work. It would have been a better book (and shorter) if he had selected only certain periods, assumed more technical knowledge in his readers, and kept his thesis at the center.
The book really suffers from slipshod editing. Here’s one example. On p. 842 Barrett starts a section by saying “The last chapter established that Charles [V], in the aftermath of the Diet of Worms (1521), became the major voice over the next two decades for a free council.” But the last chapter referenced is on the Reformation in England and Scotland, and I can’t find this “establishment” anywhere. I can only find Charles V mentioned once in the entire previous chapter and that because of his relation to someone else. When I check the index, even though Charles V is one of the most important figures in the book, he’s only listed in four pages, and all of them after this citation. I’m completely lost! This book has a lot of issues like this.
As for the argument, something strange is happening. His stated intention is to present a historical argument for how the Reformers understood themselves and to leave aside whether they were correct (p. 3).
However, it seems to me Barrett is absolutely making the argument that the Reformers were correct. Especially since he relies so much on secondary sources summarizing the events and the debates, the great weight of the book seems less on presenting the Reformers as they present themselves and more on defending the Reformers’ claims. So much of the book is about this, that it’s weird to read his thesis on page 3 that he’s leaving “correctness” to the side. I don’t think he did. I think that’s the point.
Secondly, in order to determine if the Reformers were correct (and only certain ones), Barrett has to theologically define this historical church. This he does by presenting the so-called Great Tradition that shares (arguably!) specific metaphysical commitments. I’m fine with this not being an historical book or an historical argument, but it should be clear that Barrett’s thesis (at least as he presents it) rests on this claim, and that claim is asserted in this book but not defended, which only adds to the confusion.
I learned some things, and I appreciate the book for it. Some parts were beautifully written, and Barrett is a man of great talent and learning. I look forward to benefiting from his scholarship for years to come. But this book is a chore and not ultimately a helpful one. One star means skip it. So skip it.
Some people (optimists, I guess), think books start with five stars and might slowly lose one or two if the author writes something they disagree with. I think five stars should only be given for the greats, those truly brilliant books that set a new standard.
Most books won’t rise to that level. A good book that will soon be out of print is three stars. At best. There are more books in a small-town public library than any one of us could possibly read in our lifetime, and it’s best if we all help each other along. When I think about reviewing a book here, I’m thinking: If one of my very busy friends asked me if they should read this book, what would I say?
One star means it’s not worth your time. Doesn’t mean it’s terrible or the worst. It just means I don’t think it’s worth it. Barrett’s book is solidly one star. Skip it. It’s certainly not worth 900 pages.
I’m not an expert in the topic or the time period, so I can’t judge the factual claims Barrett makes. For that, I recommend the London Lyceum review symposium (https://thelondonlyceum.com/the-refor...) that at the very least calls into question Barrett’s presentation of the material.
What I can say is that the book is badly organized and tediously written. Barrett’s purpose was to sustain an argument, but the majority of the book is duly listing one Reformation event after another. At the end of most chapters, it’s like he remembered why he was writing and tried to shoehorn his thesis back into all the material. It really doesn’t work. It would have been a better book (and shorter) if he had selected only certain periods, assumed more technical knowledge in his readers, and kept his thesis at the center.
The book really suffers from slipshod editing. Here’s one example. On p. 842 Barrett starts a section by saying “The last chapter established that Charles [V], in the aftermath of the Diet of Worms (1521), became the major voice over the next two decades for a free council.” But the last chapter referenced is on the Reformation in England and Scotland, and I can’t find this “establishment” anywhere. I can only find Charles V mentioned once in the entire previous chapter and that because of his relation to someone else. When I check the index, even though Charles V is one of the most important figures in the book, he’s only listed in four pages, and all of them after this citation. I’m completely lost! This book has a lot of issues like this.
As for the argument, something strange is happening. His stated intention is to present a historical argument for how the Reformers understood themselves and to leave aside whether they were correct (p. 3).
However, it seems to me Barrett is absolutely making the argument that the Reformers were correct. Especially since he relies so much on secondary sources summarizing the events and the debates, the great weight of the book seems less on presenting the Reformers as they present themselves and more on defending the Reformers’ claims. So much of the book is about this, that it’s weird to read his thesis on page 3 that he’s leaving “correctness” to the side. I don’t think he did. I think that’s the point.
Secondly, in order to determine if the Reformers were correct (and only certain ones), Barrett has to theologically define this historical church. This he does by presenting the so-called Great Tradition that shares (arguably!) specific metaphysical commitments. I’m fine with this not being an historical book or an historical argument, but it should be clear that Barrett’s thesis (at least as he presents it) rests on this claim, and that claim is asserted in this book but not defended, which only adds to the confusion.
I learned some things, and I appreciate the book for it. Some parts were beautifully written, and Barrett is a man of great talent and learning. I look forward to benefiting from his scholarship for years to come. But this book is a chore and not ultimately a helpful one. One star means skip it. So skip it.
August 10, 2023
4.5 stars. Very solid scholarship and analysis. The first 350 pages are a little tough to get through, but after that, the book is very readable and enjoyable. One small nitpick I have would be the reference and index system, as I will probably reference this periodically. Major figures and persons are missing from the index, and it would be more helpful in segmented into more precise categories.
December 5, 2023
This was an excellent intellectual history/analysis of the Reformation. Barrett’s aim was to “debunk” certain myths that surround the Reformation. Although he depends strongly on secondary sources, he compiles them in a fresh way. A very long book, and sometimes too long, it still was engaging to read all the way through. It has inspired/encouraged me to claim the label “catholic” more consistently.
July 18, 2024
I enjoyed this book. I also read the critiques from London Lyceum, which I would encourage other readers to do as well.
October 18, 2024
It's a long read but very thorough if you want to understand the pre-history of the reformation as well as how it expands into the actual Reformation.
May 13, 2025
This is not a very good book.
April 17, 2024
Weighing in at 880ish pages, this was a behemoth. As always, Barrett writes with clarity, elegant prose, and precision. His intention, to demonstrate the intellectual, theological, and political roots of the Reformation, especially as they relate to the Fathers and high and late medievals. Ultimately, Barrett seeks to show the catholicity of the Protestant Church.
As a Protestant, I often waffle back and forth between a desire to be united in one visible catholic church and my desire for distinctly Protestant theology. How I wish the two were one. But if you ever want to confirm yourself in the truth of Protestantism, this is a good place to go. Barrett goes to great length showing the Roman Church is absolutely bonkers when it comes to the papacy, Mary, purgatory, penance, veneration, indulgences, etc. Barrett does heavy lifting demonstrating how these various doctrines developed as Roman accretions rising often from corruption in the church and political motivations.
In the final analysis, I think Barrett succeeds in showing the continuity of theological development between key Protestant doctrines and the broader historical church. The book has given me a better understanding that a broad Protestantism with many currents is better than the flood of Roman inventions drowning Christians in that communion. Give me a broad Protestantism over Rome.
As a Protestant, I often waffle back and forth between a desire to be united in one visible catholic church and my desire for distinctly Protestant theology. How I wish the two were one. But if you ever want to confirm yourself in the truth of Protestantism, this is a good place to go. Barrett goes to great length showing the Roman Church is absolutely bonkers when it comes to the papacy, Mary, purgatory, penance, veneration, indulgences, etc. Barrett does heavy lifting demonstrating how these various doctrines developed as Roman accretions rising often from corruption in the church and political motivations.
In the final analysis, I think Barrett succeeds in showing the continuity of theological development between key Protestant doctrines and the broader historical church. The book has given me a better understanding that a broad Protestantism with many currents is better than the flood of Roman inventions drowning Christians in that communion. Give me a broad Protestantism over Rome.
March 16, 2025
Truly a remark work that shines with clarity. Matthew Barrett’s tome “The Reformation as Renewal” is an excellent resource for anyone looking for a thorough explanation of the Reformation and its Reformers catholicity. With ample historical context Barrett clearly explains how Reformers such as Martin Luther, John Calvin and many others did not create a new church with new doctrine, but stood on the shoulders of those who came before, from the Apostles to the church fathers to the medieval scholastics, to recover the doctrines of the church that had been lost.
This book is wonderfully accessible to those who (like myself) get lost in the weeds of philosophy and dense theology. I found myself craving to read more and more and found it hard to put down. Barrett’s writing is not only coherent but engaging, begging the reader to continue on. This book has given me the language and the primary sources to talk about ideas I had trouble voicing before. I will be returning this book often.
This book is wonderfully accessible to those who (like myself) get lost in the weeds of philosophy and dense theology. I found myself craving to read more and more and found it hard to put down. Barrett’s writing is not only coherent but engaging, begging the reader to continue on. This book has given me the language and the primary sources to talk about ideas I had trouble voicing before. I will be returning this book often.
November 1, 2023
If there was ever any doubt that the Reformation was seeking first and foremost to renew the church and not separate/divide the church, Barrett's work removes it. In this giant work, Barrett effectively and clearly shows how the reformers were men of their times who loved the church and sought to be faithful to the truth of Scripture. As Barrett says, "To be Protestant is to be catholic. But not Roman."
This is a much needed history of the Reformation which would be edifying to all Christians. It shows the importance of being able to trace our faith through faithful men and women down the ages all the way to Christ. As Barrett quotes Abraham Kuyper toward the close of the book, "A church that is unwilling to be catholic is not a church, because Christ is the savior not of a nation, but of a world... We cannot therefore, without being untrue to our own principle, abandon the honorable title of 'catholic' as though it were the special possession of the Roman Church."
This is a much needed history of the Reformation which would be edifying to all Christians. It shows the importance of being able to trace our faith through faithful men and women down the ages all the way to Christ. As Barrett quotes Abraham Kuyper toward the close of the book, "A church that is unwilling to be catholic is not a church, because Christ is the savior not of a nation, but of a world... We cannot therefore, without being untrue to our own principle, abandon the honorable title of 'catholic' as though it were the special possession of the Roman Church."
March 3, 2024
Matthew Barrett's "The Reformation as Renewal" offers a refreshing perspective on the 16th-century Reformation, challenging the traditional narrative of a clean break from the Catholic Church.
Instead, Barrett argues that the Reformers, far from being innovators, sought to renew the true "catholic" (universal) church, one built on the foundation of Scripture and the early church fathers. They weren’t responding to or rejecting 1500 years of church history, but responding to late Medieval innovations.
The book's strengths lie in its:
* Holistic approach: Barrett goes beyond the usual political and social factors, delving into the theological roots of the Reformation, both in patristic and medieval thought. This nuanced exploration provides a deeper understanding of the reformers' motivations and beliefs.
* Focus on primary sources: By letting the reformers speak for themselves, Barrett allows readers to engage directly with their arguments and aspirations. This firsthand perspective adds depth and authenticity to the narrative.
* Balanced portrayal: The book avoids demonizing either side, offering a fair and balanced interpretation of the complex events and figures involved. This even-handed approach encourages readers to form their own conclusions based on the evidence presented.
Moreover, Barrett convincingly emphasizes that Protestant theology has its roots also in classical theism (something that seems to have been lost in some modern Reformed circles).
If I had one criticism it’s that he relies a bit much on R2K sources, and doesn’t seem to see the irony of that. A minor criticism for sure, but nothing that detracts from his overall point.
"The Reformation as Renewal" is a valuable resource for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of this pivotal period in Christian history. It challenges traditional assumptions from Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox alike, as well as Liberal scholars, and offers a compelling case for viewing the Reformation as a movement of renewal rather than revolution.
Instead, Barrett argues that the Reformers, far from being innovators, sought to renew the true "catholic" (universal) church, one built on the foundation of Scripture and the early church fathers. They weren’t responding to or rejecting 1500 years of church history, but responding to late Medieval innovations.
The book's strengths lie in its:
* Holistic approach: Barrett goes beyond the usual political and social factors, delving into the theological roots of the Reformation, both in patristic and medieval thought. This nuanced exploration provides a deeper understanding of the reformers' motivations and beliefs.
* Focus on primary sources: By letting the reformers speak for themselves, Barrett allows readers to engage directly with their arguments and aspirations. This firsthand perspective adds depth and authenticity to the narrative.
* Balanced portrayal: The book avoids demonizing either side, offering a fair and balanced interpretation of the complex events and figures involved. This even-handed approach encourages readers to form their own conclusions based on the evidence presented.
Moreover, Barrett convincingly emphasizes that Protestant theology has its roots also in classical theism (something that seems to have been lost in some modern Reformed circles).
If I had one criticism it’s that he relies a bit much on R2K sources, and doesn’t seem to see the irony of that. A minor criticism for sure, but nothing that detracts from his overall point.
"The Reformation as Renewal" is a valuable resource for anyone seeking a deeper understanding of this pivotal period in Christian history. It challenges traditional assumptions from Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox alike, as well as Liberal scholars, and offers a compelling case for viewing the Reformation as a movement of renewal rather than revolution.
March 2, 2024
Fantastic book! I have learned so much about the Reformation from this book. Granted there are some parts in the book I felt were overly descriptive with too many details which I think could be reduced, and there are some parts of the book that can be quite technical and difficult to understand, nevertheless as a whole, this book is really really good.
One of my theological teachers pointed out a phenomenon which is called rootless Christianity. Many Christians today know about TULIP, biblical studies, expository preaching, and the 5 solas. But they don't know what it means to be part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, hence rootless. Those who read this book will in a sense be invited to change from being rootless to being rooted in the history and heritage of the True Catholic Church, which the Reformers claimed to be part of it.
And I appreciate Barrett's effort in fleshing out the intentions of the Reformers as much as he can. In doing so, he's letting the Reformers speak for themselves rather than imposing his own personal expectations on them. Thus in a sense, the contents of this book tend to be more objective and less biased.
Generally speaking, if you are from the traditional protestant denominations (Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran, Particular Baptist) you will likely find yourself agreeing with this book. However, if you are someone who holds to the values of independent churches or New Calvinism, then I think you might have strong disagreements with this book, and also with the Reformers themselves.
One of my theological teachers pointed out a phenomenon which is called rootless Christianity. Many Christians today know about TULIP, biblical studies, expository preaching, and the 5 solas. But they don't know what it means to be part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, hence rootless. Those who read this book will in a sense be invited to change from being rootless to being rooted in the history and heritage of the True Catholic Church, which the Reformers claimed to be part of it.
And I appreciate Barrett's effort in fleshing out the intentions of the Reformers as much as he can. In doing so, he's letting the Reformers speak for themselves rather than imposing his own personal expectations on them. Thus in a sense, the contents of this book tend to be more objective and less biased.
Generally speaking, if you are from the traditional protestant denominations (Anglican, Presbyterian, Methodist, Lutheran, Particular Baptist) you will likely find yourself agreeing with this book. However, if you are someone who holds to the values of independent churches or New Calvinism, then I think you might have strong disagreements with this book, and also with the Reformers themselves.
December 10, 2023
A detailed overview of the Reformation. Luther's misunderstanding of Catholic theology by accepting Biel's distortions of Catholic theology had tragic outcomes. It's a shame Luther never studied Thomas and learned the importance of grace in Catholic theology. All-in-all this is a tragic story. A top-down "reform" forced upon common man and a "reform" that was ad hoc. Nothing was thought out ahead of time, everything was made up as the Reformers went along. The author is certainly biased against the Catholic Church... I mean "the church of Rome!" which is what he calls it throughout the book, except for the chapter on England where he refers to "the Catholic Church" throughout the chapter. I suppose either he or his editors missed that. The author also seems to misrepresent or not understand that the sacrament of penance requires repentance. That's what penance means. It's a Latin word for repentance. And the sacrament of the same name isn't some medieval superstition that are Catholic required to participate in without repentance. Repentance is required by the Church before the sacrament is approached. Needless to say the Reformers differing over "the Lord's Supper" is a fiasco.
I could say more but as I said the book presents the Reformation as a tragedy. This is of course my opinion, but one really has to be biased in favor of the Reformation to think of this chaos as a good thing for the Church. If you want to know why Erasmus remained Catholic, read this book.
I could say more but as I said the book presents the Reformation as a tragedy. This is of course my opinion, but one really has to be biased in favor of the Reformation to think of this chaos as a good thing for the Church. If you want to know why Erasmus remained Catholic, read this book.
October 24, 2023
This book is incredibly helpful. It highlights in depth how the reformers were not revolutionaries, they saw their mission as renewing the ancient Catholic faith, not starting something new. They saw themselves as more Catholic than the Roman Catholic church, with its medieval accretions.
Protestants should read this book to rediscover a more Catholic and historically rooted faith, and Catholics should read this book to avoid misrepresenting the Reformation and the confessional Protestant traditions.
The one defect in the book is that it could be a lot more concise, it goes into incredible detail on points that don't support the thesis. That being said I didn't mind because I found the details fascinating.
Protestants should read this book to rediscover a more Catholic and historically rooted faith, and Catholics should read this book to avoid misrepresenting the Reformation and the confessional Protestant traditions.
The one defect in the book is that it could be a lot more concise, it goes into incredible detail on points that don't support the thesis. That being said I didn't mind because I found the details fascinating.
August 2, 2023
I think Barrett achieved what he set out today––to prove that the Reformation truly was a renewal of the Catholic church, not a separation from it. His chapters on medieval theology and Aquinas were the most helpful, showing that the Reformers were more often in line with Aquinas than not. The issue arose with how Aquinas was interpreted in people like Scotus, Biel, and Ockham. His chapters on Luther and Zwingli were incredibly insightful. At times, I did feel like I was reading a run-of-the-mill Reformation history, but most often not. And his chapter on the Roman Catholic counter-reformation showed how the Roman Catholic church truly did veer from the one, holy Catholic, and apostolic church. This will be a resource I return to regularly!
September 17, 2023
Pros: historians have been making the case that the reformation was a continuation of the catholic (small c) tradition. If you want to get a grasp on the case being made in the secondary literature without reading twenty or thirty books, this does it. Also, does a good job walking through the major theological books of the reformation and explaining their arguments.
Cons: he seems to lose sight of his thesis halfway through and becomes more of a general history of the reformation rather than a focused historical argument. Also, Luther alone gets about as much coverage as all the other reformers combined.
June 4, 2025
This book reminds why (again) I am so impressed with Matthew Barrett. My review will as short as the book is long (meaning its LOOOONG). The main point is that the reformation was really a push to make the church ONE entity (?) again. To become the universal body of Christ. There is so much history that some places you start to get lost (hence 4 stars)...but I really would say 4.5 stars.
Maybe if I was smarter I wouldn't have gotten lost in a couple of tangents...but then I did read it over the course of 5 months as I read other things. So, probably my fault.
Maybe if I was smarter I wouldn't have gotten lost in a couple of tangents...but then I did read it over the course of 5 months as I read other things. So, probably my fault.
December 1, 2023
It is a high accomplishment to detail the history of the Reformation and the ideas that led up to it. Dr. Barrett accomplishes this and more as he shows how the Roman Catholic church of the time not only stayed from biblical truth but also embraced a faulty version of truth and metaphysics. This book showed me the depth of history that my own protestant faith has and how realism needs to be the foundational undercurrent of our truth and religion. Worth a read of this lengthy book.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 39 reviews