Kenneth J. Stewart (1)

This book was refreshing. A historically nuanced critique of the evangelicals-fleeing-to-Rome-and-Constantinople narrative. Often, he argues, disaffected evangelicals have a shallow foundation in the historic Protestant tradition, and thus are at a double remove from the Reformers' (and many evangelicals', until relatively recently) own lively engagement with the Fathers. When they do leave, they often have a romanticized/simplified view of the ancient church and its connection to their adoptive tradition. Not all the chapters are equally engaging, and I didn't agree with everything, but there are some interesting (and overdue) challenges thrown down throughout.… (mais)

It would seem like a book exploring the Christian past and the Evangelical identity crisis.

The book is actually a member of the Reformed camp engaged in apologetics for the Protestant Reformation and its current standing.

Throughout the book the greatest concession is that study in early Christianity was too neglected for about a century until recently. Otherwise the author is attempting to burnish the bonafides of historic Protestantism in an attempt to warn people away from Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy.

He also would not think much of the Restoration Movement and its impulse, of which I am quite convicted, so there's my bias showing. It's not as if I disagree with him much in substance about concerns regarding any move toward Rome or Constantinople; nevertheless, it's evident throughout that the author's main purpose is to attempt to make much out of a little. He does show the interest maintained in Protestantism regarding early Christianity throughout the years and shows how many attempted to argue the historicity of justification by faith only. But the arguments are quite narrow and not altogether convincing: in terms of justification by faith only, his main beef is that the Catholics overstated their argument. But overstating the argument doesn't justify the opposing argument, and the evidence remains quite little regarding any major emphasis on justification by faith only before Luther. The author has a whole chapter devoted to what seems to be a strong interest of his, John Henry Newman; it tends to be more of a chronicle of all the interpretations on Newman more than anything else.

Yes, the answer is not to run to Rome or Constantinople. But running to Geneva or Wittenberg is just as specious. I would encourage everyone to run to Jerusalem.

**--galley received as part of early review program… (mais)