I find this point interesting as Karl Barth underscores the main target and antagonist, theologically, of the Protestant Reformation; he says:

An even more striking example is the way in which both Luther and Calvin avoided the man in whom they must have recognized, even if he was not then the most widely read author, and whom they ought to have fought as their most dangerous opponent, the true genius of the Catholic Middle Ages. I refer to Thomas Aquinas. . . . (Karl Barth, trans. Geoffrey Bromiley, “The Theology of John Calvin,” 22)

I find this interesting because I’m also reading a book by Paul Helm entitled John Calvin’s Ideas. Helm draws a heavy heavy parallel between John Calvin’s theology and Thomas Aquinas’; he says:

. . . to show that the thoughts of Aquinas and Calvin follow similar patterns at various points provides evidence of a more general or pervasive medieval influence on Calvin. . . . (Paul Helm, “John Calvin’s Ideas,” 11)

To be clear, Helm’s context is trying to provide a qualified nuance between Calvin and Aquinas — in regard to their relative positions — while at the same time drawing a parallel between their burgeoning doctrines of God. In the end, what I see Helm really doing is threading the needle between Thomas’ doctrine of God and Calvin’s. I.e. Or building on the Muller thesis that there is continuity between what was later developed by the Post-Reformed theologians and John Calvin himself — Aquinas being the point of commonality and departure.

Either Helm is right in his analysis or Barth is right. Did Calvin rely upon the “Angelic Doctor,” or did he work against Him? I think Helm is wrong and Barth right — Calvin and Luther had Thomas in their cross-hairs all along.