Short Essay on the Reformation

8/3/2019 Short Essay on the Reformation

1/12

The term reform can be both valuable and discouraging. The word alone evokes a

certain complexity, but the definition reduces down to essentially meaning complete

change. Although at first, it may be difficult to recognize, the process of reform is in fact

painstaking. And this process was no less painful when considering the break from the

Medieval Latin Christian Church in the 16th century. The Protestant Reformation brought

about many movements that changed the way in which Christianity was viewed by both

the Catholic Church and the public; however the name of the movement could be seen as

deceiving. It is often assumed that Luther broke away from the church to declare and

define Protestant theology. And from that point forward it disseminated and branched

into history. But if one would delve deeper into the material, he would discover it was not

that straightforward.

The establishment of Protestantism in Christian history can be characterized in

four separate movements: Lutheranism, the Reformed Movement, the English

Reformation, and the Radical Reformation Movement (Placher, History, 190.)

Lutheranism dominated areas within Germany while eventually finding its way into parts

of Scandinavia. The Zwigli-led Reformed Movement had predominately spread

throughout Switzerland. The English Reformation, where England separated from the

authority of the papacy, and declared the King the churchs authority (Placher, History,

227). The radical reformers are often seen as those who failed to establish a territorial

church (Placher, History, 190). But nonetheless, this movement made substantial

contributions to the Protestant Reformation, particularly its communal approach to the

matter of church and state.


2/12

When all the facts are considered, it is not that these people are the losers of the

Reformation, nor are they as radical as their name suggests. They were just so

fundamentally different from the other movements within the Reformation. George H.

Williams points out that the Radical Reformers can be broken down into three main

movements: the Anabaptists, the Spiritualists, and the Anti-Trinitarians/Rationalists

(Placher, History, 191). Although contrasting the theology of John Calvin and the Radical

Reformers would serve a historical purpose, it does little to add to the debate which seeks

to define the origin of many of these reformed movements. Moreover, it fails to identify

whether or not any of the ideas of these movements were original. The most significant

theological topics of Christian thought are the role of reason and revelation, works and

grace, and church and state (Placher, History, 14-15).

John Calvin, the Radical Reformers and the Medieval Latin Christian Church

have much in common. The theologies of each of these groups are, at times, similar. And

rightly so, they were interconnected by the authority of scripture. However, they were

disconnected by the way in which the scripture was interpreted, and while the connection

between them established a common cause, their disconnection often led to sharp

disagreements.

Much of the theologies and their differences were first begotten by many theologians of

the medieval Christian Church. And although the people within the movements of

Calvinism and Radical Reformers contributed much to their spread and growth, the

atmosphere of reform within this specific era of time provided the primary impetus to

allow these groups to cultivate and promote their doctrinal ideas. Both Calvin and the

Radical Reformers addressed various topics, but their most significant contributions can


3/12

be singled out. Calvin provided the movement with his doctrine of double predestination

and the Radical Reformers provided an intriguing approach for separating church and

state by creating a state within a state through establishing an isolated community open

only to those privy and pure enough to be accepted.

Reason versus revelation is a topic that is still debated today (Placher, History,

14). If one uses reasoning to understand the divine, then he may find difficulty in

recognizing part that faith plays. And yet if he relies merely on faith, then he may turn

blind to reason. Calvin, for instance, believed that there was a place for both reason and

revelation. Each of us mustbe stung by the consciousness of his own unhappiness as

to attain at least some knowledge of God[but] it is needful that another and better help

be added to direct us to the very Creator of the universe (Placer, Readings v II, 60.) And

while he may maintain that we must be stung by the consciousness of our own

unhappiness, his stance on irresistible grace makes revelation some part of the process

outside of reason-especially when considering his focus on his own conversion (Placher,

History, 219).

The stance commonly held by the Radical Reformers concerning reason and

revelation can be seen in the Anabaptist leader Thomas Muntzers sermon before the

princes. He speaks of how often revelation is rejected and calls out Marin Luther as one

who often does this pejoratively referring to him as Brother Soft Life. He goes on to

say, however, that the beloved apostles had to be diligent to [the meaning of] visions

because it is clearly written in their Acts. Further, he says that the use of revelation is,

indeed, the mark of a truly apostolic, patriarchal and prophetic spirit. Plancher comments


4/12

that Muntzer maintained that the Holy Spirit speaking to the public had more authority

than the scriptures as interpreted by scholars (Plancer, Readings v. II, 28-29.)

While reason and revelation played a part of the theologies of the Reformation,

this was not the first time the debate between the two had arisen. As a matter of fact, one

of the earliest theologians of the medieval times struggled with this. Anselm of

Canterbury approached the quandary unlike any of his predecessors. Although many of

the theologians up to this point approached reason and revelation the same way as

Anselm faith seeking understanding they rarely, if ever, bounded faith and reason as

tightly as Anselm. He had done this as daringly as anyone has (Placher, Readings v. 1,

144), as Placher puts it. Anselms style was intriguing. He would often structure his

writing as an A and B argument, evoking a mathematical or logical feel:

A: Thus to sin is the same things as not to render his due to God.

B: What is the dept which we owe God?

A: Every inclination of the rational creature ought to be subject to the will of

God.

B: Nothing could be truer.

- (Placher, Readings v. 1, 148)

But Anselm was not the only theologian from the medieval church that focused on the

role for the reason and faith. Thomas Aquinas focused on it a great deal. So much so that

there is a realm of philosophy, Thomism1, named after him. Aquinas took Aristotles

thought that the senses are largely needed for knowledge and applied it to his reasoning

behind his theology. Concurrently, he took the Augustinian idea that all knowing begins

with faith and turned it on its head. His Summa Theologiae balanced faith and reason,

nature and grace (Placher, Readings v. 1, 156). Aquinas believed that there was a part for

revelation and for the philosophical sciences, which are devised by human. It is therefore


5/12

expedient that there be another science which is divinely inspired, besides the

philosophical sciences, which are devised by human reason. It is therefore expedient that

there be another science which is divinely inspired, besides the philosophical sciences

(Placher, Readings v. 157).

On the other side of reason, there were the Mystics. Mysticism focused on the

revelation of the individual. Its practitioners still focused upon the orthodoxy of the

church, but because they emphasized the revelation of the individual there was a

redundancy which necessarily came when defining the role of the church. A good

example of how mysticism parallels the radical reformers stance on revelation can be

seen in an excerpt from Meister Eckerts Sermons. Here God enters the soul with all he

has and not in part. He enters the soul through its core and nothing may touch the core

except God himself (Placer, Readings v. 1 176). This is mysticism defined, no logical

explanation of how God enters the soul, nor scripture to support these claims. Mysticism

has existed well before the radical reformers, whether there is an absolute connection

from which they drew their theological convictions from is another story.

The simple fact is that although Calvin sought to balance reason and revelation,

he was preceded by a long-standing Augustinian thought which was focused on by those

quite close to him in time. Additionally, the idea that revelation can be the means by

which the knowledge of God is obtained did not begin with the radical reformers. The

mystics of the late medieval period came before the reformation and had trodden down

that oath quite often. Anselm was central to the idea of reason and revelation because he

was the first to introduce logic and reason in a way that was more intense than his


6/12

predecessors. Aquinas is important in this context because he maintained that there ought

to be a balance between revelation and reason.

The role of works and grace was the center piece of the Reformation. For Martin

Luther it was defining the role works played in the act of receiving salvation. Calvins

legacy, though, is plagued and seemingly will be plagued with his view on grace and

predestination. The Augustinian view maintained by the medieval church coincides with

John Calvin. Moreover, the Augustinian stance on works and grace can be seen, not only

in the number of theologians in the church which maintained its principles, but also in the

backlash that came out of theologians straying into Pelagian territory, focusing on

freewill in choosing ones salvation (Placher, Readings v. 1, 133-137). Additionally, there

is support for this view in later theologians as well: Aquinas (Placher, Readings v. 1, 161)

and Thomas Bradwardine (Placher, Readings v. 1, 183).

One part of the argument for works and grace which was established concretely

by Calvin was the ideas of irresistible grace and dual predestination. Calvin maintained

the individual has freewill outside of choosing his own salvation. The grace for salvation

is not given freely by God because it is only for the elect. And those who are elected as

believers, then, are so compelled by grace that they cannot turn from the invitation of

salvation. It was during and because of these reflections on how we are saved that Calvin

drew his view on predestination (Placher, History, 221).

Calvins view on predestination was not necessarily a precedent, but his making an

explicit stance on the idea of dual predestination was. Augustinian thought maintained

that people were predestined to be saved. And although it could be inferred, it was not

necessarily explicitly stated that this also meant that people are predestined to hell as


7/12

well. John Calvin stood by this idea and explained that we are all deserving of the

punishment of damnation and no one gets less than what they deserve. Some do get more

than what they deserve, but only because it pleases God to do so (Placher, History 222).

It is not explicitly clear about the radical reformers theological stance on works and

grace. Both the Anti-Trinitarians and Spiritualists were often noted for their tolerance

(Anti-Trinitarians were the more doctrinally tolerant) (Placher, History, 193, 194). And

the Anabaptists had a strong focus on post-infant baptism, which might suggest a doctrine

of freewill (Placher, History, 191) (Placher, Readings, v. II, 26). But it is quite a

coincidence that those known for tolerance have not openly stated their stance on

predestination or freewill, especially during a time when there is such a focus drawn upon

them. The wording in the Schleitheim Confession of Faith only supports the ambiguity

which suggests a tolerance for moderate doctrinal plurality: First. Observe concerning

baptism: Baptism shall be given to all those who have learned repentance and amendment

of life and who believe truly that their sins are taken away by Christ (Placher, Readings,

v. II, 31).

The final topic which these three groups shared is the role of the church and state. This

topic is complicated when considering the medieval times. It seemed that incorporating

the church with the state was doomed from the start. Augustine was in a conundrum.

Although he was so influential in both civil and spiritual affairs, he still felt torn on the

matter of whether to use state force to oversee the implementation of a theological

decision. This was seen by his indecisiveness in using force against the Donatists in

North Africa (Placher, History, 114). Regardless of whether he was at ease with his


8/12

decision, this choice is often seen as the beginning of a long road of bad decisions for the

church (Placher, History, 115).

The progressive nature of the theologians who questioned the role of the church

and state seems to be a cycle of inquiring about the papacys authority throughout the

Middle Ages. Giles of Rome had taken Aquinas view that the papacy had power over

spiritual matters and the state had authority over the temporal matters, and, for lack of

better words, destroyed it. Giles said that since heavenly power transcends all other

power-nature, art or the state and the papacy was the peoples authority of that power,

the papacy, then, has the power to transcend the state (Placher, Readings v. 1, 165).

Dante Aphigieri, only realizing the power the people had to tear the state apart, argued

that there be independent rights for the emperors (Placher, Readings v. 1. 168). Later

while dealing with the fact of two, possibly three popes, the church sought the answer to

how a council would choose the pope in such an emergency in the future. Dietrich of

Niem, then, argued that ecumenical councils have authority over the papacy. Today the

unity of the head is lost, for three dare to call themselves pope. A pope as pope is a man

and as pope can sin as a man can err. The pope is bound to obey such a council in all

things. Such a council can limit the power of the pope (Placher, Readings v. 1, 189-190).

Although the medieval church may have, at times, attacked the authority of the papacy,

the Reformation attacked the entire system. And by doing this, it led to the establishment

of churches with new internal structures, and of course, doctrines. These new

developments, caused by the disseminations of papal authority, led to those within the

Reformation to necessarily establish a new stance on the topic of church and state.


9/12

Calvin saw the state being separate from the church (Placher, Readings v. II, 64).

He says that spiritual government, indeed, is already initiating in us upon earth and

that the role of the civil government is to cherish and protect the outward worship of

God, to defend sound doctrine of piety and the church, to adjust life to the society of men,

to form social behavior to civil righteousness, to reconcile us with one another, and to

promote the general peace and tranquility (Placher, Readings v. II, 65). But Calvin

doesnt stop there. He makes a broad exception. Calvin wittingly leave room for a revolt,

he states that sometimes [God] raises up open avengers from among his servants, and

arms them with commands to punish the wicked government and deliver his people,

oppressed in unjust ways, from miserable calamity (Placher, Readings v. ii, 65). This

idea of an all-encompassing protection of religious rights as opposed to a state-mandate

depicting your religion and the practices therein sharply differs from many of the radical

reformers. The difference is seen in both the state and its people.

The radical reformers were pacifists and sought to be disassociated with the state, so

much so that they even refused to participate in military action. Because of their refusal

to acknowledge the authority of the state, they created their own communities,

establishing then away from communities away from those already established by the

state. Part of the logic behind the doctrine of the Anabaptists (rebaptizers) was that the

transformation, however it happened, had already occurred and that infant baptisms were

not scriptural. Therefore, in order to have a church with truly devoted members, those

who were baptized as adults would essentially be wholly committed to the church

(Placher, History, 191.) Many in the movement wanted to establish this type of church

because there was a belief that the church of the past had been corrupted since the


10/12

conversion of Constantine (and some maintained since the beginning of the apostolic

succession) (Placher, History, 191). This could hold some reasoning behind their lack of

civil obedience. Essentially, since they did not believe that the state had a place in their

governing, or at least they do not see that it has authority over their spiritual life, they are

withdrawn from society. But this withdrawal is intriguing and shines a light on their

views about church and state. Although they are civil pacifists and they do have a form of

excommunicating individuals, whether daily or not, they do these things with and within

a tightly-knit community separate from the already established communities by the state.

So, it could easily be said that, although they may not have a place for civil governing,

concerning society as whole, they do have a preference and place for communal

governing. Drawing from and contrasting this with Calvinism, Calvin told his followers

that they should be obedient to the state, whereas the radical reformers were telling each

other to be obedient to the community. And because the radical reformers rejected the

formal state and were pacifists, they would not revolt. In fact, this contributed much to

the abuses they experienced. Additionally, their focus on a communal government, which

superseded the authority of the governing state in which they were established, was not

something that was often seen in any of the Christian subgroups before the Reformation.

If there were preceding communities who had a communal doctrine similar to the

radical reformers, the groups were not significant enough to be mentioned in the

literature.

The Reformation gave birth to many movements which sought to reform those aspects of

the church with which they did not agree. Calvin put his foot down and formally

established the ideas of double predestination and irresistible grace. Additionally, he


11/12

argued that there should be a balance between revelation and reason by necessarily

leaving salvation as an act of revelation through the rejection of freewill and the role of

irresistible grace. He also tells his followers to be submissive to the state because they are

the ones who give you the freedom to practice their religion. Moreover, he demands that

if there is a point at which the citizens are experiencing oppressive and violent forces, it

could very well be the cleansing of their immorality. Of course, Calvin made an

exception which opened the path for the citizens of the state to revolt if they felt that the

governmental authority was acting malevolently.

The radical reformers, no doubt, maintained that revelation was the way to God.

Like their predecessors, the mystics, there was room for divine intervention. But for the

radical reformers, the room was enough to experience God without the use of scripture

because they felt that this could solely be revealed to them via revelation. Moreover,

some believed in the literal interpretation of scripture, which, in fact, implies the thought

that God reveals himself through the words of scripture without any focus on reasoning.

Again, others took the bible so literally that they did not accept the idea of a trinity

because it was not explicitly stated. Additionally, they did not believe in infant baptism

because it was not explicitly stated in scripture.

The radical reformers were sometimes known as being tolerant of other Protestant

doctrines. Although some groups were more tolerant than others, the simple proof is in

the ambiguity of the wording of their doctrine and the lack of establishing an explicit

position on freewill or predestination. If the greatest contribution of one of the groups of

the radical reformers were needed to be pointed out, it would be the formal establishment

of the communal government within an already established state. And although the goal


12/12

of other movements within the Reformation was to establish territorial churches, the

radical reformers view was completely different. They established territorial

communities. These communities served as the church and the state they governed both

spiritually and temporally. This contribution to Protestantism is important because of the

prevalence of Mennonites and Amish within the United States. And the significance lies

not only in the ubiquity of the group within parts of the United States, but maybe more

importantly, the impressive longevity and preservation of the movement.

Short Essay on the Reformation

Documents

Transcript of Short Essay on the Reformation