Tim GlessnerHistory of Christian Thought

Dr. Jack WillseyNorthwest Baptist Seminary

Spring 2001

Final Examination

1. Identify the various branches of the Reformation, discussing its various causes and the issues that shaped them.

The Reformation was one of the most complex movements in history, both in its causes

and in its effects. Any attempt to trace its causes will necessarily look at a variety of influences

that were active in Europe and which led up to the Reformation, including (but not limited to)

religious, political, economic, social, technological, and intellectual influences. An examination

of the religious movements that proceeded out of the Reformation is no less complicated. This

complexity derives not merely from the number of movements that were spawned by the

Reformation, but from the task of delineating and distinguishing between groups and theological

positions. Additionally, the impact of the Reformation was long lasting—and continues to be

felt in the present era.

In short, the Reformation is a prime example of a complex system. There are no well-

defined limits to the causes nor to the effects of the Reformation. Any attempt to chronicle it

will inevitably be forced to generalize and simplify. This essay will attempt to acknowledge

some of the more outstanding causes and effects of the Reformation.

By the fifteenth century, Europe was undergoing rapid change in many areas. Politically,

nation-states were establishing themselves. The “empire” of Charlemagne had long since been

dissolved. In France there was a powerful, centralized monarchy, while in Spain, the Spaniards

were wresting control of the Iberian Peninsula from the Moors and the four Spanish kingdoms of

Castile, Leon, Aragon, and Asturias were being consolidated. Italy was a mish-mash of

independent city-states that were fierce rivals. The papacy was a powerful force among these—

seeking to control and manipulate them while itself at the same time being controlled and

manipulated. Indeed, the Babylonian Captivity of the Popes in Avignon and the division of the

papacy were powerful demonstrations of papal vulnerability and the newfound supremacy of the

national states. The Swiss cantons won their freedom in 1499 and maintained independence. In

Germany, various princes ruled their lands independently of each other. The Netherlands was a

vibrant, growing power both with regard to economics and exploration and trade in the sixteenth

century. England, meanwhile, was engaged in both external struggles—the Hundred Years War

with France ended in 1475—and internal strife—the War of the Roses established the Tudor

family on the English throne. Although in 1521, the Spanish sovereign, Charles V, held the title

of Emperor, and was the ruler of lands throughout Western and Central Europe, he was by no

means the supreme ruler. There was no Empire, or centralized authority in Europe, as in the

days of Roman might, or even as Charlemagne exercised to a lesser extent.

Not only was the European scene marked by political diversity, but economic change was

also an important aspect of the situation of the late medieval period. There was a growing

middle class of merchants, traders, and craftsmen. Craftsmen were forming into powerful guilds

that protected the rights of their memberships. As this class grew in size and strength, it began to

wield political clout as well. The feudal system, in which powerful local lords virtually owned

the impoverished serfs who worked their land, began to weaken. Cities grew in importance

throughout Europe as economic and political centers.

Exploration and great traders also marked the European economy. Marco Polo went to

China in the thirteenth century. Vasco de Gama sailed around Africa in 1497. In 1492,

Columbus discovered America. All this contributed to the decentralization of power in Europe.

Another major development was the rise of the university and the consequent intellectual

diversity that arose from different centers of learning. The universities became the intellectual

heir to monasteries; they were places where ideas were developed, tested, and promulgated. The

university curriculum was developed, being arts, medicine, law, and theology, with theology was

held to be the “queen of the sciences”. This gave rise to an atmosphere in which theological

debate and disagreement were fostered—within certain bounds. The Renaissance in Italy,

spurred by the arrival of Eastern scholars after the fall of Constantinople and the rediscovery of

Greek literature, particularly Aristotle, began a form of humanism, which focused on the

greatness of the human form, and human achievement. Scholasticism, a diverse movement that

generally elevated reason and emphasized the role of logic and natural theology alongside

revelation, developed. Aristotelian thinking—especially the intent to systematize—played a

major role in the theology of the day. Thomas Aquinas was the chief among theologians who

were influenced by Aristotle, but William Anselm and Peter Abelard were also great thinkers

who propagated their own set of ideas. William Ockham was another thinker who defended

nominalism, the idea that abstract concepts do not have an ontological existence. Erasmus was a

humanist scholar in Martin Luther’s day who developed the first true critical Greek text of the

New Testament. He was also an eminent theologian and a voice for moderate reform in the

Catholic Church. Clearly, the era leading up to the Reformation was a dynamic mix of ideas and

schools of thought.

The religious setting of Europe leading up to the Reformation was one of considerable

turmoil. From very early in church history, the struggle against corruption in the church was

very real. The monastic movements were results of this. Reforms had been called for almost

from the time that the Roman Pope rose to political power. Under the leadership of Francis of

Assisi, the Franciscans arose as a reaction against corruption. In the centuries before Luther,

John Wycliffe in England and Jan Hus in Czechoslovakia were radical leaders who called for a

return to biblical truth and practices in the Church. Although these men were both

anathematized, nonetheless they were influential voices calling for a return to the authority of

Scripture. Erasmus, in Luther’s day, was more moderate in his calls for reform—but he was

somewhat influential. Money and wealth were a particular failing of the church. To raise funds,

the Church sold indulgences—payments for the forgiveness of sins and for the release of souls

from Purgatory. Indulgences, however, were widely recognized to be merely fund-raising for

building projects in the Church.

The papacy was also weakened. Not only had secular rulers asserted their control over

the papacy during the Babylonian captivity in Avignon, but within the Church there was a

struggle for power among competing popes and councils (the Great Schism). The pope was no

longer a supreme ruler who commanded the obedience of kings.

The last influence on the European climate at the time of the Reformation was

technological. By far the most revolutionary technology of the day was the printing press. With

the development of moveable type, books and literature could be widely and rapidly

disseminated. This contributed greatly to the dynamic promulgation of ideas and thinking

throughout Europe.

By the time Luther nailed his theses on the Wittenberg door in 1517, the Church in

Europe was ripe for change. Rome no longer exerted the political influence over the continent to

enforce doctrinal homogeneity. While acknowledging the wide variety of influences on the

European scene, a case could be made that it was this political reality which proved to be the

decisive factor in enabling the Reformation to come to fruition. This was particularly true in the

German states, in the Swiss cantons, and in England. Luther, in Germany, was protected by

Frederick of Saxony in Wartburg castle. In the independent Swiss cantons of Zurich and

Geneva, Zwingli and Calvin added their voices to the movement of reform. In England, change

was enacted strictly for political reasons; nevertheless there was reform, albeit co-opted by

Henry VIII in favor of a church controlled by the English monarch. France and Spain, at the

time of the Reformation, were controlled by powerful monarchs who supported Rome—if only

for their own political purposes—and the Reformation was never strong in these areas. Italy,

because it was the Pope’s own backyard, was never open to the Reformation, despite its

fractured political status. Certainly, attributing the Reformation only to political ends is overly

simplistic, yet politics certainly played a key role.

The Reformation is generally viewed in the light of three main directions of church and

theology that developed from it: the Magisterial, Radical, and Catholic Reformations. The

Magisterial and Radical Reformations were firm breaks from the Roman Catholic Church and

were in areas that were more or less politically independent of—or opposed to—Rome. The

Catholic Reformation involved a change of both doctrine and practice within the Roman

Catholic Church, and was a response both to the issues within the Church that prompted the

Reformation and to the Protestant Reformation. As its name implies, the Radical Reformation

was a sharp break from Rome in doctrine and practice. The Radical Reformers rejected most of

the soteriology and ecclesiology of the Catholic Church and abandoned Catholic practices. The

movement was principally located in and around the independent cities of Switzerland, Austria,

and southwestern Germany. The Magisterial Reformation found its home in strong monarchies

opposed to Rome (England, the Scandinavian countries, the Netherlands, and northern German

states) as well as independent areas—particularly Switzerland. Some of its principle

characteristics were a high view of Scripture and preaching, a strong insistence on God’s

sovereignty, and views of the Eucharist and baptism that remained similar to those of the

Catholic Church.

Martin Luther was the catalyst of the Reformation and chief among the Magisterial

Reformers. His break with Rome was based chiefly on the issue of soteriology. How is a sinner

saved and sin forgiven? Luther’s interest was both personal and social. As a monk, he struggled

with his sense of guilt over his sin and the realization that no matter how he followed the dictates

of his office, he could not be holy as a holy God demanded. Finally, the words of Paul in

Romans sank home: the righteous will live by faith. Luther understood this to mean that only by

faith (sola fide) can sin be forgiven and righteousness be experienced by a believer. Human

works have no place in this and a believer does not thereby become righteous, but is declared

righteous by God. Salvation, therefore, for Luther was strongly monergistic (Augustine was a

powerful influence on Luther—and many of the other Reformers). On a social level, a short time

after Luther arrived at this understanding, the Catholic Church authorized the sale of indulgences

in Germany in order to raise money for the refurbishing of St. Peter’s basilica in Rome. Many

Germans resented the transfer of wealth to Rome. Luther, however, was principally concerned

with the theological fallacy and the moral corruption of indulgences. He posted his ninety-five

theses in protest and was promptly thrown into a firestorm of debate which culminated in the

Diet of Worms and his excommunication. This debate proved critical in establishing a tenet of

the reformation: Sola Scriptura. Luther challenged his opponents to demonstrate the validity of

their case from Scripture and insisted that the practice and doctrine of the church must be

founded on Scripture—or at least must not contradict Scripture. No doubt he was influenced by

his own experience with salvation, in which the tradition of the Church was of no value to

remove his sin, but rather the study of the Bible freed him.

Luther had broken from the church against his every intention—he was excommunicated

—so although his ecclesiology by necessity changed, he remained close to the church in much of

his practice. Whereas the Roman Catholic Church emphasized the continuity of tradition—

particularly apostolic succession—as the main defining point of the Church, Luther (along with

all other Protestant Reformers) taught that adherence to Biblical teaching is the primary

identifying characteristic of the Church. However, although ultimately rejecting five of the

Catholic sacraments, he and Philip Melanchthon, the theologian who was the organizer of much

of Lutheran theology, held to the concept of the sacraments as imparting grace, and remained

very close to Catholic teaching in his view of the Eucharist and baptism. Infant baptism

remained as part of the Lutheran teaching and consubstantiation is similar to the Catholic

teaching of transubstantiation. This doctrinal acceptance of the sacraments was in large measure

vital to the ecclesiological development of Lutheranism as part of the Magisterial Reformation.

Ulrich Zwingli in Zurich was making a break from the Catholic Church at about the same

time as Luther. He agreed with Luther in much of his theology. However, there was sharp

disagreement between the two regarding the Eucharist. Zwingli held that the Eucharist was

symbolic and denied both the real presence in the Eucharist and its sacramental (grace-giving)

nature. He held that the Eucharist was an ordinance, a command to be obeyed as a memorial of

Christ’s work. Zwingli was highly influential on John Calvin, who did most of his work in

Geneva. Calvin was a great systematizer. Calvin, like Luther, developed a very strong view of

God’s sovereignty, both regarding salvation and the rule of the universe. After Calvin, his

followers focused this emphasis on the doctrine of election, emphasizing divine sovereignty over

the human will. For Calvin, like the Luther, the Church was to be a body in which the

sacraments were carried out and the Word of God preached. Indeed the preaching of the Word

almost became another sacrament in Calvinist practices. Much of Calvin’s impact on the

Reformation came from this emphasis on the study and preaching of the Word as well as from

his political rule of Geneva as a theocratic state. Many people from West-Central Europe, the

Netherlands, and Scotland were greatly impressed both by Calvin’s writings and his governing.

The Calvinist ideal of a theocratic state governed by scriptural principles fit well with these

independent areas of Europe. In fact, Calvin’s ideas and teachings dominated this area to the

extent that they became identified as Reformed theology.

Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin all made significant breaks with the Catholic Church.

However, they did not carry some of their theological differences to their logical end. Zwingli in

particular, with his view of the sacraments, did not. The persecuted members of the Radical

Reformation carried out the most radical change.

The Radical Reformers were those who viewed the Catholic Church as irredeemably

corrupt and who saw a need to redevelop a biblical doctrine of the church. The Radical

Reformers were centered in the areas surrounding the independent cantons of Switzerland. Chief

among them were the Anabaptists, as well as other individuals and some cultic groups. The

absence of a strong centralized authority in the region probably contributed to the emergence of

the Radical Reformers. However, they were still harshly persecuted and killed for their beliefs.

The Radical Reformers were a diverse and sometimes bizarre group— perhaps lending some

credence to the Roman Catholic argument that without an authoritative interpretive tradition all

sorts of strange teachings would arise. One of the agreements of the Radicals with the

Magisterial Reformers was that the church was to be identified with doctrinal orthodoxy and

right practices based on Scripture. Another mark of the Radical Reform was a view of the

ordinances that was similar to that of Zwingli. Indeed, the Anabaptists carried this doctrine to its

logical end and did not perform infant baptism. Believer’s baptism was the distinct mark of the

Anabaptists—earning them the derisive name of “Re-baptizers”. Regarding soteriology, the

Anabaptists were similar to the Magisterial Reformers, but were more open to a synergistic view.

Reformation in the Catholic Church was both a reaction against the Protestant

Reformation and a genuine internal reform. The Council of Trent in 1545 was in large part a

reaction against the Protestants. It added (or “recognized”, depending on one’s perspective) the

Apocryphal writings to the Bible, and re-stated the Church’s authority of Tradition. The rise of

the Order of Jesus, the Jesuits, was an attempt to reform the Church from within and respond to

Protestant gains in geographical territory. To a certain extent it succeeded in revitalizing the

moral and missionary life of the Catholic Church. The sixteenth century became a period of

rapid global expansion for the Church, both in Asia and in the Americas.

The Reformation did not entirely leave a positive legacy. The Thirty Years War was a

bloody, brutal war between the Protestant states of Northern Europe against the Catholic States

of Eastern and Southern Europe. In large measure this provides evidence of the political nature

of the Reformation. Certainly a case could be made that there was a close relationship between

the politics and economy of a geographic region and the religious system which ensued.

However, a view of history through a redemptive lens ought to acknowledge the hand of God’s

Providence in the events that set the stage for the Reformers. Certainly the Reformers revitalized

the Christian faith and renew theology and practices. Perhaps God has purpose in a diversity of

belief among faithful Christians which ultimately will contribute to His glory and the unity of

His Church.

2. Discuss the significant theological issues and forms which developed from the Post-Reformation period to the modern era.

The Reformation forever changed the face of Christianity. With the authority of the Pope

and the unity of the Church shattered there was no longer a unifying center. As a result, a

multitude of movements and theologies emerged from the Reformation. No longer can Christian

history consider the course of one movement or church. Rather, there is a plethora of diverse

movements and systems to consider. This essay will attempt to identify and discuss a few of the

movements that have had a significant impact on contemporary evangelicalism and then examine

the direction these are going.

The theology of Calvin was certainly one of the most influential theological movements

of the Magisterial Reformation. Calvin’s theology became identified with the Reformation to the

extent that it was know as Reformed Theology. To this day many evangelical churches point to

this movement and herald themselves as Reformed.

Calvin had a profound influence in Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Scotland. Calvin’s

philosophy of a close relationship between Church and State also had a powerful impact, from

Scotland, to the Netherlands, to the Puritans of England. John Knox, a Scottish preacher,

modeled his reforms in Scotland after Calvin’s Geneva. In the Netherlands, the state church was

the Dutch Reformed Church.

Calvin’s emphasis on the sovereignty of God and a monergistic view of salvation led to a

great emphasis on the doctrine of election. Although there is some doubt that Calvin himself

held as strict a view of election as many of his followers, his views regarding the sovereignty of

God lent themselves to a natural progression. Members of the Calvinist school of theology

developed the views of the logical order of God’s plan for salvation, supralapsarian and

infralapsarian. Both of these involved an understanding that salvation was only intended for the

elect. At the Synod of Dort in the Netherlands the well-known acronym TULIP was established,

which has become synonymous with Calvinism: Total depravity, Unconditional election,

Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints. These five points have

shaped Christian thought and debate on salvation and election for centuries, and are still

important in evangelical circles. Against this, Jacobus Arminius, a Dutch theologian, argued for

the role of human free will in salvation. The debate between Calvinists and Arminians continues

to this day.

Reformed theology’s emphasis on the preaching of the Word led to a stress on the

importance of biblical education. After Calvin, many Reformed schools were started in Central

and Northern Europe. Theological education has been a great heritage from Calvin’s time

onward. The Reformed Movement continues as one of the principle contributors to evangelical

thinking.

In England, the English monarchs initially strictly controlled the Reformation. Henry

VIII broke with Rome and established the Church of England. After a time a movement for

reform arose from dissenters who broke from the Church of England. These people were known

as Puritans and were the English branch of Reformed theology. They insisted on strict moral

purity and had a high view of the authority of Scripture and the sovereignty of God. They were

persecuted and eventually many left England for greater freedom of conscience in Europe and

America (although under Cromwell they enjoyed a brief period in power in England in the

seventeenth century). Under the Puritans, the Great Awakenings swept New England and were a

source of many of the moral underpinnings of the United States. Jonathan Edwards was the

finest of Puritan theologians. True to the Puritan heritage and like Luther and Calvin, his

theology upheld the sovereignty of God.

The Puritans, like the Reformed movement, were great thinkers with a high view of

God’s sovereignty and of the authority of Scripture. Their influence pervaded New England

after they settled there. Their Calvinist view of the State Church may have laid the foundations

for viewing America as a Chosen Nation.

Two centuries after Luther, the Lutheran church in Germany had become a center of dead

formalism, in which correct dogma was the focus, with spiritual life neglected. In the first part

of the eighteenth century several men led a reaction against this dead formalism that became

known as Pietism. The first leaders of the Pietistic movement were Johann Arndt, Philipp

Spener, and August Hermann Franke1; but the most well known was Count Ludwig Zinzendorf.

He was more a preacher and leader than theologian, and led a small, well-organized group

known as the Moravians. Zinzendorf also made trips to America, where he was influential on

the Wesleys, John and Charles. John Wesley had a profound impact on England and the British

Colonies in America.

The theology of Pietism, because it was a reaction against a problem in the Lutheran

church tended to emphasize the role of humans. It—especially Wesleyan theology—was open to

the role of the human will in salvation. More than simply salvation, however, Pietism was

focused on the human behavior and human experience of progressive sanctification. Indeed, if

Lutheran theology found its focus on justification, and Reformed theology on grace and election,

Pietism’s focus was on sanctification. Spiritual growth was a central concern of the Pietists.

Personal Bible study and prayer as key elements of a personal walk with God was an emphasis 1 Roger E. Olson, The Story of Christian Theology, (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press: 1999), 477-81.

of Zinzendorf. Individualism as an element of Christianity may have had its roots in Pietism.

Due to the fiercely independent spirit present in the Colonial and Post-Independence United

States, Pietism exerted an enormous influence among Americans. Personal purity and depth of

emotional feelings were also characteristic of Pietism. Although Pietistic theology did not

emphasize philosophy and was not as technical as Reformed and Puritan theology, there was a

strong emphasis on knowing the Bible. These traits have been characteristic of many evangelical

churches in the United States. Indeed many of the significant movements in the United States

either came out of a Pietistic background or were greatly influence by Pietism: Methodists,

Baptists, Nazarenes, and Quakers. In many ways, Pietism continues to shape and influence the

evangelical movement today.

One of the ongoing balancing acts throughout Christianity has been the attempt to relate

human reason and divine revelation. Several Post-Reformation movements have elevated the

former to a place of superiority over the latter. Deism in the eighteenth century was one such

movement. Supernatural acts, not being part of normal human experience, were either

considered irrelevant, or jettisoned from Deist thinking. God was viewed as remote and removed

from creation. Liberalism in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries was similar to Pietism in

some ways, in that it was a reaction against cold doctrinal belief in Germany. Schleiermacher

and Adolf von Harnack desired to counter this tendency in the German Church. However, it also

incorporated the rationalist doctrine of Enlightenment thinkers. The result of this was a rejection

of the supernatural, but, unlike Deism, a belief in a God who was intimately involved with

creation, so that almost everyone, and everything, was divine. Liberalism resulted in a very

optimistic view of humanity. Neo-orthodoxy was a rejection of liberalism and its overly

optimistic view of humanity. Karl Barth’s view was that God is totally transcendent and

unknowable, except by revelation in Jesus Christ. Yet the revelation is a subjective and personal

experience—neo-orthodoxy owed much to existentialism. Barth, and his followers kept much of

liberalism’s higher critical rationalistic evaluation of the Bible.

All three of these movements ultimately emphasized human reason and experience at the

expense of divine revelation. The result was a Christianity that looked very different from

historical orthodoxy. A series of attempts to locate the true message, or kerygma, of Jesus led to

several searches for the “historical” Jesus. These somehow ended up more as portraits of the

searchers rather than accurate portrayals of Jesus. Liberal Christianity has proved to be

something other than the real thing—and less satisfying as well, as the decline in mainline

protestant denominations demonstrates. Nevertheless, all this has influenced evangelicalism

profoundly.

Fundamentalism in the United States arose in opposition to Liberalism around the turn of

the twentieth century. It was an attempt to defend the “fundamentals” of the Christian faith.

There were many political and theological struggles for control of denominations and seminaries

between liberals and fundamentalists. Ultimately, liberals gained control and fundamentalists

withdrew to form their own movements and schools. Some fundamentalists practiced a form of

separation in which they refused interaction with more liberal positions than theirs. Others,

known as evangelicals, were more open to interaction with a variety of theological positions.

Probably the most common feature to both fundamentalists and evangelicals was a high regard

for both the authority and inspiration of the Bible. In keeping with the Protestant doctrine of sola

Scriptura, the Bible was viewed as the base of the Christian faith. However, such groups

otherwise are highly diverse and scattered. Describing them in detail would be an enormous

task. In many respects, many of the descendents of all the movements are to be found among

evangelicals.

Evangelicalism is a dynamic, growing movement. Perhaps one should say that

evangelicals are many dynamic, growing movements. The survey of Post-Reformation groups

demonstrates that almost every development is a response—usually legitimate—to a problem in

the church of its time or place. When these movements are undertaken with an attitude of

submission to God’s Word and a reverence for the Gospel, often they add qualitatively to the

fabric of theology. Reformed theology, the Puritans, Pietism, Fundamentalism, and

Evangelicalism have all made valuable contributions to an understanding of God’s plan. Perhaps

liberalism and neo-orthodoxy have provided some benefit as well (a reluctant admission from the

viewpoint of this evangelical writer). Observers of the contemporary theological milieu will note

the growing trend of dialogue between the branches discussed here. Furthermore, non-western

evangelical voices are increasingly contributing to this trajectory. Often, there is indeed strength

in diversity. If Pietistic groups provide a call to a living relationship with God, Reformed groups

may push for greater clarity in evangelical thinking about God. If differences can be respected

while irenic conversation is maintained—as increasingly seems to be the case—perhaps the very

divided (or diverse?) state of Post-Reformation theology will be a striking demonstration that

there are many members of One Body. As Qoheleth notes in Ecclesiastes: “Two are better than

one…if one falls down, his friend can help him up”.2

2 Ecclesiastes 4:9-10.

Bibliography

González, Justo L.. The Story of Christianity. Vol. 1. San Francisco: HarperCollins Publisher,

1984.

Holy Bible. New International Version. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Bible Publishers, 1985.

Latourette, Kenneth Scott. A History of Christianity. Vol. 1. Peabody: Prince Press, 1997.

McGrath, Alister E.. Historical Theology. Malden: Blackwell Publishers Inc., 1998.

Olson, Roger E.. The Story of Christian Thought. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1999.