Reformation History: Hus, Knox, Anabaptism Adults Ask (19)...

Could you discuss John Hus’s work “On the Church?” What impact did it have on Luther and later Reformers?

De Ecclesia represents John Hus’s most able treatise; hence, not surprisingly, ecclesiology (i.e., the doctrine of the church) is his primary area of doctrinal input in historical theology. Even here, however, Hus’s doctrine is by no means unique; basically, it modifies Wycliffe’s ecclesiology while simultaneously addressing contemporary issues in church life more broadly than Wycliffe.

Hus’s work grapples first with the nature of the church, and subsequently handles practical questions relative to the functioning church. Relative to the nature of the church, Hus stresses that the church is the bride of Christ, chosen by the Father; and that Christ is its Head, while the elect are members of its body. Parallel to the elect church is the congregation of the damned, who are excluded from the church of Christ. Thus, Hus adhered to what later became labeled as “double” predestination, i.e., both gracious predestination to election, and just predestination to condemnation.

Hus’s most influential contributions lie in his exposition of contemporary church issues. First, he promoted lay-man participation in worship most evident in his position that the communion cup should not be withheld from them, but also in advocating the priesthood of all believers who live holily, the active singing of laymen, etc. Secondly, he accented the exercise of true priesthood by stressing that though a priest’s walk of life does not reduce his sacerdotal power, it is intimately bound up with his jurisdictional authority. By making a cleavage between office and merit, Hus opted for a semi-Donatist position. Thirdly, Hus stressed the primacy of preaching in distinction from the papacy, and taught that no ban from any church officer against preaching should ever be obeyed. Fourthly, Hus curtailed papal primacy (albeit not as severely as Wycliffe) by subjecting such primacy to the authority of Scripture, and by teaching that “the rock” of Matthew 16 referred to Christ—not Peter. Finally, he also taught communion with God as the goal of all ecclesiology. Three kinds of Christian communion could be experienced in church: through grace, through prayer, and through sacraments.

Luther first rejected Hus, and resented their names being linked together. Upon reading Hus, however, he changed his mind, and at one point exaggeratedly implied that he had not taught anything Hus had not already stated in principle. Luther did enlarge on Hus’s ecclesiology, especially by stressing more the visible/invisible church concept (following Wycliffe), but also reduced it in other areas, for example, by limiting the sacraments to two. He also modified Hus’s transub-stantiation into consubstantiation.

Luther’s sympathy for Hussite ecclesiology had far-reaching consequences for the Reformation, as well as an indirect influence on Zwingli, Calvin, and later Reformers. Both Zwingli and Calvin carried Luther’s outline of ecclesiology further. For Zwingli the church represented the new Israel of God, exhibited concretely by those who partook of communion. He stressed that the Holy Spirit works through the visible offices of the church. On the issue of the presence of Christ, Calvin positioned himself between Luther and Zwingli, but went a step further than both in subdividing the visible church into the true evangelical church and the false papal church.

In sum, Hus’s ecclesiology was quite influential upon the Reformers: directly, upon Luther; indirectly, and to a lesser degree, upon Calvin and other Reformers.

How did the Reformation in Scotland develop through the life of John Knox?

Prior to Knox’s establishment of the Reformation in Scotland, others had already been active—most notably, Patrick Hamilton and George Wishart. Hamilton, the pioneer Reformer in Scotland, went to Germany to study under Luther, returned to preach in Scotland, and was burned as a heretic in the late 1520s. Wishart, an ardent Calvinist, studied at the University of Aberdeen, became a Greek professor, returned to Scotland to preach Protestant doctrine, ultimately being burned at the stake in the 1540s. Wishart had a profound impact on Knox.

John Knox attended Glasgow University, after which he served as chaplain at the St. Andrews Castle, which had become a Protestant center after the assassination of Cardinal Beaton. Knox and his followers held the castle for one year in the name of England, but French ships came to the aid of the regent, captured Knox and his group, and forced them to serve on the French galleys. When Knox was freed, he went to England and became a renowned preacher while Edward VI reigned. After Mary was enthroned, Knox, along with other Marian exiles, fled to Geneva where he spent valuable years studying under Calvin (mid-1550s).

In the meantime, the Reformation message made inroads into Scottish nobility. The 1550s saw rising tension between the Catholic forces (led by Mary of Lorraine) and the Protestant party (“Lords of the Congregation”). Mary called in French soldiers, and the Scottish civil war began which pitted Calvinism and nationalism against Catholicism and France. After Mary of Lorraine died, the Treaty of Edinburgh was signed in 1560. The Scottish Parliament then accepted the Scots Confession (written along Calvinian lines by Knox who had returned to Scotland by this time). Parliament also rejected papal authority and abolished the mass. Knox played a key role in the rapid organization of the new “Kirk” of Scotland via his “Book of Common Order” and “Book of Discipline” (which included conservative Sabbath observance, the abolishing of church festivals, and the representation of local congregations at kirk sessions which in turn were subjected to provincial synods and the General Assembly).

The Scottish Reformation was temporarily arrested by Mary Stuart in the 1560s, but after her flight to England (due in part to Knox’s preaching and leadership which opposed both her and popery), Protestantism was again declared to be the only religion in Scotland. Thus, by Knox’s death in the 1570s, the Presbyterian church was firmly established.

Knox’s literary output filled several volumes. Outside of his confessional writings, and his Against the Regiment of Women, he is known best for his History of the Reformation in Scotland and his academic theological work, Treatise on Predestination, which follows closely the formulations of Calvin and Beza. His most distinctive input into Reformation theology lies in the church-state relationship, which he tended to view as a synonymous community.

Knox was succeeded by Andrew Melville, who was a strict Calvinist with scholastic tendencies, and helped the Kirk move closer to the classical Presbyterian order by attacking superin-tendency and affirming ecclesiastical liberties. This became evident in the General Assembly’s ratifying of the Second Book of Discipline (c. 1580). He also had a hand in Calvinism’s being firmly established by an act of Parliament in the 1590s. Moreover, through the influence of Melville and others, the way was paved for a further spelling out of Calvinist doctrine in the re-nowned Westminster documents. The 17th century spells out a close union between the Scottish Reformation and English Puritanism, interrupted by the Stuart restoration in 1660, but marked by the final triumph of Presbyterianism in Scotland late in the century.

How does Anabaptism agree/disagree with Calvinism?

“Anabaptist” is an umbrella term to denominate sixteenth century groups which rejected the system of a state church and its “implicit” doctrine of infant baptism, but insisted upon a church freed from secular control and limited to believers’s baptism only.

Considering the variance within Anabaptism itself, as well as the variety of approaches to understanding the Anabaptist movement as a whole, my answer must be quite generalized. Anabaptism arose within Zwingli’s circle under the rubric of the notion of a voluntary society of persuaded believers who lived separate from the state. Grebel, Manz and others (calling themselves, “Brethren”) stressed that the state had no right to force religious assent. Ultimately, the state was regarded as an evil, non-Christian institution. Flowing out of this principle, conjoined with the necessity of personal persuasion of faith for church admittance, the rejection of infant baptism arose, as well as opposition to take arms, civil offices, and swearing an oath.

In general, Anabaptists embraced the doctrines of Calvin with several notable exceptions. Justification by faith, the priesthood of all believers, human need for and dependence on grace, the rejection of salvation by works (despite the fact that there was more tolerance in general for the doctrine of free will among them than among Calvinists) were all affirmed, though often not theologically developed, by the majority of Anabaptists. This lack of development is due in part to their constantly being persecuted. In addition to the obvious—the church-state relationship and infant baptism—they do appear to go beyond Calvin, however, in “radicalizing” several Calvinistic principles.

First, the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura was radicalized to some degree in one or two ways by several Anabaptists. Their method of interpreting Scripture was more literalistic than was Calvinism’s. Moreover, whereas Calvin taught that special revelation ceased upon the completion of Scripture, a number of Anabaptists tended toward affirming ongoing revelation— if not in theory, at least in practice (for example, their gatherings of waiting for the inspiration and light of the Spirit without being accompanied by human leadership—though perhaps the majority continued to regard this as simply the illuminating work of the Spirit).

Second, this is also consistent with a tendency among some Anabaptists to deny any human interfacing with divine grace, which may lead back to the notion of Jesus’ human nature “passing through Mary as water through a pipe” (Menno Simons). Moreover, since revelation tends to be ongoing, it is not surprising that this movement splintered itself into such detail (witness the Saxon group, Swiss group, German groups, Moravian group, and Dutch group) that a formal statement of beliefs could not really be ratified effectively despite repeated attempts to do so.

Further, all of these things combined tended to place the Anabaptist in the position of getting away from culture as far as possible rather than in trans-forming culture. The Calvinian notion of a Christian world-and-life view finds no rootage in the soil of Anabaptism. This is in accord with spiritual izing, revolutionary, and apocalyptic tendencies found in a significant number of Anabaptists to varying degrees. It also accounts for a simplicity of life and dress beyond the simplicity of main-stream Calvinism.

Finally, Anabaptism’s simplicity tended to attract the lower class (as well as a few disenchanted individuals from the higher class) in contrast to Calvinism’s strong pull on the middle class. In general, this simplicity applied to everything—also to biblical studies. They were not as interested in historical theology as Calvinists were. They wanted a return to the New Testament church (some even claiming special gifts) and its simple life of voluntary communion and witness, without recognizing the guiding hand of the Holy Spirit in church history.

Rev. J.R. Beeke is pastor of the First Netherlands Reformed Congregation of Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Deze tekst is geautomatiseerd gemaakt en kan nog fouten bevatten. Digibron werkt voortdurend aan correctie. Klik voor het origineel door naar de pdf. Voor opmerkingen, vragen, informatie: contact.

Op Digibron -en alle daarin opgenomen content- is het databankrecht van toepassing. Gebruiksvoorwaarden. Data protection law applies to Digibron and the content of this database. Terms of use.

Printen