隴山隴西郡
寧靜純我心 感得事物人 寫樸實清新. 閑書閑話養閑心,閑筆閑寫記閑人;人生無虞懂珍惜，以沫相濡字字真。
Calvinistic Puritans
The Trinity is the belief that God is one God in three persons: the Father, the Son (Jesus), and the Holy Spirit
Protestantism is a branch of Christianity[a] that emphasizes justification of sinners through faith alone, the teaching that salvation comes by unmerited divine grace, the priesthood of all believers, and the Bible as the sole infallible source of authority for Christian faith and practice.[1][2] The five solae summarize the basic theological beliefs of mainstream Protestantism.
Protestants follow the theological tenets of the Protestant Reformation, a movement that began in the 16th century with the goal of reforming the Catholic Church from perceived errors, abuses, and discrepancies.[3][b] The Reformation began in the Holy Roman Empire[c] in 1517, when Martin Luther published his Ninety-five Theses as a reaction against abuses in the sale of indulgences by the Catholic Church, which purported to offer the remission of the temporal punishment of sins to their purchasers.[4] The term, however, derives from the letter of protestation from German Lutheran princes in 1529 against an edict of the Diet of Speyer condemning the teachings of Martin Luther as heretical.[5] In the 16th century, Lutheranism spread from Germany[d] into Denmark–Norway, Sweden, Finland, Livonia, and Iceland.[6] Calvinist churches spread in Germany,[e] Hungary, the Netherlands, Scotland, Switzerland, France, Poland, and Lithuania by Protestant Reformers such as John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli and John Knox.[7] The political separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church under King Henry VIII began Anglicanism, bringing England and Wales into this broad Reformation movement, under the leadership of reformer Thomas Cranmer, whose work forged Anglican doctrine and identity.[f]
Protestantism is diverse, being divided into various denominations on the basis of theology and ecclesiology, not forming a single structure as with the Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy or Oriental Orthodoxy.[8] Protestants adhere to the concept of an invisible church, in contrast to the Catholic, the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Churches, the Assyrian Church of the East, and the Ancient Church of the East, which all understand themselves as the one and only original church—the "one true church"—founded by Jesus Christ (though certain Protestant denominations, including historic Lutheranism, hold to this position).[9][10][11] Some denominations do have a worldwide scope and distribution of church membership, while others are confined to a single country.[8] A majority of Protestants[g] are members of a handful of Protestant denominational families; Adventists, Anabaptists, Anglicans/Episcopalians, Baptists, Calvinist/Reformed,[h] Lutherans, Methodists, Moravians, Plymouth Brethren, Presbyterians, and Quakers.[13] Nondenominational, charismatic and independent churches are also on the rise, having recently expanded rapidly throughout much of the world, and constitute a significant part of Protestantism.[14] These various movements, collectively labeled "popular Protestantism"[i] by scholars such as Peter L. Berger, have been called one of the contemporary world's most dynamic religious movements.[15]
As of 2024, approximately 625 million identify as Protestants.[13][16][j]
***
Protestant
[edit]Six princes of the Holy Roman Empire and rulers of fourteen Imperial Free Cities, who issued a protest (or dissent) against the edict of the Diet of Speyer (1529), were the first individuals to be called Protestants.[18] The edict reversed concessions made to the Lutherans with the approval of Holy Roman Emperor Charles V three years earlier. The term protestant, though initially purely political in nature, later acquired a broader sense, referring to a member of any Western church which subscribed to the main Protestant principles.[18] A Protestant is an adherent of any of those Christian bodies that separated from the Church of Rome during the Reformation, or of any group descended from them.[19]
During the Reformation, the term protestant was hardly used outside of German politics. People who were involved in the religious movement used the word evangelical (German: evangelisch). For further details, see the section below. Gradually, protestant became a general term, meaning any adherent of the Reformation in the German-speaking area. It was ultimately somewhat taken up by Lutherans, even though Martin Luther himself insisted on Christian or evangelical as the only acceptable names for individuals who professed faith in Christ. French and Swiss Protestants instead preferred the word reformed (French: réformé), which became a popular, neutral, and alternative name for Calvinists.
Evangelical
[edit]The word evangelical (German: evangelisch), which refers to the gospel, was widely used for those involved in the religious movement in the German-speaking area beginning in 1517.[20] Evangelical is still preferred among some of the historical Protestant denominations in the Lutheran, Calvinist, and United (Lutheran and Reformed) Protestant traditions in Europe, and those with strong ties to them. Above all the term is used by Protestant bodies in the German-speaking area, such as the Protestant Church in Germany. Thus, the German word evangelisch means Protestant, while the German evangelikal, refers to churches shaped by Evangelicalism. The English word evangelical usually refers to evangelical Protestant churches, and therefore to a certain part of Protestantism rather than to Protestantism as a whole. The English word traces its roots back to the Puritans in England, where Evangelicalism originated, and then was brought to the United States.
Martin Luther always disliked the term Lutheran, preferring the term evangelical, which was derived from euangelion, a Greek word meaning "good news", i.e. "gospel".[21] The followers of John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli, and other theologians linked to the Reformed tradition also began to use that term. To distinguish the two evangelical groups, others began to refer to the two groups as Evangelical Lutheran and Evangelical Reformed. The word also pertains in the same way to some other mainline groups, for example Evangelical Methodist. As time passed by, the word evangelical was dropped. Lutherans themselves began to use the term Lutheran in the middle of the 16th century, in order to distinguish themselves from other groups such as the Philippists and Calvinists.
Reformational
[edit]The German word reformatorisch, which roughly translates to English as "reformational" or "reforming", is used as an alternative for evangelisch in German, and is different from English reformed (German: reformiert), which refers to churches shaped by ideas of John Calvin, Huldrych Zwingli, and other Reformed theologians. Derived from the word "Reformation", the term emerged around the same time as Evangelical (1517) and Protestant (1529).
**
John Calvin (/?kælv?n/;[1] Middle French: Jehan Cauvin; French: Jean Calvin [?ɑ? kalv??]; 10 July 1509 – 27 May 1564) was a French theologian, pastor and reformer in Geneva during the Protestant Reformation. He was a principal figure in the development of the system of Christian theology later called Calvinism, including its doctrines of predestination and of God's absolute sovereignty in the salvation of the human soul from death and eternal damnation. Calvinist doctrines were influenced by and elaborated upon the Augustinian and other Christian traditions. Various Congregational, Reformed and Presbyterian churches, which look to Calvin as the chief expositor of their beliefs, have spread throughout the world.
Calvin was a tireless polemicist and apologetic writer who generated much controversy. He also exchanged cordial and supportive letters with many reformers, including Philipp Melanchthon and Heinrich Bullinger. In addition to his seminal Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin wrote commentaries on most books of the Bible, confessional documents, and various other theological treatises.
Calvin was originally trained as a humanist lawyer. He broke from the Roman Catholic Church around 1530. After religious tensions erupted in widespread deadly violence against Protestant Christians in France, Calvin fled to Basel, Switzerland, where in 1536 he published the first edition of the Institutes. In that same year, Calvin was recruited by Frenchman William Farel to join the Reformation in Geneva, where he regularly preached sermons throughout the week. However, the governing council of the city resisted the implementation of their ideas, and both men were expelled. At the invitation of Martin Bucer, Calvin proceeded to Strasbourg, where he became the minister of a church of French refugees. He continued to support the reform movement in Geneva, and in 1541 he was invited back to lead the church of the city.
Following his return, Calvin introduced new forms of church government and liturgy, despite opposition from several powerful families in the city who tried to curb his authority. During this period, Michael Servetus, a Spaniard regarded by both Roman Catholics and Protestants as having a heretical view of the Trinity, arrived in Geneva. He was denounced by Calvin and burned at the stake for heresy by the city council. Following an influx of supportive refugees and new elections to the city council, Calvin's opponents were forced out. Calvin spent his final years promoting the Reformation both in Geneva and throughout Europe.
| John Calvin | |
|---|---|
 Portrait c. 1550 | |
| Born | Jehan Cauvin 10 July 1509 Noyon, Picardy, France |
| Died | 27 May 1564 (aged 54) Geneva, Republic of Geneva |
| Education | University of Paris University of Orléans University of Bourges |
| Occupation(s) | Reformer, minister, author |
| Notable work | Institutes of the Christian Religion (1536) |
| Spouse | |
| Children |
|
| Theological work | |
| Era | Renaissance |
| Tradition or movement | |
| Main interests | Systematic theology |
| Notable ideas | |
| Signature | |
 | |
Calvin's friends urged him to marry. Calvin took a prosaic view, writing to one correspondent:
I, who have the air of being so hostile to celibacy, I am still not married and do not know whether I will ever be. If I take a wife it will be because, being better freed from numerous worries, I can devote myself to the Lord.[29]
Several candidates were presented to him, including one young woman from a noble family. Reluctantly, Calvin agreed to the marriage on the condition that she would learn French. Although a wedding date was planned for March 1540, he remained reluctant, and the wedding never took place. He later wrote that he would never think of marrying her, "unless the Lord had entirely bereft me of my wits." [30]Instead, in August of that year, he married Idelette de Bure, a widow who had two children from her first marriage.[31]
Very little is known about Calvin's personal life in Geneva. His house and furniture were owned by the council. The house was big enough to accommodate his family as well as Antoine's family and some servants. On 28 July 1542, Idelette gave birth to a son, Jacques, but he was born prematurely and survived only briefly. Idelette fell ill in 1545 and died on 29 March 1549. Calvin never married again. He expressed his sorrow in a letter to Viret:
"I have been bereaved of the best friend of my life, of one who, if it has been so ordained, would willingly have shared not only my poverty but also my death. During her life she was the faithful helper of my ministry. From her, I never experienced the slightest hindrance.[45] "我失去了我一生中最好的朋友，如果命中註定，他不僅願意分享我的貧窮，還願意分享我的死亡。在她的一生中，她是我事工的忠實助手。從她那裡我從未經歷過絲毫的阻礙。
Throughout the rest of his life in Geneva, he maintained several friendships from his early years, including Montmor, Cordier, Cop, Farel, Melanchthon, and Bullinger.[46]"
在日內瓦的餘生中，他與早年的幾位朋友保持聯繫，包括 Montmor、Cordier、Cop、Farel、Melanchthon 和 Bullinger。"
Calvin preached at St. Pierre Cathedral, the main church in Geneva.
***
Within Geneva, Calvin's main concern was the creation of a collège, an institute for the education of children. A site for the school was selected on 25 March 1558 and it opened the following year on 5 June 1559. Although the school was a single institution, it was divided into two parts: a grammar school called the collège or schola privata and an advanced school called the académie or schola publica. Calvin tried to recruit two professors for the institute, Mathurin Cordier, his old friend and Latin scholar who was now based in Lausanne, and Emmanuel Tremellius, the former Regius professor of Hebrew in Cambridge. Neither was available, but he succeeded in obtaining Theodore Beza as rector. Within five years there were 1,200 students in the grammar school and 300 in the advanced school. The collège eventually became the Collège Calvin, one of the college preparatory schools of Geneva; the académie became the University of Geneva.[77]
Impact on France
Calvin was deeply committed to reforming his homeland, France. The Protestant movement had been energetic, but lacked central organizational direction. With financial support from the church in Geneva, Calvin turned his enormous energies toward uplifting the French Protestant cause. As one historian explains:
He supplied the dogma, the liturgy, and the moral ideas of the new religion, and he also created ecclesiastical, political, and social institutions in harmony with it. A born leader, he followed up his work with personal appeals. His vast correspondence with French Protestants shows not only much zeal but infinite pains and considerable tact and driving home the lessons of his printed treatises.[78] Between 1555 and 1562, more than 100 ministers were sent to France. Nevertheless French King Henry II severely persecuted Protestants under the Edict of Chateaubriand and when the French authorities complained about the missionary activities, the city fathers of Geneva disclaimed official responsibility.[79]
***
Theology
Calvin developed his theology in his biblical commentaries as well as his sermons and treatises, but the most comprehensive expression of his views is found in his magnum opus, the Institutes of the Christian Religion. He intended that the book be used as a summary of his views on Christian theology and that it be read in conjunction with his commentaries.[83] The various editions of that work spanned nearly his entire career as a reformer, and the successive revisions of the book show that his theology changed very little from his youth to his death.[84] The first edition from 1536 consisted of only six chapters. The second edition, published in 1539, was three times as long because he added chapters on subjects that appear in Melanchthon's Loci Communes. In 1543, he again added new material and expanded a chapter on the Apostles' Creed. The final edition of the Institutes appeared in 1559. By then, the work consisted of four books of eighty chapters, and each book was named after statements from the creed: Book 1 on God the Creator, Book 2 on the Redeemer in Christ, Book 3 on receiving the Grace of Christ through the Holy Spirit, and Book 4 on the Society of Christ or the Church.[85]
The first statement in the Institutes acknowledges its central theme. It states that the sum of human wisdom consists of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves.[86] Calvin argues that the knowledge of God is not inherent in humanity nor can it be discovered by observing this world. The only way to obtain it is to study scripture. Calvin writes, "For anyone to arrive at God the Creator he needs Scripture as his Guide and Teacher."[87] He does not try to prove the authority of scripture but rather describes it as autopiston or self-authenticating. He defends the trinitarian view of God and, in a strong polemical stand against the Catholic Church, argues that images of God lead to idolatry.[88] John Calvin famously said "the human heart is a perpetual idol factory".[89] At the end of the first book, he offers his views on providence, writing, "By his Power God cherishes and guards the World which he made and by his Providence rules its individual Parts."[90] Humans are unable to fully comprehend why God performs any particular action, but whatever good or evil people may practice, their efforts always result in the execution of God's will and judgments.[91]
The second book includes several essays on original sin and the fall of man, which directly refer to Augustine, who developed these doctrines. He often cited the Church Fathers to defend the reformed cause against the charge that the reformers were creating new theology.[92] In Calvin's view, sin began with the fall of Adam and propagated to all of humanity. The domination of sin is complete to the point that people are driven to evil.[93] Thus fallen humanity is in need of the redemption that can be found in Christ. But before Calvin expounded on this doctrine, he described the special situation of the Jews who lived during the time of the Old Testament. God made a covenant with Abraham, promising the coming of Christ. Hence, the Old Covenant was not in opposition to Christ, but was rather a continuation of God's promise. Calvin then describes the New Covenant using the passage from the Apostles' Creed that describes Christ's suffering under Pontius Pilate and his return to judge the living and the dead. For Calvin, the whole course of Christ's obedience to the Father removed the discord between humanity and God.[94]
In the third book, Calvin describes how the spiritual union of Christ and humanity is achieved. He first defines faith as the firm and certain knowledge of God in Christ. The immediate effects of faith are repentance and the remission of sin. This is followed by spiritual regeneration, which returns the believer to the state of holiness before Adam's transgression. Complete perfection is unattainable in this life, and the believer should expect a continual struggle against sin.[95] Several chapters are then devoted to the subject of justification by faith alone. He defined justification as "the acceptance by which God regards us as righteous whom he has received into grace."[96] In this definition, it is clear that it is God who initiates and carries through the action and that people play no role; God is completely sovereign in salvation.[97] Near the end of the book, Calvin describes and defends the doctrine of predestination, a doctrine advanced by Augustine in opposition to the teachings of Pelagius. Fellow theologians who followed the Augustinian tradition on this point included Thomas Aquinas and Martin Luther,[98] though Calvin's formulation of the doctrine went further than the tradition that went before him.[99] The principle, in Calvin's words, is that "All are not created on equal terms, but some are preordained to eternal life, others to eternal damnation; and, accordingly, as each has been created for one or other of these ends, we say that he has been predestinated to life or to death."[100] Calvin believed that God's absolute decree was double predestination, but he also confessed that this was a horrible decree: "The decree is dreadful indeed, I confess. (latin. "Decretum quidem horribile, fateor."; French. "Je confesse que ce decret nous doit epouvanter.")[101]
The final book describes what he considers to be the true Church and its ministry, authority, and sacraments. He denied the papal claim to primacy and the accusation that the reformers were schismatic. For Calvin, the Church was defined as the body of believers who placed Christ at its head. By definition, there was only one "catholic" or "universal" Church. Hence, he argued that the reformers "had to leave them in order that we might come to Christ."[102] The ministers of the Church are described from a passage from Ephesians, and they consisted of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and doctors. Calvin regarded the first three offices as temporary, limited in their existence to the time of the New Testament. The latter two offices were established in the church in Geneva. Although Calvin respected the work of the ecumenical councils, he considered them to be subject to God's Word found in scripture. He also believed that the civil and church authorities were separate and should not interfere with each other.[103]
Calvin defined a sacrament as an earthly sign associated with a promise from God. He accepted only two sacraments as valid under the new covenant: baptism and the Lord's Supper (in opposition to the Catholic acceptance of seven sacraments). He completely rejected the Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation and the treatment of the Supper as a sacrifice. He also could not accept the Lutheran doctrine of sacramental union in which Christ was "in, with and under" the elements. His own view was close to Zwingli's symbolic view, but it was not identical. Rather than holding a purely symbolic view, Calvin noted that with the participation of the Holy Spirit, faith was nourished and strengthened by the sacrament. In his words, the eucharistic rite was "a secret too sublime for my mind to understand or words to express. I experience it rather than understand it."[104]
Controversies
Calvin's theology caused controversy. Pierre Caroli, a Protestant minister in Lausanne, accused Calvin, as well as Viret and Farel, of Arianism in 1536. Calvin defended his beliefs on the Trinity in Confessio de Trinitate propter calumnias P. Caroli.[105] In 1551 Jérôme-Hermès Bolsec, a physician in Geneva, attacked Calvin's doctrine of predestination and accused him of making God the author of sin. Bolsec was banished from the city, and after Calvin's death, wrote a biography which severely maligned Calvin's character.[106] In the following year, Joachim Westphal, a Gnesio-Lutheran pastor in Hamburg, condemned Calvin and Zwingli as heretics in denying the eucharistic doctrine of the union of Christ's body with the elements. Calvin's Defensio sanae et orthodoxae doctrinae de sacramentis (A Defense of the Sober and Orthodox Doctrine of the Sacrament) was his response in 1555.[107] In 1556 Justus Velsius, a Dutch dissident, held a public disputation with Calvin during his visit to Frankfurt, in which Velsius defended free will against Calvin's doctrine of predestination. Following the execution of Servetus, a close associate of Calvin, Sebastian Castellio, broke with him on the issue of the treatment of heretics. In Castellio's Treatise on Heretics (1554), he argued for a focus on Christ's moral teachings in place of the vanity of theology,[108] and he afterward developed a theory of tolerance based on biblical principles.[109]
Calvin and the Jews
Scholars have debated Calvin's view of the Jews and Judaism. Some have argued that Calvin was the least antisemitic among all the major reformers of his time, especially in comparison to Martin Luther.[110] Others have argued that Calvin was firmly within the antisemitic camp.[111] Scholars agree that it is important to distinguish between Calvin's views toward the biblical Jews and his attitude toward contemporary Jews. In his theology, Calvin does not differentiate between God's covenant with Israel and the New Covenant. He stated, "all the children of the promise, reborn of God, who have obeyed the commands by faith working through love, have belonged to the New Covenant since the world began."[112] Nevertheless, he was a covenant theologian and argued that the Jews are a rejected people who must embrace Jesus to re-enter the covenant.[113]
Most of Calvin's statements on the Jewry of his era were polemical. For example, Calvin once wrote, "I have had much conversation with many Jews: I have never seen either a drop of piety or a grain of truth or ingenuousness—nay, I have never found common sense in any Jew."[114] In this respect, he differed little from other Protestant and Catholic theologians of his day.[115] Among his extant writings, Calvin dealt explicitly with issues of contemporary Jews and Judaism in only one treatise,[116] Response to Questions and Objections of a Certain Jew.[117] In it, he argued that Jews misread their own scriptures because they miss the unity of the Old and New Testaments.[118]
Political thought
The aim of Calvin's political theory was to safeguard the rights and freedoms of ordinary people. Although he was convinced that the Bible contained no blueprint for a certain form of government, Calvin favored a combination of democracy and aristocracy (mixed government). He appreciated the advantages of democracy.[119] To further minimize the misuse of political power, Calvin proposed to divide it among several political institutions like the aristocracy, lower estates, or magistrates in a system of checks and balances (separation of powers). Finally, Calvin taught that if rulers rise up against God they lose their divine right and must be deposed.[120][121] State and church are separate, though they have to cooperate to the benefit of the people. Christian magistrates have to make sure that the church can fulfill its duties in freedom. In extreme cases, the magistrates have to expel or execute dangerous heretics, but nobody can be forced to become a Protestant.[122][123]
Calvin thought that agriculture and the traditional crafts were normal human activities. With regard to trade and the financial world, he was more liberal than Luther, but both were strictly opposed to usury. Calvin allowed the charging of modest interest rates on loans. Like the other Reformers, Calvin understood work as a means through which the believers expressed their gratitude to God for their redemption in Christ and as a service to their neighbors. Everybody was obliged to work; loafing and begging were rejected. The idea that economic success was a visible sign of God's grace played only a minor role in Calvin's thinking. It became more important in later, partly secularized forms of Calvinism and became the starting-point of Max Weber's theory about the rise of capitalism.[121]
Selected works
Calvin's first published work was a commentary of Seneca the Younger's De Clementia. Published at his own expense in 1532, it showed that he was a humanist in the tradition of Erasmus with a thorough understanding of classical scholarship.[124] His first theological work, the Psychopannychia, attempted to refute the doctrine of soul sleep as promulgated by the Anabaptists. Calvin probably wrote it during the period following Cop's speech, but it was not published until 1542 in Strasbourg.[125]
Calvin produced commentaries on most of the books of the Bible. His first commentary on Romans was published in 1540, and he planned to write commentaries on the entire New Testament. Six years passed before he wrote his second, a commentary on First Epistle to the Corinthians, but after that he devoted more attention to reaching his goal. Within four years he had published commentaries on all the Pauline epistles, and he also revised the commentary on Romans. He then turned his attention to the general epistles, dedicating them to Edward VI of England. By 1555 he had completed his work on the New Testament, finishing with the Acts and the Gospels (he omitted only the brief second and third Epistles of John and the Book of Revelation). For the Old Testament, he wrote commentaries on Isaiah, the books of the Pentateuch, the Psalms, and Joshua. The material for the commentaries often originated from lectures to students and ministers that he reworked for publication. From 1557 onwards, he could not find the time to continue this method, and he gave permission for his lectures to be published from stenographers' notes. These Praelectiones covered the minor prophets, Daniel, Jeremiah, Lamentations, and part of Ezekiel.[126]
Calvin also wrote many letters and treatises. Following the Responsio ad Sadoletum, Calvin wrote an open letter at the request of Bucer to Charles V in 1543, Supplex exhortatio ad Caesarem, defending the reformed faith. This was followed by an open letter to the pope (Admonitio paterna Pauli III) in 1544, in which Calvin admonished Paul III for depriving the reformers of any prospect of rapprochement. The pope proceeded to open the Council of Trent, which resulted in decrees against the reformers. Calvin refuted the decrees by producing the Acta synodi Tridentinae cum Antidoto (The synod of Trent with Antidote) in 1547. When Charles tried to find a compromise solution with the Augsburg Interim, Bucer and Bullinger urged Calvin to respond. He wrote the treatise, Vera Christianae pacificationis et Ecclesiae reformandae ratio (The true system of Christian pacification and the reformation of the Church) in 1549, in which he described the doctrines that should be upheld, including justification by faith.[127]
Calvin provided many of the foundational documents for reformed churches, including documents on the catechism, the liturgy, and church governance. He also produced several confessions of faith to unite the churches. In 1559, he drafted the French confession of faith, the Gallic Confession, and the synod in Paris accepted it with few changes. The Belgic Confession of 1561, a Dutch confession of faith, was partly based on the Gallic Confession.[128]
Legacy
After the deaths of Calvin and his successor, Beza, the Geneva city council gradually gained control over areas of life that were previously in the ecclesiastical domain. Increasing secularization was accompanied by the decline of the church. Even the Geneva académie was eclipsed by universities in Leiden and Heidelberg, which became the new strongholds of Calvin's ideas, first identified as "Calvinism" by Joachim Westphal in 1552. By 1585, Geneva, once the wellspring of the reform movement, had become merely its symbol.[129] Calvin had always warned against describing him as an "idol" and Geneva as a new "Jerusalem". He encouraged people to adapt to the environments in which they found themselves. Even during his polemical exchange with Westphal, he advised a group of French-speaking refugees, who had settled in Wesel, Germany, to integrate with the local Lutheran churches. Despite his differences with the Lutherans, he did not deny that they were members of the true Church. Calvin's recognition of the need to adapt to local conditions became an important characteristic of the reformation movement as it spread across Europe.[130] Due to Calvin's missionary work in France, his program of reform eventually reached the French-speaking provinces of the Netherlands. Calvinism was adopted in the Electorate of the Palatinate under Frederick III, which led to the formulation of the Heidelberg Catechism in 1563. This and the Belgic Confession were adopted as confessional standards in the first synod of the Dutch Reformed Church in 1571. Several leading divines, either Calvinist or those sympathetic to Calvinism, settled in England (Martin Bucer, Peter Martyr, and Jan Laski) and Scotland (John Knox). During the English Civil War, the Calvinistic Puritans produced the Westminster Confession, which became the confessional standard for Presbyterians in the English-speaking world.
As the Ottoman Empire did not force Muslim conversion on its conquered western territories, reformed ideas were quickly adopted in the two-thirds of Hungary they occupied (the Habsburg-ruled third part of Hungary remained Catholic). A Reformed Constitutional Synod was held in 1567 in Debrecen, the main hub of Hungarian Calvinism, where the Second Helvetic Confession was adopted as the official confession of Hungarian Calvinists.
Having established itself in Europe, the movement continued to spread to other parts of the world including North America, South Africa, and Korea.[131]
Calvin did not live to see the foundation of his work grow into an international movement; but his death allowed his ideas to break out of their city of origin, to succeed far beyond their borders, and to establish their own distinct character.[132]
Calvin is recognized as a Renewer of the Church in Lutheran churches commemorated on 26 May.[133] Calvin is also remembered in the Church of England with a commemoration on 26 May.[134]
See also
************
During the English Civil War, (1639-1653, 1642-1651) the Calvinistic Puritans produced the Westminster Confession, which became the confessional standard for Presbyterians in the English-speaking world.
Calvinistic Puritans:
The Puritans were English Protestants in the 16th and 17th centuries who sought to rid the Church of England of what they considered to be Roman Catholic practices, maintaining that the Church of England had not been fully reformed and should become more Protestant.[1] Puritanism played a significant role in English and early American history, especially in the Protectorate in Great Britain, and the earlier settlement of New England.
Puritans were dissatisfied with the limited extent of the English Reformation and with the Church of England's toleration of certain practices associated with the Roman Catholic Church. They formed and identified with various religious groups advocating greater purity of worship and doctrine, as well as personal and corporate piety. Puritans adopted a covenant theology, and in that sense they were Calvinists (as were many of their earlier opponents). In church polity, Puritans were divided between supporters of episcopal, presbyterian, and congregational polities. Some believed a uniform reform of the established church was called for to create a godly nation, while others advocated separation from, or the end of, any established state church entirely in favour of autonomous gathered churches, called-out from the world. These Separatist and Independents became more prominent in the 1640s, when the supporters of a presbyterian polity in the Westminster Assembly were unable to forge a new English national church.
By the late 1630s, Puritans were in alliance with the growing commercial world, with the parliamentary opposition to the royal prerogative, and with the Scottish Presbyterians with whom they had much in common. Consequently, they became a major political force in England and came to power as a result of the First English Civil War (1642–1646).
Almost all Puritan clergy left the Church of England after the restoration of the monarchy in 1660 and the Act of Uniformity 1662. Many continued to practise their faith in nonconformist denominations, especially in Congregationalist and Presbyterian churches.[2] The nature of the Puritan movement in England changed radically. In New England, it retained its character for a longer period.
Puritanism was never a formally defined religious division within Protestantism, and the term Puritan itself was rarely used after the turn of the 18th century. The Congregationalist Churches, widely considered to be a part of the Reformed tradition of Christianity, are descended from the Puritans.[3][4] Moreover, Puritan beliefs are enshrined in the Savoy Declaration, the confession of faith held by the Congregationalist churches.[5] Some Puritan ideals, including the formal rejection of Roman Catholicism, were incorporated into the doctrines of the Church of England, mother Church of the Anglican Communion.
Terminology
[edit]
In the 17th century, the word Puritan was a term applied not to just one group but to many. Historians still debate a precise definition of Puritanism.[6] Originally, Puritan was a pejorative term characterizing certain Protestant groups as extremist. Thomas Fuller, in his Church History, dates the first use of the word to 1564. Archbishop Matthew Parker of that time used it and precisian with a sense similar to the modern stickler.[7] Puritans, then, were distinguished for being "more intensely protestant than their protestant neighbors or even the Church of England".[8] As a term of abuse, Puritan was not used by Puritans themselves. Those referred to as Puritan called themselves terms such as "the godly", "saints", "professors", or "God's children".[9]
"Non-separating Puritans" were dissatisfied with the Reformation of the Church of England but remained within it, advocating for further reform; they disagreed among themselves about how much further reformation was possible or even necessary. Others, who were later termed "Nonconformists", "Separatists", or "separating Puritans", thought the Church of England was so corrupt that true Christians should separate from it altogether. In its widest historical sense, the term Puritan includes both groups.[10][11]
Puritans should not be confused with other radical Protestant groups of the 16th and 17th centuries, such as Quakers, Seekers, and Familists, who believed that individuals could be directly guided by the Holy Spirit. The latter denominations give precedence to direct revelation over the Bible.[12]
In current English, puritan often means "against pleasure." In such usage, hedonism and puritanism are antonyms.[13] William Shakespeare described the vain, pompous killjoy Malvolio in Twelfth Night as "a kind of Puritan".[14] H. L. Mencken defined Puritanism as "the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy."[15] Puritans embraced sexuality but placed it in the context of marriage.
Peter Gay writes that the Puritans' standard reputation for "dour prudery" was a "misreading that went unquestioned in the nineteenth century." He said they were in favour of married sexuality, and opposed the Catholic veneration of virginity (associated with the Virgin Mary), citing Edward Taylor and John Cotton.[16] One Puritan settlement in western Massachusetts banished a husband because he refused to fulfill his sexual duties to his wife.[17]
Interior of the Old Ship Church, a Puritan meetinghouse in Hingham, Massachusetts. Puritans were Calvinists, so their churches were unadorned and plain.
Puritans in North America
[edit]Some Puritans left for New England, particularly from 1629 to 1640 (the Eleven Years' Tyranny under King Charles I), supporting the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and other settlements among the northern colonies. The large-scale Puritan migration to New England ceased by 1641, with around 21,000 persons having moved across the Atlantic.
This English-speaking population in the United States was not descended from all of the original colonists, since many returned to England shortly after arriving on the continent, but it produced more than 16 million descendants.[33][34]
This so-called "Great Migration" is not so named because of sheer numbers, which were much less than the number of English citizens who immigrated to Virginia and the Caribbean during this time, many as indentured servants.[35] The rapid growth of the New England colonies (around 700,000 by 1790) was almost entirely due to the high birth rate and lower death rate per year. They had formed families more rapidly than did the southern colonies.[36]
.jpg)
Puritan hegemony lasted for at least a century. That century can be broken down into three parts: the generation of John Cotton and Richard Mather, 1630–62 from the founding to the Restoration, years of virtual independence and nearly autonomous development; the generation of Increase Mather, 1662–89 from the Restoration and the Halfway Covenant to the Glorious Revolution, years of struggle with the British crown; and the generation of Cotton Mather, 1689–1728 from the overthrow of Edmund Andros (in which Cotton Mather played a part) and the new charter, mediated by Increase Mather, to the death of Cotton Mather. [37]
Puritan leaders were political thinkers and writers who considered the church government to be God's agency in social life.[38]
The Puritans in the Colonies wanted their children to be able to read and interpret the Bible themselves, rather than have to rely on the clergy for interpretation.[39][40][41][42] In 1635, they established the Boston Latin School to educate their sons, the first and oldest formal education institution in the English-speaking New World. They also set up what were called dame schools for their daughters, and in other cases taught their daughters at home how to read. As a result, Puritans were among the most literate societies in the world.
By the time of the American Revolution there were 40 newspapers in the United States (at a time when there were only two cities—New York and Philadelphia—with as many as 20,000 people in them).[42][43][44][45] The Puritans also set up a college (now Harvard University) only six years after arriving in Boston.[42][46]
Beliefs
Calvinism
[edit]| Part of a series on |
| Reformed Christianity |
|---|
 Reformation Wall in Geneva, featuring prominent Reformed theologians William Farel, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, and John Knox |
| Background |
| Theology |
| Texts |
| Theologians |
| Movements |
 Reformed Christianity portal |
Puritanism broadly refers to a diverse religious reform movement in Britain committed to the Continental Reformed tradition.[47] While Puritans did not agree on all doctrinal points, most shared similar views on the nature of God, human sinfulness, and the relationship between God and mankind. They believed that all of their beliefs should be based on the Bible, which they considered to be divinely inspired.[48]
The concept of covenant was extremely important to Puritans, and covenant theology was central to their beliefs. With roots in the writings of Reformed theologians John Calvin and Heinrich Bullinger, covenant theology was further developed by Puritan theologians Dudley Fenner, William Perkins, John Preston, Richard Sibbes, William Ames and, most fully by Ames's Dutch student, Johannes Cocceius.[49] Covenant theology asserts that when God created Adam and Eve he promised them eternal life in return for perfect obedience; this promise was termed the covenant of works. After the fall of man, human nature was corrupted by original sin and unable to fulfill the covenant of works, since each person inevitably violated God's law as expressed in the Ten Commandments. As sinners, every person deserved damnation.[50]
Puritans shared with other Calvinists a belief in double predestination, that some people (the elect) were destined by God to receive grace and salvation while others were destined for Hell.[51] No one, however, could merit salvation. According to covenant theology, Christ's sacrifice on the cross made possible the covenant of grace, by which those selected by God could be saved. Puritans believed in unconditional election and irresistible grace—God's grace was given freely without condition to the elect and could not be refused.[52]
Conversion
[Effectual calling (or effective calling[1]), in Calvinist Christian soteriology, is a stage in the ordo salutis in which God calls a person to himself. It is connected with, but different from external calling, in which a person hears the gospel message.
Wayne Grudem suggests that it is a summons from the King of the universe that has "such power that it brings about the response that it asks for in people's hearts."[1] Grudem appeals to the story of Lydia: according to Acts 16:14, "The Lord opened her heart to respond to Paul’s message" (NIV).[2]]]
[edit]Covenant theology made individual salvation deeply personal. It held that God's predestination was not "impersonal and mechanical" but was a "covenant of grace" that one entered into by faith. Therefore, being a Christian could never be reduced to simple "intellectual acknowledgment" of the truth of Christianity. Puritans agreed "that the effectual call of each elect saint of God would always come as an individuated personal encounter with God's promises".[53]
The process by which the elect are brought from spiritual death to spiritual life (regeneration) was described as conversion.[52] Early on, Puritans did not consider a specific conversion experience normative or necessary, but many gained assurance of salvation from such experiences. Over time, however, Puritan theologians developed a framework for authentic religious experience based on their own experiences as well as those of their parishioners. Eventually, Puritans came to regard a specific conversion experience as an essential mark of one's election.[54]
The Puritan conversion experience was commonly described as occurring in discrete phases. It began with a preparatory phase designed to produce contrition for sin through introspection, Bible study and listening to preaching. This was followed by humiliation, when the sinner realized that he or she was helpless to break free from sin and that their good works could never earn forgiveness.[52] It was after reaching this point—the realization that salvation was possible only because of divine mercy—that the person would experience justification, when the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the elect and their minds and hearts are regenerated. For some Puritans, this was a dramatic experience and they referred to it as being born again.[55]
Confirming that such a conversion had actually happened often required prolonged and continual introspection. Historian Perry Miller wrote that the Puritans "liberated men from the treadmill of indulgences and penances, but cast them on the iron couch of introspection".[56] It was expected that conversion would be followed by sanctification—"the progressive growth in the saint's ability to better perceive and seek God's will, and thus to lead a holy life".[55] Some Puritans attempted to find assurance of their faith by keeping detailed records of their behavior and looking for the evidence of salvation in their lives. Puritan clergy wrote many spiritual guides to help their parishioners pursue personal piety and sanctification. These included Arthur Dent's The Plain Man's Pathway to Heaven (1601), Richard Rogers's Seven Treatises (1603), Henry Scudder's Christian's Daily Walk (1627) and Richard Sibbes's The Bruised Reed and Smoking Flax (1630).[57]
Too much emphasis on one's good works could be criticized for being too close to Arminianism, and too much emphasis on subjective religious experience could be criticized as Antinomianism. Many Puritans relied on both personal religious experience and self-examination to assess their spiritual condition.[57]
Puritanism's experiential piety would be inherited by the evangelical Protestants of the 18th century.[56] While evangelical views on conversion were heavily influenced by Puritan theology, the Puritans believed that assurance of one's salvation was "rare, late and the fruit of struggle in the experience of believers", whereas evangelicals believed that assurance was normative for all the truly converted.[58]
Worship and sacraments
[edit]While most Puritans were members of the Church of England, they were critical of its worship practices. In the 17th century, Sunday worship in the established church took the form of the Morning Prayer service in the Book of Common Prayer. This may include a sermon, but Holy Communion or the Lord's Supper was only occasionally observed. Officially, lay people were only required to receive communion three times a year, but most people only received communion once a year at Easter. Puritans were concerned about biblical errors and Catholic remnants within the prayer book. Puritans objected to bowing at the name of Jesus, the requirement that priests wear the surplice, and the use of written, set prayers in place of improvised prayers.[59]
The sermon was central to Puritan piety.[60] It was not only a means of religious education; Puritans believed it was the most common way that God prepared a sinner's heart for conversion.[61] On Sundays, Puritan ministers often shortened the liturgy to allow more time for preaching.[20] Puritan churchgoers attended two sermons on Sundays and as many weekday sermons and lectures they could find, often traveling for miles.[62] Puritans were distinct for their adherence to Sabbatarianism.[63]
Puritans taught that there were two sacraments: baptism and the Lord's Supper. Puritans agreed with the church's practice of infant baptism. However, the effect of baptism was disputed. Puritans objected to the prayer book's assertion of baptismal regeneration.[64] In Puritan theology, infant baptism was understood in terms of covenant theology—baptism replaced circumcision as a sign of the covenant and marked a child's admission into the visible church. It could not be assumed that baptism produces regeneration. The Westminster Confession states that the grace of baptism is only effective for those who are among the elect, and its effects lie dormant until one experiences conversion later in life.[65] Puritans wanted to do away with godparents, who made baptismal vows on behalf of infants, and give that responsibility to the child's father. Puritans also objected to priests making the sign of the cross in baptism. Private baptisms were opposed because Puritans believed that preaching should always accompany sacraments. Some Puritan clergy even refused to baptise dying infants because that implied the sacrament contributed to salvation.[66]
Puritans rejected both Roman Catholic (transubstantiation) and Lutheran (sacramental union) teachings that Christ is physically present in the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper. Instead, Puritans embraced the Reformed doctrine of real spiritual presence, believing that in the Lord's Supper the faithful receive Christ spiritually. In agreement with Thomas Cranmer, the Puritans stressed "that Christ comes down to us in the sacrament by His Word and Spirit, offering Himself as our spiritual food and drink".[67] They criticised the prayer book service for being too similar to the Catholic mass. For example, the requirement that people kneel to receive communion implied adoration of the Eucharist, a practice linked to transubstantiation. Puritans also criticised the Church of England for allowing unrepentant sinners to receive communion. Puritans wanted better spiritual preparation (such as clergy home visits and testing people on their knowledge of the catechism) for communion and better church discipline to ensure that the unworthy were kept from the sacrament.[66]
Puritans did not believe confirmation was necessary and thought candidates were poorly prepared since bishops did not have the time to examine them properly.[68][69] The marriage service was criticised for using a wedding ring (which implied that marriage was a sacrament) and having the groom vow to his bride "with my body I thee worship", which Puritans considered blasphemous. In the funeral service, the priest committed the body to the ground "in sure and certain hope of resurrection to eternal life, through our Lord Jesus Christ." Puritans objected to this phrase because they did not believe it was true for everyone. They suggested it be rewritten as "we commit his body [etc.] believing a resurrection of the just and unjust, some to joy, and some to punishment."[69]
Puritans eliminated choral music and musical instruments in their religious services because these were associated with Roman Catholicism; however, singing the Psalms was considered appropriate (see Exclusive psalmody).[70] Church organs were commonly damaged or destroyed in the Civil War period, such as when an axe was taken to the organ of Worcester Cathedral in 1642.[71]
Ecclesiology
[edit]
While the Puritans were united in their goal of furthering the English Reformation, they were always divided over issues of ecclesiology and church polity, specifically questions relating to the manner of organizing congregations, how individual congregations should relate with one another and whether established national churches were scriptural.[54] On these questions, Puritans divided between supporters of episcopal polity, presbyterian polity and congregational polity.
The episcopalians (known as the prelatical party) were conservatives who supported retaining bishops if those leaders supported reform and agreed to share power with local churches.[72] They also supported the idea of having a Book of Common Prayer, but they were against demanding strict conformity or having too much ceremony. In addition, these Puritans called for a renewal of preaching, pastoral care and Christian discipline within the Church of England.[54]
Like the episcopalians, the presbyterians agreed that there should be a national church but one structured on the model of the Church of Scotland.[72] They wanted to replace bishops with a system of elective and representative governing bodies of clergy and laity (local sessions, presbyteries, synods, and ultimately a national general assembly).[54] During the Interregnum, the presbyterians had limited success at reorganizing the Church of England. The Westminster Assembly proposed the creation of a presbyterian system, but the Long Parliament left implementation to local authorities. As a result, the Church of England never developed a complete presbyterian hierarchy.[73]
Congregationalists or Independents believed in the autonomy of the local church, which ideally would be a congregation of "visible saints" (meaning those who had experienced conversion).[74] Members would be required to abide by a church covenant, in which they "pledged to join in the proper worship of God and to nourish each other in the search for further religious truth".[72] Such churches were regarded as complete within themselves, with full authority to determine their own membership, administer their own discipline and ordain their own ministers. Furthermore, the sacraments would only be administered to those in the church covenant.[75]
Most congregational Puritans remained within the Church of England, hoping to reform it according to their own views. The New England Congregationalists were also adamant that they were not separating from the Church of England. However, some Puritans equated the Church of England with the Roman Catholic Church, and therefore considered it no Christian church at all. These groups, such as the Brownists, would split from the established church and become known as Separatists. Other Separatists embraced more radical positions on separation of church and state and believer's baptism, becoming early Baptists.[75]
Family life
[edit]
Based on Biblical portrayals of Adam and Eve, Puritans believed that marriage was rooted in procreation, love, and, most importantly, salvation.[76] Husbands were the spiritual heads of the household, while women were to demonstrate religious piety and obedience under male authority.[77] Furthermore, marriage represented not only the relationship between husband and wife, but also the relationship between spouses and God. Puritan husbands commanded authority through family direction and prayer. The female relationship to her husband and to God was marked by submissiveness and humility.[78]
Thomas Gataker describes Puritan marriage as:
... together for a time as copartners in grace here, [that] they may reigne together forever as coheires in glory hereafter.[79]
The paradox created by female inferiority in the public sphere and the spiritual equality of men and women in marriage, then, gave way to the informal authority of women concerning matters of the home and childrearing.[80] With the consent of their husbands, wives made important decisions concerning the labour of their children, property, and the management of inns and taverns owned by their husbands.[81] Pious Puritan mothers laboured for their children's righteousness and salvation, connecting women directly to matters of religion and morality.[82] In her poem titled "In Reference to her Children", poet Anne Bradstreet reflects on her role as a mother:
I had eight birds hatched in one nest; Four cocks there were, and hens the rest. I nursed them up with pain and care, Nor cost nor labour I did spare.
Bradstreet alludes to the temporality of motherhood by comparing her children to a flock of birds on the precipice of leaving home. While Puritans praised the obedience of young children, they also believed that, by separating children from their mothers at adolescence, children could better sustain a superior relationship with God.[83] A child could only be redeemed through religious education and obedience. Girls carried the additional burden of Eve's corruption and were catechised separately from boys at adolescence. Boys' education prepared them for vocations and leadership roles, while girls were educated for domestic and religious purposes. The pinnacle of achievement for children in Puritan society, however, occurred with the conversion process.[82]
Puritans viewed the relationship between master and servant similarly to that of parent and child. Just as parents were expected to uphold Puritan religious values in the home, masters assumed the parental responsibility of housing and educating young servants. Older servants also dwelt with masters and were cared for in the event of illness or injury. African-American and Indian servants were likely excluded from such benefits.[84]
Demonology and witch hunts
[edit]Like most Christians in the early modern period, Puritans believed in the active existence of the devil and demons as evil forces that could possess and cause harm to men and women. There was also widespread belief in witchcraft and witches—persons in league with the devil. "Unexplained phenomena such as the death of livestock, human disease, and hideous fits suffered by young and old" may all be blamed on the agency of the devil or a witch.[85]
Puritan pastors undertook exorcisms for demonic possession in some high-profile cases. Exorcist John Darrell was supported by Arthur Hildersham in the case of Thomas Darling.[86] Samuel Harsnett, a sceptic on witchcraft and possession, attacked Darrell. However, Harsnett was in the minority, and many clergy, not only Puritans, believed in witchcraft and possession.[87]
In the 16th and 17th centuries, thousands of people throughout Europe were accused of being witches and executed. In England and Colonial America, Puritans engaged in witch hunts as well. In the 1640s, Matthew Hopkins, the self-proclaimed "Witchfinder General", whose career flourished during Puritan rule, was responsible for accusing over two hundred people of witchcraft, mainly in East Anglia.[88] Between 1644 and 1647, Hopkins and his colleague John Stearne sent more accused people to the gallows than all the other witch-hunters in England of the previous 160 years.[89] In New England, few people were accused and convicted of witchcraft before 1692; there were at most sixteen convictions.[90]
The Salem witch trials of 1692 had a lasting impact on the historical reputation of New England Puritans. Though this witch hunt occurred after Puritans lost political control of the Massachusetts colony, Puritans instigated the judicial proceedings against the accused and comprised the members of the court that convicted and sentenced the accused. By the time Governor William Phips ended the trials, fourteen women and five men had been hanged as witches.[91]
Puritan scientists
[edit]The Merton Thesis is an argument about the nature of early experimental science proposed by Robert K. Merton. Similarly to Max Weber's famous claim on the link between the Protestant work ethic and the capitalist economy, Merton argued for a similar positive correlation between the rise of English Puritanism, as well as German Pietism, and early experimental science.[104] As an example, seven of 10 nucleus members of the Royal Society were Puritans. In the year 1663, 62 per cent of the members of the Royal Society were similarly identified.[105] The Merton Thesis has resulted in continuous debates.[106]
Notable Puritans
[edit]
- John Brockett was a founder of New Haven, Connecticut.
- Peter Bulkley was an influential Puritan minister and founder of Concord.
- John Bunyan was famous for 1678 book The Pilgrim's Progress.
- William Bradford was Plymouth Colony's Governor.
- Anne Bradstreet was the first female to have her works published in the British North American colonies.
- Oliver Cromwell was an English military and political leader and eventually became Lord Protector of the Commonwealth of England, Scotland and Ireland. He was a very religious man and was considered an independent Puritan.
- John Endecott was the first governor of the Massachusetts Bay Colony and an important military leader.
- Jonathan Edwards, evangelical preacher who sparked the First Great Awakening
- Thomas Hooker was a Puritan minister and co-founder of the Connecticut Colony.
- Cotton Mather was a prominent Puritan clergyman, theologian, and author in colonial America.
- Increase Mather was a Puritan minister and father of Cotton Mather.
- Anne Hutchinson was a Puritan woman noted for speaking freely about her religious views, which resulted in her banishment from Massachusetts Bay Colony.
- John Milton is regarded as among the greatest English poets; author of epics like Paradise Lost, and dramas like Samson Agonistes. He was a staunch supporter of Cromwell.
- James Noyes was an influential Puritan minister, teacher and founder of Newbury.
- Philip Nye (minister) was the key adviser to Oliver Cromwell on matters of religion and regulation of the Church.
- Thomas Parker was an influential Puritan minister, teacher and founder of Newbury.
- Samuel Parris was a Puritan minister who gained notoriety for being the minister of Salem Village during the Salem witch trials.
- John Winthrop is noted for his sermon "A Model of Christian Charity" and as a leading figure in founding the Massachusetts Bay Colony.
- Robert Woodford was an English lawyer, largely based at Northampton and London. His diary for the period 1637–1641 records in detail the outlook of an educated Puritan.
See also
Gallery of famous 17th-century Puritan theologians: Thomas Gouge, William Bridge, Thomas Manton, John Flavel, Richard Sibbes, Stephen Charnock, William Bates, John Owen, John Howe and Richard Baxter
| Part of a series on |
| Puritans |
|---|
 |
| Background |
| Crucial themes |
| History |
| Confessions |
| England |
| America |
| Elsewhere |
| Works |
| Continuing movements |
**
The five solae (Latin: quinque solae from the Latin sola, lit. "alone";[1] occasionally Anglicized to five solas) of the Protestant Reformation are a foundational set of Christian theological principles held by theologians and clergy to be central to the doctrines of justification and salvation as taught by the Lutheranism, Reformed and Evangelical branches of Protestantism, as well as in some branches of Baptist and Pentecostalism.[2][3][4][5][6]
Each sola represents a key belief in these Protestant traditions that is putatively distinct from the theological doctrine of the Catholic Church, although they were not assembled as a theological unit until the 20th century. The Reformers are known to have only stated two of the five solae clearly. Even today there are differences as to what constitutes the solae, how many there are, and how to interpret them to reflect the Reformers' beliefs.
History
[edit]The solae were not systematically articulated together as a set of five until the 20th century;[7][non-primary source needed] however, sola gratia and sola fide were used in conjunction by the Reformers themselves.
In 1554, for example, Philip Melanchthon wrote, "sola gratia justificamus et sola fide justificamur"[8] ("only by grace do we justify and only by faith are we justified"). All of the solae appear in writings by the Protestant Reformers, but they are not catalogued together by any.[9]
In 1916, Lutheran scholar Theodore Engelder published an article titled "The Three Principles of the Reformation: Sola Scriptura, Sola Gratia, Sola Fides" ("only scripture, only grace, only faith").[4] In 1934, theologian Emil Brunner substituted Soli Deo gloriam for Sola Scriptura.[10] In 1958, historian Geoffrey Elton, summarizing the work of John Calvin, wrote that Calvin had "joined together" the "great watchwords". Elton listed sola fide with sola gratia as one term, followed by sola scriptura and soli Deo gloria.[11] Later, in commenting on Karl Barth's theological system, Brunner added Christus solus to the litany of solas[12] while leaving out sola scriptura. The first time the additional two solae are mentioned is in Johann Baptiste Metz's 1965, The Church and the World.[7][non-primary source needed]
The three solae
[edit]In most of the earliest articulations of the solae, three were typically specified: scripture over tradition, faith over works, and grace over merit. Each was intended to represent an important distinction compared with teachings claimed in Catholic doctrine.[citation needed][4][page needed]
Sola scriptura ("by Scripture alone")
[edit]Sola Scriptura is upheld by Lutheran and Reformed theologies and asserts that scripture must govern over church traditions and interpretations which are themselves held to be subject to scripture. All church traditions, creeds, and teachings must be in unity with the teachings of scripture as the divinely inspired Word of God.[13]
The doctrine of Sola Scriptura affirms that scripture is the only source of normative, apostolic, infallible revelation and that “all things necessary for salvation and about faith and life are taught in the Bible with sufficient clarity so that the ordinary believer can find it there and understand it.”[14]
This particular sola is sometimes called the formal principle of the Reformation, since it is the source and norm of the material cause or principle, the gospel of Jesus Christ that is received sola fide (Latin ablative, sōlā fidē, meaning "by faith alone") and sola gratia (Latin ablative, sōlā grātiā, meaning "by grace alone" or by God's favor). The adjective (sola) and the noun (scriptura) are in the ablative case rather than in the nominative case to indicate that the Bible does not stand alone apart from God, but rather that it is the instrument of God by which he reveals himself for salvation through faith in Christ (solus Christus or solo Christo).
It should be emphasized that this doctrine in no way denies tradition, reason, or experience as sources of truth. There is nothing in Sola Scriptura that eliminates other authorities. What it does say is that there is only one authority that can absolutely bind the conscience, that authority is holy scripture and that all controversies about doctrine and theology must be resolved in the final analysis by scripture.
Sola fide ("by faith alone")
[edit]| Part of a series on |
| Lutheranism |
|---|
 |
| Background |
| Doctrine and theology |
|
| Organization |
| Movements |
| Key figures |
| Part of a series on |
| Reformed Christianity |
|---|
| Reformation Wall in Geneva, featuring prominent Reformed theologians William Farel, John Calvin, Theodore Beza, and John Knox |
| Background |
| Theology |
| Texts |
| Theologians |
| Movements |
| Reformed Christianity portal |
Sola fide is summarized in the Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican church, specifically Article XI "Of the Justification of Man":
We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. Wherefore that we are justified by faith only is a most wholesome doctrine, and very full of comfort...
—?Thirty-nine Articles of Religion (1571)
Bishop Scott J. Jones in United Methodist Doctrine writes that in Methodist theology:
Faith is necessary to salvation unconditionally. Good works are necessary only conditionally, that is if there is time and opportunity. The thief on the cross in Luke 23:39-43 is Wesley's example of this. He believed in Christ and was told, "Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in Paradise." This would be impossible if the good works that are the fruit of genuine repentance and faith were unconditionally necessary for salvation. The man was dying and lacked time; his movements were confined and he lacked opportunity. In his case, faith alone was necessary. However, for the vast majority of human beings good works are necessary for continuance in faith because those persons have both the time and opportunity for them.[15]
—?Scott J. Jones, United Methodist Doctrine, page 190
For Luther, baptism is a work of God by which the forgiveness of sins and salvation earned by Christ's death, and confirmed by Christ's resurrection, are given to the baptized person who believes God's Word that says He is doing exactly that in baptism.[16] Infant baptism is not only appropriate, but urged: "We bring the child in the conviction and hope that it believes, and we pray that God may grant it faith; but we do not baptize it upon that, but solely upon the command of God."[17]
The Bible talks about the idea of being justified by faith opposed to "works of the law":
For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law. Romans 3:28 ESV For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last,[a] just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.” Romans 1:17
Sola gratia ("by grace alone")
[edit]Sola gratia, or "only grace", specifically excludes the merit done by a person as part of achieving salvation. Sola gratia is the teaching that salvation comes by divine grace or "unmerited favor" only, not as something merited by the sinner. A famous verse used to back up this doctrine is:
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2:8-9
Protestant Arminians, such as Methodists, are synergists but may also claim the doctrine of sola gratia, though they understand it quite differently than Lutherans and Calvinists do.[18] Arminians believe that God saves only by grace and not at all by merit, but man, enabled by what is referred to as "prevenient grace", is enabled by the Holy Spirit to understand the Gospel and respond in faith. Arminians believe that this is compatible with salvation by grace alone, since all the actual saving is done by grace. Arminians believe that humans are only capable of receiving salvation when first enabled to do so by prevenient grace, which they believe is distributed to everyone. Arminians therefore do not reject the conception of sola gratia expounded by Lutheran and Reformed theologians, although their interpretation of it is quite different.[19]
John Owen, in A Display of Arminianism, rejects the implied belief that the understanding of the Reformed theology has any alliance between the two doctrines and Arminianism is but another form of pelagianism, known as semipelagianism.
The Five Solae
[edit]  | This section may require copy editing for style, verification, and tone. You can assist by editing it. (September 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
While the Reformers of the 16th century wrote of all five solae in various period writings, they are not all mentioned together in one place and were not systematically brought together until the 20th century.[7][non-primary source needed]
Solus Christus or Solo Christo ("Christ alone" or "through Christ alone")
[edit]Solus Christus, or "only Christ", excludes the priestly class as necessary for sacraments. Solus Christus is the teaching that Christ is the only mediator between God and man,[20] and that there is salvation through no other. For this reason, the phrase is sometimes rendered in the ablative case, solo Christo, meaning that salvation is "by Christ alone".
With regard to Lutheran theology, while rejecting all other mediators between God and man, classical Lutheranism continues to honor the memory of the Virgin Mary and other exemplary saints.[according to whom?] This principle rejects sacerdotalism, the belief that there are no sacraments in the church without the services of priests ordained by apostolic succession.[citation needed] Martin Luther taught the "general priesthood of the baptized", which was modified in later Lutheranism and classical Protestant theology into "the priesthood of all believers", denying the exclusive use of the title "priest" (Latin sacerdos) to the clergy.[21] This principle does not deny the office of the holy ministry to which is committed the public proclamation of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments.[according to whom?] In this way, Luther in his Small Catechism could speak of the role of "a confessor" to confer sacramental absolution on a penitent; the section in this catechism known as "The Office of the Keys" (not written by Luther but added with his approval) identifies the "called ministers of Christ" as being the ones who exercise the binding and loosing of absolution and excommunication through Law and Gospel ministry.[citation needed]
This binding and loosing is laid out in the Lutheran formula of holy absolution: the "called and ordained servant of the Word" forgives penitents' sins (speaks Christ's words of forgiveness: "I forgive you all your sins") without any addition of penances or satisfactions and not as an interceding or mediating "priest", but "by virtue of [his] office as a called and ordained servant of the Word" and "in the stead and by the command of [his] Lord Jesus Christ".[22][original research?] In this tradition absolution reconciles the penitent with God directly through faith in Christ's forgiveness rather than with the priest and the church as mediating entities between the penitent and God.[according to whom?]
Soli Deo gloria ("glory to God alone")
[edit]Soli Deo gloria, or "glory to God alone", stands in opposition to the veneration perceived by many to be present in the Roman Catholic Church of Mary the mother of Jesus, the saints, or angels.[according to whom?] Soli Deo gloria is the teaching that all glory is to be due to God alone,[23] since salvation is accomplished solely through His will and action – not only the gift of the all-sufficient atonement of Jesus on the cross, but also the gift of faith in that atonement, created in the heart of the believer by the Holy Spirit.[citation needed] Some Reformers[weasel words] believed that human beings – even saints canonized by the Roman Catholic Church, the popes, and the ecclesiastical hierarchy – are not worthy of the glory that was accorded them; that is, one should not exalt such humans for their good works, but rather praise and give glory to God.[according to whom?]
Additional Solae
[edit]More recently, certain scholars have suggested that there should be additional solae on the list: Sola ecclesia ("the Church alone"), Sola caritas ("Charitable-love alone") and Sola Spiritus (In the "Spirit alone").[24] At the other end of the spectrum, emerging from the Imiaslavie and Primitive Catholicism streams, some Christians now affirm the “Sōlum Nōmen” position that the Holy “Name Alone” is All-sufficient, based upon the insight Jesus is “the one name that contains everything”.[25]
***
