| Radical Reformation vs. Magisterial Reformation David Bennett © January 1, 2007 Download a PDF copy of this paper |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
During the Protestant Reformation there were different views on a number of doctrinal issues. Two of these views can be summed up in what are
called the Radical Reformation and the Magisterial Reformation. These two views existed at the same time.
My purpose here is to dispel the notion that there was just the “Protestant Reformation” and that Huldrych (Ulrich) Zwingli (1484-1531), John
Calvin (1509-1564) and Martin Luther (1483-1546) were the only reformers and that their doctrine was the only doctrine of the Reformation.
I’m merely making the case that these men were not infallible.
Before I cover the differences between the Radical Reformation & the Magisterial Reformation let's look at their similarities. Both:
The following only highlights some of the differences between Radical Reformation and Magisterial Reformation. John Calvin, Martin Luther
and others usually associated with "the Reformation' fall under Magisterial Reformation.
As I have demonstrated, there were competing doctrine during the Reformation. John Calvin was not infallible and things he said and bear scrutiny
and criticism.
It is interesting that Calvinists say on one hand, “God doesn't need our help to accomplish anything, especially regarding anyone's salvation
as God has already determined it. When follow the Great Commission or do missions we don’t really accomplish anything because the
outcomes have already be determined, we’re merely being obedient.”
Then on the other hand these same people defend Calvin's dictatorial rule that included mandatory church attendance, infant baptism, and the
taking of the sacraments and his general dictatorial rule that included torture and killings for Anabaptists and others who disagreed with John
Calvin on doctrinal issues. These same defenders that say God doesn’t need our help then still defend John Calvin by saying what those like John
Calvin did was “necessary for protecting the faith from heresy...”
Jesus said you will recognize people by their fruit (Matt 7:20) and no good tree bears bad fruit (Luke 6:23).
John Calvin's decisions to have people burned at the stake are understandably viewed by Reformed Theology as an attempt “to confirm his image
as an intolerant authoritarian” and they rationalize his actions this way:
Actually that defense is a poor justification, just look at how the early Christians operated.
John Calvin said, “…God works in the hearts of men to incline their wills just as He will, whether to good for His mercy's sake or to evil
according to their merits... Whatever things are done wrongly and unjustly by man, these very things are the right and just works of
God.” (11)
That looks similar to how Islam has been spread from its beginning. However, the early Christian church was spread by love and example.
These examples just don't square with what is taught in the New Testament about the Golden Rule and how to deal with those whom we disagree
with. The point in all of this is to show that Calvin and other reformers were wrong in much of their doctrine and their methods were far from those
taught by Jesus, the Apostles, and the early church, therefore, it is right to question their position on doctrine on an individual basis.
Also see Calvin: The Unchanged and The Golden Rule.
1. http://www.bl.uk/treasures/gutenberg/indulgences.html
2. Various: http://www.anabaptists.org/history/schleith.html , http://www.eldrbarry.net/heidel/anabrsc.htm , http://history.hanover.edu/early/prot.
html, Estep, William R., Renaissance & Reformation (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1986), 241.; Littell, Franklin H., The
Origins of Sectarian Protestantism (New York: The Macmillan Company), 11 http://www.baptistchristianworldview.
com/bheritage/cumminswhitsitt.htm and many others.
3. The Seven Theses of the Anabaptists http://www.theblackboxspeaks.org/anabaptists-7-theses.html
4. Eucharist
By faith (not a mere mental apprehension), and in the Holy Spirit, the partaker beholds God incarnate, and in the same sense touches him with
hands, so that by eating and drinking of bread and wine Christ's actual presence penetrates to the heart of the believer more nearly than food
swallowed with the mouth can enter in.
John Calvin specifically rejected adoration of the Eucharistic bread and wine as "idolatry", however. Leftover elements may be disposed of
without ceremony (or reused in later services); they are unchanged, and as such the meal directs attention toward Christ's bodily resurrection and
return.
5. http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html , http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-bible.html
6. Franklin Littell, The Origins of Sectarian Protestantism: A Study of the Anabaptist View of the church, (New York: The Macmillan Company,
1964), p. xvi. Hereafter referred to as Littell. http://www.anabaptists.org/history/sepamarg.html
7. http://www.anabaptists.org/history/sattler.html
8. http://www.biblehelp.org/appndx.htm
9. http://www.victorshepherd.on.ca/Heritage/menno.htm#Menno%20Simons
10. Martin Luther and John Calvin on Sacramental Salvation. http://www.asapnet.net/remnant/page14issacrament.htm
11. http://www.thebereancall.org/node/6342
called the Radical Reformation and the Magisterial Reformation. These two views existed at the same time.
My purpose here is to dispel the notion that there was just the “Protestant Reformation” and that Huldrych (Ulrich) Zwingli (1484-1531), John
Calvin (1509-1564) and Martin Luther (1483-1546) were the only reformers and that their doctrine was the only doctrine of the Reformation.
I’m merely making the case that these men were not infallible.
Before I cover the differences between the Radical Reformation & the Magisterial Reformation let's look at their similarities. Both:
- Rejected sacramentalism (Observing only two: Baptism & the Lord's Supper).
- Rejected distinction between clergy & laity.
- Rejected ritualism.
- Emphasis on grace in justification.
- Emphasis on priesthood of all believers.
- Rejected the selling of indulgences for forgiveness/pardon of sins for which people were allowed to pay for a particular sin, even before
they committed it. (1) Actually even Martin Luther did not oppose so much the use of it as he did the abuse of it. - Rejected the selling and collecting of supposed religious icons.
The following only highlights some of the differences between Radical Reformation and Magisterial Reformation. John Calvin, Martin Luther
and others usually associated with "the Reformation' fall under Magisterial Reformation.
As I have demonstrated, there were competing doctrine during the Reformation. John Calvin was not infallible and things he said and bear scrutiny
and criticism.
It is interesting that Calvinists say on one hand, “God doesn't need our help to accomplish anything, especially regarding anyone's salvation
as God has already determined it. When follow the Great Commission or do missions we don’t really accomplish anything because the
outcomes have already be determined, we’re merely being obedient.”
Then on the other hand these same people defend Calvin's dictatorial rule that included mandatory church attendance, infant baptism, and the
taking of the sacraments and his general dictatorial rule that included torture and killings for Anabaptists and others who disagreed with John
Calvin on doctrinal issues. These same defenders that say God doesn’t need our help then still defend John Calvin by saying what those like John
Calvin did was “necessary for protecting the faith from heresy...”
Jesus said you will recognize people by their fruit (Matt 7:20) and no good tree bears bad fruit (Luke 6:23).
- But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.
Galatians 5:22-23
John Calvin's decisions to have people burned at the stake are understandably viewed by Reformed Theology as an attempt “to confirm his image
as an intolerant authoritarian” and they rationalize his actions this way:
- ...Despite the fact that religious toleration did not become a popular conviction until at least two hundred years later, and that
what was done in Geneva was done virtually everywhere else in Europe on a much grander scale...
Actually that defense is a poor justification, just look at how the early Christians operated.
John Calvin said, “…God works in the hearts of men to incline their wills just as He will, whether to good for His mercy's sake or to evil
according to their merits... Whatever things are done wrongly and unjustly by man, these very things are the right and just works of
God.” (11)
That looks similar to how Islam has been spread from its beginning. However, the early Christian church was spread by love and example.
These examples just don't square with what is taught in the New Testament about the Golden Rule and how to deal with those whom we disagree
with. The point in all of this is to show that Calvin and other reformers were wrong in much of their doctrine and their methods were far from those
taught by Jesus, the Apostles, and the early church, therefore, it is right to question their position on doctrine on an individual basis.
Also see Calvin: The Unchanged and The Golden Rule.
1. http://www.bl.uk/treasures/gutenberg/indulgences.html
2. Various: http://www.anabaptists.org/history/schleith.html , http://www.eldrbarry.net/heidel/anabrsc.htm , http://history.hanover.edu/early/prot.
html, Estep, William R., Renaissance & Reformation (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1986), 241.; Littell, Franklin H., The
Origins of Sectarian Protestantism (New York: The Macmillan Company), 11 http://www.baptistchristianworldview.
com/bheritage/cumminswhitsitt.htm and many others.
3. The Seven Theses of the Anabaptists http://www.theblackboxspeaks.org/anabaptists-7-theses.html
4. Eucharist
- According to the Roman Catholic Church, when the bread and wine are consecrated in the Eucharist, they cease to be bread and wine, and
become instead the body and blood of Christ. The empirical appearances are not changed, but the reality is.
- Many Reformed Christians, particularly those who follow John Calvin, hold that Christ's body and blood do not come down to inhabit the
elements, but that "the Spirit truly unites things separated in space" (Calvin).
By faith (not a mere mental apprehension), and in the Holy Spirit, the partaker beholds God incarnate, and in the same sense touches him with
hands, so that by eating and drinking of bread and wine Christ's actual presence penetrates to the heart of the believer more nearly than food
swallowed with the mouth can enter in.
John Calvin specifically rejected adoration of the Eucharistic bread and wine as "idolatry", however. Leftover elements may be disposed of
without ceremony (or reused in later services); they are unchanged, and as such the meal directs attention toward Christ's bodily resurrection and
return.
- Lutherans believe that the Body and Blood of Christ are "truly and substantially present in, with and under the forms" of the consecrated
bread and wine (the elements), so that communicants eat and drink both the elements and the true Body and Blood of Christ Himself (cf.
Augsburg Confession, Article 10) in the Sacrament of Holy Communion.
- The Zwinglian view sees Communion (also called the Lord's Supper or the Lord's Table) as a symbolic meal, a memorial of the Last
Supper and the Passion in which nothing miraculous occurs.
- The Radical view was the Lord's Supper was to just be an observance or remembrance. The wine remained wine and the bread remained
bread and they had no transforming power.
5. http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-earlychurch.html , http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/sola-scriptura-bible.html
6. Franklin Littell, The Origins of Sectarian Protestantism: A Study of the Anabaptist View of the church, (New York: The Macmillan Company,
1964), p. xvi. Hereafter referred to as Littell. http://www.anabaptists.org/history/sepamarg.html
7. http://www.anabaptists.org/history/sattler.html
8. http://www.biblehelp.org/appndx.htm
9. http://www.victorshepherd.on.ca/Heritage/menno.htm#Menno%20Simons
10. Martin Luther and John Calvin on Sacramental Salvation. http://www.asapnet.net/remnant/page14issacrament.htm
11. http://www.thebereancall.org/node/6342
- _______________________________________________________
http://www.freewill-predestination.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|