Gregory I (c.540–604 AD) Epistles 5.18 To The Bishop Of Constantinople

Gregory to John, Bishop of Constantinople.

At the time when your Fraternity was advanced to Sacerdotal dignity, you remember what peace and concord of the churches you found. But, with what daring or with what swelling of pride I know not, you have attempted to seize upon a new name, whereby the hearts of all your brethren might have come to take offence. I wonder exceedingly at this, since I remember how thou wouldest fain have fled from the episcopal office rather than attain it. And yet, now that thou hast got it, thou desirest so to exercise it as if thou hadst run to it with ambitious intent. For, having confessed thyself unworthy to be called a bishop, thou hast at length been brought to such a pass as, despising thy brethren, to covet to be named the only bishop. And indeed with regard to this matter, weighty letters were addressed to your Holiness by my predecessor Pelagius of holy memory; in which he annulled the acts of the synod, which had been assembled among you in the case of our once brother and fellow-bishop Gregory, because of that execrable title of pride, and forbade the archdeacon, whom he had sent according to custom to the threshold of our lord, to celebrate the solemnities of mass with you. But after his death, when I, unworthy, succeeded to the government of the Church, both through my other representatives and also through our common son the deacon Sabinianus, I have taken care to address your Fraternity, not indeed in writing, but by word of mouth, desiring you to restrain yourself from such presumption. And, in case of your refusing to amend, I forbade his celebrating the solemnities of mass with you; that so I might first appeal to your Holiness through a certain sense of shame, to the end that, if the execrable and profane assumption could not be corrected through shame, strict canonical measures might be then resorted to. And, since sores that are to be cut away should first be stroked with a gentle hand, I beg you, I beseech you, and with all the sweetness in my power demand of you, that your Fraternity gainsay all who flatter you and offer you this name of error, nor foolishly consent to be called by the proud title. For truly I say it weeping, and out of inmost sorrow of heart attribute it to my sins, that this my brother, who has been constituted in the grade of episcopacy for the very end of bringing back the souls of others to humility, has up to the present time been incapable of being brought back to humility; that he who teaches truth to others has not consented to teach himself, even when I implore him.

Consider, I pray thee, that in this rash presumption the peace of the whole Church is disturbed, and that it is in contradiction to the grace that is poured out on all in common; in which grace doubtless thou thyself wilt have power to grow so far as thou determinest with thyself to do so. And thou wilt become by so much the greater as thou restrainest thyself from the usurpation of a proud and foolish title: and thou wilt make advance in proportion as thou art not bent on arrogation by derogation of thy brethren. Wherefore, dearest brother, with all thy heart love humility, through which the concord of all the brethren and the unity of the holy universal Church may be preserved. Certainly the apostle Paul, when he heard some say, I am of Paul, I of Apollos, but I of Christ (1 Cor. 1:13), regarded with the utmost horror such dilaceration of the Lord’s body, whereby they were joining themselves, as it were, to other heads, and exclaimed, saying, Was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul (ib.)? If then he shunned the subjecting of the members of Christ partially to certain heads, as if beside Christ, though this were to the apostles themselves, what wilt thou say to Christ, who is the Head of the universal Church, in the scrutiny of the last judgment, having attempted to put all his members under thyself by the appellation of Universal? Who, I ask, is proposed for imitation in this wrongful title but he who, despising the legions of angels constituted socially with himself, attempted to start up to an eminence of singularity, that he might seem to be under none and to be alone above all? Who even said, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of heaven: I will sit upon the mount of the testament, in the sides of the North: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High (Isai. 14:13).

For what are all thy brethren, the bishops of the universal Church, but stars of heaven, whose life and discourse shine together amid the sins and errors of men, as if amid the shades of night? And when thou desirest to put thyself above them by this proud title, and to tread down their name in comparison with thine, what else dost thou say but I will ascend into heaven; I will exalt my throne above the stars of heaven? Are not all the bishops together clouds, who both rain in the words of preaching, and glitter in the light of good works? And when your Fraternity despises them, and you would fain press them down under yourself, what else say you but what is said by the ancient foe, I will ascend above the heights of the clouds? All these things when I behold with tears, and tremble at the hidden judgments of God, my fears are increased, and my heart cannot contain its groans, for that this most holy man the lord John, of so great abstinence and humility, has, through the seduction of familiar tongues, broken out into such a pitch of pride as to attempt, in his coveting of that wrongful name, to be like him who, while proudly wishing to be like God, lost even the grace of the likeness granted him, and because he sought false glory, thereby forfeited true blessedness. Certainly Peter, the first of the apostles, himself a member of the holy and universal Church, Paul, Andrew, John,—what were they but heads of particular communities? And yet all were members under one Head. And (to bind all together in a short girth of speech) the saints before the law, the saints under the law, the saints under grace, all these making up the Lord’s Body, were constituted as members of the Church, and not one of them has wished himself to be called universal. Now let your Holiness acknowledge to what extent you swell within yourself in desiring to be called by that name by which no one presumed to be called who was truly holy.

Was it not the case, as your Fraternity knows, that the prelates of this Apostolic See, which by the providence of God I serve, had the honour offered them of being called universal by the venerable Council of Chalcedon. But yet not one of them has ever wished to be called by such a title, or seized upon this ill-advised name, lest if, in virtue of the rank of the pontificate, he took to himself the glory of singularity, he might seem to have denied it to all his brethren.

But I know that all arises from those who serve your Holiness on terms of deceitful familiarity; against whom I beseech your Fraternity to be prudently on your guard, and not to lay yourself open to be deceived by their words. For they are to be accounted the greater enemies the more they flatter you with praises. Forsake such; and, if they must needs deceive, let them at any rate deceive the hearts of worldly men, and not of priests. Let the dead bury their dead (Luke 9:60). But say ye with the prophet, Let them be turned back and put to shame that say unto me, Aha, Aha (Ps. 69:4). And again, But let not the oil of the sinner lard my head (Ps. 140:5).

Whence also the wise man admonishes well, Be in peace with many: but have but one counsellor of a thousand (Ecclus. 6:6). For Evil communications corrupt good manners (1 Cor. 15:33). For the ancient foe, when unable to break into strong hearts, looks out for weak persons who are associated with them, and, as it were, scales lofty walls by ladders set against them. So he deceived Adam through the woman who was associated with him. So, when he slew the sons of the blessed Job, he left the weak woman, that, being unable of himself to penetrate his heart, he might at any rate be able to do so through the woman’s words. Whatever weak and secular persons, then, arc near you, let them be shattered in their own persuasive words and flattery, since they procure to themselves the eternal enmity of God from their very frowardness in being seeming lovers.

Of a truth it was proclaimed of old through the Apostle John, Little children, it is the last hour (1 John 2:18), according as the Truth foretold. And now pestilence and sword rage through the world, nations rise against nations, the globe of the earth is shaken, the gaping earth with its inhabitants is dissolved. For all that was foretold is come to pass. The king of pride is near, and (awful to be said!) there is an army of priests in course of preparation for him, inasmuch as they who bad been appointed to be leaders in humility enlist themselves under the neck of pride. But in this matter, even though our tongue protested not at all, the power of Him who in His own person peculiarly opposes the vice of pride is lifted up for vengeance against elation. For hence it is written, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble (Jam. 4:6). Hence, again, it is said, Whoso exalteth his heart is unclean before God (Prov. 16:5). Hence, against the man that is proud it is written, Why is earth and ashes proud (Ecclus. 10:9)? Hence the Truth in person says, Whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased (Luke 14:11). And, that he might bring us back to the way of life through humility, He deigned to exhibit in Himself what He teaches us, saying, Learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart (Matth. 11:29). For to this end the only begotten Son of God took upon Himself the form of our weakness; to this end the Invisible appeared not only as visible but even as despised; to this end He endured the mocks of contumely, the reproaches of derision, the torments of suffering; that God in His humility might teach man not to be proud. How great, then, is the virtue of humility for the sake of teaching which alone He who is great beyond compare became little even unto the suffering of death! For, since the pride of the devil was the origin of our perdition, the humility of God has been found the means of our redemption. That is to say, our enemy, having been created among all things, desired to appear exalted above all things; but our Redeemer remaining great above all things, deigned to become little among all things.

What, then, can we bishops say for ourselves, who have received a place of honour from the humility of our Redeemer, and yet imitate the pride of the enemy himself? Lo, we know our Creator to have descended from the summit of His loftiness that He might give glory to the human race, and we, created of the lowest, glory in the lessening of our brethren. God humbled Himself even to our dust; and human dust sets his face as high as heaven, and with his tongue passes above the earth, and blushes not, neither is afraid to be lifted up: even man who is rottenness, and the son of man that is a worm.

Let us recall to mind, most dear brother, this which is said by the most wise Solomon, Before thunder shall go lightning, and before ruin shall the heart be exalted (Ecclus. 32:10); where, on the other hand it is subjoined, Before glory it shall be humbled. Let us then be humbled in mind, if we are striving to attain to real loftiness. By no means let the eyes of our heart be darkened by the smoke of elation, which the more it rises the more rapidly vanishes away. Let us consider how we are admonished by the precepts of our Redeemer, who says, Blessed are the poor in spirit; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven (Matth. 5:3). Hence, also, he says by the prophet, On whom shall my Spirit rest, but on him that is humble, and quiet, and that trembleth at my words (Isai. 66:2)? Of a truth, when the Lord would bring back the hearts of His disciples, still beset with infirmity, to the way of humility, He said, Whosoever will be chief among you shall be least of all (Matth. 20:27). Whereby it is plainly seen how he is truly exalted on high who in his thoughts is humbled. Let us, therefore, fear to be numbered among those who seek the first seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the market, and to be called of men Rabbi. For, contrariwise, the Lord says to His disciples, But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your master; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your Father upon the earth, for one is your Father (Matth. 23:7, 8).

What then, dearest brother, wilt thou say in that terrible scrutiny of the coming judgment, if thou covetest to be called in the world not only father, but even general father? Let, then, the bad suggestion of evil men be guarded against; let all instigation to offence be fled from. It must needs be (indeed) that offences come; nevertheless, woe to that man by whom the offence cometh (Matth. 18:7). Lo, by reason of this execrable title of pride the Church is rent asunder, the hearts of all the brethren, are provoked to offence. What! Has it escaped your memory how the Truth says, Whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a mill stone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea (Ib. v. 6)? But it is written, Charity seeketh not her own (1 Cor. 13:4). Lo, your Fraternity arrogates to itself even what is not its own. Again it is written, In honour preferring one another (Rom. 12:10). And thou attemptest to take the honour away from all which thou desirest unlawfully to usurp to thyself singularly. Where, dearest brother, is that which is written, Have peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord (Heb. 12:14)? Where is that which is written, Blessed are the peacemakers; for they shall be called the children of God (Matth. 5:9)?

It becomes you to consider, lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled. But still, though we neglect to consider, supernal judgment will be on the watch against the swelling of so great elation. And we indeed, against whom such and so great a fault is committed by this nefarious attempt,—we, I say, are observing what the Truth enjoins when it says, If thy brother shall sin against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of one or two witnesses every word may be established. But if he will not hear them, tell it unto the Church. But if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as an heathen man and a publican (Matth. 18:15). I therefore have once and again through my representatives taken care to reprove in humble words this sin against the whole Church; and now I write myself. Whatever it was my duty to do in the way of humility I have not omitted. But, if I am despised in my reproof, it remains that I must have recourse to the Church.

Wherefore may Almighty God show your Fraternity how great love for you constrains me when I thus speak, and how much I grieve in this case, not against you, but for you. But the case is such that in it I must prefer the precepts of the Gospel, the ordinances of the Canons, and the welfare of the brethren to the person even of him whom I greatly love.

I have received the most sweet and pleasant letter of your Holiness with respect to the case of the presbyters John and Athanasius, about which, the Lord helping me, I will reply to you in another letter; for, being surrounded by the swords of barbarians, I am now oppressed by such great tribulations that it is not allowed me. I will not say to treat of many things, but hardly even to breathe. Given in the Kalends of January; Indiction 13.

Gregory the Great, “Register of the Epistles of Saint Gregory the Great,” in Leo the Great, Gregory the Great, ed. Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, trans. James Barmby, vol. 12b, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series (New York: Christian Literature Company, 1895), 166–69.

Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And [we believe] in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son;1 who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets; and one holy catholic and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.


1. The Latin text of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan (381) as revised by the Third Council of Toledo (589) ratified the use of the filioque clause  (and the Son) to further define the procession of the Holy Spirit. This revision is received by the Reformed and Presbyterian churches but is not received by the Eastern Churches. Here is a more detailed explanation.

The Received Greek Text

Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα ΘΕΟΝ ΠΑΤΕΡΑ παντοκράτορα, ποιητὴν οὐρανοῦ καὶ γῆς, ὁρατῶν τε πάντων καὶ ἀοράτων.

Καὶ εἰς ἕνα κύριον ἸΗΣΟΥΝ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΝ, τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ θεοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ, τὸν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα πρὸ πάντων τῶν αἰώνων, φῶς ἐκ φωτός, θεὸν ἀληθινὸν ἐκ θεοῦ ἀληθινοῦ, γεννηθέντα, οὐ ποιηθέντα, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρί· διʼ οὔ τὰ πάντα ἐγένετο· τὸν διʼ ἡμᾶς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν κατελθόντα ἐκ τῶν οὐρανῶν καὶ σαρκωθέντα ἐκ πνεύματος ἁγίου καὶ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου καὶ ἐνανθρωπήσαντα, σταυρωθέντα τε ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἐπὶ Ποντίου Πιλάτου, καὶ παθόντα καὶ ταφέντα, καὶ ἀναστάντα τῇ τρίτῃ ἡμέρᾳ κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, καὶ ἀνελθόντα εἰς τοὺς οὐρανούς, καὶ καθεζόμενον ἐκ δεξιῶν τοῦ πατρός, καὶ πάλιν ἐρχόμενον μετὰ δόξης κρῖναι ζῶντας καὶ νεκρούς· οὗ τῆς βασιλείας οὐκ ἔσται τέλος.

Καὶ εἰς τὸ ΠΝΕΥΜΑ ΤΟ ἌΓΙΟΝ, τὸ κύριον, (καὶ) τὸ ζωοποιόν, τὸ ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς ἐκπορευόμενον, τὸ σὺν πατρὶ καὶ ὑιῷ συν προσκυνούμενον καὶ συνδοξαζόμενον, τὸ λαλῆσαν διὰ τῶν προφητῶν· εἰς μίαν, ἁγίαν, καθολικὴν καὶ ἀποστολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν· ὁμολογοῦμεν ἓν βάπτισμα εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν· προσδοκῶμεν ἀνάστασιν νεκρῶν, καὶ ζωὴν τοῦ μέλλοντος αἰώνος. Ἀμήν.

Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical Notes: The Greek and Latin Creeds, with Translations, vol. 2 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1890), 57.

Received Latin Text

Credo in unum DEUM PATREM omnipotentem; factorem cœli et terrœ, visibilium omnium et invisibilium.

Et in unum Dominum JESUM CHRISTUM, Filium Dei unigenitum, et ex Patre natum ante omnia sæcula [Deum de Deo], Lumen de Lumine, Deum verum de Deo vero, genitum, non factum, consubstantialem Patri; per quem omnia facta sunt; qui propter nos homines et propter nostram salutem descendit de cœlis, et incarnatus est de Spiritu Sancto ex Maria virgine, et homo factus est; crucifixus etiam pro nobis sub Pontio Pilato, passus et sepultus est; et resurrexit tertia die, secundum Scripturus; et ascendit in cœlum, sedet ad dexteram Patris; et iterum venturus est, cum gloria, judicare vivos et mortuos; cujus regni non erit finis.

Et in SPIRITUM SANCTUM, Dominum et vivificantem, qui ex Patre [Filioque] procedit; qui cum Patre et Filio simul adoratur et conglorificatur; qui locutus est per Prophetas. Et unam, sanctam, catholicam et apostolicam ecclesiam. Confiteor unum baptisma in remissionem peccatorum; et expecto resurrectionem mortuorum, et vitam venturi seculi. Amen.

Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical Notes: The Greek and Latin Creeds, with Translations, vol. 2 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1890), 58–59.

Apostles’ Creed

1. I believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth.
2. And in Jesus Christ his only begotten Son, our Lord.
3. Who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary.
4. Suffered under Ponce Pilate, was crucified, dead, buried, and descended into hell.
5. The third day he rose again from the dead.
6. He ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of God the Father Almighty.
7. Whence he shall come to judge the living and the dead.
8. I believe in the Holy Spirit.
9. The holy catholic church.
10. The communion of Saints: The forgiveness of sins.
11. The resurrection of the body.
12. And the life everlasting. Amen.

Aarticuli Fidei sive Symbolum Apostolorum

1. Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, creatorem coeli et terrae:
2. Et in Iesum Christum, Filium eius unigenitum Dominum nostrum,
3. qui conceptus estde Spiritu sancto, natus ex Maria virgine,
4. passus sub Pontio Pilato, crucifixus, mortuus et sepultus: Descendit ad inferos,
5. tertia die resurrexit a mortuis,
6. ascendit ad coelum, sedet at dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis:
7. Inde venturus est ad iudicandum vivos et mortuos.
8. Credo in Spiritum sanctum,
9. sanctam Ecclesiam, catholicam,
10. sanctorum communionem, remissionem peccatorum,
11. carnis resurrectionem,
12. et vitam aeternam.

Definition Of Chalcedon

We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a rational soul and body; consubstantial with the Father according to the Godhead, and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the Virgin Mary, the theotokos (θεοτοκος), according to the humanity; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning [have declared] concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself has taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.

Ἑπόμενοι τοίνυν τοῖς ἁγίοις πατράσιν ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖν υἱὸν τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν συμφώνως ἅπαννες ἐκδιδάσκομεν, τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν θεότητι καὶ τέλειον τὸν αὐτὸν ἐν ἀνθρωπότητι, θεὸν ἀληθῶς καὶ ἄνθρωπον ἀληθῶς τὸν αὐτὸν, ἐκ ψυχῆς λογικῆς καὶ σώματος, ὁμοούσιον τῷ πατρὶ κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, καὶ ὁμοούσιον τὸν αὐτὸν ἡμῖν κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, κατὰ πάντα ὅμοιον ἡμῖν χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας· πρὸ αἰώνων μὲν ἐκ τοῦ πατρὸς γεννηθέντα κατὰ τὴν θεότητα, ἐπʼ ἐσχάτων δὲ τῶν ἡμερῶν τὸν αὐτὸν διʼ ἡμᾶς καὶ διὰ τὴν ἡμετέραν σωτηρίαν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου τῆς θεοτόκου κατὰ τὴν ἀνθρωπότητα, ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν Χριστόν, υἱόν, κύριον, μονογενῆ, ἐκ δύο φύσεων [ἐν δύο φύσεσιν], ἀσυγχύτως, ἀτρέπτως, ἀδιαιρέτως, ἀχωρίστως γνωριζόμενον· οὐδαμοῦ τῆς τῶν φύσεων διαφορᾶς ἀνῃρημένης διὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, σωζομένης δὲ μᾶλλον τῆς ἰδιότητος ἑκατέρας φύσεως καὶ εἰς ἓν πρόσωπον καὶ μίαν ὑπόστασιν συντρεχούσης, οὐκ εἰς δύο πρόσωπα μεριζόμενον ἢ διαιρούμενον, ἀλλʼ ἕνα καὶ τὸν αὐτὸν υἱὸν καὶ μονογενῆ, θεὸν λόγον, κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χοιστόν· καθάπερ ἄνωθεν οἱ προφῆται περὶ αὐτοῦ καὶ αὐτὸς ἡμᾶς ὁ κύριος Ιησοῦς Χριστὸς ἐξεπαίδευσε καὶ τὸ τῶν πατέρων ἡμῖν καραδέδωκε σύμβολον.

Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical Notes: The Greek and Latin Creeds, with Translations (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1890), 2.62–63.

Athanasian Creed

1. Whosoever will be saved: before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith:
2. Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled: without doubt he shall perish everlastingly.
3. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in unity;
4. Neither confounding the persons: nor dividing the substance.
5. For there is one person of the Father: another of the Son: and another of the Holy Spirit.
6. But the godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, is all one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal.
7. Such as the Father is: such is the Son: and such is the Holy Spirit.
8. The Father uncreate: the Son uncreate: and the Holy Spirit uncreate.
9. The Father incomprehensible: the Son incomprehensible: and the Holy Spirit incomprehensible. The Father eternal: the Son eternal: and the Holy Spirit eternal.
11. And yet they are not three eternals: but one eternal.
12. As also there are not three uncreated: nor three incomprehensibles, but one uncreated: and one incomprehensible.
13. So likewise the Father is Almighty: the Son Almighty: and the Holy Spirit Almighty.
14. And yet they are not three Almighties: but one Almighty.
15. So the Father is God: the Son is God: and the Holy Spirit is God.
16. And yet they are not three Gods: but one God.
17. So likewise the Father is Lord: the Son Lord: and the Holy Spirit Lord.
18. And yet not three Lords: but one Lord
19. For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity: to acknowledge every person by himself to be God and Lord:
20. So are we forbidden by the catholic religion: to say, there be three Gods, or three Lords.
21. The Father is made of none: neither created, nor begotten.
22. The Son is of the Father alone: not made, nor created: but begotten.
23. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son: neither made, nor created, nor begotten: but proceeding.
24. So there is one Father, not three Fathers: one Son, not three Sons: one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirit.
25. And in this Trinity none is afore, or after another: none is greater, or less than another.
26. But the whole three Persons are coeternal, and coequal.
27. So that in all things, as aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity, is to be worshiped.
28. He therefore that will be saved, must thus think of the Trinity.
29. Furthermore it is necessary to everlasting salvation: that he also believe rightly the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
30. For the right faith is, that we believe and confess: that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man;
31. God, of the Substance of the Father; begotten before the worlds: and Man, of the Substance of his mother, born in the world.
32. Perfect God: and perfect man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting.
33. Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead: and inferior to the Father as touching his manhood.
34. Who although he be God and man; yet he is not two, but one Christ.
35. One; not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh: but by taking of the manhood into God.
36. One altogether; not by confusion of substance: but by unity of person.
37. For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man: so God and man is one Christ;
38. Who suffered for our salvation: descended into hell: rose again the third day from the dead.
39. He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of the Father God Almighty.
40. Whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
41. At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies;
42. And shall give account for their own works.
43. And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting: and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire.
44. This is the catholic faith: which except a man believe faithfully, he can not be saved.

1. Quicunque vult salvus esse: ante omnia opus est, ut teneat catholicam fidem.
2. Quam nisi quisque integram inviolatamque servaverit: absque dubio in æternum persbit.
3. Fides autem catholica hæc est: ut unum Deum in Trinitate, et Trinitatem in Unitate veneremmo;
4. Neque confundentes personas: neque substantiam separantes.
5. Alia est enim persona Patris: alia Filii: alia Spiritus Sancti.
6. Sed Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti una est divinitas: æqualis gloria, coæterna majestad.
7. Qualis Pater: talis Filius: talis [et] Spiritus Sanctus.
8. Increatus Pater: increatus Filius: increatus [et] Spiritus Sanctus..
9. Immensus Pater: immensus Filius: immensus [et] Spiritus Sanctus.
10. Æternus Pater: æternus Filius: æternus [et] Spiritus Sanctus.
11. Et tamen non tres œterni: sed unus æternus.
12. Sicut non tres increati: nec tres immensi: sed unus increatus: et unus immensus.
13. Similiter omnipotens Pater: omnipotent Filius: omnipotens [et] Spiritus Sanctus.
14. Et tamen non tres omnipotentes: sed unus omnipotens.
15. Ita deus Pater: deus Filius: deus [et] Spiritus Sanctus.
16. Et tamen non tres dii: sed unus est Deus.
17. Ita dominus Pater: dominus Filius: dominus [et] Spiritus Sanctus.
18. Et tamen non tres domini: sed unus [est] Dominus.
19. Quia sicut singulatim unamquamque personam Deum ac Dominum confiteri, christiana veritate compellimur:
20. Ita tres deos, aut [tres] dominos dicere, catholica religione prohibemur.
21. Pater a nullo est factus: nec creatus, nec genitus.
22. Filius a Patre solo est: non factus, nec creatus: sed genitus.
23. Spiritus Sanctus a Patre et Filio: non factus, nec creatus, nec genitus: sed procedens.
24. Unus ergo Pater, non tres patres: unus Filius, non tres filii: unus Spiritus Sanctus, non tres spiritus sancti.
25. Et in hac Trinitate nihil prius, aut posterius: nihil majus, aut minus.
26. Sed totœ tres personœ coæternœ sibi sunt, et coæquales.
27. Ita, ut per omnia, sicut jam supra dictum est: et Unitas in Trinitate, et Trinitas in Unitate, venerenda sit.
28. Qui vult ergo salvus esse, ita de Trinitate sentiat.
29. Sed necessarium est ad æternam salutem: ut incarnationem quoque Domini nostri Jesu Christi fideliter credat.
30. Est ergo fides recta, ut credamus et confiteamur: quod Dominus noster Jesus Christus Dei Filius, Deus [pariter] et homo est;
31. Deus [est] ex substantia Patris, ante secula genitus: et homo ex substantia matris, in seculo natus.
32. Perfectus Deus: perfectus homo, ex anima rationali et humana carne subsistens.
33. Aequalis Patri secundum divinitatem: minor Patre secundum humanitatem.
34. Qui licet Deus sit et homo; non duo tamen, sed unus est Christus.
35. Unus autem, non conversione divinitatis in carnem: sed assumptione humanitatis in Deum.
36. Unus omnino; non confusione substantiæ: sed unitate personœ.
37. Nam sicut anima rationalis et caro unus est homo: ita Deus et homo unus est Christus.
38.Qui passus est pro nostra salute: descendit ad inferos: tertia die resurrexit a mortuis.
39. Ascendit ad [in] cœlos: sedet ad dexteram [Dei] Patris [omnipotentis].
40. Inde venturus [est] judicare vivos et mortuos.
41. Ad cujus adventum omnes homines resurgere habent cum corporibus suis;
42. Et reddituri sunt de factis propriis rationem.
43. Et qui bona egerunt, ibunt in vitam æternam: qui vero mala, in ignem æternum.
44. Hæc est fides catholica: quam nisi quisque fideliter firmiterque crediderit, salvus esse non poterit.

Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom, with a History and Critical Notes: The Greek and Latin Creeds, with Translations, vol. 2 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1890), 66.

Select Bibliography Of The Reformation

(rev. January 2006) © R. Scott Clark, 2006. All Rights Reserved.

1. References

Bagchi, David and David C. Steinmetz, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Reformation Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004).

Bauman, M., M. Klauber, ed., Historians of the Christian Tradition (Nashville, 1995).

Brady, T. A., H. A. Oberman, J. D. Tracy ed., Handbook of European History 1400-1600, 2 vol. (GR: Eerdmans, 1996).

Cross, F.L. and E. A. Livingstone, The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. 3rd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Collins, J.F., Primer of Ecclesiasitical Latin (Washington, D.C., 1985).

Douglas, J.D., ed., New International Dictionary of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids,1978).

Edwards, P. ed., The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 8 vol. (NY: Macmillan, 1967).

Elwell, W., ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002)

— ed., Handbook of Evangelical Theologians (Grand Rapids, 1993).

Ferguson, S. New International Dictionary of Theology. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1988.

Ferm. V., ed., An Encyclopedia of Religion. New York: Philosophical Library, 1945.

Hart, D. G. and M. Noll, ed. Dictionary of the Presbyterian and Reformed Tradition in America.Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press, 1999.

Hart, Trevor. ed. Dictionary of Historical Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001).

Hastings, J. ed., The Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics, 13 vol. (New York, 1908-28)

Hillerbrand, H., ed., The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation (Oxford, 1996).

Höfer, J., ed., Lexikon für Theolgie unk Kirche, 10 vol. (Freiburg, 1957-67).

Houldon, Leslie, P. Byrne, Companion Encyclopedia of Theology (London, 1995).

Kepple, R. Reference Works for Theological Research (Lanham, MD, 1981).

Krause, G. and Gerhard Müller, ed., Theologische Realencyclopädie, (Berlin, 1977-).

Loetscher, L. , ed., The Twentieth Century Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, 2 vol. (Grand Rapids, 1955).

Maltby, William S. ed. Reformation EuropeA Guide to Research II (St. Louis, 1992).

McKim, D., and D. Wright, ed., Encyclopedia of the Reformed Faith (Louisville, 1992).

–ed., Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters. Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity, 1998.

Schaff, P., ed., The Schaff-Herzogg Encyclopdia of Religious Knowledge, 13 vol. (New York, 1908-12).

Stelten, Leo. F. Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Latin. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia (New York, 1967-78).

Trevor A. Hart, ed., The Dictionary of Historical Theology (Carlisle UK and Grand Rapids: Paternoster and Eerdmans, 2000).

2. Theology

2.1. Dogmatic and Systematic Theologies

2.1.1. Patristic

Schaff, P. et al., The Ante-Nicene, Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers, 32 vol. (Edinburgh, 1884-).

2.1.2. Medieval

Aquinas, Thomas. Summa theologiae, 61 vol. [Blackfriars E.T.] (Cambridge, 1964-1981).

—— Summa Theologica, 5 vol. (Westminster, MD [repr.] 1981).

Ockham, William. Quodlibetal Questions (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999).

2.1.3. Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century Protestants

Ames, William The Marrow of Theology, trans. John Dykstra Eusden (Durham, NC, 1983).

Arminius, James. The Writings of James Arminius, 3 vol. trans. and ed. J. Nichols and W.R. Bagnall (Grand Rapids, repr. 1977)

Beza, Theodore. The Christian Faith. trans. James Clark (East Sussex, 1992).

A Little Book of Christian Questions and Responses, trans. K. M. Summers (Allison Park, PA: Pickwick, 1986).
NB: Q. 160 should read, “He means we are not to keep the works of the ceremonial law.”

Bucanus, William. Institutions of the Christian Religion. trans. R. Hill. (London, 1606).

Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion.
Available chiefly in three English editions. The Battles’ translation published in the LCC series is the standard critical edition. The older Beveridge edition is available on-line at: The Allen edition is also serviceable. The Battles’ trans. of the 1536 edn was published in English by Eerdmans in 1986. The Latin text of the Institutes is available in the Opera Selecta, 5 vol. ed. Peter Barth and W. Niesel (Munich, 1926-62) and in the Corpus Reformatorum, ed. C.G. Bretschneider. 101 vol. (Halle, 1834-1959) as well as in the Tholuck edn (Edinburgh, 1874). His commentaries are widely available in English translation in two editions.

— Calvin’s Calvinism: Treatises on the Eternal Predestination of God and the Secret Providence of God, trans., Henry Cole (Cambridge, 1856 repr.)

— Come out from among Them: Anti-Nicodemite Writings of John Calvin. Translated by Seth Skolnitksy. Geneva: Protestant Heritage Press, 2001.

— Sermons on Galatians, trans. A. Golding (London, 1574, repr. 1995).

— Sermons on Job. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1993.

— Sermons on Melchizedek and Abraham: Justification, Faith and Obedience. Translated by T. Stocker. Willow Street, PA: Old Paths, 2000.

— Treatises Against the Anabaptists etc. (Grand Rapids, 1982)

— The Bondage and Liberation of the Will. A Defence of the Orthodox Doctrine of Human Choice against Pighius. Translated by G. I. Davies. Edited by A. N. S. Lane. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996.

— Men, Women, and Order in the Church. Dallas: Presbyterian Heritage Publications, 1992.

— Concerning Scandals (Grand Rapids, 1978)

— Instruction in Faith (1537) (Phila., 1959)

— Theological Treatises (Phila., 1954)

— Tracts Tracts & Treatises 7 vol. (Grand Rapids, repr. 1983).

— Sermons on Psalm 119. Translated by TS. Audabon, NJ, 1996.

— Sermons on Ten Commandments (Grand Rapids, 1980)

— Sermons on Deuteronomy. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1987.

— Sermons on Ephesians (Edinburgh, repr 1973)

— Sermons on the Saving Work of Christ (Grand Rapids, 1950)

— Sermons on Timothy and Titus (Edinburgh, repr. 1983)

— Sermons on the Book of Micah. Translated by Benjamin Wirt Farley. Edited by Benjamin Wirt Farley. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2003.

— Ecclesiastical Advice (Edinburgh, 1991)

— Sermons on Election and Reprobation. Translated by J. Field. Willow Street, PA: Old Paths, 1996.

Chemnitz, M. Loci Theologici 2 vol. trans. J.A.O. Preus (St Louis, 1989).

Heppe, Heinrich. Reformed Dogmatics, trans. G.T. Thomson (Grand Rapids, ).
The German edn with the Latin texts is: Die Dogmatik der evangelisch-reformirten Kirche. Elberfeld, 1861.

Johnson, W.S. and J.H. Leith, ed., Reformed Reader: A Sourcebook in Christian Theology, vol.1. (Louisville, 1993).

Kidd, B.J. Documents of the Continental Reformation (Oxford, 1911).

Kolb, R. Martin Luther as Prophet, Teacher and Hero: Images of the Reformer, 1520-1620(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999).

Luther, Martin. Works. 55 vol. trans. and ed. J. Pelikan and H.T. Lehmann (Philadelphia and St. Louis,
1955-). The German and Latin texts are available in Luthers Werke Kritische Gesamtausgabe(Weimar, 1883-). There is also a six volume edition of Luther’s works called the ‘Philadelphia edition’.

— Bondage of the Will trans. Packer and Johnston (Cambridge, 1973)

Works 6 vol. (Phila., 1915)

— Three Treatises (Phila., 1970)

— Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, 1954)

Melanchthon, Philip. Loci Communes 
The Loci Communes were the first Protestant dogmatics and crucially important for that reason alone. The 1521 edn particularly represents a brilliant distillation of Luther’s theology. Exists in three English editions. The 1521 edn. is found the the Library of Christian Classics edition,Melanchthon and Bucer, and the 1543 edn is published by Concordia Publishing House. The 1555 edn is available in Melanchton on Christian DoctrineLoci Communes 1555. ed. Clyde L. Manschreck (Oxford, 1965).

— Commentary on Romans. trans. Fred Kramer (St. Louis : Concordia, 1992).

Muller, R. A., Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics 4 vol. 2nd edn (Grand Rapids, 2003).

Olevian, A Firm Foundation, trans. and ed., L. Bierma (Grand Rapids, 1995).

Perkins, William. The Work of William Perkins (Oxford, 1970)

Polanus, Amandus. The Substance of the Christian Religion. trans. E.W. (London, 1595).

Rollock, Robert. Select Works of Robert Rollock. 2 vol. ed. William M.Gunn. (Ediburgh, 1849).

Ursinus, Zacharias. Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism. trans. and ed., G. Willard (Philipsburg, 1985).

Vermigli, Peter Martyr. The Peter Martyr Library. ed. J. P. Donnelly and J. C. Mclelland (Kirksville: Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies, Truman State University.

Zwingli, H. Commentary on True and False Religion, ed., Samuel Macauley Jackson and C.N. Heller (Durham, 1981).

— and Bullinger (Library of Christian Classics) ed. G.W. Bromiley (Phila., 1953)

— Selected Works (Philadelphia, 1972).

— Early Writings (New York, 1912).

— On Providence and Other Essays, ed. S. M. Jackson, W.J. Hinke (Durham, NC, repr. 1983).

2.2. Historical Theologies

Berkhof, L., The History of Christian Doctrines (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1969).

Bradley, James E. and R.A. Muller, Church History: An Introduction to Research, Reference Works and Methods (Grand Rapids, 1995).

Bromiley, G., Historical Theology: An Introduction (Grand Rapids, 1978).

Cunningham, William. Historical Theology, 2 vol (1862. Edinburgh, repr. 1979)

Farmer, C. The Gospel of John in the Sixteenth Century (OUP, 1997).

Hägglund, Bengt, History of Theology. trans. Gene L. Lund 3rd edn (St Louis, 1968).

McGiffert, A.C. History of Christian Thought. 2 vol. (New York, 1954).

McGrath, A.E., ed., The Christian Theology Reader (Oxford: Blackwells, 1994)

Historical Theology (Oxford: Blackwells, 1998).

Iustitia Dei. A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification 2 vol. (Cambridge: CUP, 1986-)

Olson, R. The Story of Christian Theology (IVP, 1999).

Pelikan, Jaroslav. The Christian TraditionA History of the Development of Doctrine. 5 vol. Chicago, 1984.

Ritschl, Albrecht. A Critical History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification and Reconciliation. trans. John S. Black. Edinburgh, 1872.

Seeburg, R., History of Doctrines, 2 vol. (Philadelphia, 1904)

Shedd, W.G.T., A History of Christian Doctrine, 2 vol. (New York, 1909)

Tillich, Paul. A History of Christian Thought, ed. Carl E. Braaten (New York, 1972).

3. Humanism

Bainton, R. Erasmus of Christendom (New York, 1969)

Bouwsma, William J. “Renaissance and Reformation: An Essay in Their Affinities and Connections.” In Luther and the Dawn of the Modern Era. ed. Heiko Oberman (Leiden, 1974).

— The Waning of the Renaissance 1550-1640 (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000).

Copenhaver, B.P. and C.Scmitt, Renaissance Philosophy (Oxford, 1992)

Emerton, E. Humanism and Tyranny (Gloucester, MA, 1964)

Breen, Quirinius. Christianity and Humanism. Grand Rapids, 1968.

Hughes, Philip Edgcumbe. LefévrePioneer of Ecclesiastical Reform in France. Grand Rapids, 1984.

— “Jacques LeFèvre d’Etaples (c.1455-1536).” Calvinus ReformatorHis Contribution toTheologyChurch and State. Pochestroom, 1982.

Fleischer, M. The Harvest of Humanism in C. Europe (St Louis, 1992)

Kelley, Donald R. Foundations of Modern Historical Scholarship (New York, 1970)

— The Beginning of Ideology. Cambridge, 1981.

Kristeller, Paul Oskar. Renaissance Thought and its Sources, ed. Michael Mooney. New York, 1979.

Linder, Robert D. “Calvinism and Humanism: The First Generation.” Church History 44 (1975): 167-81.

Nauert, Charles G. “The Clash of Humanists and Scholastics: An Approach to Pre-Reformation Controversies.” Sixteenth Century Journal 4 (1973): 1-18.

Rummel, E. The Humanist-Scholastic Debate (Cambridge, MA, 1995)

Spitz, Lewis W. The Religious Renaissance of the German Humanists. Cambridge, MA, 1963.

— The Religious Renaissance of the German Humanists. Cambridge, Mass. 1963.

— “The Course of German Humanism.” Itinerarium ItalicumThe Profile of the ItalianReniassance in the Mirror of its European Transformations ed. H.A. Oberman and T.A. Brady. Leiden, 1975.

Trinkaus, C. The Scope of Renaissance Humanism. Ann Arbor, 1983.

4. Reformation Histories and Backgrounds

This is a good bibliography.

Bainton, R.H. The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. Boston, 1952.

Burchill, Christopher J. ‘The Urban Reformation and its Fate: Problems and Perspectives in the Consolidation of the German Protestant Movement’. The Historical Journal 27 (1984): 997-1010.

Cameron, Euan. The European Reformation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991).

Dorner, I.A. History of Protestant Theology. 2 vol. trans. George Robson and Sophia Taylor. Edinburgh, 1871.

Friedman, J. ed. RegnumReligio et RatioEssays Presented to Robert MKindon, (Kirksville, 1987).

Gregory, Brad S. Salvation at Stake: Christian Martyrdom in Early Modern Europe(Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 1999).

 Heinze, Rudolph W.   Reform and Conflict : from the Medieval World to the Wars of Religion, A.D. 1350-1648. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2005.

Kirk, James. ed. Humanism and ReformThe Church in EuropeEngland and Scotland14001643. Oxford, 1991.

Lindsay, Thomas M. A History of The Reformation. 2 vol. New York, 1922.

Littell, F. H. ed. Reformation StudiesEssays Honoring Roland HBainton (Richmond, 1962)

Oberman, H.A. and Frank A. James III Via Augustini: Augustine in the Later Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation (Leiden, 1991)

Raitt, J. ed. Shapers of Religious Traditions in GermanySwitzerlandand Poland 15001600(New Haven, 1981)

5. Reformation Studies

Avis, Paul D. L. The Church in the Theology of the Reformers. Basingstoke, 1981.

Baker, D., Reform and Reformation: England and the Continent (Oxford, 1979).

Benedict, Philip. Christ’s Church Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002).

Cameron, Euan ‘The Late Renaissance and the Unfolding Reformation in Europe’. ed. Derek Baker. Reform and ReformationEngland and the Continent c.1500– c.1750. Oxford, 1979.

— The Reformation of the Heretics (Oxford, 1984)

Chadwick, Owen. Reformation (New York, 1964)

Clark, R. S. “Regensburg and Regensburg II,” Modern Reformation (September/October, 1998).

Cochrane, Arthur C. ed. Reformed Confessions of the Sixteenth Century. Philadelphia, 1966.

Cunningham, Andrew and Ole Peter Grell, The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse: Religion, War, Famine and Death in Reformation Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).

Cunningham, William. The Reformers and the Theology of the Reformation. Edinburgh, 1967.

Dickens, A.G. English Reformation (2nd edn)

— Reformation and Society (New York, 1966)

Dixon, C. Scott, ed., The German Reformation (Oxford: Blackwell, 1999)

Ebling, Gerhard. ‘On the Doctrine of the Triplex usis legis in the Theology of the Reformation’.Word and Faith. trans. J. W. Leith. London, 1963.

Gerrish, B.A. ‘Biblical Authority and the Reformation’ Scottish Journal of Theology 10 1957: 337-51

—— ed., Reformers in Profile (Phila: Fortress, 1967)
Vignettes on late ME moral Reformers, 16c, Protestants and counter-Reformation figures.

Hall, P. ed. The Harmony of Protestant Confessions (repr. 1842, 1992)

Hillerbrand, Hans J. The World of the Reformation. London, 1975.

–.The Protestant Reformation. ed. New York, 1968.

Hsia, R. Po-Chia. Social Discipline in the Reformation: Central Europe 1550-1750. London, 1989.

Kidd, B.J. ed. Documents Illustrative of the Continental Reformation. Oxford, 1911.

Knox, R. Buick. ed. ReformationConformity and Dissent. Knox. London, 1977.

Leonard, E.G. A History of Protestantism. ed. H.H. Rowley and trans. J.M.H. Reid and R. M. Bethell. 2 vol. London, 1965-7.

Littell, Franklin H. ed., Reformation Studies. Essays in Honor of Roland H. Bainton (Richmond, 1962).

Lortz, Joseph. The Reformation in Germany. 2 vol. trans. Ronald Walls. London, 1968.

McGrath, Alister E. The Intellectual Origins of the European Reformation. Oxford, 1987.

— Reformation ThoughtAn Introduction. Oxford, 1988.

McNeill, J.T. ‘Natural Law in the Teaching of the Reformers’. Journal of Religion 26 (1946): 168-182.

Möller, Bernd. Imperial Cities and the ReformationThree Essays, trans., H.C. Erik Middlefort and Mark U. Edwards. Philadelphia, 1972.

Noll, M. ed. Confessions and Catechisms of the Reformation (Grand Rapids, 1991)

Oberman , H.A. ‘Europa Afflicta: The Reformation of the Refugees’ Archive fürReformationgeschicte 83 1992: 91-111.

— Forerunners of the ReformationThe Shape of Late Medieval Thought. Philadelphia, 1981.

— Masters of the ReformationThe Ermergence of a New Intellectual Climate in Europe. trans. D. Martin. Cambridge, 1981.

— The Dawn of the Reformation. T & T Clark: Edinburgh, 1986.

— Luther: Man Between God and the Devil. trans., Eileen Walliser-Schwarzbart. [reprint] London, 1993.

— Harvest of Medieval Theology. Cambridge, Mass, 1963.

— Luther and the Dawn of the Modern Era. Leiden, 1974.

— and T.A. Brady. ed. Itinerarium ItalicumThe Profile of the Italian Renaissance in the Mirrorof its European TransformationsDedicated to Paul Oskar Kristeller. ed. H. A. Oberman and T.A. Brady. Leiden, 1975.

— The Reformation. Roots and Ramifications. trans. Alan Colin Gow. Edinburgh, 1994.

Old, Hughes Oliphant. The Age of the Reformation. 5 vols. Vol. 4, The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures in the Worship of the Christian Church (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002).

Ozment, Steven E. ed. Reformation EuropeA Guide to Research. St. Louis, 1982.

— The Age of Reform 12501550An Intellectual and Religious History of Late Medieval andReformation Europe. London, 1980.

— ed. The Reformation in Medieval Perspective. Chicago, 1971.

— The Reformation in the CitiesThe Appeal of Protestantism to Sixteenth Century Germanyand Switzerland. London, 1975.

Pauck, W., The Heritage of the Reformation (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961).

Rupp, Gordon. Patterns of Reformation. London, 1969.

Scribner, R.W. The German Reformation. London, 1986.

Sessions, Kyle C. and Phillip N. Bebb, ed. Pietas et SocietasNew Trends in ReformationSocial HistoryEssays in Honor of Harold JGrimm (Kirksville, 1985).

Spitz, Lewis W. ed. The Protestant Reformation. Englewood Cliffs, 1966.

— The Protestant Reformation 1517-1559. New York, 1985.

— The Renaissance and Reformation Movements. 2 vol. St. Louis, 1971.

Steinmetz, David C. Reformers in the Wings. Philadelphia, 1971.

Trevor-Roper, H. R. Religion, the Reformation and Social Change. Second ed., London, 1972.

6. Luther and Lutheranism

Althaus, Paul. The Theology of Martin Luther. trans. Robert C. Schultz. Philadelphia, 1966.

Atkinson, James. The Great Light: Luther and the Reformation (Grand Rapids, 1968).

——Martin Luther and the Birth of Protestantism (London, 1968).

Bagchi, D. V. N. Luther’s Earliest Opponents: Catholic Controversialists, 1518-1525. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991.

Bainton, R.H. Here I Stand (1950).

Bornkamm, H. Luther and the Old Testament. Translated by E. C. Gritsch and R. Gritsch. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1969.

— Luther in Mid-Career 1521-1530, trans. E. T. Bachmann, ed. K. Bornkamm (Philadelphia, 1983).

Braaten, Carl E. and R. W. Jenson ed., Union with Christ: The New Finnish Interpretation of Luther (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998).

Brecht, M. Martin Luther: The Preservation of the Church 1532-1546, trans J. L. Schaaf (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993),

Cargill-Thompson, W. D. J.. The Political Thought of Martin Luther Sussex, 1984

Heinrich Denifle, Luther and Lutherdom, trans. Raymond Volz (Somerset, OH: Torch Press, 1917)

Edwards, Mark U. Jr. Luther and the False Brethren (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1975).

Estes, James Martin. Peace, Order and the Glory of God: Secular Authority and the Church in the Thought of Luther and Melanchthon, 1518-1559. Leiden: Brill, 2005.

Farthing, John L. Thomas Aquinas and Gabriel Biel: Interpretations of St. Thomas Aquinas in German Nominalism on the Eve of the Reformation. Durham and London, 1988.

Gerrish, B.A. Grace and ReasonA Study in the Theology of Luther. Oxford, 1962

Green, Lowell C. “The Question of Theosis in the Perspective of Lutheran Christology,” inAll Theology Is Christology: Essays in Honor of David P. Scaer, edited by Dean O. Wenthe and David P. Scaer (Ft Wayne, IN: Concordia Theological Seminary Press, 2000)

Headley, J.M. Luther’s Use of Church History (New Haven, 1963).

Kolb, R. Martin Luther as Prophet, Teacher and Hero: Images of the Reformer 1520-1620(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999).

Loewenich, Walther von. Luther’s Theology of the Cross. trans. H. J. A. Bouman (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1976).

Lohse, Bernhard. Martin LutherAn Introduction to His Life and Work. Edinburgh, 1986.

— Martin Luther’s Theology: Its Historical and Systematic Development (Phila: Fortress, 1999).

Mackinnon, James. Luther and the Reformation. 4 vol. London, 1925-30.

Marty, Martin E. Martin Luther. New York: Viking Penguin, 2004.

McGrath, Alister E. Luthers Theology of the CrossMartin Luthers Theological Breakthrough. Oxford, 1985.

McSoreley, Harry J. Luther: Right or Wrong? An Ecumenical-Theological Study of Luther’s Major Work, the Bondage of the Will. Toronto, Amsterdam, London, and Minneapolis: Newman Press and Augsburg Publishing House, 1969.

Mannerma, Tuomo, ed., Tuomo Mannermaa and Kirsi Stjerna eds, Christ Present In Faith: Luther’s View Of Justification (Augsburg Fortress Publishers, repr. 2005).

Marius, R. Martin Luther: Christian Between God and Death (Harvard, 1999).

Oberman, H.A. Luther: Man Between God and the Devil (New Haven, 1989)

Pelikan, J. ed. Interpreters of Luther (Philadelphia, 1968).

Obedient Rebels: Catholic Substance and Protestant Principle in Luther’s Reformation (New York, 1964).

Plass, Ewald M., ed. What Luther Says. 3 vols. St Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959.

Preus, Robert D. The Theology of Post-Reformation Lutheranism A Study of Theological Prolegomena. 2 vol. St. Louis, 1970.

— The Inspiration of ScriptureA Study of the theology of the Seventeenth Century Lutheran Dogmaticians (Mankato, MN, 1955).

Preus, H. A. The Communion of Saints: A Study of the Origin and Development of Luther’s Doctrine of the Church (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1948)

Rupp, G. Luther’s Progress to the Diet of Worms 1521 (London, 1951)

The Righteousness of God (London, 1953)

Schmid, Heinrich. The Doctrinal Theology of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Translated by Charles A. Hay and Henry E. Jacobs. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lutheran Publication Society, 1889.

Spitz, Lewis P. and Wenzel Lohff ed. DiscordDialogue and ConcordStudies in the LutheranReformations Formula of Concord (Philadelphia, 1977).

Steinmetz, David. C. Luther and StaupitzAn Essay in the Intellectual Origins of the ProtestantReformation. Durham, N.C. 1980.

—— Luther in Context (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1996)

James M. Stayer, ed., Martin Luther, German Saviour, Mc Gill-Queen’s Studies in the History of Religion (Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2000)

Trueman, Carl R. “Is the Finnish Line a New Beginning? A Critical Assessment of the Reading of Luther Offered by the Helsinki Circle,” Westminster Theological Journal 65 (2003): 231-244

Watson, Philip S. Let God Be God! An Interpretation of the Theology of Martin Luther. London: The Epworth Press, 1947.

Wengert, Timothy J., ed. Harvesting Martin Luther’s Reflections on Theology, Ethics, and the Church. Edited by Paul Rorem, Lutheran Quarterly Books. Grand Rapids and Cambridge: Eerdmans, 2004.

7. Tyndale Studies

Tyndale, William. The Works of William Tyndale. Edited by Henry Walter. 2 vols, The Parker Society for the Publication of the Works of the Fathers and Early Writers of the Reformed English Church. Cambridge: The University Press, 1848-1849.

Cargill Thompson, W.D.J. ‘The Two Regiments: The Continental Setting of William Tyndale’s Political Thought’. Reform and ReformationEngland and the Continent c.1500– c.1750. ed. Derek Baker. Oxford, 1979.

Daniell, David, William Tyndale: A Biography. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1994.

Dick, John A. R.,and Anne Richardson, ed., William Tyndale and the Law. Kirksville: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1994.

Edwards, Brian H., God’s Outlaw. Grand Rapids: Evangelical Press, 1976.

McGiffert, Michael. ‘William Tyndale’s Conception of Covenant’. Journal of EcclesiasticalHistory 32 (1981): 167-84.

Trueman, C. R. Luther’s Legacy: Salvation and English Reformers 1525-1556 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994).

8. Melanchthon Studies

Breen, Q. ‘The Subordination of Philosophy to Rhetoric in Melanchthon’ ARG 43 (1952)

Fraenkel, Pierre. Testimonia PatrumThe Function of the Patristic Argument in the Theology ofPhilip Melanchthon. Geneva, 1961.

Green, L. ‘Erasmus, Luther and Melanchthon on the Magnus Consensus: The Problem of the Old and the New in the Reformation and Today’ The Lutheran Quarterly 27 (1975).

Maag, Karin, ed., Melanchthon in Europe: His Work and Influence Beyond Wittenberg (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999).

Manschrek, C.L. Melanchthonthe Quiet Reformer. New York, 1958.

— The Bible in Melanchthon’s Philosophy of Education’ Journal of Bible and Religion 23 (1955).

Meijering, E.P. Melanchthon and Patristic Thought. The Doctrines of Christ, Grace, the Trinity and the Creation. Leiden, 1983.

Meyer, Carl S. ‘Melanchthon, Theologian of Ecumenism’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History 27 (1966).

Reed, A.C. ‘Melanchthon’s 1521 Loci Communes: The First Protestant Apology’ The Churchman

Rogness, Michael. Philip Melanchthon. Reformer Without Honor. Minneapolis, 1969.

Scheible, H. ‘Luther and Melanchthon’ trans. T. Wengert Lutheran Quarterly (1990)

Wengert, Timothy J., Law and Gospel: Philip Melanchthon’s Debate with John of Agricola of Eisleben over Poenitentia. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997.

— Human Freedom, Christian RighteousnessPhilip Melanchthon’s Exegetical Dispute with Erasmus of Rotterdam. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Wengert is probably the leading scholar of Melanchthon in the English speaking world.

Zuck, Lowell H. ‘Heinrich Heppe: A Melanchthonian Liberal in the Nineteenth Century German Reformed Church’. Church History 51 (1982): 419-33.

— ‘Melanchthonianism and Reformed Theology in the Late 16th Century’ Controversy andConciliationThe Palatinate Reformation15591618. ed. Derk Visser. Pittsburgh, 1986.

9. Calvin and Calvinism

Anderson, Marvin W. ‘Peter Martyr, Reformed Theologian (1542-1562): His Letters to Heinrich Bullinger and John Calvin’. Sixteenth Century Journal 4 (1973): 41-64.

Armstrong, Brian G. Calvinism and the Amyraut HeresyProtestant Scholasticism andHumanism in SeventeenthCentury France. Madison, 1969.

Backus, Irena. ‘The Teaching of Logic in Two Protestant Academies at the End of the Sixteenth Century. The Reception of Zarabella in Strasbourg and Geneva’ Archiv fürReformationgeschicte 80 (1989): 240-51.

Balke, W. Calvin and the Anabaptist Radicals. trans. W.J. Heynen (Grand Rapids, 1981).

Baird, Henry Martyn. Theodre BezaThe Counsellor of the French Reformation. New York, 1899.

Barth, Karl., The Theology of John Calvin, trans. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids, 1995).

Battles, Ford Lewis. ‘God Was Accommodating Himself to Human Capacity’. Interpretation 31 (1977): 19-38.

— ‘Calculus Fidei’. Calvinus Ecclesiae Doctor. ed. W. Neuser. Kampen, 1978.

— The Piety of John Calvin (Grand Rapids, 1978)

Bavinck, Herman. ‘Calvin and Common Grace’ Calvin and the Reformation trans. G. Vos. London, 1909.

Beardsley III. John W. Reformed DogmaticsJWollebiusGVoetiusFTurretin. New York, 1965.

Beeke, Joel R. Assurance of FaithCalvinEnglish Puritanism and the Dutch SecondReformation. New York, 1991.

— ‘Faith and Assurance in the Heidelberg Catechism and its Primary Composers: A Fresh Look at the Kendall Thesis’, Calvin Theological Journal 27 (1992): 39-67.

Bierma, Lyle D. ‘Covenant or Covenants in the Theology of Olevianus?’ Calvin TheologicalJournal 22 (1987): 228-250.

— ‘Federal Theology in the Sixteenth Century: Two Traditions?’ Westminster TheologicalJournal 45 (1983): 304-321.

— ‘Olevianus and the Authorship of the Heidelberg Catechism: Another Look’. SixteenthCentury Journal 13 (1982):17-27.

— ‘The Covenant Theology of Caspar Olevian’. Ph.D. Diss. Duke University, 1980.

— ‘The Role of Covenant Theology in Early Reformed Orthodoxy’. The Sixteenth CenturyJournal 21 (1990): 453-462.

— ‘Vester Grundt and the Origins of the Heidelberg Catechism’ Later CalvinismInternationalPerspectives Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies vol. 22 ed. W. Fred Graham Kirksville, MO, 1994.

— ed. An Introduction to the Heidelberg Catechism: Sources, History, and Theology. Edited by Richard A. Muller, Texts and Studies in Reformation and Post-Reformation Thought (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005).

Bouwsma, William J. ‘Calvin and the Renaissance Crisis of Knowing’. Calvin TheologicalJournal 17 (1982): 190-211

— John CalvinA Sixteenth Century Portrait. Oxford, 1988.

Bray, John S. Theodore Bezas Doctrine of Predestination. Nieuwkoop, 1975.

Breen, Quirinus. John CalvinA Study in French Humanism. Grand Rapids, 1931

Burchill, Christopher, J. ‘On the Consolation of a Christian Scholar: Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583) and the Reformation in Heidelberg’. Journal of Ecclesiastical History 37 (1986): 565-583.

— ‘Girolamo Zanchi: Portrait of a Reformed Theologian and His Work’. Sixteenth Century Journal 15 (1984): 185-207.

Butin, Philip. W. , ‘John Calvin’s Humanist Image of Popular Late-Medieval Piety and its Contribution to Reformed Worship’. Calvin Theological Journal 29 (1994): 419-31.

— Revelation, Redemption and Response. Calvin’s Trinitarian Understanding of the Divine-Human Relationship. New York, 1995.

Clark, R  Scott, “The Catholic-Calvinist Trinitarianism of Caspar Olevian,” Westminster Theological Journal 61(1999): 15-39.

— “The Authority of Reason in the Later Reformation: Scholasticism in Caspar Olevian and Antoine de La Faye,”Protestant ScholasticismEssays in Reassessment, ed., Carl Trueman, R. Scott Clark. Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 1999.

— “Calvin and the Lex Naturalis,” Stulos Theological Journal 6 (1998): 1-22.

— & J. R. Beeke, “Ursinus, Oxford and the Westminster Divines.” The Westminster Confession into the 21st Century: Essays in Remembrance of the 350th Anniversary of the Publication of the Westminster Confession of Faith, ed. J. Ligon Duncan and Duncan Rankin. Reformed Academic Press, forthcoming.

— “Ridley, Latimer, and Cranmer: The Oxford Martyrs,” Reformation and Revival: A Quarterly Journal for Church Leadership: The Church, 7 (1998): 167-79.

— “The Belgic Confession – Article 14: Of the Creation and Fall,” Christian Observer 173.23 (December 1, 1995): 23.

— “The Belgic Confession- Article 15: Sin,” Christian Observer 173.24 (December, 1, 1995)

— “The Evangelical Fall from the Means of Grace,” The Compromised Church, ed. John Armstrong (Wheaton: Crossway, 1998).

— Caspar Olevian and the Substance of the Covenant: The Double Benefit of Christ. Rutherford Studies in Historical Theology, ed. David F. Wright and Donald Macleod (Edinburgh: Rutherford House, 2005).

—  “The Benefits of Christ: Double Justification in Protestant Theology before the Westminster Assembly,” in The Faith Once Delivered: Celebrating the Legacy of Reformed Systematic Theology and the Westminster Assembly (Essays in Honor of Dr. Wayne Spear), ed. Anthony T. Selvaggio (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2006)

Collinson, Patrick. The Elizabethan Puritan Movement. London, 1967.

Dent, C.M. Protestant Reformers in Elizabethan Oxford (Oxford, 1985)

deGreef, W. The Writings of John Calvin: An Introductory Guide trans. L.D. Bierma (Grand Rapids, 1993)

Dever, Mark E. Richard Sibbes. Puritanism and Calvinism in Late Elizabethan and Early Stuart England. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 2000.

Donnelly, John Patrick. ‘Calvinist Thomism’. Viator 7 (1976): 441-55.

— ‘Immortality and Method in Ursinus’s Theological Ambiance’ Controversy and Conciliation:The Palatinate Reformation15591618. ed. Derk Visser. Pittsburgh, 1986.

— ‘Italian Influences on the Development of Calvinist Scholasticism’. Sixteenth Century Journal7 (1976): 81-101.

— Calvinism and Scholasticism in Vermiglis Doctrine of Man and Grace. Leiden, 1976.

— ‘Immortality and Method in Ursinus’s Theological Ambiance’. Controversy and Conciliation:The Palatinate Reformation15591618. ed. Derk Visser. Pittsburgh, 1986.

Dowey, Edward A. The Knowledge of God in Calvins Theology. New York, 1952.

Duffield, G. ed. John Calvin. Courtenay Studies in Reformation Theology, I. Appleford, 1966.

Duke, Alistair, Gillian Lewis and Andrew Pettegree. ed. Calvinism in Europe 15401610ACollection of Documents. Manchester, 1992.

Eire, C.M.N. War Against the IdolsThe Reformation of Worship from Erasmus to Calvin. Cambridge, 1986.

Farthing, John L. ‘De Coniungio Spirituali: Jerome Zanchi on Ephesians 5:22-33′. Sixteenth Century Journal 24 (1993): 621-52.

— ‘Foedus Evangelicum: Jerome Zanchi on the Covenant’. Calvin Theological Journal 29 (1994): 149-67.

— ‘Christ and the Eschaton: the Reformed Eschatology of Jerome Zanchi’. Later Calvinism. International PerspectivesSixteenth Century Essays and Studies Vol., 22. ed., W. Fred Graham. Kirksville, 1994.

Foxgrover, David, ed. Calvin and the Company of Pastors, Calvin Studies Society Papers 2003. Grand Rapids: Calvin Studies Society, 2004.

Ganoczy, Alexandre. The Young Calvin. trans. David Foxgrover and Wade Provo. Edinburgh, 1977.

George, Timothy. ed. John Calvin and the ChurchA Prism of Reform. Louisvile, 1990.

Gerrish, B.A. ‘John Calvin and the Reformed Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper’. McCormickQuarterly 22 (1969): 85-98.

— Grace and Gratitude. Edinburgh, 1993.

— B. A. Gerrish, “John Calvin on Martin Luther,” in Interpreters of Luther: Essays in Honor of Wilhelm Pauck, ed. J. Pelikan (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1968)

Godfrey, W. Robert. ‘Biblical Authority in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries: A Question of Transition’, Scripture and Truth ed. D.A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge (Grand Rapids, 1983).

— ‘Reformed Thought on the Extent of the Atonement to 1618’. Westminster TheologicalJournal 37 (1975): 133-71.

— ‘Tensions within International Calvinism: The Debate on the Atonement at the Synod of Dordt 1618-1619’. Ph.D. Diss. Stanford University, 1974.

Graham, W. Fred ed. Later CalvinismInternational Perspectives. Kirksville, 1994

Grohman, D.D., The Genevan Reactions to the Saumur Doctrines of Hypothetical Universalism: 1635-1685. Th.D. thesis, Knox College, Toronto School of Theology, 1971.

Helm, Paul. Calvin and the Calvinists. Edinburgh, 1982.

— ‘Calvin (and Zwingli) on Divine Providence’. Calvin Theological Journal 29 (1994): 388-405.

Heppe, Heinrich. Reformed Dogmatics Set Out and Illustrated from the Sources. trans. G.T. Thomson. ed. E. Bizer. London. 1950.

Höpfl, Harro. The Christian Polity of John Calvin. Cambridge, 1982.

Jeon, J. K. Covenant theology : John Murray’s (1898-1975) and Meredith G. Kline’s (1922-) Response to the Historical Development of Federal Theology in Reformed Thought (Lanham, MD: University Press of America, 1999).

Johnson, John H. Leith and Robert A., ed. Papers Presented at the Ninth Colloquium on Calvin Studies, Calvin Studies Conference. Davidson College and Davidson Presbyterian Church, 1998.

Jones, S. Calvin and the Rhetoric of Piety (Louisville: WJKP, 1995).

Kantzer, Kenneth S. ‘John Calvin’s Theory of the Knowledge of God and the Word of God’. Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University, 1950.

Karlberg, Mark W. ‘Covenant Theology and the Westminster Tradition’. WestminsterTheological Journal 54 (1992): 135-152.

— ‘Reformed Interpretation of the Mosaic Covenant’. Westminster Theological Journal 43 (1980): 1-57.

— ‘The Mosaic Covenant and the Concept of Works in Reformed Hermeneutics: A Historical-Critical Analysis with Particular Attention to Early Covenant Eschatology’. Ph.D. Diss. Westminster Theological Seminary, 1980.

Kendall, R. T. Calvin and English Calvinism to 1649. Oxford, 1979.

Kingdon, Robert M. Adultery and Divorce in Calvin’s Geneva. Vol. 118, Harvard Historical Studies. Cambridge, MA and London: Harvard University Press, 1995.

Klauber, Martin I. ‘Continuity and Discontinuity in Post-Reformation Reformed Theology: An Evaluation of the Muller Thesis’. Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 33 (1990): 467-75.

— ‘Between Protestant Orthodoxy and Rationalism: Fundamental Articles in the Early Career of Jean LeClerc’. The Journal of the History of Ideas 54 (1993): 611-36.

Lachman, David C. “The Marrow Controversy 1718-1723: An Historical and Theological Analysis,” Ph.D. Thesis, University of St. Andrews, 1979.

Lane, A.N.S. ‘Calvin’s Use of the Father’s and Medievals’. Calvin Theological Journal 16 (1981): 149-205.

–. ‘The Quest for the Historical Calvin’. The Evangelical Quarterly 55. (1983): 95-113.

— John Calvin: Student of the Church Fathers (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999).

Leith, John H., ed. Calvin Studies 8: The Westminster Confession in Current Thought, Papers Presented at at the Colloquium on Calvin Studies. Davidson, NC, 1996.

Leithart, Peter J. ‘Stoic Elements in Calvin’s Doctrine of the Christian Life. Part I: Original Corruption, Natural Law, and the Order of the Soul’. Westminster Theological Journal. 55 (1993): 31-54.

— ‘Stoic Elements in Calvin’s Doctrine of the Christian Life. Part II. Mortification’. WestminsterTheological Journal. 55 (1993): 191-208.

— ‘Stoic Elements in Calvin’s Doctrine of the Christian Life. Part III. Christian Moderation’.Westminster Theological Journal. 56 (1994): 59-85.

— ‘That Eminent Pagan: Calvin’s Use of Cicero in Institutes 1.1.5’. Westminster TheologicalJournal. 52 (1990): 1-12.

Letham, Robert, W. ‘Amandus Polanus: A Neglected Theologian?’ The Sixteenth CenturyJournal. 21 (1990): 463-476.

— ‘The Foedus Operum: Some Factors Accounting For Its Development’. The SixteenthCentury Journal. 14 (1983): 457-467.

— ‘Theodore Beza: A Reassessment’. The Scottish Journal of Theology 40 (1987): 25-40.

Lillback, Peter A. ‘The Continuing Conundrum: Calvin and the Conditionality of the Covenant’.Calvin Theological Journal 29 (1994): 42-74.

— ‘Ursinus’ Development of the Covenant of Creation: A Debt to Melanchthon or Calvin?’Westminster Theological Journal. 43 (1981): 247-288.

— The Binding of God: Calvin’s Role in the Development of Covenant Theology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001).

Manetsch, Scott M. Theodore Beza and the Quest for Peace in France, 1572-1598. Edited by Heiko Oberman. Vol. 74, Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought (Leiden, Boston, Koln: Brill, 2000).

McGiffert, Michael. ‘The Perkensian Moment of Federal Theology’. Calvin Theological Journal29 (1994): 117-48.

McGrath, Alister E. A Life of John CalvinA Study in the Shaping of Western Culture. Oxford, 1990.

McKim, Donald K. ed. Encyclopedia of the Reformed Faith. Louisville, 1992.

— ‘William Perkins and the Theology of the Covenant’. Studies of the Church in History. ed., Horton Davies. Allison Park, Pennsylvania, 1983.

McNeill, J.T. ‘The Church in Sixteenth Century Reformed Theology’. Journal of Religion 22 (1942): 251-69.

— The History and Character of Calvinism. Oxford, 1954.

Muller, Richard A. ‘Duplex Cognitio Dei in the Theology of Early Reformed Orthodoxy’.Sixteenth Century Journal 10 (1979): 51-61.

— ‘Fides and Cognitio in Relation to the Problem of Intellect and Will in the Theology of John Calvin’. Calvin Theological Journal 25 (1990): 207-224.

— ‘Perkins’ A Golden Chaine: Predestinarian System or Schematized Ordo Salutis?’ SixteenthCentury Journal 9 (1978): 69-81

— ‘Christ in the Eschaton: Calvin and Moltmann on the Duration of the Munus Regium‘,Harvard Theological Review 74 (1981): 31-59.

Muller, Richard A. God, Creation and Providence in the Thought of Jacob Arminius. Grand Rapids, 1991.

— The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of a Theological Tradition (Oxford: OUP, 2000).

— After Calvin: Studies in the Development of a Theological Tradition, Oxford Studies in Historical Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003).

Christ and the Decree: Christology and Predestination in Reformed Theology from Calvin to Perkins ( Grand Rapids, 1986).

Murray, John. ‘Calvin’s Doctrine of Creation’. Westminster Theological Journal 17 (1954): 21-43.

— Calvin on Scripture and Divine Sovereignty. Grand Rapids, 1960.

Naphy, William G. Calvin and the Consolidation of the Genevan Reformation. Manchester, 1994.

Neuser, Wilhelm H. ed. Calvinus Sacrae Scripturae. Grand Rapids, 1994.

— ‘Calvin’s Teaching on the Notae Fidelium: An Unnoticed Part of the Institutio 4.1.8′. trans. Mark S. Burrows. In Probing the Reformed TraditionHistorical Studies in Honor of Edward A.DoweyJr. Louisville, 1989.

Nicole, Roger. ‘The Doctrine of Definite Atonement in the Heidelberg Catechism’. GordonReview 3 (1964): 138-45.

— ‘John Calvin’s view of the Extent of the Atonement’, Westminster Theological Journal 47 (1985): 197-225.

Niesel, W. The Theology of Calvin. trans. Knight. Philadelphia, 1956.

Nijenhuis, Willem. ‘Calvin and the Augsburg Confession’, Ecclesia Reformata. Studies on the Reformation. trans. Mary Foran. Leiden, 1972.

— ‘Calvin’s “Subito Conversio”: Notes on a Hypothesis”, Ecclesia ReformataStudies on the Reformation. vol., 2. Leiden, 1994.

Nischan, Bodo. ‘”The Fractio Panis’: A Reformed Communion Practice in Late Reformation Germany’. Church History53 (1984): 1729.

Nugent, D. Ecumenism in the Age of the ReformationThe Colloquy of Poissy. Cambridge, Mass. 1974.

Oberman, H.A. ‘Initia Calvini: The Matrix of Calvin’s Reformation’. Calvinus Sacrae ScripturaeProfessor. ed. Wilhelm H. Neuser. Grand Rapids, 1994.

— ‘The “Extra” Dimension in the Theology of Calvin’ Journal of Ecclesiastical History 21 (1970): 43-64.

Packer, J.I. ‘Calvin the Theologian’. In John CalvinA Collection of Essays‘. Grand Rapids, 1966.

Parker, T.H.L. The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God. London, 1952.

— John Calvin: A Biography (Philadelpia:Westminster Press, 1975).

Partee, Charles. Calvin and Classical Philosophy. Leiden, 1977.

Peterson, Robert A. Calvin’s Doctrine of the Atonement. Phillipsburg, N.J., 1983.

Packer, J. I. The Redemption and Restoration of Man in the Thought of Richard Baxter: A Study in Puritan Theology, Studies in Evangelical History and Thought. Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 2003.

Platt, John. Reformed Thought and Protestant Scholasticism. Leiden, 1982.

Porter, C.W. Reformation and Reaction in Tudor Cambridge. Cambridge, 1958.

Prestwich, Menna. ed. International Calvinism 15411715 (Oxford, 1985).

Raitt, Jill. ‘Three Inter-Related Principles in Calvin’s Unique Doctrine of Infant Baptism’.Sixteenth Century Journal. 11 (1980): 51-62.

— The Colloquy of MontbeliardReligion and Politics in the Sixteenth Century. Oxford, 1993.

— The Eucharistic Theology of Theodore Beza. Chambersburg, PA. 1972.

Rainbow, J. H. The Will of God and the Cross (Allison Park, PA, 1990).

Reid, W. Stanford, “Justification by Faith According to John Calvin,” Westminster Theological Journal 42 (1980): 290–307.

Schaefer, Paul. “The Spiritual Brotherhood on the Habits of the Heart: Cambridge Protestants and the Doctrine of Sanctification from William Perkins to Thomas Shepard.” DPhil. thesis. Oxford University, 1994.

Schnucker, R.V. CalvinianaThe Ideas and Influence of John Calvin. Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Publishers, 1988.

— ed. CalvinianaIdeas and Influence of Jean Calvin (Kirksville, 1988).

Tamburello, D.E. Union with Christ (Louisville, 1994)

Trueman, C. R. and R. S. Clark, ed. Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment. Carlisle, UK: Paternoster, 1999.

van Asselt, W. and Eef Dekker, ed., Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise(Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001).

van Ruler, J.A. The Crisis of Causality: Voetius and Descartes on God, Nature and Change(Leiden: Brill, 1995).

van Stam, F. P., The Controversy over the Theology of Saumur, 1635-1650 Disrupting Debates Among the Huguenots in Complicated Circumstances (Amsterdam: Holland University Press, 1988).

von Rohr, John. The Covenant of Grace in Puritan Thought (Atlanta, 1986).

Cornelis P. Venema, “The Twofold Nature of the Gospel in Calvin’s Theology: The Duplex Gratia Dei and the Interpretation of Calvin’s Theology,” Ph.D. Diss. (Princeton: Princeton Theological Seminary, 1985).

Vos, G. ‘The Doctrine of the Covenant in Reformed Theology’. Redemptive History and BiblicalInterpretationThe Shorter Writings of Geerhardus Vos. trans. and ed. Richard B. Gaffin. Phillipsburg, 1980.

Wallace, Ronald S. Calvins Doctrine of Word and Sacrament. Edinburgh, 1953

Warfield, Benjamin B. Calvin and Calvinism. New York, 1931.

Weir, David A. The Origins of the Federal Theology in Sixteenth Century Reformation Thought. Oxford, 1990.

Wendel, Francois. CalvinOrigins and Development of His Religious Thought. trans. Philip Mairet. London, 1965.

Willis, David E. Calvins Catholic ChristologyThe Function of the SoCalled ExtraCalvinisticum in Calvins Theology. Leiden, 1966.

Zachman, Randall C. The Assurance of Faith in the Theology of Martin Luther and JohnCalvin. Philadelphia, 1993.

10. Zwingli and Zwinglian Studies

Baker, J. Wayne. Covenant and Community in the Thought of Heinrich Bullinger. Philadelphia, 1980.

Büsser, Fritz. ‘Bullinger and 1566’. Conflict and Conciliation: The Palatinate Reformation, 1559-1618. ed. Derk Visser. Pittsburgh, 1986.

Gordon, Bruce, and Emidio Campi, eds. Architect of Reformation: An Introduction to Heinrich Bullinger, 1504-1575. Edited by Richard A. Muller, Texts and Studies in Reformation and Post-Reformation Thought (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004).

McCoy, Charles S. and J. Wayne Baker. Fountainhead of FederalismHeinrich Bullinger andthe Covenantal Tradition with a Translation of De Testamento seu Foedere Dei Unico etAeterno (1534). Louisville, 1991.

Stephens, W. P. The Theology of Huldrych Zwingli. Oxford, 1984.

Venema, Cornelis. ‘Heinrich Bullinger’s Correspondence on Calvin’s Doctrine of Predestination’. Sixteenth Century Journal. 17 (1986): 435-450.

Wesel-Roth, Ruth. Thomas Erastus. Lahr-Baden, 1954

11. Bucer

Martin Bucer, Basic Instruction in Christian Love, translated by P. T. Fuhrmann (Richmond: John Knox Press, 1952).

Eells, Hastings. Martin Bucer (New York: Russell and Russell, repr. 1971)

Joel Edward Kok, “The Influence of Martin Bucer on John Calvin’s Interpretation of Romans: A Comparative Case Study,” Ph. D. diss. (Duke University, 1993).

Greschat, Martin. Martin Bucer: A Reformer and His Times. Translated by Stephen E. Buckwalter. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2004.

Stephens, W.P. The Holy Spirit in the Theology of Martin Bucer (Cambridge, 1970).

Wright, D.F., ed., Common Places of Martin Bucer (Abingdon: Sutton Courtenay Press, 1971).

— ed., Martin Bucer: Reforming Church and Community (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).

12. Counter-Reformation

Bagchi, D.V.N. Luther’s Earliest Opponents (Phila: John Knox Press)

Dickens, A.G. The Counter Reformation. London, 1968.

Kidd, B.J. The Counter Reformation 15501600. London, 1933.

Schroeder, H.J. ed. The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent (Rockford, 1978)

13. Anabaptists and Radicals

Littell, Franklin H. The Origins of Sectarian Protestantism (New York, 1964).

Williams, G. H. The Radical Reformation (Phila., 1962; rev. repr. Kirksville, 1994)

Simons, Menno. The Complete Writings of Menno Simons (C. 1496-1561). Translated by Leonard Verduin. Edited by John Christian Wenger. Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1956.

14. Cranmer

MacCulloch, D. Thoomas Cranmer: A Life (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1996).
State of the art.

Ayris, P., D. Selwyn, Thomas Cranmer: Churchman and Scholar (London: Boydell and Brewer, 1999).

Ridley, J., Thomas Cranmer (Oxford: OUP, 1962),
The older, standard work.

G. Bromiley, Thomas Cranmer Theologian (New York:OUP, 1956).

Brooks, Peter Newman, Cranmer in Context (Cambridge: CUP, 1989).

15. Knox

MacGregor, G. The Thundering Scot: A Portrait of John Knox (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1957).

Ridley, J., Knox (Oxford: OUP, 1968).

Sefton, Jinkins, Torrance, John Knox (1993)

Reid, W. S. Trumpeter of God: a Biography of John Knox (New York: Scribner, 1974).

HT602 Patristics Seminar

Course Description Readings in and discussion of primary sources in the development of Patristic theology. Fall semester. 2 credits.

—Academic Goals:

  • To enable the student to read well, i.e., thoughtfully, carefully, and accurately primary texts in patristic theology and to intereact intelligently with relevant secondary literature in the field.
  • The student “demonstrates understanding of the dogmatic (theological) development in the history of the church” (Source: WSC Student Learning Outcomes).

—Pastoral Goals:

    • The student “exhibits growing integrity, teachability/humility, perseverance, self-discipline” (Source: WSC Student Learning Outcomes).
    • The student “gives reasons for convictions rather than merely asserting them.” (Source:WSC Student Learning Outcomes).

Required Reading (see schedule below)

      1. Michael Holmes, Apostolic Fathers (Grand Rapids, Baker) (all)
      2. Tertullian, Against Marcion (ANF 3, 271–344)
      3. Tertullian, Against Praxeas (ANF 3, 597–627)
      4. Chrysostom, On Romans (NPNF, series 1, vol 11, 335–408)
      5. Gregory of Nazianzen, Oration on Holy Baptism (NPNF series 2 vol 7, 360–78)
      6. Athanasius, On the Incarnation of the Word (NPNF, series 2, vol 4, 36–67)
      7. Athanasius, Festal Letter 39 (NPNF, series 2, vol 4, 551–52)
      8. Augustine, De doctrina Christiana (NPNF, series 1, vol 2, 519–97)


Hour/Date Author/Topic Leader
1/Sep Historiography rsc
2/Sep Historiography rsc
3/Sep Ap Fathers, 33–131 (1 Clem) Student
4/Sep Ap Fathers, 132–65 (2 Clem) Student
5/Sep Ap Fathers, 166–271 (Ignatius 1) Student
6/Sep Ignatius (2) Student
7/Sep Ap Father, 272–343 (Polycarp 1) Student
8/Sep Polycarp (2) Student
9/Oct Polycarp (3) Student
10/Oct Ap Fathers, 334–69 (Didache) Student
11/Oct Ap Fathers, 370–441 (Barnabas) Student
12/Oct Barnabas (2) Student
13/Oct Ap Fathers 442–685 (Shepherd 1) Student
14/Oct Shepherd 2 Student
15/Oct Ap Fathers, 686–719 (Diognetus 1) Student
16/Oct Diognetus (2) Student
17/Nov Tertullian (Adv Marc) Student
18/Nov Tertullian, Adv Prax Student
19/Nov Chrysostom, Romans Student
20/Nov Gregory of Nazianzen (Oration) Student
21/Nov Athanasius (Incarnation/Canon) Student
22/Nov Augustine (De Doctrina) Student
23/Nov Augustine (2) Student
24-26/Nov Papers Student

Suggested Reading

    1. Irena Backus, The Reception of the Church Fathers in the West: From the Carolingians to the Maurists (Leiden: Brill, 1997), volume 2, part 3 (Renaissance, Reformation, Counter-Reformation).
    2. ——”Thomas Bradwardine (c. 1290–1349) and the Church Fathers” Studia patristica28 (1993): 161–68.
    3. —— “The Bible and the Fathers according to Abraham Scultetus (1566–1624) and Andre Rivet (1571/73–1651): The Case of Basil of Caesarea” Patristik in der Bibelexegese des 16. Jahrhunderts 231 (1999).
    4. —— “Irenaeus, Calvin and Calvinist Orthodoxy: The Patristic Manual of Abraham Scultetus (1598)” Reformation and Renaissance Review 1 (1999): 41–53.
    5. —— “Calvin and the Greek Fathers” Continuity and Change (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 253–276.
    6. Moreschini, Claudio and Enrico Norelli. Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature: a Literary History. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005.
    7. Drobner, Hubertus R. The Fathers of the Church: a Comprehensive Introduction. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007.

The class and paper schedule is distributed via populi

Course Structure

Each class session will involve discussion of the assigned readings for that week. Each week a student will be assigned to lead discussion. About midway through the semester students will begin presenting papers in the second hour of class.

Course Requirements:

  • It is impossible to benefit from or participate in this course without doing the reading.
  • After the initial orientation, each class session will be led by a student who shall have prepared a brief (limit 1,000 word) seminar paper analyzing an assigned reading or introducing an assigned author/reading. Every student shall produce an outline of the assigned reading for the class session. Each member must bring to class a hardcopy of the readings assigned for that session.
  • Each student will present a research paper to the seminar. Papers will be distributed to the seminar no later than 24 hours before the seminar in which the paper is to be read. Papers will be revised in light of comments and submitted to the instructor by 10AM on the last day of class. Papers must follow the requirements laid out in the Essay on the Writing of Essays.Word limit: 2500 words (of text, not including footnotes).Grades will be determined on the basis of class participation, seminar leadership, and the seminar paper.


  • Students who take class notes by computer tend to create a large, detailed transcript but they also tend not to analyze the information they are receiving. They hear the lecture but they do not listen to what is being said. In such a case, it is difficult to think about and interact with what is being said. As a consequence, students end the course with a large transcript of material with which they are not intimately familiar. This means that students have only reading week to master a large amount of relatively unfamilar class material for the final exam.
  • The student who takes notes by hand must synthesize and prioritize material. As a result, the student with handwritten notes has relatively less material to review before the exam. An informal survey of students with handwritten notes suggests that they felt better prepared for the final exam than they had with a large transcript.
  • It is not wise to rely on the class notes of others or upon study group (e.g., Google Doc) answers. You will be most successful if you do your own work.


Assertion of Intellectual Property Rights

The instructor holds the copyright to all course lectures and original course materials. This copyright extends to student notes and summaries that substantially reflect the lectures or original course materials. Course lectures and materials are made available for the personal use of students only and may not be recorded or otherwise distributed (including the publication of student notes or summaries on social media) in any way for commercial or non-commercial purposes without the express written permission of the instructor.

CH601 Ancient Church

Course Description 

A study of the developing theology, ecclesiology, piety, and worship of the Christian church from the close of the apostolic age to 600 A.D. Special attention will be given to primary sources. Fall semester. 2 credits.

Course Goals

—Academic Goals:

    • To enable the student to understand and discuss intelligently the institutional, theological, and social history of the church from c. 100 AD c. 450 AD.
    • The student “demonstrates understanding of the dogmatic (theological) development in the history of the church” (Source: WSC Student Learning Outcomes).

—Pastoral Goals:

    • To help the student gain a critical appreciation for the development of Christian theology, piety, and practice from c.100 AD to 450 AD.
    • The student “exhibits growing integrity, teachability/humility, perseverance, self-discipline” (Source: WSC Student Learning Outcomes).
    • The student “gives reasons for convictions rather than merely asserting them.” (Source:WSC Student Learning Outcomes).

Required Reading

NB: I do not usually discuss the background texts at length (Heath, Chadwick, Kelly, Brown) in class. The lectures assume that you have read them but you must read and master them in order to complete the course. Please do the readings in the order presented below. Reference will be made, in class, to the primary source texts.

  1. Gordon L. Heath, Doing Church History: A User-Friendly Introduction to Researching the History of Christianity
  2. Henry Chadwick, The Early Church
  3. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines.
  4. Early Christian Fathers
    1. Ad Diognetum (please print out this online text if you’re using this version)
    2. Didache
    3. Justin, First Apology
    4. Irenaeus, Against Heresies
  5. Christology of the Later Fathers
    1. Athanasius, On the Incarnation
    2. Gregory of Nazianzus, Letters on the Apollinarian Controversy
    3. Gregory of Nyssa, An Answer to Ablabius
    4. Documents (pp. 329ff.)
  6. Early Latin Theology.
    1. Tertullian, All
    2. Cyprian, Unity of the Catholic Church and Letter 33
  7. J. Pelikan and V. Hotchkiss, eds. Creeds and Confessions in the Christian Tradition(New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003), 1.58–61, 75–99; 158–81 (Reference Room)
  8. Peter Brown, Augustine of Hippo.
  9. Augustine, City of God, Books 1, 11–18, 20, 22.

Suggested Reading

    1. Irena Backus, The Reception of the Church Fathers in the West: From the Carolingians to the Maurists (Leiden: Brill, 1997), volume 2, part 3 (Renaissance, Reformation, Counter-Reformation).
    2. ——”Thomas Bradwardine (c. 1290–1349) and the Church Fathers” Studia patristic 28 (1993): 161–68.
    3. —— “The Bible and the Fathers according to Abraham Scultetus (1566–1624) and Andre Rivet (1571/73–1651): The Case of Basil of Caesarea” Patristik in der Bibelexegese des 16. Jahrhunderts 231 (1999).
    4. —— “Irenaeus, Calvin and Calvinist Orthodoxy: The Patristic Manual of Abraham Scultetus (1598)” Reformation and Renaissance Review 1 (1999): 41–53.
    5. —— “Calvin and the Greek Fathers” Continuity and Change (Leiden: Brill, 2000), 253–276.
    6. Moreschini, Claudio and Enrico Norelli. Early Christian Greek and Latin Literature: a Literary History. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005.
    7. Drobner, Hubertus R. The Fathers of the Church: a Comprehensive Introduction. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007.
    8. Holmes, Michael W. The Apostolic Fathers. Greek Texts and English Translations. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.

Course Requirements:

Mid-term 40% (Lectures to that point and assigned reading (see below) The mid-term will be in the middle of the semester (week 7).

Final exam 40%

NB: A failing grade on the final exam means a failing grade for the course. The exam covers the lectures and assigned readings. Note: Students are expected to sit the final exam at the scheduled time. Please make your travel plans accordingly.

Reading 20%

The WSC catalogue requires attendance to class. Class conflict petitions will not ordinarily be approved for this course.

Anyone found to be using the computer in class inappropriately will face discipline.

Reading Schedule

Week Reading
1 Heath, all, Chadwick, ch’s 1-9
2 Chadwick, 10-18, Kelly, ch’s 1-4
3 Kelly, ch’s 5-10
4 Kelly, ch’s 11-17
5 Ad Diognetum, Didache, Justin’s 1st Apol
6 Pelikan/Hotchkiss (all), Irenaeus (all)
7 Mid-Term, Athanasius (all)
8 Nazianzus (all), Nyssa (all)
9 Documents (all), Tertullian (all)
10 Cyprian (all), Brown, chs 1-16
11 Brown, chs 17-36
12 Augustine, bks 1, 11-15
13 Augustine, bks 16-18, 20, 22


Students who take class notes by computer tend to create a large, detailed transcript but they also tend not to analyze the information they are receiving. They hear the lecture but it is more difficult to listen (i.e., to think about and interact with) what is being said. As a consequence, students find themselves with a large transcript with which they are not intimately familiar which can make the mid-term and final more difficult than necessary.

The student who takes notes by hand must synthesize and prioritize material in class. As a result, the student with handwritten notes has relatively less material to review before the exam. An informal survey of students with handwritten notes suggests that they felt better prepared for exams than they had with a large transcript.

The goal of the lectures is to provide a framework within which to interpret church history. Thus, it may be best to note, in bullet points, important themes and arguments and the most important details that illustrate the theme or support the interpretation being offered.

It is not wise to rely on the class notes of others or upon study group (e.g., Google Doc) answers. You will be most successful if you do your own work.


Assertion of Intellectual Property Rights

The instructor holds the copyright to all course lectures and original course materials. This copyright extends to student notes and summaries that substantially reflect the lectures or original course materials. Course lectures and materials are made available for the personal use of students only and may not be recorded or otherwise distributed (including the publication of student notes or summaries on social media) in any way for commercial or non-commercial purposes without the express written permission of the instructor.

Roman Emperors In Early Christianity AD 69–211

Location Caesar Reign Notable
Rome Galba/Otho/Vitellius 69 murdered/suicide/murdered
Rome Vespasian 69–79 ___
Rome Titus 79–81 Destroyed Jerusalem 70
Rome Domitian 81–96 Persecuted the Ap John
et al
Rome Nerva 96–98 ___
Rome Trajan 98–117 corr. w/Pliny
Rome Hadrian 117–38 ___
Rome Anton. Pius 138–61 ___
Rome Marcus Aurelius 161–80 ___
Rome Lucius Verus 161–69 co-regent w/Marcus
Rome Avidius Cassius 175 Usurper murdered
Rome Commodus 177–92 murdered
Rome Pertinax 193–93 disputed/murdered
Rome Didius Julianus 193–93 disp/murdered
Rome Septimus Severus 193–211 presided over intense persecution


NB: These notes were originally written for a course in theological anthropology given at Wheaton College, Spring Semester, 1997.


Early in the course I made the claim, which I did not intend to be controversial, that Pelagius is a heretic. After some e-mail discussions, it seems this claim requires explanation and justification. I hope that this discussion stimulates you (as it has me) to a more thoughtful theological anthropology.

Traditionally Pelagius has been considered an arch-heretic in the Western Church. Modern scholarship, however, has revised the picture by arguing that he did not take the more extreme positions later associated with Pelagianism.(1) There is, however, an overwhelming consensus in the Western Church that the positions traditionally ascribed to Pelagius and certainly taught by his key followers are heretical and outside the pale of Christian orthodoxy. (2)

I. Background

Pelagius was a British monk who appears on the historical radar ca.380 in Rome. (3) He disappeared more mysteriously from the radar ca. 410. His interest seems to have been to promote asceticism, i.e., withdrawal from the world as a means to holiness and that as a means to justification or righteousness before God. (4)

It is likely that Pelagius and his associates were drawn to Rome by Jerome’s strongly moralist (c.342-420) preaching. (5) Pelagius himself apparently attracted a following by teaching that humans are not Adam’s children, but, like Adam, have the ability to sin or not to sin (6). He was, ironically, like much of Reformed theology, a creationist regarding the soul, i.e., he taught each soul is created immediately by God so that it does not participate in original sin. (7)

On the sacking of Rome (ca.409-10) by Alaric the Goth, Pelagius went to North Africa, settling in Carthage. His colleague, Celestius (or Coelestius) moved to Jerusalem where he was charged by Paulinus of Milan of denying the transmission of Adam’s sin to all humanity but was cleared by a diocesan synod.

The Pelagians also presupposed that ought equals can, i.e., justice requires that God may only require of us what we are freely able to do. Thus they interpreted passages such as Deut 30.19 to imply that humans must have the ability to will the contrary relative to the divine will. (8)

Augustine (354-430)

On the other side, Augustine from at least 396, was teaching that humanity was a massa peccati (lump of sin). (9) In his Confessions (397) he was teaching that all humans are born sinful because we were in Adam. (10) His famous formula was, posse peccare, posse non peccare, before the fall (ante lapsum) but non posse, non peccare after the fall (post lapsum). As the Puritans (i.e., 16th through early 18th century English, Dutch and North American Calvinists) put it in their rhyme: “In Adam’s fall, sinned we all.”

It was not Pelagius himself but a follower, namely Julian of Eclanum (c.386-c.455), who initiated the famous literary battle with Augustine over the doctrines of sin, grace, predestination and free will. Augustine taught the view later described as ‘total depravity’ or ‘total inability’, i.e., humans apart from prevenient grace [grace which works first] are unable to will to choose to believe. Remember, the Pelagians (particularly Julian) had affirmed the total freedom of the human will as the necessary postulate of moral responsibility. Not so for Augustine. In Augustine’s view, one is guilty because one was in Adam. When we sin actually, we’re only doing what comes naturally.

For Augustine our will is so sin impaired by Adam’s fall that it only chooses evil apart from Grace. Pelagius, Celestius and Julian, naturally denied predestination while Augustine affirmed it. For Augustine, one believes because he is elect. It was unthinkable that humans should exercise the initiative in salvation.

Augustine began responding to the Pelagians in 411-2. He first defended infant baptism as the means by which God washes away original sin in response to Coelestius and Julian who had argued that children were eligible for eternal life without baptism.

This was a shocking affront. For most of the ancient Church infant baptism was a given, since it was widely understood that it washed away original sin. This one of the reasons Augustine taught it and the Pelagian denial of the grace of baptism to the children of believers was one of the most heinous aspects of their theology. (11)

He also criticized the Pelagian hermeneutic, their view of grace, their denial of original sin. He defended predestination (426/7 and again in 428/9) and the perseverance of the saints. (12)

Augustinian Realism

Where Paul worked clearly and consistently with “forensic” (legal) categories, Augustine did not, at least not exclusively. He responded (in 412 AD) to the Pelagians by arguing the following:

  • Human nature was created blameless, without vitium. All sin and weakness is ex originali peccato. (13)
  • The threat of punishment upon the first disobedience entailed bodily & spiritual death. (14)
  • Adam’s sin is transmitted from him to all humans through natural descent. (15)
  • The reason infants are baptized, is to wash away original sin. (16.
  • Just as sin is propagated (traducere) by natural descent, grace is infused .(17)
  • Romans 5.12 teaches that in quo all sinned. (A misreading of the Greek here as as a locative rather than a causal phrase?) In this he may have followed “Ambrosiaster.” (18)
  • Original sin is to be distinguished from actual sin. Original sin is not just the first actual sin. It is corporate in nature. Therefore we are born to condemnation. We sin in actu because we are sinners, in Adam. (19)
  • After baptism, the guilt of original sin is removed, but concupiscentia (spark of sin, yearning of lower appetites) remains. (20)
  • The result of Adam’s sin is that humanity is now massa damnitionis or massa peccatorum et impiorum corporately and individually. (21.
  • The result of original sin is spiritual and physical death. (22)
  • Therefore grace is, in the nature of the case, “free” and unmerited.
  • God justly condemns those who have not heard the gospel because all have sinned in Adam.

I I. The Ecclesiastical Response

Augustine’s views, formally at least, carried the day in the West. (23) Pelagius was excommunicated by Pope Innocent I (410-17) and Pelagianism condemned by four regional councils, one ecumenical council and at least one Roman Catholic council not to mention numerous Protestant synods, assemblies and confessions.

Councils of Carthage (412, 416 and 418)

Coelestius was condemned at Carthage in 412. Pelagianism was condemned also in 416 and 418.

Council of Ephesus (431)

Pelagianism was anathematized at the Third Ecumenical (universal) council, on 22 July in Ephesus. (24)

The Council of Orange (529)

The 2nd Council of Orange (Aurausio, France) in 529 upheld Augustine’s view of grace and condemned Pelagianism unequivocally.

Council of Trent (Sessio Quinta)

On 17 June, 1546, the Roman Council of Trent condemned Pelagius in five chapters. (25)

Protestant Synods and Confessions

Pelagianism was condemned universally by the Protestants. Some notable examples.

  • 2nd Helvetic (1561/66) 8-9. (Swiss-German Reformed)
  • Augsburg Confession (1530) Art. 9, 18 (Lutheran)
  • Gallican Confession (1559) Art. 10 (French Reformed)
  • Belgic Confession (1561) Art. 15 (Lowlands, French/Dutch/German Reformed)
  • The Anglican Articles (1571), 9. (English)
  • Canons of Dort (1618-9), 3/4.2 (Dutch/German/French Reformed)

To say that Pelagianism is heresy, is to stand in the broadest stream of the Western Church. It is not a narrow, bigoted position, at least not as seen from the perspective of the historic Western Christian tradition.

III. Theological Analysis


Its important to realize that he was a moralist, i.e., he was very much concerned about Christian behavior and was concerned that the pessimistic Augustinian anthropology and soteriology (doctrine of salvation) would discourage good behavior. Augustine’s prayer, ‘Give what you command, and command what you will’, seemed to Pelagius, to strip humans of their freedom and hence moral responsibility. (26)

Most soteriological moralism is rooted in an attempt to get folk to behave properly. The question is not whether to behave, but why? For justification or as a result of it? Historically and theologically attempts to get folk to be good apart from divine grace must be judged a failure. This would seem to be the lesson of Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians and the Reformation generally. (27)

Historically it has been the case that those who have sided with Pelagius; i.e., those who have broken the link between Adam and us; have also broken the link between the redeemed and Christ. They have argued that just as one is not sinful ‘in Adam’, is one not righteous “in Christ.” Grace, in this system, only helps one to do what one could do naturally. It is not, therefore of the essence of salvation.

The Pelagian a Priori

The key unstated presupposition, in Pelagius’ argument, was the there is a universal standard of justice to which all, even God are bound. Flowing from this belief is the further belief that justice requires absolute freedom of the will. Why? Because if God is absolutely sovereign, then humans must be only puppets, thus depriving God of his justice by stripping humans of their freedom and their moral responsibility. God is just. Therefore humans must have a free will. (28)


Pelagius’ notion of justice required him to deny any link between Adam and us. God, he argued, cannot blame us for another’s sin (29). Since Pelagius broke entirely the link (whether biological or legal) between Adam and us, he concluded that the only way in which sin can be transmitted is through imitation of Adam’s example (30). “[B]efore he begins exercising his will, there is only in him what God has created.” (31)


Pelagius began with a notion of justice which he inherited from his culture. He brought this notion to Scripture and it blinded him to several important biblical notions. Flowing from this error was another.

Adam and Us

In order to maintain his notion of justice he had to break not only the link between Adam and us, but also between Christ and us. As a result he denied the doctrine of original sin.

In the face of rather overwhelming amount of biblical data indicating a link between Christ and his people, few people have been willing to be as ruthlessly consistent. (32)

Grace and Free Will

In Augustinian theology, grace (L. gratia) is the unearned and undeserved favor of God. It is the sine qua non of the Christian doctrine of salvation. This has been the Western consensus since the 4th century. On this point, Rome and the Protestants agreed, if only formally. The conflict between Rome and the Protestants was never, whether grace and faith, but what sort of grace and what sort of faith?

Grace, in the Pelagian theology, however, became superfluous. Since we are not sinners in Adam, we have no need of grace from the beginning. At best, grace can be said to bring out our natural abilities.


Pelagius went boldly where few have dared to go. He went on to argue that not only do we not need grace, we can if we will, observe God’s commandments without sinning. (33) This must be since Jesus said, ‘Be holy as your heavenly Father is holy’. He would not have said so if we could not do it. He did not expect that many would do from childhood to death, but that through struggle one could attain a state of perfection by the exercise of the will. (34)

Two Adams

The Pelagians retained, however, the analogy between Adam and Christ (Romans 5:12-21). This forced them to argue that what was true for us relative to Adam; i.e., one falls by imitating Adam; is also true for us relative to Christ; i.e., one becomes righteous by exercising the will to sinlessness in imitation of Jesus.

Vicarious Atonement

Since Anselm (1033-1109) most of the Church has understood Christ’s death in forensic, i.e., legal categories. In Cur Deus Homo, Anselm argued that God having willed to redeem us, he could so in no other way than by the incarnation. The penal, substitutionary doctrine of the atonement was also at the heart of the Protestant Christologies and soteriologies, whether Calvinist or Lutheran. Since the 18th century this has been the evangelical doctrine of the atonement as well.

Not so, however, for the Pelagians. In their scheme, it has been considered unjust for Christ to have suffered vicariously for sinners. How can one righteous person suffer for others, especially the unrighteous? This was Pelagius’ argument and has been followed in more Modern times by Hugo Grotius (1583-1645) and Charles Grandison Finney (1792-1875). (35) The Pelagian move here is perhaps the classic example of the power of an a priori notion which comes to control one’s theology.

Conclusion: The Protestant Answer

The Protestants, beginning with Martin Luther (1483-1546) and continuing in John Calvin (1509-64) realized that part of the problem was the realistic theory of sin. That is, Augustine had been assumed certain ontological categories, that is, evil is the absence of being, and grace is a sort of stuff which the Church dispenses.

The Protestants realized that our problem is not a matter of being or lack thereof. Sin is not a thing (res) which can be transmitted sexually any more than divine justice (iustitia Dei) is a thing which can be dispensed.

Rather sin and righteousness belong to a moral category. Justice is one of God’s communicable moral attributes – that is, one of the attributes which he gives to or shares with humans. This realization moved them to strengthen the federal notion of union with Adam and Christ by moving to a forensic doctrine of justification.

True, we are all biologically connected to our first parents (we are all one blood Scripture says), but more importantly, we are legally identified with them so that we are reckoned as we ourselves had disobeyed. The forensic category is absolutely necessary, in the case of Christ, for obvious reasons. Working consistently from the Two-Adam notion they reasoned that our relations to Adam can also be considered forensic (legal) instead of realistic.

Thus just as sin was imputed to all in Adam, in the same way, by virtue of gracious divine election to union with Christ (unio Christo) believers are all ‘in Christ’. Thus Paul says that we died and were raised with Christ and are presently seated with him. This is forensic, not realistic language.

Sinners benefit from the the righteousness Christ accomplished both actively and passively (from L. passio, suffering) through faith (per fidem) i.e., the instrument which lays hold of Christ’s obedience (iustitia Christi aliena), i.e., Christ’s alien righteousness. Christ’s iustitia is imputed to believers as if they had themselves accomplished it. (36)


1. Pelagius has been partially rehabilitated in Modern scholarship. See G. Bonner, ‘How Pelagian Was Pelagius?’ Studia Patristica (1966): 350-8; J. Ferguson, Pelagius: A Historical and Theological Study (Cambridge, 1956).

2. Heresy is noun derived from the Greek noun haeresis (1 Cor 11.19; Gal 5.20; 2 Peter 2.1) meaning a divisive sect. Modern Christianity considers that than can be no such thing as ‘heresy’ since Modernity understands religion to primarily sociological and historical, i.e., the description of religious sensibilities. Historic Christianity, however, has always considered that the Christian religion, contains a necessary body of propositional truths revealed by God which one must affirm in order to be a Christian. Heresy in this scheme is a substantial deviation from this body of necessary truths.

3. He was monachus, i.e., an ascetic who belonged to no particular order (J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, rev. (New York, 1978), 357.

4. The primary source of Pelagius’ writings is found in A. Souter, ed. Pelagius’ Exposition of Thirteen Epistles of St. Paul 3 vols (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1922-31). See also, Pelagius, Pelagius’ Commentary on St Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, trans. T. de Bruyn (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993).

5. Jerome is one of the greatest of the Latin speaking Fathers. He was the primary translator of the Biblia Vulgata (i.e., the common language Bible), the Latin Bible which dominated Western piety and theology until the middle of the 16th century. He was a hermit to taught himself Hebrew in the desert as a way of overcoming the lusts of the flesh. As a preacher in Rome (382-5) he stressed withdrawal from the world as the road to holiness. From 386 he settled in Jerusalem to work on the Vulgate.

6. The formula as its found in Augustine is posse peccare, posse non peccare.

7. peccatum originalis.

8. “This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live” (Deut 30.19). Pelagius argued for three features in action: 1)power (posse); 2)will (velle); 3)the ability to make it so (esse). Kelly, 358.

9. Augustine, Ad Simplicianum.

10. Confessions, ch.7.

11. Please not that though Luther retained infant baptism, he did so on different grounds. For Luther, baptism is the gospel made visible. For Calvin, it was the sign and seal of the covenant.

12. Augustine’s anti-Pelagian tracts are widely available in English on the web in the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers series.

13. De natura et gratia, iii.3-iv.4, Corpus Scriptorum ecclesiaticorum latinorum, vol.60, ed. C.F. Urba & J. Zycha (Vienna, 1913), 238.-236.6; McGrath, 219.

14. De peccatorum meritis et remissione, ex. Retractiones, 2.23. Nicene & Post Nicene Fathers vol. V.

15. De pecc. 1, 9.

16. De pecc. 1, 10.

17. De pecc, 1.17; 1.18, p.22.

18. McGrath, 216.

19. De pecc, 1,11-2.

20. De pecc. 2,46.

21. McGrath, 218. De diversibus quaestionibus ad Simplicianum I.ii.12, Corpus Christianorum: Series Latina, vol.44, ed. A. Mutzenbecher (Turnhold: Brepols, 1970), 48.620-7.

22. De natura, McGrath, 219.

23. Among the doctrines which the Council anathematized were the ‘natural’ rather than penal mortality of Adam; denial of infant baptism; restricting the work of grace to past sins only.

24. Kelly, 361. Council of Ephesus, canon IV. ‘If any of the clergy should fall away, and publicly or privately presume to maintain the doctrines of Nestorius or Celestius, it is declared just by the holy Synod that these should be deposed’. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 14.229-30.

25. Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, 2.83-8.

26. da quod iubes et iube quod vis (De dono perseverantia, 53). See Kelly, 387.

27. See Galatians 2.15-3.19; 5.16-6.10.

28. Like most free-will arguments, theodicy, i.e., the need to justify God, is at the core as well. Throughout Scripture, however, one finds precious little such theodicy. See Exodus 9; Job [passim] and Romans 9, for examples of fairly shocking disregard for what we might consider ‘fairness’.

29. In Romanos 5.15 ‘Ne in forma aequalitas putaretur….Plus praeualuit iustitia in vivifando quam peccatum in occidendo, quia Adam tantum se et suos posteros interfecit, Christus autem et qui erant tunc in corpore et posteros liberavit‘ (Souter, 46). See also his comments on vv.12-4.

30. In Romanos 5.12,16. Kelly, 359.

31. Augustine, de gratia Christi et peccato originali (418), 2.14

32. Paul used the locative expression en Christo approx. 87 times, just to cite one example. This expression grammatically, is stronger than Pelagius’ theory admits. For Paul, believers are legally united with Christ in his death and resurrection. They are seated with him in the heavenlies. See Rom 6.11, 8.1-2, 39; 1 Cor 1.1-4, 30; 15.18-22, 31; 2 Cor 5.17; Gal 2.17; 3.28; Eph 1.1-15; 2.6-10; Col 3.1.

33. Augustine, de gest. Pelag. 16. Kelly, 360.

34. Ad Demet., 27. Aug. de gest. Pelag. 20. Kelly, 360.

35. See Charles Finney, Finney’s Systematic Theology, ed. J. H. Fairchild (Minneapolis: Bethany, 1976).

36. The Heidelberg Catechism (1563) Q.60 states this nicely.