Who Are The True Catholics?

Introduction
There are truly important works that have simply been forgotten or unjustly ignored. One of those is William Ames’ Fresh Suit Against Human Ceremonies in defense of the Reformed theology and practice of worship. Another is William Perkins’ 1597 treatise, A Reformed Catholic subtitled Or a Declaration Showing How Near We may Come to the Present Church of Rome in Sundry Points of Religion and Wherein We Must Forever Depart From Them. To this he added, With An Advertisement [a statement calling attention to something] to “All Favorers of the Roman Religion Showing How the Said Religion is Against the Catholic Principles and Grounds of the [English] Catechism.”

William Perkins (1558–1602) is worthy of our attention for a few reasons. First, he was one of the most important English Reformed theologians of the Reformation/post-Reformation periods. The other is John Owen. Arguably Perkins should be on anybody’s short list of Great English Theologians. Second, his teaching was a great influence on the Westminster Assembly, and thus to understand Perkins is to understand our own confession more fully. Third, he articulated Reformed theology at a time when the Reformation was under assault from the Socinians, the Arminians (Remonstrants), and a renewed Romanism. We still face these challenges in our day. We know the Socinians as “The Unitarians” today but they were influential upon many of the followers of Arminius (post-Episcopius) and their methodological influence is still felt in American Evangelical circles. The advocates of Open Theism rely on essentially a Socinian view of God and biblical hermeneutic (approach to reading Scripture). “Biblicism,” i.e., the idea that one is going to read the Bible as if no one has ever read it before, is not only deliberately ignorant and contrary to the Reformation approach to reading Scripture with the church past and present, is essentially a Socinian approach to Scripture that yielded a denial of Christ’s divinity, the Trinity, and the atonement, among other things.

Most Reformed folk who are familiar with Perkins might think of his Golden Chaine, his exposition of the doctrine of predestination, and the criticism he received from Jacob Arminius but Perkins was much more than a theologian of predestination. He was a member of the “Spiritual Brotherhood” at Cambridge. He was a Reformed churchman who understood that theology is not mere theory. He defined it as the “science of living blessedly forever. ” He was as devoted to cultivating true piety as he was to defending true theology. For Perkins the two were inseparable. For more on his life and setting see Paul Schaefer’s The Spiritual Brotherhood, 49–107.

Were the Reformation a boxing match, it appeared in the first half of the sixteenth century that Rome was flat on the canvas. Beginning with Ignatius of Loyola (1491–1556) in the 1540s, Rome got off the canvas, as it were, and began counter-punching theologically and militarily. Rome would try to recover her geo-political influence and the struggle would not end until the close of the Thirty-Years War (1648). The Jesuits and others proved to be a genuine difficulty for the Reformation. They began to make more sophisticated appeals to tradition and to Scripture that required increased sophistication from the Reformed.

In this essay we cannot survey all that Perkins wrote but we will look at how his soteriology (doctrine of salvation) responded to Rome. Perkins’ argument was that it was the Reformed (and the Reformation doctrine more broadly), not Rome, that was the home of truly catholic (universal), Christian theology.

The Reformed Response To The Roman Counter-Reformation
This treatise is an interesting and useful example of the way the Reformed responded to the Roman response (the “Counter Reformation” or the “Catholic Reformation”). Perkins responded by challenging a central Romanist assumption: that the Roman communion is the “Catholic Church.”

Perkins began his assault on Rome in the dedicatory epistle. [NB: I’ve modernized the spelling, capitalization, and punctuation on C. S. Lewis’ theory that we tend to impute ignorance to older writers when we see variance from our practice.]

RIGHT worshipful, it is a notable policy of the devil, which he has put into the heads of sundry men in this age, to think that our religion, and the religion of the present Church of Rome are all one for substance: and that they may be re-united as (in their opinion) they were before. Writings to this effect are spread abroad in the French tongue, and respected of English Protestants more then is meet, or ought to be. For, let men in show of moderation, pretend the peace and good estate of the Catholic Church as long as they will; this union of the two religions can never be made, more then the union of light and darkness. And this shall appear, if we do but a little consider, how they of the Roman Church have razed the foundation.

For though in words they honor Christ, yet in deed they turn him to a Pseudo-Christ, and an idol of their own brain. They call him our Lord, but with this condition, that the Servant of Servants of this Lord, may change and add to his commandments: having so great power, that he may open and shut heaven to whom he will; and bind the very conscience with his own laws, and consequently be partaker of the spiritual kingdom of Christ.

Again, they call him a Savior, but yet in us: in that he gives this grace unto us, that by our merits, we may partake in the merits of the saints. And they acknowledge, that he died and suffered for us, but with this caveat, that the fault being pardoned, we must satisfy for the temporal punishment, either in this world, or in purgatory. In a word, they make him our Mediator of Intercession unto God: but withal, his Mother must be the Queen of Heaven, and by the right of a Mother command him there.

Thus, in word, they cry Hosanna, but indeed they crucify Christ. Therefore we have good cause to bless the name of God, that hath freed us from the yoke of this Roman bondage, and hath brought us to the true light and liberty of the Gospel. And it should be a great height of unthankfulness in us, not to stand out against the present Church of Rome, but to yield our selves to plots of reconciliation.

To this effect and purpose I have penned this little treatise, which I present to your worship, desiring it might be some token of a thankful mind, for undeserved love. And I crave withal, not only your worshipful (which is more common) but also your learned protection; being well assured, that by skill and art you are able to justify whatsoever I have truly taught. Thus wishing to you and yours the continuance and the increase of faith and good conscience, I take my leave.

Cambridge, June 28. 1597.

Your W. in the Lord,

W. PERKINS.

Notice the issues that Perkins highlighted: the unique authority (and Spirit-wrought) clarity of the Scriptures, its corollary Christian freedom, the uniqueness of Christ’s once-for-all work, and the Roman denial of the assurance of faith that is gift of God to believers as a consequence of the first two.

These are the issues that face us today. Perkins was concerned about a false ecumenism then and we have just as much right to be concerned about it now. As Rome begins its year-long celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of Vatican II it is well to remember that Vatican II changed none of the doctrines against which the Reformation reacted. The issues remain. The popular, informal role of Mary as mediatrix has become formalized. The Roman doctrine of the necessity of cooperation with grace as part of progressive sanctification unto eventual justification (after purgatory), the mediation of the saints, the authority of the church, all these issues are as divisive today as they were at Trent and Perkins’ re-assertion of the genuine catholicity (university) of the Reformed faith, against the pretension of the Roman Bishop and councils, is as relevant today as the day it was first published.

In his treatise defending the Reformation understanding of Scripture against resurgent Romanism Perkins counted 22 issues between Protestants (his term) and Rome:

  1. Of Free-will.
  2. Of Original sin.
  3. Assurance of salvation.
  4. Justification of a sinner.
  5. Of Merits.
  6. Satisfactions for sin.
  7. Of Traditions.
  8. Of Vows.
  9. Of Images.
  10. Of Real presence.
  11. The sacrifice of the Mass.
  12. Of Fasting.
  13. The state of Perfection.
  14. Worshipping of Saints departed.
  15. Intercession of Saints.
  16. Implicit faith.
  17. Of Purgatory.
  18. Of the Supremacy.
  19. Of the efficacy of the Sacraments.
  20. Of Faith.
  21. Of Repentance.
  22. The sins of the Roman Church

He began he exposition with a decidedly unfriendly quotation from Revelation 18:4:

And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Go out of her my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and receive not of her plagues….

His intent, as he went on to make clear, was to identify Rome as the whore of Babylon:

And the whore of Babylon, as by all circumstances may be gathered, is the state or regiment of a people that are the inhabitants of Rome and appertain thereto. This may be proved by the interpretation of the holy Ghost: for in the last verse of the seventeenth Chapter, the woman, that is, the whore of Babylon, is said to be a city which reigns over the kings of the earth: now in the days when Saint John penned this book of Revelation, there was no city in the world that ruled over the kings of the earth but Rome; it then being the seat where the Emperor put in execution his imperial authority. Again, in the seventh verse she is said to sit on a beast having seven heads and ten horns: which seven heads be seven hills, verse 9. whereon the woman sits, and also they be seven kings. Therefore by the whore of Babylon is meant a city standing on seven hills. Now it is well known, not only to learned men in the Church of God, but even to the heathen themselves, that Rome alone is the city built on seven distinct hills….

In response to the charge that to separate from Rome is schism, Perkins replied:

…all those who will be saved, must depart and separate themselves from the faith and religion of this present church of Rome. And whereas they are charged with schism that separate on this manner; the truth is, they are not schismatics that do so, because they have the commandment of God for their warrant: and the party is the schismatic in whom the cause of this separation lies: and that is the Church of Rome, namely, the cup of abomination in the whores hand, which is their heretical and schismatical religion

The Problem Of Sin And Free Will
His first charge against Rome, which he notes is not the principal issue, is that the Roman communion has corrupted the doctrine of sin. It comes under the heading of free will, which he defined thus:

Free-will both by them and us, is taken for a mixed power in the mind and will of man; whereby discerning what is good and what is evil, he doth accordingly choose or refuse the same.

He identified three aspects of free will. Natural, human, and spiritual. The question is whether, after the fall, humans have this power. He began to address this question the same way Augustine began with the Pelagians (and semi-Pelagians!) and the way Thomas Boston would do after Perkins, with the fourfold state of humanity:

Man must be considered in a four-fold estate, as he was created, as he was corrupted, as he is renewed, as he shall be glorified. In the first estate, we ascribe to mans will liberty of nature, in which he could will or not nill [to be unwilling] either good or evil: in the third, liberty of grace: in the last, liberty of glory. All the doubt is of the second estate: and yet therein also we agree

“All the doubt is of the second….” The issue between Rome and Protestants is what are the effects of the fall. How sinful are we? The great attraction of semi-Pelagianism has always been that they avoid to obvious and gross error of the Pelagians, who denied any legal or spiritual connection between Adam and us, formally by affirming our connection with Adam. They affirm that in Adam’s fall sinned we all but they deny what Paul, Augustine, the medieval neo-Augustinians, and the Protestants affirm, namely that the effect of Adam’s sin is extensive and intensive. According to the semi-Pelagians, whether in Rome or out, we’re not that sinful. In this case, they assert that we are not so sinful that we cannot do our part in cooperation with grace, which is said to make it possible.

He distinguished between different aspects of human freedom. On the question of what Luther and Melanchthon called “external freedom,” i.e., the lack of compulsion, there is no disagreement:

Human actions are such as are common to all men good and bad, as to speak, and use reason, the practice of [al]mechanical and liberal arts, and the outward performance of civil and ecclesiastical duties; [such] as to come to [the] church, to speak and preach the word, to reach out the hand to receive the Sacrament, and to lend the ear to listen outwardly to that which is taught. And hither we may refer the outward actions of civil virtues: as namely, justice, temperance, gentleness, and liberality.

The Augustinian and Protestant doctrine of corruption (pravitas) does not teach that humans are as wicked as they could be. In the providence of God, by which the Spirit restrains evil, humans are capable of civil, outward, virtues.

Protestants agree with Rome that when fallen humans sin they do so without compulsion.

[I]n these we likewise join with the Papists, and teach, that in sins or evil actions man have freedom of will.

On Free Will And Regeneration
Perkins says that we Protestants even agree with Rome, in part on a second part of spiritual willing.

We likewise in part join with the Church of Rome, and say, that in the first conversion of a sinner, man’s free-will concurs with Gods grace, as a fellow or co-worker in some sort. For in the conversion of a sinner three things are required: the Word, God’s spirit, and man’s will, for man’s will is not passive in all and every respect, but has an action in the best conversion and change of the soul. When any man is converted, this work of God is not done by compulsion, but he is converted willingly: and at the very time when he is converted, by Gods grace he wills his conversion.

The point of discussion is what we now call “regeneration,” not sanctification as much as the moment of awakening from death to life. He quoted Augustine to the effect that when God gives quickening grace he also gives “a desire and will” simultaneously. We will freely but we do so with a renewed, Spirit-given, will. When he gives faith the Spirit gives a new will causing the will to “desire faith and to willingly receive the gift of believing….” So, even in regeneration we do not act under compulsion because, as Perkins noted, “no man can receive grace utterly against his will, considering [that] will constrained is no will.”

On free will, the difference between confessional Protestants and Rome is the effect of the fall.

The Papists say, mans will concurs and works with Gods graces in the first conversion of a sinner, by itself, and by it own natural power: and is only helped by the Holy Ghost. We say, that mans will works with grace in the first conversion: yet not of it self, but by grace. Or thus: They say, will has a natural cooperation: we deny it, and say it has cooperation only by grace, being in itself not active but passive, willing well only as it is moved by grace, whereby it must first be acted and moved, before it can act or will.

The difference between Rome and Protestants is illustrated by the different analogies we use. They use the analogy of a prisons and prisoners, who are said to be bound and weak, who are “but living in part” i.e., “not wholly dead” and therefore “yet has ability to stir….” On this image, if the warden [the Holy Spirit] “and do but untie his bands, and reach him his hand of grace, then can [the prisoner] stand of himself, and will his own salvation, or any thing else that is good.”

We Protestants, however, use a different image to describe the human condition after the fall: death. Perkins wrote that we must describe the prisoner as he actually is, “even stark dead” and “one that lies rotten in the grave, not having any ability or power to move or stir: and therefore he cannot so much as desire to do any thing that is truly good of himself” who is utterly dependent upon the Spirit, who

must first come and put a new soul into him, even the spirit of grace to quicken and revive him: and then being thus revived, the will begins to will good things at the very same time, when God by his spirit first infuses grace.

This is, as Perkins wrote, “the true difference between us and the Church of Rome in this point of free will.” The issue is not whether we sinned in Adam but whether, as Perkins put it, “after baptism…how far forth it remains after baptism.” In other words, after baptism, how sinful are we. This is important because, as he wrote, “hereupon depend many points of Popery.”

The Reformed and Romanists agree that after baptism “natural corruption” is abolished but we disagree as to what extent. For Perkins there were three things in original sin:

  1. The punishment (the first and second death)
  2. Guiltiness (the binding up of the creature unto punishment)
  3. The fault (offending of God)

Under the third heading he addressed our guilt in Adam, the corruption of the heart, i.e., a natural inclination and proclivity to “any thing that is evil or against the law of God.”

According to Perkins, for the regenerate, in baptism, “the punishment of original sin is taken away” because “There is no condemnation (saith the Apostle) to them that be in Jesus Christ, Rom. 8. 1.”

Working backward, guilt is also taken away in the regenerate (i.e., those given new life). He cautioned that this is true of the person regenerate but not of the “sin in the person.” His clear intent was to restrict these benefits to the regenerate and he did not attribute the power of regeneration (new life) to the sacrament of baptism. In effect he was saying that Baptism was the sign and seal to the regenerate of what is promised in the gospel. He continued to explain that the corruption of sin remains until death.

Where he differ with Rome, however, concerns “the manner, and the measure of the abolishment of this sin.” Rome teaches, he argued, that, in baptism, original sin is “taken away” so completely that “it ceases to be a sin properly” so that it is now, after baptism, only a “want, a defect, a weakness” which leaves the potential of sin “like tinder” that is ready to burst into flames. They take this position in order to make it possible for them to “uphold some gross opinions of theirs namely, that a man in this life may fulfill the law of God: and do good works void of sin: that he may stand righteous at the bar of God’s judgement by them.”

In contrast, the Reformed teach that though “original sin be taken away in the regenerate” nevertheless it remains in them after baptism not only as “a want and weakness” but “as sin….”

He appealed to Romans 7:17. Sin, not mere want or weakness, dwells in baptized believers. Further, baptized infants “die the bodily death before they come to the years of discretion.” If baptism removes original sin in the way Rome claims there would be no cause of death them. Third, concupiscence (sinful desire) remains after baptism (Galatians 5:17 and (James 1:14). Finally, under this heading, Perkins appealed to Augustine (Epistle 29), where he argued that in baptism the reigning power of sin is broken but not that there is no sin whatever.

Perkins concluded this section by addressing four objections the essence of which has to do with defining sin. According to Perkins, Rome is Pelagianizing. Rome’s account of sin does not match the biblical doctrine of sin and it doesn’t square with Augustine’s (mature) doctrine of sin against the Pelagians and semi-Pelagians. Rome is implicitly perfectionist. Once again, according to Rome, in Adam we are sinful but we are not so sinful (depraved) that we cannot do our part, cooperate with grace unto sanctification and thence to justification.

Assurance Of Salvation
Perkins’ third point against Rome concerned the assurance of salvation. According to Perkins, the Protestants and Rome agree that:

  1. A man in this life may be certain of salvation; and the same thing does the Church of Rome teach and hold (William Perkins, A Reformed Catholic 562).
  2. A man is to put a certain trust [“affiance”] in God’s mercy in Christ for the salvation of his soul
  3. Assurance of salvation in our hearts is joined doubting; and there is no man so assured of his salvation, but he at sometime doubts
  4. A man may be certain of the salvation of men, or of the Church by Catholic faith: and so say we.
  5. A man by faith may be assured of his own salvation through extraordinary revelation, as Abraham and others were, and so do we.

The disagreements between the Reformed faith and Rome on assurance are quite substantial. Perkins wrote,

We hold that a man may be certain of his salvation in his own conscience even in this life, and that by ordinary and special faith. They hold that a man is certain of his salvation only by hope: both of us hold a certainty, we by faith, they by hope (ibid, 563).

There have been some Reformed writers who made assurance a second blessing. There are some who continue to teach that assurance may be had only by a special work of the Spirit. This is closer to the Roman dogma than to the confessional Reformed faith. According to Roman dogma, assurance is only “only probable.” Further, by contrast we “hold and avouch that our certainty by true faith is infallible.”

The Heidelberg Catechism (1563), which had been widely used in Latin and English by the time Perkins wrote, confessed that assurance is of the essence of saving faith. The first question began with “trust” (German) or “consolation” (Latin). Our comfort, trust, consolation is that we belong to Christ. It’s not that might belong or we belong if we meet a test. Our comfort is that we cannot be separated from Christ.

According to the Heidelberg Catechism, true faith is “a certain knowledge and a hearty trust” (following the German text). The Latin text, with which Perkins was certainly familiar defined faith as not only knowledge (notitia) “by which we firmly assent to all things, which God works in us by his Word, but also a certain trust (certa fiducia) kindled (accensa) in my heart by the Holy Spirit through the gospel….” In fact, the catechism refers to certainty no fewer than nine times.

Perkins summarized the difference between Rome and the Reformed thus:

our confidence comes from certain and ordinary faith: theirs from hope, ministering (as they say) but a conjectural certainty.

He anticipates three objections from Rome:

  1. Where there is no word, there is no faith, for these two are relatives: but there is no word of God, saying, Cornelius believe thou, Peter believe thou, and thou shalt be saved (ibid);
  2. It is no article of the Creed, that a man must believe his own salvation: and therefore no man is bound thereto
  3. We are taught to pray for the pardon of our sins day by day, Mat. 6 12. and all this were needless, if we could be assured of pardon in this life.

Perkins replied:

It is true. God does not speak to men particularly, “Believe and you shall be saved. But yet does he that which is answerable hereunto, in that he gives a general promise, with a commandment to apply the same: and has ordained the holy ministry of the word to apply the same to the persons of the hearers in his own name: and that is as much as if the Lord himself should speak to men particularly. To speak more plainly: in the Scripture the promises of salvation be indefinitely propounded: it does not say any where, “If John will believe, he shall be saved;” or “if Peter will believe, he shall be saved;” but “whosoever believes shall be saved.” Now then comes the minister of the word, who standing in the room of God, and in the stead of Christ himself, takes the indefinite promises of the Gospel, and lays them to the hearts of every particular man: and this in effect is as much as if Christ himself should say, “Cornelius believe thou, and thou shalt be saved: Peter believe thou, and thou shalt be saved.”

These promises are not for “hypocrites, heretics, and unrepentant persons.” They are presumptuous, not believing. “Nevertheless it is true in all the elect having the spirit of grace, and prayer: for when God in the ministry of the word being his own ordinance….” When the offer of the gospel comes, they believe by divine grace.

Rome Does Not Understand The Creed

for in that which is commonly called the Apostles’ Creed, every article implies in it this particular faith. And in the first article, “I believe in God,” are three things contained: the first, to believe that there is a God, the second, to believe the same God to be my God, the third, to put my confidence in him for my salvation: and so much contain the other articles, which are concerning God.

Finally, to the objection that we cannot have assurance since that denies the fourth petition in the Lord’s Prayer that asks for the forgiveness of sins:

The fourth petition must be understood not so much of our old debts or sins, as of our present and new sins: for as we go on from day to day, so we add sin to sin: and for the pardon of them must we humble our selves and pray. I answer again, that we pray for the pardon of our sins; not because we have no assurance thereof, but because assurance is weak and small: we grow on from grace to grace in Christ, as children do to mans estate by little and little (ibid, 564).

According to Perkins “true faith” is “both an infallible assurance, and a particular assurance of the remission of sins, and of life everlasting.” True faith is not simply a categorical faith that certain things are true of believers but a particular faith, i.e., that things are true of one’s self. He appealed to Matthew 14:31, our Lord’s rebuke of the disciples’ unbelief. To doubt is not to believe. To believe is to trust. As Perkins says, “to be certain and to give assurance is of the nature of faith.” He also quoted Romans 4:20, 22. Abraham, he reminds us, “did not doubt” God’s promise but believed. The “property of faith is to apprehend and apply the promise, and the thing promised, Christ with his benefits” John 1:12).

The very act of communion presupposes a personal, particular assurance:

[H]e sets forth his best hearers, as eaters of his body and drinkers of his blood; and…he intends to prove this conclusion, that to eat his body and to drink his blood, and to believe in him, are all one. Now then, if Christ be as food, and if to eat and drink the body and blood of Christ, be to believe in him, then must there be a proportion between eating and believing (ibid, 564).

Perkins also argued the “Holy Ghost particularly testifies to us our adoption, the remission of our sins, and the salvation of our soul. Therefore we may and must particularly and certainly by faith believe the same” (ibid, 565). Rome says that the Spirit does witness to us about our adoption but they reduce it to a “bare sense” or mere “comfortable feeling of God’s love and favor” but it is weak “and oftentimes deceitful.”

Law And Gospel
By definition, the command to pray presupposes faith. One cannot ask anything of God unless he believes that God has made a promise. Part of the Roman problem is that they do not distinguish the law and the gospel:

God in the Gospel commands us to believe the pardon of our own sins, and life everlasting; and therefore we must believe thus much, and may be assured thereof. This proposition is plain by the distinction of the commandments of the law, and of the Gospel, The commandments of the law show us what we must do, but minister no power to perform the thing to be done; but the doctrine and commandments of the Gospel do otherwise, and therefore they are called spirit and life: God with the commandment giving grace that the thing prescribed may be done. Now this is a commandment of the Gospel, to believe remission of sins, for it was the substance of Christ’s ministry, repent and believe the Gospel.

Since Rome makes all of Scripture a species of law (old law or new law) they see no free promise in Scripture. It’s worth noting how naturally Perkins turns to this distinction. It was a basic part of his hermeneutic (way of interpreting Scripture) and a quite uncontroversial piece of mental furniture.

Again, the gospel is not believed in general but in particular. It’s more than a vague hope. When Rome speaks of “hope” she makes it essentially uncertainty. Biblically, hope is certainty. “For the property of true and lively hope is never to make a man ashamed, Romans 5:5.” Rome objects that we can never be sure of our own disposition (to which we we come in the next post the series) and Perkins agrees. We cannot be certain of our disposition but we can be certain of God’s toward us and we may be, on the basis of his gracious promise in Christ revealed in his Holy Word.

The Formal And Material Principles Of The Reformation
In theological terms, there were two principles of the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformation: the formal principle and the material principle. The first, the formal principle, was the doctrine that Scripture is the sole, unique, and infallible authority for Christian faith and life. The second, the material principle, was the pan-Protestant consensus that sinners are justified, i.e., accepted by God as righteous, solely on the basis of righteousness or merit Christ earned for his people and imputed to them and received by faith that rests and trusts in Christ and his finished work.

In his fourth point, Perkins turned his attention to the material principle of the Reformation, the “justification of a sinner.” He first summarizes the Protestant position and then the Roman view indicating where we disagree. We get a glimpse into the significance of this section (and the heat with which it was composed) when he added, “wherein we are to stand against them, even to death.”

He began with “four rules:”

Rule I. That justification is an action of God, whereby he absolves a sinner, and accepts him to life everlasting for the righteousness and merit of Christ.
Rule II. That justification stands in two things: first, in the remission of sins by the merit of Christ his death: secondly, in the imputation of Christ his righteousness; which is another action of God whereby he accounts and esteems that righteousness which is in Christ, as the righteousness of that sinner which believes in him. By Christ his righteousness we are to understand two things, first, his sufferings specially in his death and passion, secondly, his obedience in fulfilling the law: both which go together: for Christ in suffering obedience and obeying suffered. And the very shedding of his blood to which our salvation is ascribed, must not only be considered as it is passive, that is, a suffering; but also as it is active, that is, an obedience, in which he showed his exceeding love both to his Father and us, and thus fulfilled the law for us. This point if some had well thought on, they would not have placed all justification in remission of sins as they do.

A word of explanation is in order here. Under this point Perkins not only gave a brief account of the Protestant doctrine of justification but articulated it in light of developments after Calvin, one of which was the denial by the Lutheran theologian Kargius and the Reformed theologian Piscator (and others) of the imputation of Christ’s active obedience. To do this they first made a chronological distinction between the obedience Christ owed for himself, which he accomplished in order to qualify himself to be the Savior of sinners by his death. His passion, or “suffering” then, they argued is that part of Christ’s obedience intended to be substitutionary.The majority of the Reformed theologians, however, rejected the chronological distinction in Christ’s work. They taught that his “whole obedience” (to use the language that was proposed at the Westminster Assembly but rejected in favor of “perfect obedience” in order to satisfy the minority who opposed IAO) was both active and passive. This is why Perkins says that Christ suffered while he obeyed and he obeyed while he suffered. For more on this see the chapter on the imputation of active obedience in Covenant, Justification, and Pastoral Ministry.

Rule III. That justification is from Gods mere mercy and grace, procured only by the merit of Christ.
Rule IV. That a man is justified by faith alone; because faith is that alone instrument created in the heart by the holy Ghost, whereby a sinner lays hold of Christ his righteousness, and applies the same unto himself. There is neither hope, nor love, nor any other grace of God within man, that can do this but faith alone.
In contrast, Perkins wrote, the Roman communion teaches that before justification there must be a “preparation” which is worked partly by the Holy Spirit and partly by the “power of natural free will” by which a man disposes himself or a “habitus” is created in him toward future justification.

When Rome says “faith” they mean “a general knowledge” or an intellectual apprehension of one’s sins, “a fear of hell, hope of salvation, love of God, repentance and the like….” When we have attained to these things they are said by Rome to be “fully disposed” to their justification. In short, for Rome, justification is the process, the result of sanctification or grace and cooperation with grace.

For Rome, justification is not God’s declaration that we are righteous on account of what Christ has done for us but a recognition of the righteousness that has been wrought in us by grace and cooperation with grace.

To effect this, two things are required: first, the pardon of sin, which is one part of the first justification: secondly, the infusion of inward righteousness, whereby the heart is purged and sanctified, and this habit [disposition] of righteousness stands specially in hope and charity.

This is the first justification. According to Rome there is a second, when a “just man is made better and more just: and this, say they, may proceed from works of grace: because he which is righteous by the first justification, can bring forth good works: by the merit whereof he is able to make himself more just and righteous: and yet they grant that the first justification comes only of Gods mercy by the merit of Christ.”

The great difference between the Protestants and Rome is the “cause” or ground of justification with God. We say: “Nothing but the righteousness of Christ, which consists partly in his sufferings and partly in his active obedience in fulfilling the rigor of the law.” Rome grants that “in justification sin is pardoned by the merits of Christ, and that none can be justified without remission of sins” and they concede that “the righteousness whereby a man is made righteous before God, comes from Christ” alone. Further, the “most learned among them” teach that Christ’s satisfaction and merit is “imputed to every sinner” who believes and we agree.

The “very point of difference”is that we say that Christ made satisfaction for us and Rome says

The thing…that makes us righteous before God, and causes us to be accepted to life everlasting, is remission of sins, and the habit of inward righteousness; or charity with the fruits thereof.

Perkins hastened to add that we believe in a “habit of righteousness.” We call it sanctification and it is the “most excellent gift of God” but it not the ground of justification but rather the fruit of justification.

Conclusion
William Perkins illustrates the Reformed contention that Rome, by embracing the very error rejected at the Council of Ephesus (431 AD), by effectively turning its back on Augustine, by rejecting the biblical doctrines of sin, grace, free will, regeneration, and the biblical distinction between law and gospel, removed itself from true catholicity. Perkins thought that catholicity was a significant category. He valued universality. In other words, he did not consider the Reformed a mere sect nor the Reformation a sectarian movement. In that he might be thought to have answered critics of the Reformation such as Hillaire Belloc, who classified the Reformation as one of the great heresies in the history of the church.

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: http://ccel.wheaton.edu/calvin/institutes/icr1.txt. 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).
Brief.

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).

CH602 Medieval And Reformation Church

Course Description

The first half of the course shall study the development of medieval theology, doctrinal controversies, the development of the church, monasticism, mysticism and the forerunners of the Reformation. The second half shall study the theology and practices of the Protestant Reformation. We will consider the social and intellectual contexts in which the Reformation theologies developed with special attention to Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli, and Calvin. Some attention shall be given the English and later Reformations including the rise of Protestant scholasticism and confessionalism. Spring Semester. 4 credits.

Course Goals

—Academic Goal:

To enable the student to understand and discuss intelligently the institutional, theological, and social history of the church such that the student demonstrates understanding of dogmatic development in the history of the church from c. 500 AD -1619 AD.

—Pastoral Goal:

To help the student gain a critical appreciation for the development of Christian theology, piety, and practice from c.500 AD to 1619 AD.

Required Reading

NB: I do not discuss the background texts (Southern and Cameron) in class. The lectures assume that you have read them but you must read and master them in order to complete the course.

R. W. Southern, Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages (New York, [repr.] 1978). This is a general background text not intended for class discussion.

Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae in either St Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, 5 vol. (Westminster, MD [repr.] 1981), or in A.M. Fairweather, ed. Aquinas on Nature and Grace (Philadelphia, 1959).

 

Summa TheologicaReference Nature and Gracepagination
1a. Q. 1 Art. 1.1–10 35–49
1a. Q.23 Art. 1–8 101–18
1a–2ae. QQ. 112–114 174–218

Euan Cameron, The European Reformation (Oxford, 1991). This is a general background text not intended for class discussion. Chapters 1–5, 14, 19, 21.

T. Lull ed. Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings:

Disputation Against Scholastic Theology
Heidelberg Disputation
Concerning the Letter and the Spirit
A Brief Instruction
Preface to the NT
Two Kinds of Righteousness
Bondage of the Will

R. Scott Clark, Iustitia Imputata Christi: Alien or Proper to Luther’s Doctrine of Justification?”Concordia Theological Quarterly 70 (2006): 269–310.

——, “The Benefits of Christ: Double Justification in Protestant Theology Before the Westminster Assembly,” Anthony T. Selvaggio, ed., The Faith Once Delivered: Celebrating the Legacy of Reformed Systematic Theology and the Westminster Assembly (Essays in Honor of Dr. Wayne Spear). (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2007), 107–34.

——, “Election and Predestination: Sovereign Expressions of God,” in David Hall and Peter Lillback, ed. A Handbook of Calvin’s Institutes (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing).

——, “Calvin’s Principle of Worship,” in ed. David Hall, Tributes to John Calvin: A Celebration of his Quincentenary (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2010), 247–69.

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. F. L. Battles, ed. J. T. McNeill, 2 vols (Philadelphia, 1961), 1.1–10; 2.9–11; 3.1, 2, 11, 13, 17, 20, 24; 4.14–19.

Philip Schaff, ed. Creeds of Christendom (Grand Rapids, [repr.] 1983) or online:

Vol. 2: Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Tridentine Profession of Faith;

Vol. 3: Augsburg Confession, Formula of Concord, Heidelberg Catechism, Belgic Confession, Canons of the Synod of Dort, Westminster Confession of Faith.

R. Scott Clark, Caspar Olevian and the Substance of the Covenant: The Double Benefit of Christ (2005; Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2008) [all]

Willem van Asselt, ed. Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, Reformed Historical-Theological Studies (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011).

Recommended Reading

Engelbrecht, Edward A. Friends of the Law: Luther’s Use of the Law for the Christian Life. St Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2011.

Carl R. Trueman and R. Scott Clark, ed. Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment(Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999).

Part 1:
—Bagchi
—Steinmetz
Part 2:
—Muller
Part 3:
—Schaefer
—Godfrey
—Trueman

Dorothy Sayers, “Lost Tools of Learning”

G. R. Evans, ed. The Medieval Theologians (Oxford: Blackwells, 2001).

——A Brief History of Heresy (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2003).

Marcia L. Colish, Medieval Foundations of the Western Intellectual Tradition 400-1400, Yale Intellectual History of the West (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1998).

Sabina Flanagan, Hildegard of Bingen, a Visionary Life, (Routledge, London, 1989).

Hildegard von Bingen,The letters of Hildegard of Bingen, trans. Joseph L. Baird, Radd K. Ehrman. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1994).

Course Requirements:

  1. We live in a post-everything world of endless options. Nevertheless, in this course, your options are more limited. In order to pass the course you must demonstrate that you have learned and can adequately summarize and repeat the important material from the lectures and the readings.
  2. Mid-Term (covers the medieval church lectures and reading). 35%A failing grade on the mid-term means a failing grade for the course.
  3. Final exam (covers the Reformation church lectures and reading) 35 % A failing grade on the final exam means a failing grade for the course.
  4. Reading 30%
  5. Attendance. The WSC catalogue requires attendance to class. Class conflict petitions will not ordinarily be approved for this course.

Computers, Cheating, and Plagiarism

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

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 unfamiliar class material for the final exam.

In 2007, I encouraged students to take notes by hand. By doing so, those students had to listen closely to what was being said and they had to make a decision whether to write down anything and what to write. 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.

Cheating and plagiarism are a serious infractions of the law of God and punishable by a measures determined by the faculty up to and including expulsion from the seminary. Cheating is presenting someone else’s work during an exam as your own. Plagiarism is presenting someone else’s work as your own in a paper. Please acknowledge all sources with appropriate footnotes. See the Student Handbook for a complete statement on plagiarism.

Questions in Class

I will set aside the last five minutes of class for questions. I generally encourage students to refrain from asking questions during the lecture unless it is a clarification that would be of use to the entire class. Students often report that if they wait a bit I will answer their questions in the lecture. I am not forbidding questions but I do ask students to ask themselves before the ask a question in class whether the question will benefit the entire class or whether the question would be better addressed privately after class. I always stay after class as long as necessary to answer questions and I am available in my office and by email and telephone.

Helps

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.