Reformed Scholasticism: Recovering the Tools of Reformed Theology 9780567679727, 9780567679758, 9780567679741

Table of contents :
Cover
Contents
Acknowledgments
Part 1 Introduction
1 Introduction: Why Reformed Scholasticism?
Why study Reformed scholasticism?
Who is this book for?
How does this book achieve its aims?
Why is this book justified?
Conclusion
Part 2 Research Methodology
2 Sources: Primary
How to choose a topic of study
How to identify primary sources
Using primary sources to set your context
The language of Reformed scholastic primary sources: Learning and using Latin
How to obtain primary sources
Some significant primary source authors
Conclusion
3 Sources: Secondary
How to identify relevant secondary sources
How to use secondary sources
How to obtain secondary sources
Conclusion
4 Research Methodology: Historiography and Writing Historical Theology
Preliminary reflections on historiography
Toward “seeing things their way”
Conclusion
5 Writing Historical Theology
Outlining a project
Writing a project
Keeping track of everything
Conclusion
Part 3 The Nature of Reformed Scholasticism: Methodand Trajectories
6 General History and Terminology
Historical scope
Related historical movements
Related descriptive terms
Conclusion
7 A Theology of the Schools
The rise and development of medieval theological education
The early development of Protestant universities
The development of universities under Reformed orthodoxy
Conclusions: The character of the theology of the schools
8 A Theology in Conversation with the Entire Catholic Tradition
Sola scriptura not solo scriptura
Test case one: Amandus Polanus
Test case two: Francis Turretin
Medieval and contemporary appropriations
Conclusions
9 A Theology of Continuities and Discontinuities
Continuities and developments
Discontinuities of method and substance?
Conclusions
Part 4 The Character of Reformed Scholasticism: InternationalCatholicity and Piety
10 International Catholicity
International education and teaching
Reformed orthodoxy in various regions of Europe
Conclusions
11 Piety
Piety and the nature of theology in Reformed scholasticism
Puritanism
The Dutch Nadere Reformatie
Conclusions
Part 5 Contemporary Appropriations of Reformed Scholasticism
12 What Is Next?: Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, and Service to the Church
Reflect on what you have gained
Remember your goals
Recognize potential avenues for theological and pastoral uses
Conclusion
Works Cited
Index

Citation preview

Reformed Scholasticism

ii

Reformed Scholasticism Recovering the Tools of Reformed Theology Ryan M. McGraw Professor of Systematic Theology Greenville Presbyterian Theological Seminary Adjunct Professor of Doctoral Studies Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary

T&T CLARK Bloomsbury Publishing Plc 50 Bedford Square, London, WC1B 3DP, UK 1385 Broadway, New York, NY 10018, USA BLOOMSBURY, T&T CLARK and the T&T Clark logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published in Great Britain 2019 Copyright © Ryan M. McGraw, 2019 Ryan M. McGraw has asserted his right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Author of this work. For legal purposes the Acknowledgments on p. x constitute an extension of this copyright page. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc does not have any control over, or responsibility for, any third-party websites referred to or in this book. All internet addresses given in this book were correct at the time of going to press. The author and publisher regret any inconvenience caused if addresses have changed or sites have ceased to exist, but can accept no responsibility for any such changes. A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. ISBN:

HB: ePDF: eBook:

978-0-5676-7972-7 978-0-5676-7974-1 978-0-5676-7973-4

Typeset by Integra Software Services Pvt. Ltd. To find out more about our authors and books visit www.bloomsbury.com and sign up for our newsletters.

To Dr. James E. McGoldrick Excellent scholar, outstanding Christian, and the man who largely taught me how to write

vi

Contents Acknowledgments

x

Part 1  Introduction 1 Introduction: Why Reformed Scholasticism? Why study Reformed scholasticism? Who is this book for? How does this book achieve its aims? Why is this book justified? Conclusion

3 4 7 7 10 12

Part 2  Research Methodology 2 Sources: Primary How to choose a topic of study How to identify primary sources Using primary sources to set your context The language of Reformed scholastic primary sources: Learning and using Latin How to obtain primary sources Some significant primary source authors Conclusion

17

3 Sources: Secondary How to identify relevant secondary sources How to use secondary sources How to obtain secondary sources Conclusion

51

4 Research Methodology: Historiography and Writing Historical Theology Preliminary reflections on historiography

17 24 26 34 41 43 50

51 60 63 65

67 67

Contents

viii

Toward “seeing things their way” Conclusion 5 Writing Historical Theology Outlining a project Writing a project Keeping track of everything Conclusion

71 81 83 83 87 91 92

Part 3  The Nature of Reformed Scholasticism: Method and Trajectories 6 General History and Terminology Historical scope Related historical movements Related descriptive terms Conclusion

95 95 100 113 119

7 A Theology of the Schools The rise and development of medieval theological education The early development of Protestant universities The development of universities under Reformed orthodoxy Conclusions: The character of the theology of the schools

121

8 A Theology in Conversation with the Entire Catholic Tradition Sola scriptura not solo scriptura Test case one: Amandus Polanus Test case two: Francis Turretin Medieval and contemporary appropriations Conclusions

139

9 A Theology of Continuities and Discontinuities Continuities and developments Discontinuities of method and substance? Conclusions

122 125 129 135

139 141 144 146 149

153 154 160 163

Contents

ix

Part 4  The Character of Reformed Scholasticism: International Catholicity and Piety 10 International Catholicity International education and teaching Reformed orthodoxy in various regions of Europe Conclusions

167

11 Piety Piety and the nature of theology in Reformed scholasticism Puritanism The Dutch Nadere Reformatie Conclusions

183

167 169 182

183 187 189 192

Part 5  Contemporary Appropriations of Reformed Scholasticism 12 What Is Next?: Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, and Service to the Church Reflect on what you have gained Remember your goals Recognize potential avenues for theological and pastoral uses Conclusion Works Cited Index

197 198 201 205 213 215 238

Acknowledgments Scholarship is a community affair. Many more people influence the writing of a book than an author can acknowledge or even realize. My explicit debts include Anna Turton with Bloomsbury, who took an early interest in this project and pushed it through to publication. Ben Castle, who is my research assistant, student, and friend, read through an entire draft of the work, checking references and making helpful stylistic comments. Joseph Pipa, who is my boss now as well as a mentor, has always offered great encouragement in my work and he sent the pebbles down the hill that got me started in academic research. This appears to have turned into an avalanche that now has its own momentum. John Fesko has always provided good friendship and fellowship and often sharpens my ideas through our conversations about Reformed scholasticism. James McGoldrick, Adriaan Neele, and Rob McCurley deserve thanks for helping me track down some key sources and references along the way. Dr. McGoldrick in particular has had a pivotal role in my development as a historian and as a writer and I cannot repay him for all that I have received through his teaching and friendship in this regard. Chad van Dixhoorn also graciously took an interest in my initial outline and helped me fine tune and tone down some points through some healthy constructive criticism. Keith Mattison took great interest in this project and helped me clean up its form significantly. David Noe assisted me with some Latin work as well. The triune God has also sustained me through this work and I hope that he has enabled me to give him glory through good scholarship and by giving sound advice to others in some measure. As always, my family is a great encouragement, especially my wife Krista. I believe that anything worth doing is worth doing together. My wife and children share my burdens, pray for my projects, and generally make the Lord’s blessings more evident in life. He has kindly helped me develop the skill of loving my work and devoting myself to it while remembering that my family is my higher ministry and calling.

Acknowledgments

xi

Ultimately, this book exists because of my students. Numerous conversations with students from my own academic institution as well as others have generally followed a pattern of initial awkward silence when I try to pitch my elective course on Reformed scholasticism, followed by growing interest as I try to convince them why they should study this subject, to excitement as its potential payoff starts to dawn on them, concluded by a barrage of questions related to how to get started. In this regard, my interaction with students has largely determined the content of this book, since I seek to answer here the most common questions that they usually have, including why to study this subject, how to do it, and what to do with it when they are done. In this respect, this book would not have been possible without this kind of interaction with interested students. I teach at an institution that trains future ministers largely because I desire to invest in the future of the church. This means investing in people. I hope that this book gives something back to the students who have given so much to me over the years and that it encourages a generation to come to study classic Reformed theology.

xii

Part One

Introduction

2

1

Introduction: Why Reformed Scholasticism? As Karl Barth asserted famously, “The fear of scholasticism is the mark of a false prophet.”1 Reformed scholasticism is an important part of the Reformed tradition, particularly in regard to the method of theological education and the development of the theological system. Reformed scholasticism represents a growing field of study today, in relation to both historical studies and Systematic Theology. However, while many students have a growing passion for classic Reformed theology and its methods, most of them have little introduction to the research methodology specifically needed to study this subject effectively, nor do theological students have a guide directing them what to do with their academic studies once they finish them. This book introduces the research methodology and general characteristics of historic Reformed scholastic theology (roughly 1560–1790) to students. It stresses scholasticism primarily as a theological method adapted to university education, without excluding orthodoxy, which bears more directly on content. It answers the basic questions why one would want to study Reformed scholasticism, how they should do so, and what they can do with what they learn once they are done. The thesis of this work is that students of Reformed theology need to study the scholastic roots of the Reformed orthodox tradition to understand and to build a constructive Reformed theology. The author aims to introduce the tools needed to study Reformed scholasticism with an ultimate view to the

As cited in Willem J. van Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, trans. Albert Gootjes (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 15; for similar comments by Barth, see Heinrich Heppe, Reformed Dogmatics: Set out and Illustrated from the Sources, trans. Ernst Bizer (London: Allen, & Unwin, 1950), v–vi. In spite of such comments, in the later citation Barth added that “a return to this orthodoxy could not be contemplated” due to what were, in his view, the presuppositional defects of classic Reformed scholasticism/orthodoxy.

1

4

Reformed Scholasticism

potential benefits that such studies can offer the church today. This period was the most important one in church history for the formulation and codification of Reformed theology, especially in the area of prolegomena.2 However, contemporary Reformed theology sometimes stresses theological content to the neglect of the historic development of Reformed theological method. Studying Reformed scholasticism can better enable students to build a contemporary Reformed theology in conversation with its classic expressions. This book invites students into the subject through learning how to engage with primary source reading, to do research, and to write, while emphasizing the importance of Latin works of classic Reformed didactic (systematic) theology. The material seeks to introduce students to the study Reformed scholasticism using proper historiography, to express themselves well in writing on this topic, to become competent scholars, and to apply what they learn to contemporary theology and to pastoral ministry.

Why study Reformed scholasticism? Highlighting some of the possible benefits derived from classic Reformed theology shows why one should want to take the time to study Reformed scholasticism. Frist, Reformed scholasticism promotes precision and clarity in teaching, both in the church and in the seminary.3 While scholasticism remains a derogatory term in some circles, building on Reformed scholastic theology can provide clarity and stability in the church and in the seminary. Scholasticism developed precise and stable theological methods and terms.

Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, Ca. 1520 to Ca. 1725, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 1:109. 3 This and the following points are expanded and adapted from Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism; See also, Dolph te Velde, “Reformed Theology and Scholasticism,” in Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, ed. Paul T. Nimmo and David A. F. Ferguson (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 228–9. Te Velde argues that it is important to study Reformed scholasticism because of its preoccupation with divine self-revelation, because it is part of the classic Christian tradition, because of its apologetic potential, and because of its stress on the Creator/ creature distinction. 2

Introduction: Why Reformed Scholasticism?

5

Such features promoted a level of precision and catholicity that is often lacking in contemporary theology and ministry.4 Second, studying and writing about Reformed scholasticism can enable ministers and seminary professors to translate academic theology into pastoral theology. Pastors often spend much time studying important material that does not transfer readily or helpfully into sermons or into the classroom. They must learn to digest what they read prayerfully and adapt it in a way that can be useful to others. Many Reformed scholastics, such as Petrus van Mastricht (1630–1706), wrote their systems of theology to teach men how to preach better.5 This was true even of Thomas Aquinas (1225–74), who in the medieval period wrote his Summa to equip Dominican preachers.6 Through writing this book, the author aims, in part, to help some of his readers develop the skill to think on an academic and practical level and to move fluidly between both, which is a rare skill in our present era. Third, studying Reformed scholasticism promotes historical methodology. While ministers and theological students in particular are increasingly interested in studying classic Reformed thought, they rarely learn proper historical method, nor do they see the value in doing so. It is important to separate historical theology as a discipline from contemporary uses before translating the raw materials gleaned from such studies into something that can help the church. It is crucial to know what historic Reformed authors meant in their own contexts and why they said what they did before evaluating and appropriating critically their ideas. While students may not always like what they find in asking such questions, they need to learn that this is okay. It is important to listen to what people said on their own terms before evaluating, let alone using, their teaching. This is particularly important for churches that continue to use historic Reformed confessions, such as the Three Forms of Unity, the Second Helvetic Confession, the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms, and the London Baptist Confession. Such documents have historical contexts as For example, Johannes Maccovius, Scholastic Discourse: Johannes Maccovius (1588–1644) on Theological and Philosophical Distinctions and Rules (Apeldoorn: Instituut voor Reformatieonderzoek, 2009). 5 Peter van Mastricht, The Best Method of Preaching: The Use of Theoretical-Practical Theology, trans. Todd Rester (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2013), 17–18. 6 Philip McCosker and Denys Turner, eds., The Cambridge Companion to the Summa Theologiae, Cambridge Companions to Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 3, 18. 4

6

Reformed Scholasticism

well as contemporary uses. A contextual study of Reformed scholasticism can help modern students understand what Reformed orthodox authors meant before asking whether their teaching is biblical or helpful. Fourth, Reformed scholasticism provides the foundational character of classic Reformed Systematic Theology. This is important to grasp if contemporary Reformed theology aims to maintain catholic unity and continuity with its historic roots. Bac and Pleizier note the need to “safeguard” the historical reading of sources in their historical contexts instead of rushing into modern systematic uses of the material.7 This present book promotes this concern while taking a forward step toward systematic and practical theology. Many authors struggle to translate Reformed doctrine for contemporary audiences. This often results in devising new methods for doing theology and new emphases and altered content in modern Reformed theology.8 The last chapter of this book shows how recovering a contextual study of Reformed scholasticism can help students bring a different set of conversation partners to the table in theological discussions. Building on the historic roots of Reformed systematic theology has great potential for promoting unity among Reformed (and other) Christians by learning to expound and to adapt classic models of Reformed theology for today’s church. The recent resurgence of interest in this field of study and the widespread online availability of primary sources for the first time in history makes such studies ripe for development. Lastly, Reformed scholasticism provides a model for engaging critically with the entire catholic tradition of the church. Several parts of this book illustrate how Reformed authors developed their theology in conversation with the early church, the medieval period, Reformation, and post-Reformation Reformed authors, as well as with contemporary thinkers across confessional lines. This feature of Reformed scholastic theology secured the catholic character of Reformed thought while keeping the confessional fault lines dividing postReformation theologians relatively clear. Such critical engagement provides a model of theologically mature evaluations of the entire catholic tradition of

Martijn Bac and Theo Pleizier, “Reentering the Sites of Truth: Teaching Reformed Scholasticism in the Contemporary Classroom,” in Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honor of Willem J. van Asselt, ed. Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, vol. 14, Studies in Theology and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 53. 8 The last chapter of this present volume provides examples of this trend. 7

Introduction: Why Reformed Scholasticism?

7

the church. While this is a difficult endeavor, it reflects the conviction that Christ has been faithful to his church in every age and that she has something to learn from every period of Christian history. The skill of wedding catholicity to biblical and confessional fidelity is rare in any age. Reformed scholasticism provides an excellent historical example of a robust attempt at doing so.

Who is this book for? This book is designed primarily for English-speaking seminary students, budding historians, and Reformed ministers and professors. The author hopes to promote the sound theory and practice of historical theology and to convince ministers particularly of the benefits of studying Reformed scholasticism while serving in ministry. While distinguishing these tasks, one burden of this book is to illustrate the potential relationship between them. In doing so, the author aims to promote godly and learned Reformed pastors and professors who can teach others what they learn to the Father’s glory, in union with Christ, by the Spirit’s ministry to the church. It also aims to teach all students of this field how to be sound historians and to develop their skills in doing and teaching historical theology. In light of these things, the tone of the book is partly scholarly and partly anecdotal. The author promotes the study of Reformed scholasticism here like a teacher in a classroom leading students by the hand through the subject. For this reason, he occasionally deviates from academic style, providing both professional and personal illustrations from the combined perspectives of a professional historian, of a Professor of Systematic Theology, and of a pastor. These deviations into personal illustrations appear only where the author believes that students need them for the sake of clarifying the topics treated.

How does this book achieve its aims? This book is divided roughly into five parts. The introduction constitutes part one. Subsequent parts treat research methodology and writing, the nature of Reformed scholasticism, the character of Reformed scholasticism, and

8

Reformed Scholasticism

contemporary appropriations of Reformed scholasticism. The working thesis of this book, namely, that a contextual study of Reformed Scholasticism is vital for understanding and developing Reformed Systematic Theology today, carries through all of its chapters, though in differing respects that reflect the tenor of each part. The material treating research methodology and contemporary appropriations, in many respects, represents the core of the book. The parts on the nature and character of Reformed scholasticism introduce students to enough material to become oriented to the subject. For this reason, this book does not treat the history of scholarship on the subject at length, but it summarizes the work of other authors on this front and directs readers to a host of sources that they will need to pursue serious study of this topic. This means, for example, that the book does not include full treatments of Aristotelian philosophy and medieval theology, though it provides examples of both to show why this material is relevant to further research. The author’s primary concern throughout is not so much to produce a comprehensive introduction to the topics treated as it is to teach students how to study Reformed scholasticism and how to understand what they can do with their research. The introduction to research methodology includes four chapters. These cover the proper use of primary sources, secondary sources, some comments on historiography, and suggestions for writing historical theology. Each chapter draws examples from primary source evidence, published books, and articles in this field, as well as from personal research experience. This includes a survey of some primary authors of Reformed scholastic theology, suggestions on how to obtain and use original sources, how to identify and avoid some historical fallacies, and directions for outlining and writing a research project. The distinctive contribution of this part is that all examples are taken from the field of Reformed orthodox/scholasticism studies, covering Reformed theology from roughly 1560 to 1790. The author’s assumption throughout is that the reader is in the early stages of learning to write about Reformed scholasticism. This material targets students whose first language is English. The part on the nature of Reformed scholasticism has four chapters as well. The first of these chapters introduces Reformed scholasticism generally with introductory comments on the terminology relevant to such

Introduction: Why Reformed Scholasticism?

9

studies. This material introduces, in seed form, the relevance of items such as Renaissance studies, Aristotelianism and Ramism, and medieval theology for Reformed thought. The following three chapters address the nature of Reformed scholasticism as a theology of the schools, the interaction of Reformed scholastic theology with the entire catholic theological tradition of the Christian church, and some examples of methodological and theological continuities, discontinuities, and developments between Reformation and post-Reformation Reformed theology. These chapters outline the nature and development of Reformed scholasticism as a method and means of Reformed theological education. The catholic character of this movement, its use of ancient and medieval sources, and its methodology characterized the theological education of Reformed ministers for almost three centuries. This material sets the stage for later comments on possible contemporary appropriations in relation to how to develop Reformed theology today. The fourth part, which addresses the character of Reformed scholasticism, builds on the preceding one. The three chapters comprising this part expand the catholic character of Reformed scholasticism by highlighting its international character, its capacity for theological precision and clarity, and the integral relationship between theology and piety in classic Reformed theology. The material on international crossover in Reformed theology introduces briefly the distinctive contexts of various regions where Reformed churches grew and the role of scholastic theology in various universities in giving international coherence to the movement. The chapter on piety addresses the devotional tendency of Reformed definitions of theology, using English Puritanism and the Dutch Nadere Reformatie to illustrate continuities and discontinuities within Reformed scholastic theology more generally in light of national contexts. Due to its practical bent, this chapter serves as a bridge to the last part of the book that deals with potential contemporary appropriations of Reformed scholastic theology. The fifth part of this book brings the whole to practical resolution by teaching students to think through the process of integrating elements of the study of Reformed scholasticism into theological and pastoral uses. In many ways, this material is both the climax and capstone of this book. While proper historical method is vital to this field, pastors, and those who train them, need to learn what to do with historical theology. For this reason, the single chapter

10

Reformed Scholasticism

constituting this part concludes the book by teaching students what to do with the “raw materials” that they have gathered, filtering it through their goals as Christians and teachers, with some final exhortations and examples showing the potential payoff of these studies for the church. Writing historical theology, especially in relation to Reformed scholasticism, is like mining for gold. Once students extract and refine the ore, they either need to make something with it or sell it to someone who can. This concluding chapter is a modest attempt to give students ideas for how to do this. In summary, this entire book argues implicitly why students should study Reformed scholasticism. Every chapter in parts two through four opens with a thesis that illustrates why the content of that chapter is necessary to study Reformed scholasticism. The last chapter shifts emphases, using language such as, “in order to profit from your study of Reformed scholasticism, you should … ” The result is that the book teaches students why to study this topic, how to do so, and what to do after doing so. Examples of original research from primary source material are also scattered throughout the book, making it a bit more than a guide to the subject and its literature. A project of this breadth is bound to have weak points and key omissions, but the author hopes that it nonetheless serves its purposes in promoting sound historical theology and theological reflection.

Why is this book justified? The primary texts that I use for the course on which this book is based illustrate why the book is necessary. Though the select bibliography points to some of the many sources used to develop this course, four of them stand out as resulting in the development of this present volume. Willem van Asselt’s outstanding Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism is the primary textbook for the abovementioned course.9 Van Asselt introduces the study of Reformed scholasticism excellently. However, his presentation of research methodology admits expansion by way of copious positive and negative examples in light of the large body of secondary literature related Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism.

9

Introduction: Why Reformed Scholasticism?

11

to Reformed scholasticism. His part on contemporary uses of Reformed scholasticism allows for expansion as well, particularly in bridging the gap between academic theology and pastoral ministry. This present book aims to build on this invaluable work through providing such examples and by making such connections explicitly. To teach students research methodology, I require Michael Kibbe’s From Topic to Thesis.10 This book explains how to put together a research project with simplicity and clarity. However, almost all of the examples are drawn from biblical studies and students of Reformed scholasticism need more specific examples to help them get a handle of researching and writing in relation to this important field. This volume mimics Kibbe’s counsel regarding developing a thesis, outlining, writing, and revising a project with an eye on Reformed scholasticism. I supplement the material from Kibbe with Carl Trueman’s Histories and Fallacies.11 Trueman goes a step beyond Kibbe by showing how history should be done once students have narrowed their theses. The examples in my work imitate Trueman’s evaluation of historical fallacies, with special application to research and writing in the realm of Reformed scholasticism, which he does little of in that volume. As a result, most of the examples come from my own research and from numerous published book reviews. Lastly, I require my students to read the English translation of Johannes Maccovius’s Scholastic Discourse to introduce them to the theological terms involved in Reformed scholasticism by way of an important primary source.12 This book introduces students to the vocabulary and grammar that undergirded classic Reformed theology. This present volume seeks to use Latin primary sources such as this one to introduce the character of Reformed scholasticism to students more broadly. While this project would not be possible without the four texts mentioned above, in summary, this book makes the following additional contributions to this field of study: Michael Kibbe, From Topic to Thesis: A Guide to Theological Research (Downer’s Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2016). 11 Carl R. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010). 12 Maccovius, Scholastic Discourse. 10

12

Reformed Scholasticism

1. I provide extensive examples of research methodology from literature related directly to Reformed scholasticism. 2. I (hesitantly) illustrate fallacies from published secondary sources in this field of research. 3. I teach pastors the value of learning historical methodology to separate historical theology as a discipline distinct from others and valuable in its own right. 4. I aim to teach pastors how to reintegrate what they learn from their historical research to enrich their teaching ministries and effectiveness in discipling local congregations. In these ways, this author seeks to inculcate proper historical research methodology without clouding historical conclusions with theological agendas. However, authors are never unbiased. Theological agendas may drive students toward this kind of research without negating their ability to do sound research. As Bac and Pleitzier state, At a twenty-first century academic institution, students are supposedly not motivated by mere archeological reasons to study the theological tradition. Though intrinsically worthwhile, the conceptual reconstruction of Reformed scholasticism is part of the quest for truth that should inspire the academic training of intellectually responsible theologians. We study Reformed scholasticism according to its own canons, if we keep being interested in the journey for truth.13

This author contends that to learn from Reformed scholasticism without renouncing modern theological agendas, students must first develop the ability to study Reformed scholasticism without reading their theological agendas into classic Reformed theology. This is a difficult task, but it is one that is worthwhile.

Conclusion The objectives used in my Reformed scholasticism course outlines summarize and conclude this introduction: Bac and Pleizier, “Teaching Reformed Scholasticism,” 54.

13

Introduction: Why Reformed Scholasticism?

13

1. To teach pastors and students how understand the significance of Reformed scholastic theology for historical and contemporary theology. 2. To teach pastors and students how to develop proper historiography and research methods. 3. To guide pastors and students to put proper methodology into practice through research and writing. For some, this will prepare them for higher degree programs. For professors, it may give them a guide to use with their students. 4. To illustrate why students should appreciate and value a contextually oriented historical theology. 5. To help pastors and students distinguish and separate historical theology from contemporary uses. 6. To develop the skill of learning from historical theology to make contemporary applications. 7. To recover Reformed theological method and not merely Reformed theological content. This is vital for doing contemporary theology and for learning from classic Reformed theology for the edification of the church. 8. To enable students better to understand the contexts and content of the Westminster Standards, the Three Forms of Unity, and other historic Reformed confessions. This will better equip readers to understand what their confessional documents mean so that they can evaluate them in light of Scripture and use them more effectively in the church.

14

Part Two

Research Methodology

16

2

Sources: Primary Good history must be rooted in primary sources. One of the primary reasons why Richard Muller’s studies of Reformed scholastic theology have revolutionized this field lies in his careful reading of historical sources on their own terms and in their own contexts.1 Which primary sources students use and how they use them will depend on how their theses develop out of general topics of interest. Students must then know how to identify relevant primary sources and they must learn how to use them properly. This chapter aims to lay some foundational principles to guide researchers in doing these things. This material concludes with introducing some important authors for each periodization of Reformed orthodoxy to give readers a generic starting point for resources that may be relevant to further study. The main point is that to study Reformed scholasticism, it is necessary to learn how to choose a topic and to identify and to use relevant primary sources. Accordingly, the sections below move through choosing a topic, learning how to use primary sources, setting historical contexts, how to learn and use the Latin language, how to get needed sources, and an introduction some important Protestant scholastic authors.

How to choose a topic of study Choosing a good topic will largely determine the measure of successful research and how much students enjoy their studies. However, to write good historical theology, it is vital to learn to modify, if not replace, the questions Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, eds., Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honour of Willem J. Van Asselt, vol. 14, Studies in Theology and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 5.

1

18

Reformed Scholasticism

that we ask in relation our subjects with the questions that our subjects lead us to ask. This should result in a cycle of asking preliminary questions and altering them through the research process. Doing so will help students move from a general topic to a solid thesis.2

Pick a topic that interests you Choosing a good topic may include goals related to what a writer plans to do with what they hope to gain from their research when they complete their projects. For example, this author once had a student who was interested in studying Owen’s covenant theology because it gave him greater clarity personally in understanding the Reformed doctrine of the covenant. However, once the student began to delve into the secondary literature on Owen’s covenant theology, he discovered that he might have bit off more than he could chew. While Owen defined covenants in a standard Reformed manner and he upheld the basic distinction between the covenants of works of and grace, he held a minority view of the Mosaic covenant.3 He taught that the Mosaic covenant was neither the covenant of works nor the covenant of grace, but superadded covenant that connected both the covenants of works and of grace to the new covenant in Christ.4 Without going into the details of this position here, it illustrates the value and limitations of studying a topic that interests a student. Students may begin with a subject of personal interest and discover either that their topic is a good one or that it presents a seemingly unreachable goal for a beginning student in this field. Researchers need to discover which topics are feasible through a process of trial and error. In any case, if the chosen topic does not sufficiently interest the writer, then he or she will not likely follow it through to the end. Some personal interest in a subject is, nevertheless,

For fuller ideas along these lines, see Michael Kibbe, From Topic to Thesis: A Guide to Theological Research (Downer's Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2016). 3 Mark Jones, “The ‘Old’ Covenant,” in Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, ed. Michael A. G. Haykin and Mark Jones, vol. 17, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 183–203. 4 For more detail on this thorny issue, see Ryan M. McGraw, “A Heavenly Directory”: Trinitarian Piety, Public Worship, and a Reassessment of John Owen’s Theology, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), chapter five, chapter five. 2

Sources: Primary

19

important, especially for those who are not yet familiar with the overarching state of research or the issues involved, since it provides a starting point that will lead to digging into primary sources.

Answer historical questions rather than contemporary ones Though personal questions and interests may lead potential authors to a topic of research, their thought processes must undergo a substantial metamorphosis in light of primary source reading. Picking a topic that one enjoys often makes the end product more useful even as doing so helps researchers persevere in their work. Yet, to borrow a well-known phrase from Cambridge scholar Quentin Skinner, historians must learn to “see things their way.”5 While contemporary questions may lead to topics that appeal to personal tastes and to meeting the needs of Christian ministry, they do not necessarily lead to the best historical research. Current interests can lead even sound historians into using anachronisms, which unintentionally impose contemporary issues on historical figures. For example, Robert Letham has asked whether Owen’s trinitarian theology is Eastern or Western in light of his emphasis on distinct fellowship with each divine person.6 However, as I have argued elsewhere, Reformed orthodox authors such as Owen were not asking the question as to whether their trinitarianism should be Eastern or Western.7 Moreover, Richard Muller argues that it is impossible to classify Reformed trinitarianism either as Eastern or Western.8 Owen in particular engaged in an eclectic use of historical sources, which, as I will illustrate below under the nature and character of Reformed scholasticism, was characteristic of Reformed theology

Quentin Skinner, Visions of Politics: Volume 1: Regarding Method (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002); Alister Chapman, John Coffey, and Brad S. Gregory, eds., Seeing Things Their Way: Intellectual History and the Return of Religion (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009). 6 Robert Letham, “John Owen’s Doctrine of the Trinity in Its Catholic Context,” in The Ashgate Research Companion to John Owen’s Theology (Farnham, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012), 185–98. 7 Ryan M. McGraw, “Trinitarian Doxology: Reassessing John Owen’s Contribution to Reformed Orthodox Trinitarian Theology,” Westminster Theological Journal 77, no. 2 (Fall 2015): 293–316. 8 Muller, PRRD, 4:72. This sentence is adapted from the article cited in the immediately preceding footnote. 5

20

Reformed Scholasticism

at the time. The question of whether we should emphasize the unity of the Godhead or the divine persons or both is a modern question stemming from ecumenical conversations between some Reformed authors and some Eastern authors.9 Reformed scholastics, as far as this author can tell, were unaware that this was (or would be) a serious question. What a scholar learns from Owen may be relevant to contemporary questions by derivation, but importing such questions into a historical study runs the risk of missing (at least in part) Owen’s distinctive contribution to Reformed trinitarian theology. Doing this in some way or another is every historian’s temptation. As this author will show more fully under the heading of “primary sources” below, it is important to set aside the questions that led to a topic for a time to let the subjects raise their own questions as understood in their own context. The student’s first task is to ask why such subjects said what they did in light of their own historical concerns and contexts. Such questions should shape the development of research leading to writing.

Read widely in primary source literature This observation relates to the above-noted issue of learning to ask historical questions rather than contemporary ones. It highlights the point that students must read widely in primary source literature. This means that if they chose a topic related, for example, to Richard Baxter (1615–91), then they must read relevant material from Baxter, from people associated with him, from his opponents, and from theologians of other traditions to get a feel for the lay of the historical landscape in which he lived and thought. This process applies to all chosen topics related to field of Reformed scholasticism.

Read secondary source literature related to your topic In developing a topic, students need to learn to think outside of the box. In relation to this author’s PhD project, which related to Owen’s trinitarian theology in relation to his system of theology and as culminating in public

Fred Sanders, “Back to the Trinity,” in Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, ed. Darren Sarisky (London: T&T Clark, 2017), 224.

9

Sources: Primary

21

worship, he did not have much secondary source material to draw from that was related immediately to his subject. This created a need to read other secondary sources that were analogous to the questions raised. So, for example, he needed to read books on English Puritanism and continental theology. He had to seek out studies on seventeenth-century trinitarian theology and on the importance of public worship in Reformed orthodoxy. He read secondary works on Reformed scholastic thought on the doctrines of Scripture, of God, theological method, Ecclesiology, and many other related areas. These often included studies on related figures, such as Thomas Goodwin (1600–80), who was Owen’s friend and sometime co-pastor, Calvin, Mastricht, and even the Council of Trent theologian, Ambrogio Catarino (1484–1553). The author also found a biography on William Laud (1573–1645), the Puritan arch-nemesis in relation to the question of public worship, very helpful in developing his subject.10 These studies will help shape a proper treatment of the topic chosen and narrow one’s studies, moving toward a specific thesis that the researcher can prove, showing why it is significant in its historical context. Reading secondary literature to help select a topic and narrow its scope into a thesis should not replace primary source reading, but it can help students gain a better sense of the state of current research as they attempt to state their own research questions more clearly and accurately.

Keep an open mind Keeping an open mind involves being willing to lay aside, modify, or abandon preconceived ideas about an author or topic. Researchers need to learn to let their topics of study guide their thoughts as they read, which will guide their hands as they write. Students may not always like what they find in relation to the biases they bring to their studies (and we all have them). For instance, historical figures may have personal flaws that scholars either find distasteful or that may clash with their preconceptions of historical figures. One instance that stands out in this regard relates to an “Italian convert” named Galeazzo Caracciolo, who fled to Calvin’s Geneva in the mid-sixteenth century. This man was from the wealthy upper class in Italy. He was converted Charles Carlton, Archbishop William Laud (London and New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1987).

10

22

Reformed Scholasticism

dramatically out of Roman Catholicism and had to flee his country. However, the dark side of the story was that he abandoned his wife and children to do so and was granted permission to divorce his wife and to remarry in Geneva. While he became a hero, who was set forth as an example of piety in many Reformed hagiographical accounts of his life, his remarriage created an uneasy tension with the prevailing Reformed views of divorce and remarriage at the time. Reformed authors perhaps surprisingly, at the time and long afterward, overlooked this fact to create a useful example of a dramatic conversion to the Reformed faith.11 People may not always fit comfortably into expected confessional categories and historical outcomes are frequently unexpected. This came home to a friend of the author’s whom he directed to read a book about diversity within the Reformed tradition.12 He was shocked to discover that proponents of a form of English Hypothetical Universalism at the Westminster Assembly still professed to believe everything that the Westminster Standards taught about Christ dying to save the elect only. The primary difference was that they added the notion that Christ died for all men in a different sense.13 Being fair to your subject and liking what you find do not always coincide. Keep an open mind and let historical figures lead you to conclusions on their own terms.

Do not rely on your supervisors to choose your topic and to outline your chapters Supervisors are there to help direct students. This includes giving direction in choosing a topic. While receiving such help is indispensable in studying a field such as Reformed scholasticism, supervisors are not there to do the work of the student for them. This is especially true when pursuing a higher degree based

This material summarizes the account as presented in Emidio Campi, Shifting Patterns of Reformed Tradition, vol. 27, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), 285–95. 12 Michael A. G. Haykin and Mark Jones, eds., Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, vol. 17, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011). 13 J. V. Fesko, “Lapsarian Diversity at the Synod of Dort,” in Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, ed. Mark Jones and Michael A. G. Haykin, vol. 17, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 99–123. 11

Sources: Primary

23

on a European rather than an American model, since in lieu of course work that may or may not provide ideas on what to study, students need to come to their projects with a basic sense of direction and they need to prove to their potential supervisors that they can do the work.14 However, in this author’s experience, students often expect those supervising their work to answer all of their questions for them instead of teaching them how to ask, research, and answer their own questions. Supervisors should be tools to aid our research rather than becoming substitutes for learning to do our own work. Ordinarily, as research progresses, students will often be in a better position to choose a topic and outline their chapters than their supervisors will. The reason for this is that students will become immersed in primary sources that their supervisors might not be. This is part of the point of engaging in fresh historical research related to Reformed scholasticism. Supervisors are better able to help students refine a topic and a proposed structure than they are to create one for them. They can suggest topics and potential chapters, but students must take ownership of their own projects. This will likely mean that the first year of study in a postgraduate program, for example, will be largely devoted to reading, note taking, and working through reworking a proposal. In light of the above counsel, you may end in a very different place from where you began and from where you expected to be.

Assess the difficulty of your topic The opening paragraphs of this chapter touched on this area in relation to choosing a topic that interests the student, yet some further comments are in order in this connection. Some ideas sound better as subjects of research prior to pursuing them than they do when students delve into the primary and secondary source materials related to them. Writing on Calvin, for example, will be daunting for most students, though not impossible, due to the staggering amount of secondary literature available on his life and theology. This makes it harder to justify a research project as contributing something to Calvin

For some further suggestions in this area, see Ryan M. McGraw, “Continuing Education for Ministers: A Guide for Ministers and Congregations,” Puritan Reformed Journal 4, no. 1 (January 2012): 307–23. This article is available on the journal’s website.

14

24

Reformed Scholasticism

studies. On the other hand, writing on a subject such as Thomas Manton, on whom almost no secondary literature exists, creates its own difficulties and makes research and writing particularly provisional in nature. General topics are also much more difficult than individual subjects, though they are often more important if done well. Randall Pederson’s PhD work on defining Puritanism is a good example of pursuing a general topic.15 The strength of his research lies in clarifying a broader question in historical theology related to the definition of Puritanism, but its weaknesses lies in struggling to obtain the breadth of knowledge and precision in relation to individual topics and in fitting countless historical figures into his narrative.16 Pederson is an excellent scholar who set for himself a difficult task, due to both the thorny nature of defining English Puritanism and the virtual cottage industry that has risen around this question. He did his work well, but many may not. Particularly if this is your first venture into historical theology, then be careful that your topic does not get you more than you bargained for.

How to identify primary sources Primary sources should shape your research and writing. As noted above, Richard Muller dropped a bombshell on contemporary historical research related to Reformed scholasticism, the effects of which continue to reverberate in the scholarly world.17 In contrast to earlier research, which pitted Calvin as the pristine founder of the Reformed tradition against the nasty scholastics, who allegedly fouled up Calvin’s biblical system of theology, Muller demonstrated decisively that Reformed orthodox uses of scholastic theology developed constructively the Reformed system of doctrine in a way that was marked by both continuity and discontinuity. He also highlighted the fact that Calvin was not the founder of a theological tradition, but that he was one excellent proponent of that tradition

Randall J. Pederson, Unity in Diversity: English Puritans and the Puritan Reformation, 1603–1689, vol. 68, Brill Studies in Church History (Leiden: Brill, 2014). 16 Ryan M. McGraw, “A Review of Randall J. Pederson, Unity and Diversity: English Puritans and the Puritan Reformation 1603–1689,” Calvin Theological Journal, 50, no. 2 (2015): 307–9. 17 This work is reprinted as, Richard A. Muller, Christ and the Decree: Christology and Predestination in Reformed Theology from Calvin to Perkins (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008). 15

Sources: Primary

25

among others.18 His method was simple. He went back to primary sources and read and explained them in their original contexts.19 This highlights why students of Reformed scholasticism must learn how to identify and use primary sources well to write sound historical theology related to this field of study.

What are primary sources? Up to this point, this author has used the terms primary and secondary sources while assuming some familiarity with their meaning. However, it can be helpful to clarify what they mean. Primary sources are those sources resulting immediately from the historical event in question. For example, Calvin’s Institutes, commentaries, and letters are primary sources in relation to any given area of his thought. For the purposes of historical research, primary sources are records of events directly resulting from the subject studied. In relation to the history of his ideas, of which historical theology is a part, these events are ideas and concepts. Some historians divide sources into primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. The intent in doing so is to distinguish primary sources related to a particular subject and contemporaneous sources surrounding that subject. Applying this rubric to Calvin studies, for example, would mean that Calvin’s writings constitute primary sources, Beza’s biography of Calvin would be a secondary source, and books written about Calvin’s ideas after the fact are tertiary. For the purposes of this book, I distinguish only between primary and secondary sources. This means that, in the example given here, Calvin’s writings and Beza’s writings (and other literature contemporaneous to Calvin) are all primary sources.

What are secondary sources? Secondary sources are anything written about the event after the fact. Following the example above, secondary sources include what others have written about Calvin’s thought. Ordinarily, this is what scholars call secondary sources. This

The title of a recent work by John Fesko illustrates one outcome of Muller’s research. J. V. Fesko, Beyond Calvin: Union with Christ and Justification in Early Modern Reformed Theology (1517–1700), vol. 20, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012). 19 For another seminal study along these lines, see David C. Steinmetz, Calvin in Context (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995). 18

26

Reformed Scholasticism

author will refer to them in this way in all subsequent discussions. With regard to Calvin studies, secondary sources could encompass nineteenth-century biographies as well as more up-to-date historical research. Current secondary sources are ordinarily more useful than older ones, since they engage in up-todate reflections on a subject and bring us into conversation with them.

Using primary sources to set your context Setting a context is necessary in any historical study. The historian sets a historical context as broadly or as narrowly as he or she chooses based on the questions they raise and the breadth of sources that they chose to draw from.20 A personal illustration can help readers see more easily the value in doing so. I do most of my teaching in a Presbyterian seminary. For this reason, I often show students the need to set a broad historical context by using an example from my experience serving in presbyteries as a Presbyterian minister. In my context, all of our ministers subscribe to the Westminster Confession of Faith and Larger and Shorter Catechisms. However, some of our ministers come from non-denominational, Baptist, and other backgrounds. While some of them grew up in Presbyterian and Reformed homes, most attended seminary in a variety of institutions, and they come from different states in the United States as well as from other countries. This group of Presbyterian ministers also define themselves, implicitly at least, by a series of negations: they are not Roman Catholic, they are not Baptists, they are not Anglicans, they are not Congregationalists, etc. In addition to such varied backgrounds, church officers with a common theology may have widely differing pastoral concerns and emphases. Some are concerned with legalism while others combat antinomianism; some fight the inroads of perceived liberal tendencies while others positively preach Christ, etc. Such ministers are rarely self-conscious about their contexts in this environment. Nevertheless, these implicit influences shape how they view themselves as

Carl R. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 140.

20

Sources: Primary

27

well as how and what they teach. Such factors are relevant if we want to understand historical people well, yet our removal from their contexts makes the process of doing so challenging. The problem with doing historical research is that historians must reconstruct the broader contexts of people whose times that differ widely from our own. For this reason, the following directions provide hints at how to do so in relation to studying Reformed scholasticism. While students of Reformed scholasticism can never fully reconstruct the historical contexts of their chosen subjects, they should aim to do so as far as they can to make sense of the data they are analyzing.

Set a broad context While writing historical theology, which is a subset of the history of ideas, students must include many historical issues that influence the thought of historical subjects. For example, social and political contexts are equally important with theological ones to set the stage for writing accurate history. One professional historian related to this author in conversation that one of the most profound lessons that he learned in his field of study was that not every theological question has a theological cause. Sometimes theological questions have social, political, and personal causes as well as convictions that stand in the mainstream of a particular confessional tradition. Setting John Owen’s views on worship in their historical context illustrates this principle clearly. On the one hand, the principle of worship that he elaborated was a relatively standard application of the Reformed doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture. On the other hand, he faced persecution in his early life from a national church that often suppressed his convictions and practices by law.21 National, international, and cross-confessional contexts are vital in this regard.22 This does not mean that such issues exclude Owen’s interpretation of the Bible or his place within Reformed confessional theology,

For an anti-Puritan perspective on Reformed views of worship from the viewpoint of Richard Hooker, see W. Bradford Littlejohn and Scott N. Kindred-Barnes, eds., Richard Hooker and Reformed Orthodoxy, vol. 40, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), 73, 79. 22 See chapters 1 and 3 of McGraw, A Heavenly Directory. 21

28

Reformed Scholasticism

but they remind us that Reformed scholastic authors, such as Owen, wrote in a context that scholars must attempt to grasp in some measure if they would understand why they wrote what they did and how their ideas and practices developed. In this case, an international context highlights what Owen had in common with Reformed theologians more broadly, while his particular social and political contexts show why public worship occupied his attention with urgency and why he raised some of the questions that he did.

Prioritize primary sources Prioritizing primary sources means developing arguments from primary sources first and foremost. This applies first to a chosen subject, especially if the researcher chooses to write on an individual theologian versus a general topic. A topic, such as the knowledge of God in Reformed orthodoxy, will demand drawing from a range of authors from various national and international contexts. On the other hand, studying a figure, such as Gisbertus Voetius, requires understanding his place in the Netherlands in the seventeenth century generally and Voetius’s writings in particular. Prioritizing primary sources applies next to topics related to those treated by a subject and to contemporary accounts that interact with or relate analogously to your subject. The goal is to build a full picture of your subject in his or her context, mainly from primary source material. John Coffey’s theological and political biography on Samuel Rutherford illustrates this point well.23 Coffey argues that most modern readers either know Rutherford as the author of his devotional collection or letters or as an early modern precursor to modern ideas of freedom and liberty. He argues that, when set in context, a different Rutherford emerges. Coffey’s Rutherford spent most his life engaged in heated theological polemics in the context of the English Civil War. He opposed religious toleration, arguing for an established state church enforced by law. This Rutherford engaged in these activities in the context of the sincere and fervent love for Christ expressed in his letters, yet the context of those letters included his broader concerns for an established state church and the crossover between English and Scottish

John Coffey, Politics, Religion and the British Revolutions: The Mind of Samuel Rutherford (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002).

23

Sources: Primary

29

politics. This results in a more well-rounded and historically accurate portrait of Rutherford. This illustrates how research can take an author in, perhaps, surprising directions when he or she follows the lead of the relevant primary sources. I will add some cautions against going to opposite extremes in this regard below. Studying sources related most immediately to a chosen topic is the best means of writing good history, but they are not enough to understand historical subjects contextually.

Prioritize other primary sources due to their immediate relevance to your topic Not all primary sources related to a historical topic are of equal weight or importance. Determining what sources to prioritize can be a tricky business at times. A good illustration of this is Hunter Powell’s excellent work on debates over church government at the Westminster Assembly.24 Powell discovered that prioritizing Robert Ballie’s (1602–62) journals, the writings of the Westminster divines, and the minutes and papers of the Westminster Assembly25 instead of tracts on church government by authors, such as Thomas Edwards (1599–1647), yielded very different results than earlier scholarship on this subject. He discovered that the Scottish Presbyterians held a common view on the seat of church power with the Westminster Congregationalists, who were known as “the five dissenting brethren.” The English Presbyterians, such as Edwards, commonly held the view that Christ communicated church power to Presbyteries and then through Presbyteries to ministers and elders. However, the Scots and the Dissenting Brethren taught that Christ communicated church power to ministers and elders in one way and to the entire church (as electing their officers) in a different way. This explains why some of the Scottish commissioners to the Assembly allied themselves with the

Hunter Powell, The Crisis of British Protestantism: Church Power in the Puritan Revolution 1638–44, Politics, Culture and Society in Early Modern Britain (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2015); Hunter Powell, “October 1643: The Dissenting Brethren on the Proton Dektikon,” in Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, ed. Mark Jones and Michael A. G. Haykin, vol. 17, Reformed Historical Theology (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011), 52–82. 25 Chad B. van Dixhoorn, The Minutes and Papers of the Westminster Assembly, 1643–1652, 5 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). 24

30

Reformed Scholasticism

Westminster Congregationalists against the English Presbyterians in the early stage of the debates over church government. They later broke this alliance due to changing political circumstances. Powell’s use of primary sources shows that historians need to learn to build a context that is sometimes more complicated than it appears at first. Not all primary sources are equally useful for drawing accurate historical conclusions. Researchers need to develop their assessments of historical ideas through reading broadly and through exercising critical thinking with regard to which sources they should prioritize to build an accurate picture of a historical context.

Set your subject in the international context of Reformed theology As subsequent chapters will show, Reformed scholasticism inherently includes the international context of historic Reformed orthodoxy as it was propagated in universities and theological schools. Students of this subject, therefore, need to be sensitive to the international context of Reformed theological methodology and teaching. Recognizing this fact is important, even if a chosen subject shows no direct dependence on some of the authors selected to illustrate the broader context of Reformed thought. Reformed scholasticism was an international movement that interacted not only with early church and medieval theology, but with international Reformed and cross-confessional thought.26 Sometimes this kind of research yields surprising results. For example, while Dutch church polity is often described as “continental,” this does not reflect adequately the fact that continental authors sometimes differed over their views of church synods. Authors, such as Francis Turretin, taught that synods came under the title of “church” and argued that synods, as expressions of the visible church, possessed and exercised the power of the keys of the kingdom, while many Dutch authors did not.27 Turretin also

Although his treatment of Reformed scholasticism is limited to three authors, Ulrich Leinsle illustrates the medieval trajectories and development of scholastic thought well in, Ulrich G. Leinsle, Introduction to Scholastic Theology, trans. Michael J. Miller (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2010). 27 Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George Musgrave Giger, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992), 3:306; 18.23.1. The first set of numbers refers to volume and page number in the translated version of Turretin’s work. The second set of numbers refers to topic, chapter, and section. 26

Sources: Primary

31

defined issues such as the invisible and visible aspects of the church very differently from a Dutch author like Wilhelmus a Brakel.28 Turretin taught that the members of the invisible church consisted of the elect while the members of the visible church consisted partly of the elect and partly of hypocrites.29 By contrast, Brakel suggested that the terms invisible and visible were not very useful, since the true church consisted of elect regenerate members only and that the visible church consisted only of this same group as they made themselves visible on earth. Those only externally attached to the church were not truly church members and had no true right to the sacraments.30 For another related example, at the Westminster Assembly, Robert Ballie tried (illegally) to involve Gisbertus Voetius in debates over polity at the Assembly only to discover that Voetius had endorsed Congregationalist John Cotton’s Keys of the Kingdom. As Hunter Powell illustrates, Dutch authors, such as Voetius, denied both the title of church and the exercise of church power to synods.31 In this case, setting an international context uncovers points of divergence as well as points of agreement among Reformed scholastic authors. Such research can challenge an author’s assumptions regarding the nature of continental theology on at some points. If a student is researching the theology of a British Reformed scholastic author, he or she needs to remember that very few systems of theology appeared in English during this time period. This means that the researcher must consult continental works on theology to understand a historic British subject. Reflecting the international context of Reformed scholasticism helps place a subject of research in a broader Reformed context. While this adds complexity to doing research, it will add clarity to writing and it will make conclusions more solid.

Include authors from other theological traditions Another mark of Reformed scholastic theology is catholicity. This included not only critical interaction with early church and medieval authors, but Wilhemus A’Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 2:5–7. 29 Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:1; 18.1.2. 30 A’Brakel, Christian’s Reasonable Service, 2:6. 31 Powell, The Crisis of British Protestantism, 163–8. 28

32

Reformed Scholasticism

representatives of cross-confessional contexts. This led to appropriations of ideas from other confessional traditions as well as to doctrinal skirmishes. To understand Reformed scholastic theology, students must consult some Roman Catholic authors, Lutherans, Laudians, Socinians, and others as they pertain to various subjects to build an adequate historical analysis. Theological influences were more fluid in the period of Reformed orthodoxy than they often are at present. Possible Lutheran influences on Owen’s covenant theology and Powell’s note about some dependence of the Westminster Divines on the Lutheran, Johan Gerhard, for polity issues are some good examples of where crossconfessional studies can pay off.32 A late orthodox theologian, like Bernardinus de Moor, cited Gerhard positively on his use of the church fathers and creeds as well as his doctrine of Scripture.33 Aaron Denlinger’s work on the Roman Catholic counter-Reformation theologian Ambrogio Catarino is a prime example of a partial Roman Catholic overlap with Reformed conceptions of the Covenant of Works.34 His study shows that Catarino developed a doctrine of a Covenant of Works to bolster the Roman Catholic concept of merit. Some of his Roman Catholic contemporaries became suspicious of him as being too close to Protestantism on this point.35 Socinianism determined part of Owen’s theological emphases on the Trinity,36 even as antinomianism did with respect to Baxter,37 and Arminianism did in the Dutch lapsarian controversies.38

J. Mark Beach, Christ and the Covenant: Francis Turretin’s Federal Theology as a Defense of the Doctrine of Grace (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007), 265–8; Powell, The Crisis of British Protestantism, 37–9. 33 Bernardinus de Moor, Continuous Commentary on Johannes Marckius’ Didactico-Elenctic Comendium of Christian Theology, trans. Stephen Dilday, vol. 1 (Culpeper, VA: L & G Reformation Translation Center, 2014), 192, 201, 241. 34 Aaron C. Denlinger, Omnes in Adam Ex Pacto Dei: Ambrogio Catarino’s Doctrine of Covenantal Solidarity and Its Influence on Post-Reformation Reformed Theologians (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010). 35 Denlinger, Omnes in Adam Ex Pacto Dei, 8:183–92. 36 McGraw, A Heavenly Directory, chapter 2. 37 Tim Cooper, John Owen, Richard Baxter, and the Formation of Nonconformity (Farnham, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011). 38 Fesko, “Lapsarian Diversity”; Joel R. Beeke, Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination: Early Lutheran Predestination, Calvinian Reprobation, and Variations in Genevan Lapsarianism, vol. 42, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), 168–73; Martin Mulsow and Jan Rohls, eds., Socinianism and Arminianism: Antitrinitarians, Calvinists, and Cultural Exchange in Seventeenth-Century Europe (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2005). The section cited in the Beeke volume is particularly helpful in clarifying the parallel nature of competing methods of ordering the divine decrees current in this debate. 32

Sources: Primary

33

Those studying and writing about Reformed scholasticism need to understand something of the cross-confessional backgrounds that shaped the ideas of such people. This is central to the historian’s task of attempting to reconstruct a glimpse into the world in which these authors lived and thought.39

Use primary sources in their original languages and in first printings, if obtainable Mark Jones discovered that the published editions of Goodwin’s works were sometimes very different in wording from original printings.40 Use copies that are as close to first printings as you can find. Avoid nineteenth-century reprints of Puritan works, for example, unless you can prove that they are verbatim with the original texts to justify your use of them. For example, in the case of John Owen’s Works, the nineteenth-century editor, William Goold, improved Owen’s outlines without altering the content of his writings. Even in such cases, however, original printings are generally more reliable. This also means that, if at all possible, you should not rely exclusively on translation of original texts. Even if good scholarly translations are available and you appeal to them, then you should always check these translations with the original text in your work. One example is where Turretin’s translator depicts him as asserting that theology “is not knowledge.”41 What he actually wrote is that theology is not scientia. While theology involved scientia, most Reformed authors did not classify merely under the genus of science, opting instead for defining theology as spiritual wisdom growing from God’s self-revelation in Scripture and conjoined with the regenerating power of the Spirit in the theologian.42

See, Chapman, Coffey, and Gregory, Seeing Things Their Way, 40. Mark Jones, Why Heaven Kissed Earth: The Christology of the Puritan Reformed Orthodox Theologian, Thomas Goodwin (1600–1680), vol. 13, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 19–21. 41 Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 1:19; 1.6.5. 42 Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 19; Franciscus Junius, A Treatise on True Theology: With the Life of Franciscus Junius, trans. David C. Noe (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), 99; Amandus Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae Ab Amando Polano a Polansdorf: Juxta Leges Ordinis Methodici Conformatum, Atque in Libros Decem Digestum Jamque Demum in Unum Volumen Compactum, Novissime Emendatum (Hanoviae, 1610), 63; John Owen, Theologoumena Pantodapa, Sive, De Natura, Ortu, Progressu, Et Studio Veræ Theologiæ, Libri Sex Quibus Etiam Origines & Processus Veri & Falsi Cultus Religiosi, Casus & Instaurationes Ecclesiæ Illustiores Ab Ipsis Rerum Primordiis, Enarrantur (Oxoniæ, 1661), 9–10; A. Walaeus et al., Synopsis 39 40

34

Reformed Scholasticism

If you study a work, such as Voetius and Hoornbeeck’s book on Spiritual Desertion,43 then you will need to consult the Dutch text alongside the English translation. However, in most cases, the primary language of primary sources related to Reformed scholasticism was Latin. Latin was the language of theological education, both in the classroom and in writing theological texts. Latin provided an international vehicle for the study of theology and, for this reason, not many systematic texts appeared in English.44 This is why I provide some suggestions for studying Latin in the next section.

The language of Reformed scholastic primary sources: Learning and using Latin Students must learn Latin to engage in any serious study of Reformed scholasticism or Reformed orthodoxy. Most serious works of theology appeared in Latin during that time period to reach an international audience.45 As William Cunningham (1805–61) wrote, “Systems of theology have been chiefly the production of Continental writers, and are to be found principally in the Latin Language—one fact, among many others of a similar kind, which establishes the necessity of students of theology acquiring the capacity of reading Latin with perfect ease and readiness.”46 Moving beyond the pale of mere theological literature, Pope John Paul II quoted Cicero, who wrote, “Non tam praeclarum est scire Latine, quam turpe nescire.”47 This is roughly translated, “It is not so excellent to know Latin, as it is shameful not to know it.”

Purioris Theologiae = Synopsis of a Purer Theology, ed. Henk van den Belt, trans. Riemer A. Faber, vol. 1 (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 37; de Moor, Continuous Commentary on Marckius, 1:186–87. From this list, the Leiden Synopsis states that theology fits the genus either of scientia or sapientia (vel scientiam vel sapentiam) and de Moor prefers to expand theology to encompass every genus. 43 Gijsbert Voet and Johannes Hoornbeeck, Spiritual Desertion, trans. M. Eugene Osterhaven (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003). 44 One notable exception is, Edward Leigh, A Systeme or Body of Divinity Consisting of Ten Books, Wherein the Fundamentals and Main Grounds of Religion Are Opened (London, 1654). 45 Willem J. van Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, trans. Albert Gootjes (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 4, 202, 217. 46 William Cunningham, Theological Lectures (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1878), 39. 47 P. Suitbertus and H. Siedl, Cursus Linguae Latinae Vivae, 2nd ed. (Clearwater, FL: Editiones Familiae Sancti Hieronymi, 1998), 2.

Sources: Primary

35

In relation to Reformed scholasticism, even English-speaking authors, such as John Owen and Samuel Rutherford, wrote in Latin and drew from an international backdrop of Latin theological education.48 In addition to Reformed scholastic literature, having a working knowledge of Latin gives students access to sources from the early church all the way through the eighteenth century. This is an indispensable tool that opens access into a new world of theological literature that can connect readers to a vast portion of the Christian theological tradition as a whole. Due to the fact that many students may not begin their research with an adequate grasp of the Latin language, below are some suggestions regarding where and how to start. The ultimate goal is to gain reading proficiency in Reformed scholastic Latin and the author’s directions have this end in view. These suggestions are limited largely to resources that are easy to use and that build language skills quickly. These initial Latin studies will not likely furnish students with adequate skill to produce professional translations of Latin texts, but they will enable beginning students to read the books that they need and want to read.

How to learn Latin The Davenant Latin Institute conducts an online series of Latin courses that aim specifically at reading theological Latin.49 Their self-description taken from their website summarizes well the value of this resource in relation to scholastic primary sources: The Davenant Latin Institute aims to equip today’s seminarians, graduate students, and teachers with the competency to unearth these treasures, reading them in the original and perhaps even translating them for others to enjoy. We will be offering a program of online courses, both introductory and advanced, equipping students with basic Latin reading competence and, for those that desire, the skills they need to engage with and translate some of the most difficult early modern theological texts. For examples from both authors, see John Owen, Diatriba de Iustitia Divina (Oxford, 1653); Owen, Theologoumena Pantodapa; Samuel Rutherford, Disputatio Scholastica de Divina Providentia (Edinburgh, 1649); Samuel Rutherford, Examen Arminianismi (Utrecht, 1668). 49 https://davenanttrust.org/latin-institute/ 48

36

Reformed Scholasticism

Several of this author’s students have used this resource with excellent results. Those who have advanced to the higher levels of instruction provided through the Davenant Institute have sometimes surpassed their teacher in some aspects of their use of Latin as well. For those looking for greater proficiency in the Latin language than simply the ability to read texts, this material is particularly ideal. Many students, however, will benefit from a self-directed reading program to learn Latin. This is particularly true for those engaging in other labors, such as pastoral ministry or teaching, while pursuing a higher degree program. Self-study requires a higher level of self-discipline than enrolling in courses. Yet some excellent resources are available that can enable students to pursue this track effectively. The suggestions below reflect the author’s own path in devoting at least one hour a day Monday through Friday to learning the Latin language. After one year of study, he gained enough skill in the language to read almost any Reformed scholastic text that he needed to for research purposes. A necessary caveat to add is that scholastic texts, in this author’s opinion, are easier to read than classic and early church texts, due to their use of standardized theological terms and to the familiar paths of theological debate.50 In this author’s view, the easiest to use beginner’s text is Suitbertus Siedl’s Cursus Linguae Latinae Vivae.51 This text begins with Latin and English text and shifts quickly to Latin only. The textbook is brief, yet it will furnish students with at least a 1000-word Latin vocabulary by the end of the course. The audio component of this course is its most important component, since the teacher explains the terms and content of his text in Latin exclusively. The audio component is what makes this course stand out above others. The idea is that as students listen to the Latin language as well as read it, they learn the

For an introduction to the terminology involved in scholastic theology, see Johannes Maccovius, Scholastic Discourse: Johannes Maccovius (1588–1644) on Theological and Philosophical Distinctions and Rules (Apeldoorn: Instituut voor Reformatieonderzoek, 2009); Richard A. Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985). The Maccovius text includes the Latin text on the left and the English translation, with notes, on the right. 51 This course can be obtained from http://www.hieronymus.us.com/Venalia/IndLatin.htm. The website is a bit archaic and they require you to mail in a check, upon receipt of which they will mail the course with its audio component to you doorstep. 50

Sources: Primary

37

language more quickly and in a holistic way. The result is that the course creates an immersion style of learning in which students learn how to think in and how to use the Latin language. Siedl introduces classical Latin, ecclesiastical Latin, and everyday Latin, which he spoke and taught in the context of the Familiae Sancti Hieronymi in Clearwater, Florida. Students using this text correctly should do very little memorization in the process of learning. You simply read, reread, and listen until you understand the grammar, retain the vocabulary, and are able to move forward. This author studied the text for one hour a day for five days a week and listened to the audio component while driving to work. On this schedule, it took about three months to complete the course. The ecclesiastical component consists largely of the Athanasian Creed, the Vulgate Bible, and elements taken from the Roman Catholic Latin liturgy. This method helps students develop a basic Latin reading level with very little effort. This course is not well-known, but this author has not found anything else quite like or nor anything else that has come close to being as easy and effective in developing the skill of reading Latin well. Hans Orberg’s Lingua Latina per se Illustrata is an invaluable tool as well.52 There is no English in this series of books, which, in this author’s opinion, makes it initially more difficult to use as a first Latin textbook than the Siedl course, especially without the context of participating in a classroom. However, Orberg’s series of texts are by far one of the best means of immersing readers into the language in an interesting way. The first volume takes readers through the story of a Latin family with 100 servants in ancient Rome. One of the characters is eventually converted to Christianity, which gives the author opportunity to introduce biblical citations in Latin. The second volume takes readers largely through Roman mythology through excerpts taken from the Aeneid. Orberg provides a host of supplemental booklets to this text as well, which reinforce and build vocabulary and reading proficiency. In the case of the first volume of his course, two of these supplemental booklets even expand the main storyline. For those uncomfortable with reading a Latin-only textbook, Jeanne Marie Neumann has prepared a Companion to volume one of Orberg’s

Hans H. Oerberg, Lingua Latina: Per Se Illustrata, Pars 1: Familia Latina (Newburyport, MA: Domus Latina; Focus Publishing, 1990); Hans H Oerberg, Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata. Pars 2, Pars 2 (Newburyport, MA: Domus Latina; Focus Publishing, 2003).

52

38

Reformed Scholasticism

text, which explains grammatical concepts at greater length through English explanations.53 Rather than looking up all new vocabulary terms, students should use the pictures and word explanations in the margins and read and re-read each paragraph until they understand the vocabulary. This cuts down on memorization and produces long-term memory of the Latin language by aiming at reading comprehension. This series of texts leads students to build a much broader vocabulary than Siedl will. It can also help students become more comfortable when working through Latin texts. Orberg’s course is less immersive than Siedl’s, but it is also much broader in scope and one of the best ways to learn the Latin language with very little memorization involved. Cambridge Latin is a four-volume course that focuses on learning Latin through induction and through reading.54 In contrast to Orberg, Cambridge Latin attempts to immerse students quickly in the Latin language while including a lot of English text, especially at the end of each chapter. The focus of these books is primarily on lengthy reading sections exclusively in Latin. The storyline introduces the history of the Roman Empire’s influence in England and in Alexandria. Each chapter includes a concluding section (in English) on the history treated in the chapter, with special stress on the Latin vocabulary acquired in that chapter. Each volume also has a concise Latin grammar appended to it, which together build gradually from beginning Latin to more advanced levels. The downside of this course is that there is too much material in English. The upshot of this course is that students still learn how to read large blocks of Latin text with little memorization involved. SPQR is a Latin App available for mobile devices. It includes a range of older Latin grammars, the ability to use and make vocabulary cards, and a host of classic and ecclesiastical Latin texts, including the Vulgate Bible, Augustine’s Confessions, and Bede’s Ecclesiastical History. In addition to its inclusion of interesting texts, the primary benefit of this tool is that readers can highlight unknown words in Latin books and find their definitions without constantly

This resource appears under the following two titles, depending on the edition used: Jeanne Marie Neumann, Lingua Latina: A College Companion Based on Hans Ørberg’s Latine Disco, with Vocabulary and Grammar (Newburyport, MA: Focus Publishing, 2007); Jeanne Marie Neumann, A Companion to Familia Romana: Based on Hans Orberg’s Latine Disco, with Vocabulary and Grammar, Second (Newburyport, MA: Focus Publishing, 2016). 54 Stephanie M. Pope, Cambridge Latin Course, Unit 1 (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001). 53

Sources: Primary

39

opening a separate Latin dictionary. Sometimes the app confuses words and defines them incorrectly, yet readers with some facility in the Latin language can ordinarily identify such mistakes easily. This can also become a test of how we students are grasping the language. SPQR places a basic library of classic and ecclesiastical Latin in the reader’s pocket, together with a host of tools that make reading easier. This is a highly useful and inexpensive tool to build Latin vocabulary and to practice reading in Latin.

How to retain Latin After putting in the hard work needed to start reading Latin, how can students continue to stretch their abilities to use the language while retaining what they already know? The following suggestions represent some practices that the author has found helpful in promoting these goals. First, read something regularly. As with any language, the rule is, “use it or lose it.” For studying Reformed scholasticism, I recommend reading the Latin texts of Reformed creeds and theological compendia. Philip Schaff ’s Creeds of Christendom is useful both due to its inclusion of Latin texts of creeds with English translations and because it is inexpensive in print and available for free in older editions through Google Books.55 In the case of the Second Helvetic Confession, Schaff included the Latin text only. This enables students of Latin to test their skills on a relatively simple document without the temptation to keep glancing at an English translation. Johannes Wollebius’s Compendium Theologiae Christianae is virtually an ideal text to practice Reformed scholastic Latin.56 Students can obtain it for free from prdl.org and it is just over 300 pages in length with generous font size. Wollebius excelled at clear statements of Reformed doctrine and concise definitions of scholastic terms. His structure and language is similar to the Westminster Shorter and Larger Catechisms (or rather vice versa), though roughly thirty years earlier, and he is easy to read. If you want a more extensive volume that is also easy to read but that

Philip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom: With a History and Critical Notes (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983). 56 Johannes Wollebius, Compendium Theologiæ Christianæ, Editio Ultima Prioribus Multo Correctior, 9th ed. (Cantabrigiæ, 1655). 55

40

Reformed Scholasticism

will keep you busy for a while, then Amandus Polanus’s Syntagma is an ideal choice, though it is nearly 3,000 pages in length.57 This author began practicing Latin by working through this text by digesting ten pages per day. The key is to set small goals and to be consistent. Once a student completes a Latin book, then they should start reading another. Small doses of Latin reading are less overwhelming than overly ambitious goals and the material gained accumulates more quickly than you may realize. Second, especially with respect to theological students and ministers, it helps to read something in Latin devotionally. One way to do this is to incorporate the Vulgate Bible into a regular Bible reading plan. This author did this initially, minus the prophets, for about four years consecutively. The prophets present greater challenges for students of ecclesiastical Latin, both in terms of style and vocabulary. The present author added the prophets to his reading plan during the fourth reading cycle, since his grasp of the Latin language had improved sufficiently at that point to handle the breadth of new vocabulary and differences in style. The advantage of becoming familiar with the Vulgate Bible is that, while those who read the Bible in English regularly may know its contents well, doing so will help build a Latin vocabulary of well over 10,000 words, creating virtual reading fluency. The text of the Vulgate in SPQR is not as solid of a translation of Scripture as other critical editions,58 but it carries the advantage of providing easy to obtain definitions of less familiar terms at a glance as well as an easy way to flip back to the English text for comparison if needed. In conjunction with Bible reading, it can be helpful for ministers to incorporate Latin Bible commentaries into sermon preparation as well. For example, this author used Polanus on Malachi59 and Johannes Marckius on Zechariah.60 Students will find that Latin scholastic commentaries in the Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae. For example, Robert Weber and Roger Gryson, eds., Biblia Sacra: Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007). 59 Amandus Polanus, Analysis Libelli Prophetae Malachiae: Aliquot Praelectionibus Genevae Proposita a Amando Polando a Polansdorf; Praemissi Sunt Duo Indices, Adiunctae Sunt Orationes Quatuor: I. De Incarnatione Immanuelis Nostri Iesv Christi, Ii. De Crucis Christi Scientia & Communione, Iii. De Vita & Obitu Oecolampadii, Cui Disputatio De Primatu Papae Inserta, Iv. De Prophetia Danielis (Basileae: Per Conradum Waldkirch, 1597). 60 Johannes Marckius, In Haggaeum, Zecharijam, et Malachiam Commentarius, Seu Analysis Exegetica (Amsterdam, 1701). 57 58

Sources: Primary

41

Reformed tradition such as these were often more thorough exegetically and theologically than English commentaries available from the time period. Readers can also search for such sources by biblical books using prdl.org. In addition, then can find numerous Bible commentaries by Thomas Aquinas for free online at corpusthomisticum.org. This is a way for such students to retain and to build their Latin skills while seeking to labor prayerfully for the benefit Christ’s church. Simultaneously, doing so adds to the breadth of primary source material relevant to an academic research project related to Reformed scholasticism. Third, find ways to do a lot of writing using Latin texts. This provides the opportunity to digest and to interact with Latin texts by analyzing and applying them to specific uses. Analyzing Latin texts in writing is most pertinent to writing an academic project in the field of Reformed scholasticism. Writing about Latin texts solidifies language skills and enables students to incorporate concepts learned into their thought processes more easily. Pursuing a degree program related to Reformed scholasticism will force a researcher to do this, but such writing should not stop here. Even taking extensive notes on Latin texts (partly in Latin, if you can do it) helps students build and retain facility with the language. The point with all three of these suggestions is that you need to learn to do something with the Latin language if you expect to make learning it worthwhile. There are other ways to achieve these goals, but these directions are designed to get students started.

How to obtain primary sources After thinking through how to choose a topic, how to set a context using primary sources, and how to learn to read primary sources in Latin, a few words are in order about how to obtain such sources. Other works, such as Kibbe’s From Topic to Thesis and van Asselt’s Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism provide some overlapping and alternative directions in this regard.61 The material below includes three of the most important resources needed to locate and to read Reformed scholastic literature.

Take particular note of Kibbe’s advice regarding using Zotero to keep track of your bibliographic material. From Topic to Thesis, 133–45. Zotero can save thousands of hours of time in formatting

61

42

Reformed Scholasticism

Calvin Theological Seminary has collected an online and free Post Reformation Digital Library (prdl.org). This resource contains links to primary sources available for free from sources all over the Internet. This includes texts related to Reformed scholasticism in multiple languages, especially in the area of Latin post-Reformation literature. The database includes a number of key medieval entries as well, which are important in setting a broad context for the development of Reformed scholastic thought. PRDL’s greatest value lies in collecting Reformed, Lutheran, Roman Catholic, and Medieval theological literature from various online sites. Resources like this one put at your disposal more primary source material than you can read in a lifetime and more than you would have had access to in the late twentieth century by visiting rare book rooms in libraries across Europe and North America. Online collections like this one have literally changed the face of studies in Reformed scholastic theology. Google Books is one of the most impressive databases containing many Reformed scholastic texts as well as countless other out-of-print resources. While many of these sources are already represented in prdl.org, the amount of literature available is so vast and it is growing so rapidly that students will still likely find fresh material by doing their own searches using Google Books. With regard to Latin texts, you might need to learn tricks for searching by varying the conjugations of author’s names or book titles to find what you need. One advantage of Google Books over other online options for primary sources is that Google offers an eBook format for all available books that readers can use through their Google Play app. This both makes reading easier and enables students to keep track of their own digital libraries of primary sources more conveniently. For English primary sources related to Reformed scholasticism, Early English Books Online (EEBO) is without peer for comprehensiveness. This resource includes most printed English literature from 1400–1700. EEBO is a digitized version of what previously was a microfilm collection. The digitized database is fully searchable as well. EEBO used to be available only through

footnotes and in making bibliographies and it is free. You already have enough work to do without formatting footnotes. Neglecting such resources is downright irresponsible and masochistic in relation to working through a substantial academic research project of any size.

Sources: Primary

43

universities that subscribed to the service. As of 2015, however, the database began to be published to the public for free online. The full database is scheduled for public release in three increments, making the entire collection available to everyone by 2025. Prdl.org has begun to incorporate key resources from EEBO in their collection, but the full collection yields much broader search results in relation to English language classic Reformed theology.

Some significant primary source authors While your chosen topic will demand which Reformed scholastic authors you should consult, it may help some students to introduce some important authors from the Reformation, Early, High, and Late Orthodox periods to get them started. Reading Muller’s Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics and Brill’s Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy will broaden your exposure to significant authors beyond this brief sketch.62 I have listed some significant works by most of these authors, with English translations, where available, for wider use. From the Reformation period, Calvin is obvious choice for obvious reasons. He helped codify Reformed theology in his Institutes and commentaries and he helped disseminate Reformed thought internationally through the Geneva Academy.63 Martin Bucer (1491–1551) was an important German Reformer who mediated between elements of Lutheran and Reformed theology. His biblical commentaries, especially those on Romans and John, introduce good examples of mingling exegetical theology and the loci communes method into single works.64 Ulrich Zwingli (1484–1531) is, even more than Calvin, the father of Reformed theology. His emphases differ from Calvin and from subsequent

Muller, PRRD; H. J. Selderhuis, ed., A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy (Leiden: Brill, 2013); See also, Willem J. van Asselt and E. Dekker, Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001); Carl R. Trueman and R. Scott Clark, eds., Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster, 1999). 63 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, vol. XX–XXI, 2 vols., Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960). 64 Martin Bucer, Metaphrasis Et Enarratio in Epist. D. Pauli Apostoli Ad Romanos, in Quibus Singulatim Apostoli Omnia, Cum Argumenta, Tum Sententiae & Verba, Ad Autoritatem Divinae Scripturae, Fidemque Ecclesiae Catholicae Tam Priscae Qum̉ Praesentis, Religios ̈ac Paul ̣fusius Excutiuntur (Basileae, 1562). 62

44

Reformed Scholasticism

Reformed theology in some respects, but his teaching at Zurich gave him widespread influence.65 Heinrich Bullinger (1504–75), Zwingli’s successor at Zurich, is a vital figure who was a theological bridge between Calvin and Zwingli. He developed a consensus statement with Calvin with regard to the Lord’s Supper66 and he wrote the Second Helvetic Confession, which continues to be used by Reformed churches today. His Decades presents the entire system of theology through a series of fifty sermons, which received wide use in theological education, especially in England.67 Peter Martyr Vermigli (1499–1562) was an Italian Reformer who taught students internationally, including at Cambridge. While he did not prepare his Loci Communes for publication, his students collected portions of his writings into a systematic form that influenced generations of Reformed ministers.68 Wolfgang Musculus (1497–1563) if an oft-overlooked German Reformer who taught at Bern in Switzerland.69 His Loci Communes, in contrast to Calvin’s Institutes, contain a full doctrine of the attributes of God and were studied widely.70 He is also the only Reformer we know of on record who made the children of believers participants in the Lord’s Supper, which makes him an interesting case study on the covenant and the sacraments.71 Juan de Valdez (1509–41) was one of the few influential Spanish Reformed theologians. Only one copy of his Dialogo de

An important work by Zwingli is Ulrich Zwingli, De Vera Et Falsa Religione, Commentarius (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer, 1545). 66 Campi, Shifting Patterns of Reformed Tradition, 27:83–122. 67 Heinrich Bullinger, The Decades of Henry Bullinger, 2 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1849). 68 Pietro Martire Vermigli, Loci Communes (London, 1576); Pietro Martire Vermigli, The Common Places of the Most Famous and Renowmed Diuine Doctor Peter Martyr: Diuided into Foure Principall Parts: With a Large Addition of Manie Theologicall and Necessarie Discourses, Some Neuer Extant Before. Translated and Partlie Gathered by Anthonie Marten, One of the Sewers of Hir Maiesties Most Honourable Chamber. (London: In Pater noster Rovve [by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton] at the costs and charges of Henrie Denham, Thomas Chard, VVilliam Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583). 69 Craig S. Farmer, The Gospel of John in the Sixteenth Century: The Johannine Exegesis of Wolfgang Musculus, Oxford Studies in Historical Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 2–8. 70 Wolfgang Musculus, Loci Communes Sacrae Theologiae (Basel, 1567); Wolfgang Musculus, Common Places of Christian Religion, Gathered by Wolfgangus Musculus, for the Vse of Suche as Desire the Knowledge of Godly Truthe. Translated Out of Latine into Englishe. Hereunto Are Added Two Other Treatises, Made by the Same Author, One of Othes, and an Other of Vsurye. with a Moste Perfecte and Plentifull Table, trans. John Man (London: Printed by Reginalde Wolfe, 1563). 71 Jordan J. Ballor, Covenant, Causality, and Law: A Study in the Theology of Wolfgang Musculus, vol. 3, Refo500 Academic Studies (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012). 65

Sources: Primary

45

Doctrina Christiana72 survived the Spanish Inquisition and it was rediscovered only in 1925.73 On the Lutheran side, Martin Luther (1483–1546) and Philip Melanchthon (1497–1560), his friend and associate, deserve special attention. While all Reformed theologians respected Luther,74 Melanchthon influenced many early Reformed authors. His Loci Communes, structured around the book of Romans, served as the pattern for Calvin’s Institutes and he was one of the primary influences in the Reformed development of the threefold use of the law.75 Melanchthon was also a vital figure in developing the Lutheran confessional tradition, which received stable form in the Book of Concord. Several figures stand out for their seminal importance in Early Orthodoxy. Andreas Hyperius (1511–64) was one of the first to develop a distinctively Reformed theological method.76 Franciscus Junius (1545–1602) wrote the first Reformed prolegomena and he developed the distinction between archetypal and ectypal theology.77 Zacharias Ursinus (1534–83) was one of the primary authors of the Heidelberg Catechism and influenced Reformed dogmatics largely through his lectures on the catechism.78 Amandus Polanus (1561–1610) was a professor at Basel. His Syntagma Christianae Theologiae was arguably the most important Early Orthodox Reformed textbook, which he organized following a Ramist structure of what man is to believe concerning God and what duty God requires of man. He defense of the doctrine of Scripture against

Juan de Valdes, Dialogo de Doctrina Christiana (Mexico: Casa Unida de Publicationes, 1946). Frances Luttikhuizen, Underground Protestantism in Sixteenth Century Spain: A Much Ignored Side of Spanish History, vol. 30, Refo500 Academic Studies (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), 73. 74 Robert Kolb, Irene Dingel, and L’ubomir Batka, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014). 75 Philip Melanchthon, Loci Communes Theologici (Basel, 1550); Philipp Melanchthon, Melanchthon on Christian Doctrine: Loci Communes, 1555, trans. Clyde Leonard Manschreck (New York: Oxford University Press, 1965); Timothy J Wengert, Law and Gospel: Philip Melanchthon’s Debate with John Agricola of Eisleben Over Poenitentia (Carlisle, Cumbria, and Grand Rapids, MI: Paternoster; Baker Books, 1997). 76 Andreas Hyperius, Methodus Theologiae Adj. Eft. De Ejusdem Vita Et Obita Oratis Wigandi Arthii (Basileae, 1562); Donald Sinnema, “The Distinction between Scholastic and Popular: Andreas Hyperius and Reformed Scholasticism,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006), 127–44. 77 Franciscus Junius, De Theologia Vera; Ortu, Natura, Formis, Partibus, Et Modo (Lugduni Batavorum, 1594); Junius, A Treatise on True Theology. 78 Zacharias Ursinus and David Pareus, Corpus Doctrinae Orthodoxae: Sive, Catecharum Explicationum D. Zachariae Ursini Opus Absolutum D. Davidis Parei Opera Extrema Recognitum … Adiuncta Sunt Miscellanea Catechetica … ([Genevae]: sumptibus Samuelis Crispini, 1616). 72 73

46

Reformed Scholasticism

Robert Bellarmine is particularly full and exhaustive.79 In this connection, Polanus’s student and colleague, Johannes Wollebius (1589–1629), wrote one of the most important and long-lasting compendiums of Reformed scholastic theology.80 Jerome Zanhchius (1516–90) was most famous for his De Tribus Elohim, which set the standard for Reformed trinitarian theology for almost two centuries.81 He also engaged in Christological debates with Lutheran authors.82 Theodore Beza (1519–1605) and Lambert Daneau (1535–1690) were two vital French theologians who marked the transition into scholastic theology at the Geneva Academy. Among other things, Beza became known widely for his New Testament commentaries.83 His Confessio Christiane Fidei represents his systematic summary of Reformed doctrine.84 Daneau illustrates Reformed interaction with the medieval tradition, especially through his commentary on the first book of Peter Lombard’s Senetentia.85 The number of significant authors from the period of High Orthodoxy is staggering. Gisbertus Voetius (1585–1676) trained an entire generation of Dutch Reformed ministers and had international prestige.86 He is best known Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae; Byung Soo Han, Symphonia Catholica: The Merger of Patristic and Contemporary Sources in the Theological Method of Amandus Polanus (1561–1610), vol. 30, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015). 80 Wollebius, Compendium. 81 Jerome Zanchius, De Tribus Elohim, Aeterno Patre, Filio, Et Spiritu Sancto, Uno Eodemque Iehova, Libri Xiii. in Duas Distincti Partes. Pars Prior: Ad Edmundum Grindallum, Archiepiscopum Eboracensem, Angliaeque Primatem Amplissimum. in Qua, Tota Orthodoxa De Hoc Magno Mysterio Doctrina, Ex Sacrarum Literarum Fontibus, Explicatur, & Confirmatur. Cum Indice Triplici (Neostadii Palatinorum, 1589). 82 Benjamin R. Merkle, Defending the Trinity in the Reformed Palatinate: The Elohistae, Oxford Theology and Religion Monographs (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016); Stefan Lindholm, Jerome Zanchi (1516–90) and the Analysis of Reformed Scholastic Christology, vol. 37, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016). 83 Theodorus Beza, Theodori Bezae Annotationes Maiores in Novum Dn. Nostri Iesu Christi Testamentum: In Duas Distinctae Partes, Quarum Prior Explicationem in Quatuor Evangelistas Et Acta Apostolorum, Posterior Verò in Epistolas Et Apocalypsin Continet: Quibus Etiam Adiuncti Sunt Indices Rerum Ac Verborum Locupletissimi (Genevae: J. des Planches, 1594). 84 Theodorus Beza, Confessio Christianae Fidei, et Eiusdem Collatio Cum Papisticis Haeresibus, 1560. 85 Lambert Daneau, In Petri Lombardi Episcopi Parisiensis (qui Magister Sententiarum Appellatur) Librum Primum Sententiarum, Qui Est De Vero Deo, Essentiâ Quidem Uno: Personis Autem Trino: Lamberti Danaei Commentarius Triplex. Unus, Ad Marginem Ipsius Libri, in Quo Singularum Distinctionum Artificium Breviter Explicatur. Alter, Ubi Locorum À Lombardo Prolatorum Accurata Collatio Facta Est. Tertius, Qui Censuram Doctrinae, Methodique Lombardi, Tum Ex Ipso Dei Verbo, Tum Ex Veris Sententiarum Scribendarum Praeceptis Habet (Genevae: Apud Eustathium Vignon, 1580); Olivier Fatio, Méthode Et Théologie: Lambert Daneau Et Les Débuts De La Scolastique Réformée (Genève: Droz, 1976). 86 Andreas J. Beck, Gisbertus Voetius 1589–1676 Sein Theologieverständnis Und Seine Gotteslehre (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007). 79

Sources: Primary

47

for his instructions to theological students and for his disputations.87 Johannes Cocceius (1603–69) taught an eccentric covenant theology and became prominent in his debates with Voetius and through his influence on Reformed covenantal thought.88 Petrus van Mastricht (1630–1706) was a prominent student of Voetius. It has become common knowledge that Jonathan Edwards (1703–58) remarked that Mastricht’s Theoretico-Practica Theologia was the best book that he had read outside of the Bible.89 Herman Witsius (1636–1708) was another Voetian who is largely remembered for his outstanding Oeconomia Foederum Cum Hominibus.90 However, one should not overlook his important works on the Apostle’s Creed and the Lord’s Prayer, which give a more rounded view of his system of theology.91 In Britain, some outstanding names include John Owen (1616–83),92 Richard Baxter (1615–91),93 William Twisse (1578– 1646), Samuel Rutherford (1600–61), and Edward Leigh (1602–71). To single out two names, Twisse was the prolocutor (moderator) of the Westminster

Gisbertus Voetius, Exercitia Et Bibliotheca Studiosi Theologiæ (Rheno-Trajecti: Apud Wilhelmum Strick, 1644); Gijsbert Voetius, Selectarum Disputationum Theologicarum Pars Prima (Quinta. Accedunt Dissertatio Epistolica De Termino Vitæ. Exercitatio De Prognosticis Cometarum. Antehac Seorsim Editæ), 5 vols. (Ultrajecti, 1648). 88 Johannes Cocceius, Collationes De Foedere Et Testamento Dei: Ad Illustrandam Methodum & Analogian Doctrinæ Pietatis in Scripturis Traditam (Franekeræ: Apud I. Balck, 1648); Johannes Cocceius, The Doctrine of the Covenant and Testament of God, trans. Casey Carmichael, vol. 3, Classic Reformed Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016); Willem J. van Asselt, The Federal Theology of Johannes Cocceius (1603–1669) (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2001); Brian J. Lee, Johannes Cocceius and the Exegetical Roots of Federal Theology, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008). 89 Peter van Mastricht, Theoretico-Practica Theologia. Qua, Per Singula Capita Theologica, Pars Exegetica, Dogmatica, Elenchtica & Practica, Perpetua Successione Conjugantur (Trajecti ad Rhenum, and Amstelodami: Sumptibus Societatis, 1715); Adriaan C. Neele, Petrus Van Mastricht (1630–1706) Reformed Orthodoxy: Method and Piety (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2009). At the time of writing this book, the first volume of Mastricht’s work was being prepared for publication in English translation. 90 Herman Witsius, De Oeconomia Foederum Dei Cum Hominibus Libri Quatuor, 2 vols. (Trajecti ad Rhenum: apud Franciscum Halmam, Gulielmum van de Water, 1694); Herman Witsius, The Economy of the Covenants between God and Man, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. William Crookshank, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010). 91 Herman Witsius, Sacred Dissertations: On the Apostles’ Creed, trans. Donald Fraser, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010); Herman Witsius, Sacred Dissertations on the Lord’s Prayer, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. William Pringle (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010). 92 Carl R. Trueman, John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man (Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007); Kelly M. Kapic and Mark Jones, eds., The Ashgate Research Companion to John Owen’s Theology (Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012). 93 Cooper, John Owen, Richard Baxter, and the Formation of Nonconformity; Simon J. G. Burton, The Hallowing of Logic the Trinitarian Method of Richard Baxter’s Methodus Theologiae (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2012). 87

48

Reformed Scholasticism

Assembly and Leigh wrote one of the only English language scholastic systems of theology.94 Twisse developed an international reputation for his writings on middle knowledge, predestination, and providence.95 In Switzerland, Francis Turretin (1623–87) and Johannes Heidegger (1633–98) stand out for teaching theology at Geneva and Zurich, respectively, and for their combined work on the Formula Consensus Helvetica, which was one of the last written Reformed confessions of faith (though with limited influence).96 Leonard Ryssen (1636– 1700) also prepared a popular abridgement of Turretin’s theology.97 Johann Gerhard (1582–1637) was the most important Lutheran scholastic theologian of this period, whose Loci Communes received wide attention from Reformed scholastic authors.98 It is arguably the longest systematic theology ever written, spanning seventeen large volumes.99 Late Orthodoxy becomes more diversified and difficult to classify. This period was marked simultaneously by persistence, alteration, and even decline within Reformed theology. The scholastic form of theology became an increasing matter of debate, bearing widely differing results ranging from radical conservatism to radical transformation in method and theology. The best that I can do is to provide a few names and seed thoughts for further study here. Thomas Boston (1676–1732) was a Scottish Reformed theologian Leigh, Body of Divinity. William Twisse, Dissertatio de Scientia Media, Tribus Libris Absoluta (Arnheimium, 1639); William Twisse, The Riches of God’s Love Unto the Vessels of Mercy, Consistent with His Absolute Hatred or Reprobation of the Vessels of Wrath, Or, An Answer unto a Book Entitled, God’s Love unto Mankind (Oxford, 1653); William Twisse, Vindiciae Gratiae, Potestatis ac Providentiae Dei, hoc est, ad Examen Libelli Perkinsiani de Praedestinationis Mode et Ordine, Institutum a Jacobo Arminio, Responsio Scholastica (Amsterdam, 1632). 96 Francis Turretin, Institutio Theologiae Elencticae, vol. 1, 3 vols. (Geneva, 1679); Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology; Johann Heinrich Heidegger, Corpus Theologiae Christianae, vol. 1, 2 vols. (Tiguri, 1732); Beach, Christ and the Covenant; James E. Bruce, Rights in the Law: The Importance of God’s Free Choices in the Thought of Francis Turretin, vol. 24 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013). 97 Leonard Ryssen, Francisci Turretini Ss. Theologiae Doctoris Et Professoris Compendium Theologiae Didactico-Elencticae, Ex Theologorum Nostrorum Institutionibus Theologicis Auctum Et Illustratum: Ut Praeter Explicationes Theticas Et Problematicas in Controversiis Verum Statum Proponatur, “Prôton Pseudos” Detegatur, Vera Sententia Confirmetur, Argumentis Ad Paucas Classes Revocatis, Praecipuae Adversariorum Exceptiones Et Objectiones Diluantur, Calumniae Etiam Adversarioru, Abstergantur (Amsterdam, 1695). 98 Johann Gerhard, Loci Theologici Cum Pro Adstruenda Veritate Tum Pro Destruenda Quorumvis Contradicentium Falsitate Per Theses Nervose Solide Et Copiose Explicati. 5. 5., ed. Johann Friedrich Cotta, 20 vols. (Tubingae: Cotta, 1766); David P. Scaer, “Johann Gerhard’s Doctrine of the Sacraments,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, ed. R. Scott Clark and Carl R. Trueman (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006). 99 Concordia University Press is in the process of translating this work in fifteen volumes. 94 95

Sources: Primary

49

who stood at the heart of the so-called Marrow Controversy.100 John Gill (1697–1771) was a Baptist hyper-Calvinist who retained the basic structure of a scholastic Reformed theological system with his own distinctive emphases.101 Thomas Ridgley (1667–1734) was an English minister who wrote his system of theology by way of commenting on the Westminster Larger Catechism.102 Bernardinus de Moor (1709–80) was a Dutch student of Johannes Markcius (1656–1731), who wrote a seven-volume commentary on his teacher’s compendium of theology.103 This project represents an expansion and summary of the Reformed scholastic tradition that is highly conservative in method and content.104 The last Late Orthodox theologian that I list here is Jean-Alphonse Turretin (1671–1737), who was son of Francis Turretin and his successor at Geneva. Jean-Alphonse marked the beginning of a shift away from scholastic Reformed theology in Geneva into the early Enlightenment quest for a Christianity built more on natural theology and in search for a theological system consisting almost entirely of “fundamental articles” of the faith.105 According to Martijn Bac and Theo Pleizier, Willem van Asselt taught that “the major break in church history is the Enlightenment rather than the Reformation and Renaissance period.”106 The select list of authors surveyed here illustrates this point well. The authors listed in all three periods of Reformed orthodoxy only scratch the surface in relation to what resources are readily available to students.

Thomas Boston, The Complete Works of the Late Rev. Thomas Boston, Ettrick: Including His Memoirs (Wheaton, IL: R.O. Roberts, 1980); William VanDoodewaard, The Marrow Controversy and Seceder Tradition: Marrow Theology in the Associate Presbytery and Associate Synod Secession Churches of Scotland (1733–1799), Reformed Historical-Theological Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011). 101 John Gill, A Body of Doctrinal Divinity: Or, a System of Evangelical Truths, Deduced from the Sacred Scriptures. in Two Volumes. by John Gill (London: Printed for the author, and sold by George Keith, 1769); Michael A. G. Haykin, ed., The Life and Thought of John Gill (1697–1771): A Tercentennial Appreciation (Leiden: Brill, 1997). 102 Thomas Ridgley, A Body of Divinity (London, 1731). 103 Dolph te Velde referred to de Moor as the Last Voetian. te Velde, “Reformed Theology and Scholasticism,” 222. 104 de Moor, Continuous Commentary on Marckius. 105 Martin I. Klauber, “Theological Transition in Geneva from Jean-Alphonse Turretin to Jacob Vernet,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006), 256–70. 106 Martijn Bac and Theo Pleizier, “Reentering the Sites of Truth: Teaching Reformed Scholasticism in the Contemporary Classroom,” in Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honor of Willem J. van Asselt, ed. Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, vol. 14, Studies in Theology and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 32. 100

50

Reformed Scholasticism

However, this list has highlighted some of the major figures in each period and their primary writings as they relate to scholasticism in particular.

Conclusion The above material is designed to get students started in studying Reformed scholasticism in relation to using primary sources. Researchers may come with topics in mind that they wish to pursue. A topic should interest the student enough to pursue it through to the end. However, you must approach your topic with more questions than answers and your questions may change as you read. This process begins with learning to identify and to use primary sources. Students of Reformed scholasticism need to know what to start reading and what to do with what they read. They need the required language tools to read what they need to and they need to know where to get their sources. They also need to learn through the process of reading which sources to prioritize. The list of important authors and their works at the end of this section provides enough material to get started and to keep a student going for a while, possibly to the end. You still may not have a thesis, however. Having one is indispensable to give focus to your research and to prevent you from getting lost in the daunting amount of available materials. Michael Kibbe’s From Topic to Thesis can help students further learn how to do this more fully. The material below will illustrate the cyclical nature of historical research and writing as well. For now, readers should use the above material to learn what they are looking for in relation to the theses they develop. The author will provide more help in this area below as well. Before getting to that point, however, it is important to expand the discussion of basic research methodology into using secondary sources and into learning more about historical methodology before learning how to narrow a thesis statement and to write and outline a research project.

3

Sources: Secondary To borrow a scholastic distinction, primary sources are a necessary cause of a good research project, but they are not a sufficient cause of one.1 It is possible to write a relatively sound analysis of a subject from primary sources while missing essential relevant points due to neglecting secondary literature about the subject. No one knows everything and, as we have seen, setting a historical context can become virtually infinitely expansive. Students of Reformed scholasticism need to interact humbly and respectfully with other scholars who have written in their field of study or in areas potentially related to that field of study. The point of this chapter is that to study Reformed scholasticism, students must become familiar with the secondary literature relevant to their research topics. Accordingly, the material below addresses how to identify potentially relevant secondary sources, how to use them properly, and how to obtain needed resources.

How to identify relevant secondary sources Remember that secondary literature related to a topic refers to written material reflecting on a subject after the event in question. Recent scholarly secondary sources should take priority when researching Reformed scholasticism, since such materials bring students up to speed with current conversations

For example, Maccovius noted that the analogia fidei is necessary for interpreting Scripture, but that it is not sufficient by itself for doing so. Johannes Maccovius, Scholastic Discourse: Johannes Maccovius (1588–1644) on Theological and Philosophical Distinctions and Rules (Apeldoorn: Instituut voor Reformatieonderzoek, 2009), 77.

1

52

Reformed Scholasticism

relevant to their chosen topics. Some of the examples in the preceding chapter illustrate the value of solid secondary literature, to the degrees that such literature engages fruitfully with primary source literature. Secondary literature can teach students what questions to ask, where to look in relation to primary sources, and they help students learn where their own research can potentially contribute something to ongoing scholarly discussions about a subject. Identifying relevant secondary literature relates to learning how to both recognize scholarly sources and find literature analogous to one’s subject. The matter of first importance here is learning how to recognize scholarly sources related to Reformed scholasticism. While Kibbe’s counsel regarding scholarly sources in From Topic to Thesis is relevant here, most of his advice relates narrowly to biblical studies rather than to historical theology. The material below narrows the focus on secondary sources to materials that will immediately help those studying Reformed scholastic theology. Scholarly secondary sources, as opposed to popular ones, are important because they ask different questions in light of their different purposes. Instead of asking whether a topic is useful, scholarly resources ask historical questions related to the development of historical ideas in historical contexts. Scholarly sources thus accomplish different things that popular-level writings do. Scholarly secondary literature is also subject to peer review by other experts in the field, both prior to and after publication (through reviews and other published interaction). Such features make them invaluable for doing serious research in this field. One way to determine which secondary sources are relevant lies in identifying important series of books, publishers, authors, and journals. Since the primary target audience for this book comes from the English-speaking world, most of the material surveyed narrows its focus to English literature about Reformed scholasticism.

Books and publishers Several publishers include series of books related directly to Reformed orthodox and scholastic theology. The list below does not pretend to be

Sources: Secondary

53

exhaustive. Instead, it provides students with a starting point to pursue their explorations of Reformed scholastic theology. In the Netherlands, Brill is preeminent for publishing materials related to this subject in several series of books. Brill’s Studies in Church history, Studies in Reformed Theology, and Companion series include many useful scholarly sources. These include items such as van Asselt’s work on Cocceius,2 a volume on Reformed orthodoxy and philosophy,3 the authority of Scripture in Reformed theology,4 Puritanism in relation to Reformed orthodoxy,5 A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy,6 and a large number of other resources related to Reformed scholasticism, both in terms of methodology and content. Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism, which is a feschrift for Richard Muller, stands out as immediately relevant to the development of Protestant scholastic theology due to the fact that it focuses narrowly on the development of theological schools and their relation to the church.7 While secondary literature is always liable to provoke disagreement at points as well as raise questions for further study, Brill’s books are always well-researched and provide a consistently reliable source of secondary literature. Oxford’s Studies in Historical Theology are also useful in this regard. The volumes included in this series encompass early church and medieval studies as well as ones related to the development of Reformed thought and beyond. This series is worth monitoring for useful authors and topics. It includes volumes on late seventeenth-century theological developments in England,8

Willem J. van Asselt, The Federal Theology of Johannes Cocceius (1603–1669) (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2001). 3 Aza Goudriaan, Reformed Orthodoxy and Philosophy, 1625–1750 Gisbertus Voetius, Petrus Van Mastricht, and Anthonius Driessen (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2006). 4 Henk Van den Belt, The Authority of Scripture in Reformed Theology: Truth and Trust, Studies in Reformed Theology (Leiden: Brill, 2014). 5 Randall J. Pederson, Unity in Diversity: English Puritans and the Puritan Reformation, 1603–1689, vol. 68, Brill Studies in Church History (Leiden: Brill, 2014). 6 H. J. Selderhuis, ed., A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy (Leiden: Brill, 2013). 7 Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, eds., Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013). 8 Dewey D. Wallace, Shapers of English Calvinism, 1660–1714: Variety, Persistence, and Transformation (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011). 2

54

Reformed Scholasticism

debates between Calvin and Lutherans over Christological exegesis,9 John Owen,10 British trinitarian debates,11 the development of the filioque doctrine throughout history,12 and several others. Oxford has published numerous other useful volumes related to Reformed scholasticism as well, including Chad van Dixhoorn’s seminal work on the Westminster Assembly,13 The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology,14 The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology,15 Brannon Ellis’s study of Calvin’s treatment of eternal generation and his relation to later Reformed thought,16 Merkle’s study of Jerome Zanchi’s development of trinitarian theology from Hebrew grammar,17 and many others are indispensable for students interested in related topics. Some Oxford compilation volumes include chapters on Reformed orthodox theology as well, such as their handbooks on the Trinity, Christology, and Sacramental Theology.18 Oxford sets a high standard for historical theology and their published treatments of topics related to Reformed scholasticism aim at setting a very broad context. Works such as these are not only valuable resources for doing research, but they serve as a model as to how on should do research and write historical theology. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht’s Reformed Historical Theology series is related most directly to the field of Reformed scholasticism, since the entire series is G. Sujin Pak, The Judaizing Calvin: Sixteenth-Century Debates over the Messianic Psalms (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010). 10 Crawford Gribben, John Owen and English Puritanism: Experiences of Defeat, Oxford Studies in Historical Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016). 11 Paul Chang-Ha Lim, Mystery Unveiled: The Crisis of the Trinity in Early Modern England (New York: Oxford University Press, 2012). 12 A. Edward Siecienski, The Filioque: History of a Doctrinal Controversy, Oxford Studies in Historical Theology (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010). 13 Chad B. Van Dixhoorn, The Minutes and Papers of the Westminster Assembly, 1643–1652, 5 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). 14 Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016). 15 Robert Kolb, Irene Dingel, and L’ubomir Batka, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014). 16 Brannon Ellis, Calvin, Classical Trinitarianism, and the Aseity of the Son (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012). 17 Benjamin R. Merkle, Defending the Trinity in the Reformed Palatinate: The Elohistae, Oxford Theology and Religion Monographs (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016). 18 Gilles Emery and Matthew Levering, eds., The Oxford Handbook of the Trinity (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2011); Francesca Aran Murphy, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Christology (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015); Hans Boersma and Matthew Levering, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Sacramental Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). 9

Sources: Secondary

55

devoted exclusively to historic Reformed thought. A good number of these books began as PhD dissertations, many of which came to fruition under Richard Muller, Willem van Asselt, and other recognized scholars in this field. As of the time of writing this book, this series is breaking fifty volumes, treating a range of Reformed authors and theological topics. These include authors such as Francis Turretin,19 Thomas Goodwin (1600–80),20 John Owen,21 Amandus Polanus (1561–1610),22 John Edwards (1637–1716),23 Campegius Virtringa (1659–1722),24 and many more. This series also treats a wide range of theological topics, including diversity in the Reformed tradition,25 the ordo salutis,26 covenant theology,27 and other vital aspects of Reformed thought. Some volumes include multi-author edited collections on particular subjects, such as John Calvin and Richard Hooker.28 Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht also has a related Reformation 500 series that focuses on similar issues in relation J. Mark Beach, Christ and the Covenant: Francis Turretin’s Federal Theology as a Defense of the Doctrine of Grace (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007); James E. Bruce, Rights in the Law: The Importance of God’s Free Choices in the Thought of Francis Turretin, vol. 24 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013). 20 Mark Jones, Why Heaven Kissed Earth: The Christology of the Puritan Reformed Orthodox Theologian, Thomas Goodwin (1600–1680), vol. 13, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010). 21 Ryan M. McGraw, “A Heavenly Directory”: Trinitarian Piety, Public Worship, and a Reassessment of John Owen’s Theology, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014); Andrew M. Leslie, The Light of Grace: John Owen on the Authority of Scripture and Christian Faith, vol. 34, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015). 22 Byung Soo Han, Symphonia Catholica: The Merger of Patristic and Contemporary Sources in the Theological Method of Amandus Polanus (1561–1610), vol. 30, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015). 23 Jeongmo Yoo, John Edwards (1637–1716) on Human Free Choice and Divine Necessity: The Debate on the Relation between Divine Necessity and Human Freedom in Late Seventeenth-Century and Early Eighteenth-Century England, vol. 22 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013). 24 Charles K. Telfer, Wrestling with Isaiah: The Exegetical Methodology of Campegius Vitringa (1659– 1722), vol. 38, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016). 25 Michael A. G. Haykin and Mark Jones, eds., Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, vol. 17, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011). 26 J. V. Fesko, Beyond Calvin: Union with Christ and Justification in Early Modern Reformed Theology (1517–1700), vol. 20, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012). 27 Brian J. Lee, Johannes Cocceius and the Exegetical Roots of Federal Theology, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008); J. V. Fesko, The Covenant of Redemption: Origins, Development, and Reception, vol. 35, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016). 28 Herman J. Selderhuis, Calvinus Pastor Ecclesiae Papers of the Eleventh International Congress on Calvin Research, vol. 39, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016); W. Bradford Littlejohn and Scott N. Kindred-Barnes, eds., Richard Hooker and Reformed Orthodoxy, vol. 40, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017). 19

56

Reformed Scholasticism

primarily to sixteenth-century authors and topics. The vast majority of these volumes are heavily situated in historical contexts, though some draw less widely from contemporary cross-confessional primary source material than others do. The narrower focus of these books than comparable series’ should make this publisher stand out as an excellent starting point for students of Reformed scholasticism. Ashgate has produced some substantial and consistently excellent volumes related to this field. This includes several important volumes on John Owen’s theology.29 Ashgate also publishes works on important medieval thinkers and delves into late orthodox and evangelical theologians, such as Phillip Doddridge (1702–51).30 Perusing their website periodically will often become fruitful in looking for key theologians and theological topics. Students should also not overlook Manchester University Press. While their range of publications is much smaller than the others listed above, the select titles that they carry are excellent models of sound historical theology. Hunter Powell’s outstanding work on debates over church power at the Westminster Assembly, cited in the preceding chapter, appears through this publisher.31 Manchester also plans to publish an edited volume on debates over church polity in Reformed orthodoxy under the title, The Keys of the Kingdom, which promises to be a substantial and comprehensive contribution to historical scholarship for those interested in this subject. Cambridge University Press includes a number of interesting volumes related to scholastic theology. Cambridge has produced vital stand-alone volumes, such as Sarah Mortimer’s work on early English Socinianism.32 Their Introduction to Medieval Theology is also, in this author’s opinion, one of the best entry points into the rise of scholastic theology, especially in relation

Carl R. Trueman, John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man (Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007); Kelly M. Kapic and Mark Jones, eds., The Ashgate Research Companion to John Owen’s Theology (Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012); Tim Cooper, John Owen, Richard Baxter, and the Formation of Nonconformity (Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011). 30 Robert Strivens, Philip Doddridge and the Shaping of Evangelical Dissent, Ashgate Studies in Evangelicalism (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2015). 31 Hunter Powell, The Crisis of British Protestantism: Church Power in the Puritan Revolution 1638–44, Politics, Culture and Society in Early Modern Britain (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2015). 32 Sarah Mortimer, Reason and Religion in the English Revolution: The Challenge of Socinianism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010). 29

Sources: Secondary

57

to the nature of theology, piety, and the Trinity.33 Some of their compilation volumes, such as The Cambridge Companion to Puritanism, The Cambridge Companion to the Trinity, and The Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology include valuable historical essays on classic Reformed thought.34 Like the abovementioned publishers, Cambridge consistently produces highquality historical research in this field. Wipf and Stock publishes volumes on Reformed theology of varying quality. These works are generally helpful, though some of them are less contextually grounded than the preceding examples. For example, Edwin Tay on Owen on the Atonement is excellent in terms of its analysis, though requiring a bit more comparison with continental Reformed authors.35 On the other hand, Brian Kay misses much of Owen’s context on the Trinity due to his limited appeal to the broader Reformed and medieval contexts of trinitarian thought.36 Readers should remember as well that, in cooperation with Paternoster, this publisher includes Clark and Trueman’s indispensable high-quality volume on Protestant Scholasticism.37 They include other individual studies covering individual figures, such as Samuel Rutherford,38 and the development of classic Reformed systematic theology.39 While readers should not overlook this publisher, they should also be aware that many of the volumes produced by them border on self-publication, which accounts for the varying quality of these works. T&T Clark is an important publisher for modern systematic theology in particular, which often includes forays into Reformed orthodox/scholastic thought. Their materials are always worth consulting and their books are always Rik Van Nieuwenhove, An Introduction to Medieval Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). 34 John Coffey and Paul C. H. Lim, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Puritanism (Cambridge, and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008); Peter C. Phan, The Cambridge Companion to the Trinity (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011); Selderhuis, A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy. 35 Edwin E. M. Tay, “The Priesthood of Christ in the Atonement Theology of John Owen (1616–1683),” PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2009. 36 Brian Kay, Trinitarian Spirituality: John Owen and the Doctrine of God in Western Devotion (Bletchley, Milton Keynes and Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2007). 37 Carl R. Trueman and R. Scott Clark, eds., Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster, 1999). 38 Guy M. Richard, The Supremacy of God in the Theology of Samuel Rutherford (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009). 39 Jan van Vliet, Rise of the Reformed System: The Intellectual Heritage of William Ames (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2013). 33

58

Reformed Scholasticism

thought provoking and worth the time invested in them. However, some of their historical studies, while valuable for their theological analyses, require greater contextual development. Alan Spence’s Incarnation and Inspiration is an example of this, since he cites Owen and contemporary authors extensively, but he includes little interaction with international Reformed orthodox theology.40 His treatment of Owen’s Christology in relation to his Pneumatology on his own terms is clear, insightful, and accurate, but the lack of interaction with Owen’s broader intellectual world makes it appear as though no one else from the time period made comparable connections between these two theological loci. By contrast, Maarten Wisse and Hugo Meijer have suggested elsewhere that Owen’s views had both medieval precedent and contemporary parallels, both of which areas can yield further fruitful research.41 Baker Academic has published widely recognized volumes by authors such as Richard Muller and Willem van Asselt, among other leading scholars in this field. This makes them a useful resource for the study of Reformed scholasticism, though readers should note that Baker produces a smaller number of resources related to this field than other comparable publishers. The same comments are in order with respect to Eerdmans. Many other publishers include books related to classic Reformed theology. As students digest important secondary literature in relation to the publishers discussed explicitly here, they will learn to follow the bibliography in these works, which will increasingly expand their horizons as they search for scholarly secondary literature. In addition to following publishers and series of books, it will be helpful to ask friends and recognized scholars to provide advice and direction for further research as well. Do not hesitate to contact scholars and authors with questions related to their work. Their contact information can generally be obtained from their academic institutions or through other online resources. This author has found that authors are usually generous with their time and counsel in this regard and that they are ordinarily excited that others are interested in their research. For example, the author once contacted Paul

Alan Spence, Incarnation and Inspiration: John Owen and the Coherence of Christology (London and New York: T & T Clark, 2007). 41 Maarten Wisse and Hugo Meijer, “Pneumatology: Tradition and Renewal,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 465–518. 40

Sources: Secondary

59

Lim about his work on Socinianism, who provided generous counsel even though he and the author have never met to this day. Contact with authors and scholars can also lead to developing international friendships leading to ongoing conversations about research that will enrich your work. One last research tip regarding finding relevant secondary literature is to follow important authors and their students. Even when authors, such as Muller, write for non-academic publishers they have something useful to say in relation to historical theology. Mark Jones on antinomianism is a good example of this as is A Puritan Theology.42 However, use caution and exercise discernment here. Outstanding scholars are not merely right due to their reputation. Even outstanding and reputable scholars can stretch historical evidence to its limits at times.43 Primary sources always trump secondary ones as evidence for framing arguments. If you must disagree with a recognized author, especially when their work is printed through a reputable publisher, then you should do so as humbly and reservedly as possible in your writing.

Published articles The same general principles relevant to identifying scholarly books related to Reformed scholasticism apply to looking for published articles. Rather than providing another extensive list of examples here, this section instead gives general suggestions. The advantage of using scholarly articles rather than merely published books is that articles are often able to investigate specific narrow questions that may not appear in the context of a book. Scholars in an academic field often write more articles than books and students can miss significant material without some reference to them. Ideally, university access will enable students to search databases to find scholarly articles related to their research topics. Historical journals published through universities known for sound historical research, such as Oxford, Cambridge, Leiden, and Amsterdam, are ordinarily a reliable source of valuable well-researched Mark Jones, Antinomianism: Reformed Theology’s Unwelcome Guest? Philipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2013; Joel R. Beeke and Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012). 43 For example, see my review of Gribben, John Owen and English Puritanism; Ryan M. McGraw, “A Review of Crawford Gribben, John Owen and English Puritanism: Experiences of Defeat,” Westminster Theological Journal (2016): 353–4. 42

60

Reformed Scholasticism

articles. In relation to Reformed scholasticism, some journals that stand out are Brill’s Journal of Reformed Theology, the International Journal of Systematic Theology, Westminster Theological Journal, Calvin Theological Journal, MidAmerica Journal of Theology, the Journal for the History of Reformed Pietism, and many others. Working through books produced by reputable publishers and by established authors in this field will help students develop ideas regarding where to look for more articles as well, since a large number of academic journals exist that include essays related to historic Reformed theology whether or not the journal’s title gives students clues in this direction.

How to use secondary sources Given that primary sources should form the basis of sound historical research and writing, it can be helpful to give some further guidance on how to use secondary sources responsibly. The suggestions that follow represent practices that the present author has found useful in his own research through a creative process of trial and error. Prioritize secondary sources that are related most immediately to your subject. Look for scholarly monographs related directly to your subject, but also search for dissertations. If you are writing on John Calvin’s view of the church, for example, then you obviously should start by searching for secondary literature on Calvin’s ecclesiology. In addition to the counsel above concerning searching for books from specific publishers, one way to find books written on a subject like this one is to search by relevant key words using bookfinder.com. Many of the books a student discovers through this kind of broad search will be irrelevant to his or her research, but this resource sometimes yields results from publishers that students may not have thought to consult. In regard to Calvin’s ecclesiology, it will be helpful to look at material covering analogous subjects as well, such as the ecclesiology of contemporary Reformers, especially like Theodore Beza, who was Calvin’s successor in Geneva. In this connection, students should attempt to use doctoral dissertations related to their subjects, though with some caution. While dissertations represent earned doctorates, not all are of publishable quality. Some dissertations remain unpublished for good reasons. Ordinarily this results from a failure to

Sources: Secondary

61

set historical contexts adequately. Even with regard to published dissertations, students should become familiar with the methods approved by each publisher in light of the consistent trajectory of their finished products. Other dissertations are pure gold, such as Knapp on Owen’s exegetical method, yet they remain unpublished due to the personal reasons of their authors.44 However, even relatively weak dissertations can give readers something to interact with and can help direct them to other useful sources that they might not discover otherwise. Every researcher knows something that we do not and that we can learn from. Understanding primary sources in their original contexts reiterates the need to interact predominantly with secondary sources that have a scholarly reputation. Non-scholarly history often addresses different questions that will not suit the needs of academic historical research. For instance, historical material published by Banner of Truth can have limited value in historical research, even though they are often full of good and edifying information. They are valuable in their practical aim and for their intended audience, but they often seek to identify heroes instead of putting people in their historical contexts. They can also blur the distinction between understanding historical ideas in historical contexts and applying these ideas for contemporary uses. Chad Van Dixhoorn’s useful Banner of Truth volume on the Westminster Confession is a good example of this.45 The author is an undisputed expert in his field, yet he did not write this book for an academic audience. Though it purports to present the theology of the Westminster divines on their own terms, there is very little footnote evidence to back up historical assumptions. This makes it difficult to distinguish the author’s historically informed statements from his contemporary interaction with Scripture and his aim to reach a contemporary audience with Reformed theology. His book is an excellent introduction to Reformed theology for church members at large, but its value for historical research is limited by design. Readers should be aware of the purpose of the book or article that they are reading and they should keep the intended audience in view. Look first at Oxford, Brill, V&R, and similar

Henry M. Knapp, “Understanding the Mind of God: John Owen and Seventeenth-Century Exegetical Methodology,” Unpublished PhD thesis, Calvin Theological Seminary, 2002. 45 Chad B. Van Dixhoorn, Confessing the Faith: A Reader’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2014). 44

62

Reformed Scholasticism

academic publishers and use published material aimed at a popular audience sparingly for academic research.46 Another important reminder is that while students should use secondary sources to gather ideas and to raise questions, they should let primary sources alone drive their analyses and conclusions. Secondary literature alerts a reader’s attention to what others have said about historical ideas, but they cannot replace studying these historical ideas first hand. As a subsequent chapter will illustrate, for decades scholars assumed that Reformed scholasticism marked a departure from Calvin’s pristine Reformed theology. Most authors have now abandoned this thesis due to heavy emphasis on reading primary sources and contextualizing historical ideas more adequately. Secondary sources either illustrate the present state of the question on a given topic, lacunae in the issues treated, or even misrepresentations of historical ideas. Using them is vital, but it is not enough to do sound research. It is important at this juncture to add some comments on the need to read secondary sources that are analogous in content to your subject of interest. This author cannot overstress the importance of this point. If you write, for example, on Goodwin’s trinitarian piety (on which, to this author’s knowledge, no scholarly works exist to date), then read works on Owen and Baxter’s trinitarian theology, as well as others that you can find on the development of Reformed trinitarian theology to fill in the gaps in your understanding. Be imaginative. Authors writing on similar topics may help you learn where to look for what you need or illustrate why your research fills a gap in historical theological studies. Biographies of Oliver Cromwell47 and William Laud,48 for example, helped the present author build Owen’s context more broadly. Timothy Wengert’s Law and Gospel, which treats the Lutheran antinomian context, was also indispensable for my research on Owen’s treatment of the law and the gospel, even though Wengert did not have a British context in view.49

I once resented this counsel, but I have come to see its value. Finding heroes in church history can be helpful, yet it is equally if not more helpful to understand historical figures and ideas in their own contexts first before evaluating whether their actions or ideas are true or useful. 47 Patrick Little, Oliver Cromwell: New Perspectives (Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009). 48 Charles Carlton, Archbishop William Laud (London and New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1987). 49 Timothy J. Wengert, Law and Gospel: Philip Melanchthon’s Debate with John Agricola of Eisleben Over Poenitentia (Carlisle, Cumbria, and Grand Rapids, MI: Paternoster; Baker Books, 1997); Ryan M. McGraw, John Owen: Trajectories in Reformed Orthodox Theology (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017). 46

Sources: Secondary

63

The last point of advice in using secondary sources is don’t try to read everything from cover to cover. Learn how to analyze a whole book before delving into its particular parts. Mortimer J. Adler’s classic How to Read a Book gives good directions related to this point.50 Seek to identify which books you need to read entirely and which sections of other books might prove fruitful to your research. The introductions and conclusions of well-written and well-planned books are the best tools to determine the distinctive aims and contributions of an author or a group of contributors. Stay focused on your thesis in your research. Doing so will largely determine what you read, why you read it, how much of it you need to digest, and what you opt to skip over.

How to obtain secondary sources Most of the secondary literature recommended in this chapter is very expensive to purchase. Many of the books range from $100 and upwards in price. Some sets, such as Van Dixhoorn’s five volumes on the Westminster Assembly, cost around $1000. With respect to some publishers, a portion of such high prices reflects extensive behind the scenes peer-review and editorial processes that authors do not receive from non-academic publishers. This process makes authors work harder and it makes their final products much better and more useful to others. However, obtaining such valuable secondary sources easily becomes cost prohibitive to many students, especially to those laboring in Christian ministry concurrently with their studies. Below are some creative suggestions for obtaining expensive secondary literature, especially with regard to academic books. First, students should learn to use the inter-library loan services of a local lending library. Ordinarily this service is free. At most, it has cost the present author a dollar to ship a book to the local public library. It is rare for a university or local lending library not to be able to obtain very expensive scholarly secondary sources. A librarian can also assist students in obtaining articles that may help them in their studies. This point does not apply only to students with access to university libraries. This author, for example, was Mortimer J. Adler and Charles Lincoln Van Doren, How to Read a Book (New York: A. Touchstone Book, 2014).

50

64

Reformed Scholasticism

able to gain access to large numbers of academic books and articles through the inter-library loan services of the public library of the small town in South Carolina in which he lived for a time.51 Second, only purchase expensive academic books if you plan to return to them frequently. For the present author, the number of books that meet this criterion is relatively small. Ordinarily, it is sufficient to take good notes on a volume obtained through inter-library loan for present and future uses as long as the reader knows what to look for and what to write down. Few can afford the expense of adding a steady stream of academic books to their personal libraries. Third, if you are a minister, then work with your local church to establish an adequate professional expense account that you can use to purchase books, computers, or other resources needed to further your research. In the United States, this is a tax-free professional account designed to facilitate your work. It can be used to purchase books, computers, tuition, and other essential items, as well as for travel related to your work. Applying such an account to academic studies in historical theology assumes that you have an agreement to pursue further studies with the leadership of your local congregation. It also assumes that even though you are pursuing an academic project, your aims are ultimately to use what you learn for the benefit of the church. Fourth, use online article databases, such as ATLA or JSTOR. A theological seminary and seminary librarian should be able to help students on this front. This applies to university students as well. Ordinarily, journal access databases are available, both to current students and to alumni in many institutions. Local public libraries can also obtain expensive articles and have the capacity either to print copies of them for students or to email pdf copies of needed articles to them. Fifth, some students will be able to request review copies of important new books, if they can guarantee published reviews of the books that they request from publishers. The present author has done this through establishing a reputation as a reviewer with multiple scholarly journals as well as by serving as an assistant review editor to one journal. This often enables this author to For students in California, they can use the Link + system, which gives them access to California University libraries as well as to some private universities. Broader inter-library loan services are available for an extra charge.

51

Sources: Secondary

65

make prior arrangements with journal editors to publish reviews of books that he is interested in acquiring. Publishing reviews of books enables students to build their personal libraries without being weighed down with excessive costs of buying academic books. Writing reviews also promotes digesting material, remembering it better, and finding uses for it in relation to one’s research. Those attempting to pursue this route need to start publishing reviews with several journals to build their reputations as reviewers and to secure predictable avenues through which to publish reviews. Publishers are generally generous with granting requests for review copies, as long as you can publish them with reputable journals and not in blog posts.

Conclusion Using secondary literature related to Reformed scholasticism enhances and completes one’s interaction with primary source literature. It is important to learn how to identify which secondary sources will likely be most relevant to historical research, to know how to use those sources responsibly, and to pursue various avenues of obtaining them. Together, primary and secondary sources provide students of Reformed scholasticism with the tools that they need to delve into materials related to classic Reformed theology. However, to complete this sketch of historical methodology, it is necessary to outline proper historical methodology itself and to show what this method looks like in practice through the process of outlining and writing a project related to Reformed scholasticism. The following chapter seeks to plant seed thoughts that will help students move in the right direction in this regard.

66

4

Research Methodology: Historiography and Writing Historical Theology In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the author’s undergraduate degree in History, he took courses in historical thinking (historiography) and in historical writing. This paved the way for a senior research seminar in which students applied the skills obtained from these other courses to a large-scale research and writing project. Taken together, these courses reflect the fact that, as a discipline, history has its own theory and practice and that historians need to learn the tools of their trade. Yet it is often the case today that many students pursuing higher degrees in historical theology have not obtained these skills at the undergraduate level. Students without these foundational studies may need to develop a basic theory and practice of historical writing through studying some of the key texts listed in the bibliography of the present book. This chapter and the one that follows apply principles related to historiography and to historical writing, with special application to research related to Reformed scholasticism. The basic point of the present chapter is that to study Reformed scholasticism, students must develop a sound historiography to begin writing historical theology well.

Preliminary reflections on historiography Historiography overlaps with that branch of philosophy known as epistemology. In recent decades, the growth of postmodern philosophy and its theories related to the deconstruction of language has threatened the legitimacy of history as an academic discipline. While such philosophical theories are beyond the scope of the present book, readers should be aware that this has created a crisis

68

Reformed Scholasticism

in the right of history to exist as a discipline. Some historians have responded to these philosophical trends by seeking to dismantle postmodern language theory.1 Others have reframed the historian’s task by appropriating elements of postmodern philosophy, while retaining a realistic yet optimistic view of explaining the thought of historical figures in historical contexts.2 Historians generally agree, however, that to justify the existence of history as an academic discipline, and the history of ideas in particular, it is necessary to develop a philosophical foundation that supports the possibility of doing historical research that retains some level of objectivity. While this chapter and the one that follows stress the practice of history primarily, these observations lead to two preliminary ideas regarding the theoretical grounds of historiography.

Theological reflections The first point is that, in this author’s view, only a biblical epistemology can support the possibility of historical research.3 The point here is merely to state some of the key principles that this assertion entails, with their implications, rather than arguing at length in favor of them. The first component of this epistemology is the Creator/creature distinction. The triune God revealed in Scripture is transcendent and in a category entirely separate from creation. In light with Reformed scholastic thought, as we will see below, this means that God has all knowledge in himself, through himself, and with reference to himself. This is what Reformed scholastics called archetypal theology.4 This means that the triune God is the archetypal pattern and foundation of all knowledge. All creaturely knowledge must be derived

For example, Joyce Oldham Appleby, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret C. Jacob, Telling the Truth about History (New York: Norton, 1994). 2 Quentin Skinner, Visions of Politics: Volume 1: Regarding Method (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002); Alister Chapman, John Coffey, and Brad S. Gregory, eds., Seeing Things Their Way: Intellectual History and the Return of Religion (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009). 3 For a full defense of Christian epistemology that lays the groundwork for history as well as other fields of study, see Cornelius Van Til, A Christian Theology of Knowledge (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publications, 1969). 4 Franciscus Junius, A Treatise on True Theology: With the Life of Franciscus Junius, trans. David C. Noe (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), 107–20; Willem J. van Asselt, “The Fundamental Meaning of Theology: Archetypal and Ectypal Theology in Seventeenth-Century Reformed Thought,” Westminster Theological Journal 64, no. 2 (2002): 319–35. 1

Historiography and Writing Historical Theology

69

analogously from God’s self-knowledge, while creaturely knowledge can never be qualitatively the same as God’s self-knowledge. The second component of a Christian epistemology is the Creator/creature relationship. This means that God reveals himself to creatures made in his image. The facts of mathematics, for example, all what they are because God has created them to be what they are. Since human beings are made in God’s image, they have the capacity for ectypal knowledge based analogously on God’s archetypal knowledge. Under this theory, scientific investigation is possible only because God has revealed himself and all things in the world in relation to him to creatures who possess the receptive capacity to understand such things. With the introduction of sin into the world, this means that while human beings still think and act as creatures made in God’s image, they do not acknowledge him as God and as their God without the regenerating power of the Spirit at work in their hearts, reconciling them to God in Christ. This means that because God is who he is and because human beings are who they are, scientific investigation (which includes historical reasoning from evidence) is possible, even when scientists do not acknowledge that only such theological principles undergird their discipline by providing a theory that makes natural laws and facts existent and knowable. The distinction between the Creator and his creation coupled with the epistemological relationship between them makes history possible as a discipline even as history partakes of the character of other sciences.

Practical reflections However, having a biblical epistemology is not the same thing as using sound historical methodology. One can be a sound Christian theologian and a poor historian. Conversely, one can be a sound historian who is not a Christian at all. In this author’s opinion, the first person possesses right beliefs, but the wrong practices; the latter person pursues right practices without a sound philosophical grounding for those practices. Historians, Christians or otherwise, should beware of confusing these two issues. To illustrate, the author once received an F in an undergraduate research course on the English Reformation. He was tasked to analyze Nicholas Ridley’s (1500–55) thought and approach to the Reformation. The problem

70

Reformed Scholasticism

was that while he sought to contextualize Ridley’s thought in light of primary source evidence, the professor wanted him to impose modern psychoanalysis on Ridley and Latimer to explain which particular psychological disorders led them to go to the stake singing hymns. It could be tempting to see this as an example of persecuting a Christian student over a religious difference. However, the problem was that the student did not believe that the professor was requiring him to use a sound historical method. He complained to another professor, who was a Christian and a professor of medieval history. This professor appealed to the academic dean, who was not a Christian. Both the Christian professor and the non-Christian dean sided with the student in this case. Yet they did so on methodological grounds rather than on the grounds of a Christian epistemology, which they did not hold in common. Both professors agreed over how history should be done in spite of their basic philosophical differences. Students should also distinguish between a theological foundation for historiography and purported theological interpretations of history. Appealing to a Christian epistemology as the theoretical ground of history does not mean that students should import religious evaluations into every historical investigation.5 To illustrate, in this author’s undergraduate degree, he initially argued with his historiography professor regarding the importance of divine providence in historical interpretation. Without criticizing the student’s personal convictions, the professor responded that appealing to divine providence was not particularly helpful for historical interpretations of events. His point was that it is one thing to believe that the triune God directs all things to his own glory and that he uses historical events to bring people to repentance from sin, etc. It is another thing to apply overly specific cause and effect relationships between historical events and God’s supposed intent behind these events. Historians can attempt to trace the development of human ideas and actions in historical contexts. Doing so involves framing probable arguments from historical evidence. Tracing the thought of the divine mind in history is another matter entirely that goes beyond the historical evidence. While it is true, for example, to say that God providentially directed Augustine

See Trueman’s cautions in this regard in Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 166–7.

5

Historiography and Writing Historical Theology

71

of Hippo to read the Bible through children singing, “Tolle lege,” this does not furnish a historian with a good explanation of how Augustine developed his thought. Answering such questions would require background studies related to his education, his philosophical inclinations and shifts, his foray into Manichaeism, and many other areas. While a Christian epistemology tries to lay a theoretical foundation for history as a discipline, sound historical principles often exist in spite of the absence of such self-conscious epistemological principles.6

Toward “seeing things their way” Many students misunderstand what it means to detail their approach to historical method. This author once reviewed a doctoral dissertation in which under “method” the student described his approach as “chronological.” While this was an accurate description of the ordering of his chapters, it missed the mark in answering the question of methodology. Historical methodology, or historiography, describes for readers how an author approaches his or her evidence and what methods he or she uses to interpret that evidence. Cambridge historian Quentin Skinner is known for the using the phrase, “seeing things their way,” to describe his historical method.7 While Skinner recognized that a contemporary historian can never fully understand the thoughts of historical figures in historical contexts, the goal of his historiographical method is to come as close as possible to doing so by learning to ask historical questions rather than contemporary ones. This largely represents the historical method advocated here. In explaining this method of historical investigation, Brad Gregory writes, “I take ‘seeing things their way’ to be more or less synonymous with understanding religious people on their own terms, or with reconstructing the ways in which they viewed themselves

The author would add here that this is possible because even historians who do not share a Christian epistemology are made in God’s image, live in God’s world, and interpret facts that God has made. 7 Following and developing Skinner’s methodology, see Alister Chapman, John Coffey, and Brad S. Gregory, eds., Seeing Things Their Way: Intellectual History and the Return of Religion (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009). 6

72

Reformed Scholasticism

and their world, or with depicting them in the manner in which they would have recognized themselves.”8 Philip Benedict provides a useful illustration of this method. He states that readers have a right to know the religious orientation of a historian. He described himself as “a total outsider, an agnostic, nonpracticing Jew raised in a secular household.”9 However, he exemplifies what histories, such as Skinner meant by, “seeing things their way.” He wrote, While I thus lack the easy familiarity with enduring elements of the tradition that a church upbringing offers and worry about my formal lack of instruction in theology and the Bible. I can only hope I have been able to overcome some of these handicaps through that most basic of mental processes cultivated by historians; the effort to think one’s way sympathetically into a distant land and, to a degree, alien worldview.10

By way of contrast, the present author is a conservative Reformed minister/ professor in a conservative Presbyterian denomination. An author like Benedict has the advantage of not being as tempted to read his own denominational background, commitments, and present theological debates into historical theology. The advantages that an author like myself has include formal training in the Reformed confessional tradition, numerous courses in Greek and Hebrew, extensive knowledge of the Bible, and a general familiarity with the trajectories of Reformed thought from the outset. Both kinds of authors must grapple with the tendency to import their philosophical and theological commitments into historical contexts and ideas. However, all historians must develop the skill of reading historical figures sympathetically, treating their ideas as entering into distant lands and widely varying cultural contexts. Though Benedict is not a committed Reformed Christian, he has accomplished his task well and Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed remains one of the standard introductions to the development and spread of Reformed churches and Reformed ideas.

Alister Chapman, John Coffey, and Brad S. Gregory, eds., Seeing Things Their Way: Intellectual History and the Return of Religion (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009), 25. 9 Philip Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002), xxv. 10 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, xxv–xxvi. 8

Historiography and Writing Historical Theology

73

Rather than reconstructing this historical method from the ground up, the remainder of this chapter gives students directions toward reconstructing the historical world of Reformed scholasticism insofar as it relates to their research topics. The author’s comments under this heading make explicit what is implicit already in the chapter on primary sources. The material below develops many theoretical and practical observations about historiography by interacting with the article by Gregory cited here.

Seek to listen to rather than speak to the past As noted in Chapter 2, while a combination of contemporary relevance and personal interests should lead students to their topics, they must be more ready to hear than they are to speak. You may find that the primary value of your historical research does not lie in finding your subject to be for or against your “side” in a current debate. The purpose of such research is to see things from another perspective, in this case a historical one. Students may find that they must either proceed with extreme caution or abandon a chosen topic because current questions on a subject differ so widely from historical ones. The author’s work on Owen’s treatment of covenant threats in relation to gospel preaching illustrates this counsel.11 Reflecting the advice he is giving in the present book, he chose to research this topic, in part, because of current confusion in Reformed theology over law-gospel categories. However, the author notes that Owen does not always meet the expectations of contemporary readers in relation to these issues. While, on the one hand, Owen clearly rejected Lutheran dichotomies to the effect that the law commands and threatens while the gospel promises and blesses, on the other hand, his construction of the covenant of works in relation to the Mosaic covenant does not fit seamlessly into either side of modern debates over such issues. He held the minority position that the Mosaic covenant was neither the covenant of works nor the covenant of grace but a “superadded covenant.” In addition, he held that the covenant of works was present under the Mosaic covenant, but that it was so

Ryan M. McGraw, “The Threats of the Gospel: John Owen on What the Law/Gospel Distinction Is Not,” Calvin Theological Journal 51 (2016): 79–111. All statements in this paragraph are summarized from the conclusions found in this article.

11

74

Reformed Scholasticism

declaratively rather than covenantally. This meant that while the purpose of the Mosaic covenant was not to “republish” the covenant of works, the covenant of works was still there as an essential component of the first use of the law in convicting sinners and driving them to Christ. Owen’s views of the law and the gospel did not coincide entirely with Lutheran theology while his views of the Mosaic covenant represented a minority position among Reformed authors. Issues such as these, in which historical positions bear verbal similarities to modern ones at points, make “seeing things their way” particularly challenging. All of this illustrates Trueman’s point that “historians have a hard task in front of them.”12 They must immerse themselves in their chosen period of study and revise their questions and conclusions as historical contexts unfold. They must allow historical questions and concerns to supplant contemporary ones. Historians must also consider the “ideological freight” behind their questions and how they influence their investigation of various aspects of Reformed scholastic thought.13 This should result in a cyclical process of self-correction and reevaluation in the process of research and writing.

Delay value judgments related to historical subjects While no one can be entirely unbiased, it is more important studiously to avoid mixing one’s evaluations of a subject with the subject itself.14 This principle is similar to the biblical proverb that warns readers against answering a matter before hearing it (Prov. 18:13). Students must learn to treat historical figures with dignity and respect by seeking to understand and to depict them in their contexts, just as one should do in dealing with living people. It is wiser to understand what someone is saying and why he or she is saying it, dead or living, before evaluating their ideas. Avoid both the extremes of hagiography and of historical slander. Hagiography transforms historical subjects into seemingly flawless saints. Slander often results from choosing the least charitable possible interpretations of historical actions and ideas when the evidence does not require such

Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, 140. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, 164. 14 Chapman, Coffey, and Gregory, Seeing Things Their Way, 33. 12 13

Historiography and Writing Historical Theology

75

interpretations. To use a scholastic distinction, the former is a sin of in excessu while the latter is a sin in defectu. Students should write neither assuming the truth or falsehood of the religious ideas of their subjects (this process can come later). They must analyze Reformed scholastic thought apart from personal value judgments before such value judgments can be of any meaningful use.

Do not confuse objectivity with neutrality Trueman makes the simple, yet profound, observation that objectivity and neutrality are not the same thing.15 Objectivity relates to using proper methods for evaluating evidence from a historical perspective. Neutrality entails a claim that an author is able to set aside his or her own biases and commitments as he or she writes. It is possible to be approach objectivity while it is neither possible nor desirable to achieve neutrality. Trueman added wisely, “The claim to neutrality is merely a specious means of privileging my point of view— disguised as the simple truth, so to speak—over that of everybody else.”16 In other words, when someone attempts to pass off their own arguments from evidence as neutral rather than as objective, then they run the risk of blurring the distinction between personal opinions and conclusions based on solid evidence and sound argumentation. Trueman concludes rightly, “Objectivity is much more modest, and thus a much more attainable category than neutrality.”17 It may be advisable, at times, for a historian to state his or her biases in introductory material. In general, however, it is best to present historical arguments from historical evidence that serve as the proper object of study and to press tentative historical conclusions based on such evidence alone. Gregory hit the proverbial nail on the head when he wrote, “I have never been impressed by the general claim that all interpretations must be flawed because all scholars are biased. This seems facile and the product of intellectual laziness. This issue is rather how precisely is this particular interpretation adequate, if at all?”18 The

Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, 21. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, 21. 17 Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, 67. 18 Chapman, Coffey, and Gregory, Seeing Things Their Way, 39. Emphasis original. 15 16

76

Reformed Scholasticism

point is that historians should learn to ask questions and to draw conclusions derived from the documentary evidences to which they are appealing.19

Avoid anachronisms Avoiding anachronisms means learning to use the vocabulary contemporary to your subject as much as possible.20 Using vocabulary freighted with meaning from contemporary theological discussions, for example, runs the risk of importing modern ideas into Reformed scholastic theology. As the common proverb goes, those who gaze into the well of history are always at risk of seeing their own reflections. Sometimes anachronisms appear to be relatively harmless. For example, seventeenth-century British authors referred to public worship and not to corporate worship. While this change appears to make little difference in meaning, it is still better to retain historic terms to avoid the risk of distorting ideas. Other examples have greater moment. For example, older Reformed authors frequently treated the relationship between the covenant of works and the covenant with Moses. They did not refer to “republication” or to a “works principle,” which terms pervade modern theology in light of ancient Near Eastern studies. Even accurate historical studies by sound historians incorporate anachronisms into their work. It is difficult for any of us to get away from them fully. For example, Stephen Casselli’s otherwise fine work on Anthony Burgess (1600–63) uses terms such as “garden-temple,” “covenant overlord,” “Adamic administration,” and “the Christ event.”21 The first two terms come via modern biblical theology. “Adamic administration” language comes from John Murray. The last term, “the Christ event,” likely comes in one way or another from Karl Barth. All of these terms represent twentieth-century theological developments. Using anachronistic terms can simultaneously blur the distinctions between historical ideas and contemporary ones and it

Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, 77. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, chapter 3. 21 Stephen J. Casselli, Divine Rule Maintained: Anthony Burgess, Covenant Theology, and the Place of the Law in Reformed Scholasticism (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016), 63, 74, and 135, respectively. 19 20

Historiography and Writing Historical Theology

77

borders violating the principle of delaying value judgments in doing historical research. This does not mean that it is always a mistake to use modern concepts to explain historical ideas, however. As Bac and Pleizier add, “There is nothing wrong with the use of modern logical instruments to analyze historical texts. It is perfectly legitimate to study history using modern methods and strategies developed after the historical revolution, as long as the historian is aware of the methodological danger of anachronisms.”22 If a historian chooses to use anachronistic terms, then he or she must be able to justify such uses as well as demonstrate that they are aware of the anachronism.23 Referring to Germany or France in the sixteenth century is anachronistic, for example, but the anachronism is arguably both understandable and excusable in such cases. In general, however, anachronistic terms run the risk of distorting rather than explaining historical ideas and students of Reformed scholasticism should learn to avoid them as a general rule.

Consider the role of the Bible in Reformed scholastic theology Do not forget that, for Reformed scholastic authors, the Bible was part of their historical context.24 This means that the Bible as understood in the various contexts of Reformed scholasticism was a genuine cause of theological ideas. For anyone treating the Bible as possessing divine authority, historical context partly shapes how they read their Bibles. However, biblical expressions and ideas contributed to how historic figures understood themselves in their historic contexts. This principle often explains the very language that Reformed scholastic authors used in developing technical theological terms and categories. Two examples will suffice. In his Snytagma, Amandus Polanus concluded most of Martijn Bac and Theo Pleizier, “Reentering the Sites of Truth: Teaching Reformed Scholasticism in the Contemporary Classroom,” in Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honor of Willem J. van Asselt, ed. Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, vol. 14, Studies in Theology and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 38. 23 Muller does this, for example, in his use of the terms synchronic and diachronic contingency. Richard A. Muller, Divine Will and Human Choice: Freedom, Contingency, and Necessity in Early Modern Reformed Thought (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017), 41. He notes here that Paul Helm contests the use of these terms in this connection. 24 See, Chapman, Coffey, and Gregory, Seeing Things Their Way, 31. 22

78

Reformed Scholasticism

chapters by developing the “uses” of the doctrines treated under each heading. He divided these concluding sections consistently into four categories introduced by four Greek terms. These were didaskalia, epanordzesis, padeia, and epiclesis.25 He lifted these terms from Paul’s fourfold description of the uses of Scripture in 2 Timothy 3:16. This was a common practice among Reformed orthodox authors. William Perkins used the rubric provided in this text as a pattern for preachers in his famous manual on the subject, dividing the four terms into noetica (mental) and practica (practical) application.26 The second example appears in how Reformed authors treated the distinction between God’s will with reference to his decrees and his will as revealed as a rule for his creatures to follow. Francis Turretin illustrates this point well. He noted that there were three common ways of describing this distinction. The first was God’s decretive and his preceptive will, the second was his will of good purpose (eudokias) and his will of good pleasure (euarestas), and the last was his will of good pleasure (voluntas beneplaciti) and his significant will (voluntas signi).27 The second set of terms (eudokias and euarestias) were lifted from their uses in the New Testament in passages, such as Ephesians.28 These examples show how biblical vocabulary grew into technical terms that became standard features of Reformed scholastic theology. Protestants professing to submit to the authority of Scripture with implicit faith have always treated the Bible as a contemporary book speaking to them with God’s authority at the time. While it may be convenient for some to dismiss such a view of the Bible as the invention of twentieth-century

For example, see his conclusion to his chapter on de Beatitudine Dei in, Amandus Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae Ab Amando Polano a Polansdorf: Juxta Leges Ordinis Methodici Conformatum, Atque in Libros Decem Digestum Jamque Demum in Unum Volumen Compactum, Novissime Emendatum (Hanoviae, 1610), 997–8. 26 William Perkins, Prophetica; sive, De Sacra et Unica Ratione Concionandi, Tractatus (Cambridge, 1602), 116–19. 27 Wollebius represents the practice of many seventeenth-century compendia by favoring the distinction between volntas signi and voluntas beneplaciti. Bucanus represents the core of the Reformed concern by denying that there are two wills in God, but rather that we struggle with how to distinguish our understanding of the divine will. Johannes Wollebius, Compendium Theologiæ Christianæ, Editio Ultima Prioribus Multo Correctior, 9th ed. (Cantabrigiæ, 1655), 25; William Bucanus, Institutiones Theolgicae, Seu, Locorum Communium Christanae Religionis (Geneva, 1648), 146. 28 Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George Musgrave Giger, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992), 1:221–2; 3.15.8–12. In Ephesians 1:5 and 9, Eudokias describes God’s good purpose in relation to election and predestination. In 4:10, Euarestas describes his good pleasure as believers should know and do it. 25

Historiography and Writing Historical Theology

79

“fundamentalism,” the primary sources of Reformed scholasticism demand otherwise. This means that students of Reformed scholasticism need to develop an extensive knowledge of the language and content of the Bible itself to understand the extent to which the Bible served as part of the historical context of Reformed theology. This author has often found, for example, that when reading Reformed scholastic authors, they often end up citing many of the same passages of Scripture that he had in mind while reading them. Taking the Bible seriously as partly shaping historical ideas applies preeminently to becoming familiar with the Bible in Latin, and in Greek and Hebrew, if possible, since these were the languages from which Reformed scholastic authors developed their interpretations of Scripture and often their technical theological vocabulary.

Be charitable toward historical subjects Exercise charity toward your subject without naively taking him or her at his word at all times. Self-perception is often faulty. This is true of all people in every era of history, including our own. Scholars must exercise both charity and discernment in evaluating the ideas and motives of historical figures. They must exercise charity in listening to authors make their cases on their own terms, for instance, in claiming that they have been wronged or sidelined. They must also recognize, however, that there are two sides to every story. Realizing this fact requires critical discernment. The testimony of friends and enemies are important to consider in addition to an author’s own assertions. Students must avoid both extremes of simply taking a subject at his or her word uncritically, on the one hand, and of assuming that the caricatures of their enemies are wholly accurate, on the other. To provide a concrete example, one solid historian raises the suggestion of imputing a haughty look to a portrait of Owen as a possible indication of his character.29 Yet other interpretations of this portrait are equally plausible. Owen’s expression may simply indicate that he sat too long for the portrait, that the artist lacked skill, or that the historian is reading too much into seventeenth-century facial expressions. If other

Crawford Gribben, John Owen and English Puritanism: Experiences of Defeat, Oxford Studies in Historical Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 233.

29

80

Reformed Scholasticism

interpretations are equally plausible, then it is probably best not to speculate one way or the other. Bac and Pleizier warn historians rightly not to take their subjects words at face value.30 However, this should not result in failing to take a subject’s words seriously or to imputing motives to a subject where the evidence does not necessarily lead in this direction. In this vein, The Myth of the Reformation article on Calvin being subversive to the French civil authority reads more like a brief from a prosecuting attorney than a sound piece of historical theology.31 Certainly the author’s assertion that Calvin was “the veritable Osama bin Laden of Sixteenth-century France,”32 transgresses the bounds of responsible historical investigation in a plethora of ways, not the least of which is anachronism. Arguing that Calvin’s religious ideas were implicitly in conflict with the governing authorities is not the same thing as concluding that Calvin intended his religious ideas to subvert civil government. Analyzing ideas in historical contexts is a safer procedure than imputing motives, which are beyond the bounds of historical research, to historical figures. Unless a subject explains his or her motives, you should beware of imputing motives to them through conjecture. In this regard, students must beware of imposing modern psychological interpretations on historical subjects as well.33

Analyze rather than regurgitate historical data Do not regurgitate facts only, but provide analyses of evidence. These means that historians should, as a rule, minimize block citations from historical documents. Gathering material from primary sources is only the first step in good historical method and writing. However, the historian’s job is to make sense of the material that he or she gathers. Sometimes key block citations or including large portions of text from primary sources can serve to make

Bac and Pleizier, “Teaching Reformed Scholasticism,” 41. Peter Opitz, ed., The Myth of the Reformation, vol. 9, Refo500 Academic Studies (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013), 160–72. 32 Myth of the Reformation, 161. 33 Chapman, Coffey, and Gregory, Seeing Things Their Way, 34. 30 31

Historiography and Writing Historical Theology

81

several important points of historical analysis. Yet if a historian only provides block citations, then his or her work can read like an abridgement of historical material instead of actual historical research. Block quotations often appear to short-circuit or bypass the task assigned to the historian. It is often best to include such lengthy citations in footnotes for ease of reference than it is to push them into the body of the text. In either case, the goal of writing history is analyzing material and making sense of it rather than merely regurgitating notes on primary sources. It is important to add here that historical analysis does not entail evaluating historical ideas through the lens of the historian’s present beliefs. Instead, it aims to show development, continuities, discontinuities, and trajectories within a subject’s historical context, tradition, social, political, and intellectual framework. For instance, arguing that John Cameron’s scheme of three covenants (works, grace, and Moses) was a minority among seventeenthcentury authors is not the same thing as asserting that it is true, false, better, or worse than other historical options available in the past or the present.34 This does not mean that a historian cannot provide theological evaluations in their proper place. It merely recognizes that he or she must state clearly and openly when they are engaging in historical versus systematic theology. Van Vlastuin’s Be Renewed is an outstanding example of how to accomplish both tasks in the same book without blurring lines between disciplines.35 This author provides a model for separating and relating historical and systematic theology in an exemplary manner. This model will become particularly relevant to the concluding chapter of the present book.

Conclusion In C. S. Lewis’ book, Till We Have Faces, the narrator recounts the difficulty of telling even her own history. She cautioned,

Mark Jones, “The ‘Old’ Covenant,” in Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, ed. Michael A. G. Haykin and Mark Jones, vol. 17, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011). 35 Willem van Vlastuin, Be Renewed: A Theology of Personal Renewal, vol. 26, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014). 34

82

Reformed Scholasticism

Let no one lightly set about such a work. Memory once waked, will play the tyrant. I found I must set down (for I was speaking before judges and must not lie) passions and thoughts of my own which I had clean forgotten. The past which I wrote down was not the past that I thought I had (all these years) been remembering. I did not, even when I had finished the book, see clearly many things that I see now. The change which the writing wrought in me (and of which I did not write) was only a beginning; only to prepare me for the gods’ surgery. They used my own pen to probe my wound.36

Through writing, she came to know herself and her history better. This illustrates well some of the challenges that historians face, both with regard to themselves and to those about whom they write. To borrow Lewis’ imagery, we, and those about whom we write, often do not know our own faces adequately. The best that we can do is to seek to know ourselves and our biases better and try to see things their way as we study and write history. This brief sketch of historiography as applied to studying Reformed scholasticism has been more thematic in nature than systematic in presentation. This author recommends that students requiring a fuller treatment of this topic read books like Telling the Truth about History or Seeing Things Their Way as a starting point. The primary issues related to historiography include developing a philosophy/theology of history and, especially, exploring proper historical method. Students should also state clearly their approach to historical method somewhere early in their work so that readers know what to expect regarding the character of their work. Since the present book stresses why and how to study Reformed scholasticism, the author has primarily shifted the reader’s attention to methodological rather than philosophical/theological ones. These observations set the stage for engaging in serious writing in this field, to which the next chapter now turns.

C. S. Lewis, Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold (London: Geoffrey Bles, 1956). This quotation comes from the second paragraph of the first chapter of part two of this work. The electronic version of the book is unpaginated.

36

5

Writing Historical Theology Learning comes best ultimately through doing. This chapter both completes and compliments the previous one by applying the principles learned to outlining and writing a research project. Its primary objective is to show students of Reformed scholasticism that to study topics related to this field well, it is necessary to learn how to write sound history. Doing so results in a cyclical process of outlining a research project, writing, keeping track of one’s studies, and then continually revising the outline, chapters, and even sometimes the thesis itself through the process of writing.

Outlining a project Outlining a project provides a writer with a preliminary sense of direction. Submitting an outline to a supervisor in a degree program also enables the supervisor to provide initial and substantial feedback, resulting in fruitful dialogue between teacher and student. This fosters the learning process for students. Outlining a project is the first step in writing about a topic drawn from Reformed scholasticism. As research and writing develop a life of their own, the outline, and even a preliminary thesis, will likely change significantly before arriving at a final product. Producing a useful outline should involve at least four steps.

Narrowing the thesis Transitioning from a topic to a thesis is a gradual process that can only come through extensive reading and note taking, both in primary and secondary literature. However, it is important as one studies sources related to Reformed

84

Reformed Scholasticism

scholasticism to develop a tentative thesis that is demonstrable from the evidence, broad enough to be flexible, and narrow enough to keep the student on track. For example, if your thesis were that Gisbertus Voetius was a pivotal figure in high orthodox theology, then you would need to write volumes on the influence of every facet of his theology in relation to Dutch, continental, and British authors. This thesis needs narrowing. For instance, you may need to limit your research to Voetius’s church polity. Yet this is still a broad topic without a specific target. This may lead you to narrow your focus further to the relationship between Voetius’s church polity and debates over church power at the Westminster Assembly. Hunter Powell laid seed thoughts for further research on this point in his Crisis of British Protestantism.1 Turning this narrow topic into a specific thesis statement would involve making a preliminary statement about Voetius’s relationship to the Westminster Assembly that you intend to prove. It could be something like, “Voetius had an indirect influence on debates over church polity at the Westminster Assembly.” While a statement like this one is not set in stone in the initial stages of research, it will effectively limit the questions that you ask an answer, which will enable you to manage an otherwise daunting amount of historical evidence. Making a preliminary statement such as this one requires a level of familiarity with relevant primary source literature and with what others have done in relation to your topic in secondary literature. Further research always means that your thesis is subject to change as well as you follow the trail of evidence. Keeping the thesis somewhat general gives you the flexibility to adapt to what you find in your research. Yet narrowing a thesis statement sufficiently ensures that students will be able both to begin their work and to bring it to completion.

Developing chapters in light of a thesis The chapters of a large-scale research project related to Reformed scholastic theology must actually aim to prove its thesis statement. For example, in this Hunter Powell, The Crisis of British Protestantism: Church Power in the Puritan Revolution 1638–44, Politics, Culture and Society in Early Modern Britain (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2015), 104, 122, 141.

1

Writing Historical Theology

85

author’s first academic book on John Owen, he wrote on Owen’s life as it pertained to questions surrounding public worship and the Trinity—no more and no less.2 The reason for this limitation in subject matter was that the thesis of this book is that Owen’s doctrine of communion with the triune God was the foundation of his theology of public worship. A sub-thesis is that Owen regarded public worship as the highest expression of the believer’s communion with the triune God. The chapters of a historical research project must advance the thesis or they must be cut from the outline eventually. This author initially included a chapter on the Sabbath that had to be cut because it incorporated the worship theme but not the Trinity theme. Rather than devoting a distinct chapter to the Sabbath, the author needed instead to note Owen’s omission in this case at an appropriate place in another chapter. Each chapter should have its own thesis as well that both directs the content of that chapter and relates the chapter to the primary thesis of the research as a whole. This present book on Reformed Scholasticism has sought to exemplify this point by including a statement in the introduction of each chapter that connects the content of that chapter to the overarching theme of studying and profiting from the study of Reformed scholasticism. Doing so retains both unity and momentum in historical writing.

Providing a preliminary bibliography Developing a preliminary bibliography is an important part of outlining and proposing a research project. It reflects the initial research that led to a provisional thesis statement and proposed outline. Many universities require this step prior to officially enrolling in an academic program. A preliminary bibliography will not be exhaustive and it may include a list of books and articles that students have not yet read but that they think may be relevant to their work. A preliminary bibliography is an exercise in locating relevant primary and secondary sources as the student begins to work through a tentative reading list. Ryan M. McGraw, A Heavenly Directory. Trinitarian Piety, Public Worship, and a Reassessment of John Owen’s Theology, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014), chapter 1.

2

86

Reformed Scholasticism

Like the outline, a bibliography gives those supervising a research project something to interact with critically. This is a crucial aspect of learning through the process of doing historical research. Supervisors can look through the list of potentially helpful resources and add to or subtract from it based on what they know. Do not expect supervisors to do all of the work for you. This is your research, not theirs. You should consider their expertise as a tool to help you do your own work. This kind of critical interaction will help beginning students in particular learn what avenues to pursue and which ones to abandon. Supervisors will help you most effectively if you give them something to discuss with you or that piques their interests.

Refining a thesis and altering an outline Students of Reformed scholasticism must learn to refine their theses and alter their outlines as they write and obtain critical feedback on their work. Proposing a thesis statement and plan for research are vital components of doing historical research. However, students should not set their hearts irrevocably on their initial proposals. Remember that you are learning as you go and the more you write about a subject the better qualified you will become to treat it effectively. Crave correction and instruction. Do not fear it. Sometimes responding to critical feedback as research progresses might mean abandoning a thesis or topic to pursue better or more viable one. This creates more work for students, but it is the primary way that they will learn through researching and writing about their chosen topics. The goal should not be to get everything right the first time, but to keep revising a thesis, outline, and bibliography until it is adequate for the student’s purposes. Celebrated historian John Patrick Donnelly once spent six months of his doctoral studies pursuing an avenue of research that he discovered was wrong and needed a thorough overhaul.3 This process can be frustrating and may even appear futile when it happens, but it is part of the process of making a good historian. We must be self-critical as well as willing to receive criticism from others. A. Lynn Martin, “An Irish-American Jesuit in the Madison Mafia,” in From Rome to Zurich, between Ignatius and Vermigli: Essays in Honor of John Patrick Donnelly, ed. Kathleen M. Comerford, Gary W. Jenkins, and William John Torrance Kirby, vol. 184, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2017), 13.

3

Writing Historical Theology

87

Writing a project The process of writing in general, and of writing about Reformed scholasticism in particular, will vary significantly from student to student. The following suggestions are designed to furnish students with some ideas regarding where to begin and how to move forward. Recognize that writing about any subject involving substantial research should be cyclical and provisional in nature. Students should be in constant dialogue with primary and secondary sources as well as with their critical readers who help them through their projects. This involves humility. As Trueman notes, we should treat our theories as hypotheses that are liable to correction from beginning to end.4 Get something on paper as soon as possible. After doing initial research, which should be extensive, it is better to start writing out material (even if from memory initially) than it is to risk drowning in information. Writers can always add new paragraphs to sections and add fresh sources to footnotes in existing sections of one’s work. It is always possible to correct and to expand material with ease by copying, pasting, and cutting material. Beware, however, of making a project unwieldy in this process. Students have to set a cutoff point somewhere. A good thesis statement and outline will help determine what this approximate cutoff point will be. Do not rest your primary evidence on one book primarily. Doing so will truncate one’s conclusions about a historical figure by cutting off the possibility of tracing developments in that author’s thought over time. It can also result in a partial picture of that figure’s relationship to Reformed scholastic thought more broadly. This is why Trueman recommends obtaining an accumulation of varied evidences.5 Kay’s treatment of Owen’s trinitarianism is deficient to some extent in this regard in light of the fact that he rests his case predominantly on Communion with God.6 Derek Cooper similarly reduces much of his research on Thomas Manton to Manton’s commentary on James, whereas Manton’s Carl R. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 73. 5 Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, 59. 6 Brian Kay, Trinitarian Spirituality: John Owen and the Doctrine of God in Western Devotion (Bletchley, Milton Keynes, and Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2007). 4

88

Reformed Scholasticism

printed works span twenty-two closely printed volumes.7 It is also insufficient to master the writings of a single author alone to write historical theology well. Doing so can result in summarizing and explaining the author’s thought without adequately analyzing their thought in their intellectual context. This point coincides with the present author’s counsel in a previous chapter about using a wide array of sources to set a broad historical context. Avoid raising questions that you do not intend to answer. This means avoiding the introduction of theological and philosophical terms that you do not intend to define. In other words, do not reference theological concepts or people that you do not have space to introduce properly. We should not assume that other experts in our field of study understand the meaning of terms in the same way we do. Such assumptions make reading difficult even for the initiated and can result in misunderstandings and lack of clarity in writing. Even accomplished historians can be subject to this problem.8 Write in the past tense regarding the thoughts and actions of dead authors; write in the present tense to describe the thoughts and actions of living authors. While Calvin still says and thinks things in heaven, the Calvin represented by historical documents is not saying anything beyond what he left us in print. In other words, Calvin said and wrote things, of which readers have some surviving record. Readers do not know what he says or thinks now. On the other hand, if one references Muller’s writings about Calvin, then they have some idea of what Muller currently thinks or says about Calvin and the present tense is appropriate. Do not make assertions in writing that cannot be supported fully from the evidence. This point goes beyond the earlier warning against making unnecessary conjectures. Every new assertion in a paragraph requires a footnote to prove that assertion or argument. As it is with teaching math to young children, it is not enough to have the right answer if you cannot show your teacher how you arrived at it. Shy away from guesswork and make sure

Derek Cooper, “The Ecumenical Exegete: Thomas Manton’s Commentary on James in Relation to Its Protestant Predecessors, Contemporaries, and Successors” (PhD diss., Lutheran Theological Seminary, 2008). 8 A recent example of a difficult book due to a complex use of under-defined terms by a celebrated historian is Richard A. Muller, Divine Will and Human Choice: Freedom, Contingency, and Necessity in Early Modern Reformed Thought (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017). 7

Writing Historical Theology

89

you show your work. Chances are that someone will read your work who knows a lot about a subject that you touch in passing only. Your treatment may lack nuances that you are yet unaware of. Become increasingly aware of what you do not know and write solid conclusions about what you do know. Make assertions that appear to be the most likely ones to draw from the evidence available. Take criticism of your writing well, but do not follow your mentors slavishly.9 On submitting the first chapter of his PhD project, one of this author’s readers told him to start over due to lack of adequate analysis and contextualization. Such rigid and thorough criticism was valuable and it resulted in a much better book in the long run. Receiving this kind of critical feedback is essential to learning to do good work. However, even the best scholars are not infallible. This author later found that one of his readers blurred the distinction between the analogia Scripturae and the analogia Fidei in print (which criticism this reader accepted graciously and consented to).10 Receiving criticism humbly does not, however, mean acquiescing to those who know more than they do in all cases. During the defense of his thesis, one scholar whom the author has learned from greatly challenged his contention that Owen’s Theologoumena Pantodapa was primarily a Reformed prolegomena rather than a covenant theology. This pressed the author toward further research and writing to prove his case, since he believed that this was where the evidence led him. This resulted eventually in a more solid subsequent publication on the subject.11 Use an outside source to check for good writing and for proper use of grammar. Many works go into print due to their excellent content, which are, nevertheless, poorly written. Even renowned scholars in their fields can be poor writers. The best compliments that the present author received on his PhD book came from pastors and church members who could follow what he wrote in spite of having little expertise related to the subject of the book. This

Alister Chapman, John Coffey, and Brad S. Gregory, eds., Seeing Things Their Way: Intellectual History and the Return of Religion (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009), 38. 10 Mark Jones, Why Heaven Kissed Earth: The Christology of the Puritan Reformed Orthodox Theologian, Thomas Goodwin (1600–1680), vol. 13, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 88. 11 Ryan M. McGraw, John Owen: Trajectories in Reformed Orthodox Theology (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017), chapter 6. 9

90

Reformed Scholasticism

resulted from having lots of help from people who had no expertise in this field, but who were expert grammarians, editors, and writers. Your work is only as valuable as it is readable. Using outside resources to improve readability can make your work more useful to more people. Write with an aim to publish. While the Lord always blesses research pursued with prayer and a practical aim in view, those studying Reformed scholasticism on a professional level should aim to stretch the usefulness of their work as far as possible. If your work is not publishable, then why write it? If you spend so much time researching and writing, then why should you not strive to take the fruits of your labors to the highest level, with the Lord’s blessing, by publishing it? Publishing with a reputable academic publisher also adds another substantial layer of peer review in most cases (which will likely entail more research and revision before the end of the process). Publishing through such venues can turn a good project into an excellent one. Nonacademic publishers simply cannot compete with this process due to the personnel and expense involved in it. Fewer people read academic books than those published for a broader audience, but publishing one makes the writer work harder and learn more before all is said and done. If for some reason you cannot publish your work, then submit to this as the Lord’s providence and do not despair. All is not lost. Ministers, in particular, can still prayerfully use what they learn for the benefit of the church by shaping how they think and how they teach. Publishing historical theology, coupled with writing analytical book reviews, has the advantage of accumulating a wealth of information to draw from in other writing projects. Learning to begin with such goals in view provides a potentially solid platform upon which to write in other areas of theology later. Lastly, remember humbly that all of your conclusions are provisional. Historical contexts are multifaceted and often complicated. Neither a single author nor series of authors knows everything that can be known about any historical context. God alone knows all things. As a result, those writing historical theology should guard their language in making many historical contentions. For example, appropriate expressions could include: “based on the available evidence, the present author concludes … ,” “it appears that … , ” “more research is required …, ” “other fruitful questions might include … , ” “in light of the available evidence, the author appears to have intended … , ”

Writing Historical Theology

91

etc. Beware as well of confusing an author’s intentions, which are drawn from publicly available records, with imputing motives to that author. Motives are lost in an author’s mind and authors may not even have been entirely selfconscious with respect to the full scope of their own intentions.12

Keeping track of everything Writing involves taking good notes and keeping track of large amounts of information to synthesize and analyze it. Some of the information that we gather will be useful immediately while some of it may come in handy later. This author has found at least two things to be indispensable for keeping track of everything throughout the process of research and writing. First, students should use a bibliographic tool, such as Zotero. Zotero is a free bibliographic plug in that can be obtained from zotero.org. It provides plug ins for Microsoft Word as well as for Pages (which is far less useful and versatile than Word for any kind of serious writing). Zotero enables users to input bibliographic information from online resources, such as WorldCat and other online databases. This facilitates keeping track of books and articles. Users may need to edit some of the information that Zotero adds to a bibliographic list automatically, but once the source in question is added to one list, then Zotero enables researchers to create new lists and to add references to a document through the click of a button. This resource saves countless hours in formatting footnotes and creating bibliographies, since Zotero can do these things automatically. You can also collect lists of books and articles by subject and even keep track of your own personal library. Using Zotero for all references enables one to change the citation style of his or her work with the click of a button. This is indispensable in working with various publishers, since they sometimes shift between Chicago Manual, Oxford, Turabian, or their own unique style guides. Teachers and others can create annotated bibliographies with ease using this tool as well. It is virtually irresponsible to neglect invaluable tools like this one, since it frees researchers to devote their time to more important tasks than formatting footnotes and bibliographies. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies, 119.

12

92

Reformed Scholasticism

Second, take notes organized by subject in some fashion. However, do not take notes on everything that you read. Stay focused. Collect material that is relevant to your thesis. You can note other items that you may use later for other purposes, but do not lose time by getting bogged down with every detail of every book or article read. If you use electronic books, such as I have done with Brill’s edition of the Leiden Synopsis,13 then you can copy and paste Latin and English text directly into a set of notes for later use. Since electronic documents are searchable, students should learn to include key words in their notes that they can use later to locate material relevant to specific subjects of research. In relation to Reformed scholasticism, this should likely include references to key Latin or Greek theological terms. If the material included in these notes is significant enough, then you can copy and paste it into separate files organized by topic. Regardless of how a writer keeps track of their research notes, it is vital to develop some method of doing so.

Conclusion Many students of Reformed scholasticism will be interested in this subject due to theological commitments and interests. The preceding chapters on research methodology, while recognizing the legitimacy and value of such concerns, have encouraged students to set theological agendas aside temporarily to hear historic Reformed authors speak in their own voices, reflecting their own questions. The concluding chapter of this book will suggest how to reintegrate these interests after completing significant historical research related to Reformed scholasticism. The directions given above related to primary and secondary sources, historical thinking, and historical writing are intended to promote forward momentum as students delve into issues related to Reformed scholasticism. The following chapters introduce the basic nature and character of Reformed scholasticism itself.

A. Walaeus et al., Synopsis Purioris Theologiae = Synopsis of a Purer Theology, ed. Henk van den Belt, trans. Riemer A. Faber, vol. 1 (Leiden: Brill, 2015).

13

Part Three

The Nature of Reformed Scholasticism: Method and Trajectories

94

6

General History and Terminology Every discipline includes specific terminology related to that discipline. While the introductory chapter of this book presented reasons for studying Reformed scholasticism, the task remains to set parameters for pursuing research in this area. Reformed scholasticism overlaps with a number of other historical movements and it has its own descriptive terms as well. To study Reformed scholasticism, therefore, it is necessary to understand the general periodization of the movement, its relation to other historical movements, and the most prominent standard terminology related to it. The author’s goal in this chapter is to introduce readers to common classifications, ideas, and terms related to Reformed scholasticism with simplicity, brevity, and clarity. Doing so will help students find their footing to move forward. As such, the material does not develop debates over issues related to these themes, but rather it covers the general historical scope of the Reformed scholasticism, introduces broader relevant historical movements, and attempts to introduce the definitions of and interrelationship between commonly used terms. Students should follow the works cited in the footnotes to study these issues with greater depth and nuance.

Historical scope Periodization in history is always an imprecise science. People did not wake up one morning and realize that they were living in the medieval rather than the early church period. Likewise, historical figures developed their ideas fluidly in the eras spanning what we call the pre-Reformation to the Reformation and post-Reformation periods. Herman Selderhuis, in his recent biography of Martin Luther, illustrates this point well when he concludes that to his

96

Reformed Scholasticism

dying day Luther was, in many respects, still a monk.1 While his theology was decisively Protestant, he retained many ideas and habits that he acquired in the monastery. This is virtually a microcosm of what we should expect when studying people’s ideas in historical contexts that shifted gradually and often imperceptibly. Historians, however, need to break history down into general periods in some fashion to enable them to set parameters around their studies and to know what to look for. While such periods can sometimes appear arbitrary or even imprecise, they are useful as general guides to any field of history. Though Reformed scholasticism and Reformed orthodoxy are not synonyms, most scholars have more or less adopted Richard Muller’s division of the period into early, high, and late orthodoxy as representing useful bench marks for both movements.2 The broad sketch of these periods below explains the general characteristics both of orthodoxy and of scholasticism under each division, leaving a clearer definition of key terms for later in the chapter.

Early orthodoxy (1560–1620) Early orthodoxy marks a transition from the magisterial Reformation to the period of post-Reformation theology. It roughly spans from 1560 to 1620, though the close of the period is more difficult to identify than its inception. The primary characteristic of this first stage of Reformed orthodoxy is confessionalization.3 During this period, Reformed (and Lutheran) communions sought to distinguish themselves more clearly from others by framing and adopting confessions of faith. Reformed churches established their identity more clearly through documents such as the Scots Confession (1560), the Belgic Confession of Faith (1561), the Heidelberg Catechism Herman Selderhuis, Martin Luther: A Spiritual Biography (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017), 312–13. Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, Ca. 1520 to Ca. 1725, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 1:30–2; Muller, Richard A. “The Problem of Protestant Scholasticism—A Review and Definition,” in Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, ed. Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001); Dolph te Velde, “Reformed Theology and Scholasticism,” in Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, ed. Paul T. Nimmo and David A. F. Ferguson (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 217–22; Willem J. van Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, trans. Albert Gootjes (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 103–93. 3 Muller, PRRD, 1:31. 1 2

General History and Terminology

97

(1563), the Second Helvetic Confession (1566), and many others that are less well known and used less widely. James Dennison has highlighted the prevalence of such confessions during this period by collecting many of them into four large volumes.4 This collection shows that confessionalization began prior to 1560 and continued into the high orthodox period as well. Reformed confessions distinguished Reformed churches from others, who were also writing confessions at the time. The Roman Catholic Council of Trent (1545– 63) is one of the most notable examples of this trend because Protestants began to develop their systems of theology more fully in response to the canons and decrees of Trent as well as to Roman Catholic apologists, notably Robert Bellarmine (1542–1621).5 Most scholars regard the early orthodox period as ending with or around the Synod of Dort (1618–19), which was the closest thing to an ecumenical Reformed synod in post-Reformation theology.6 While some have argued against defining orthodoxy in light of the rise of such confessions,7 most scholars have recognized that doing so is one of the primary distinctive features of early orthodoxy. In terms of content, Richard Muller has argued at length that the doctrines of Scripture and of God as the two principia of Reformed theology helped shape the Reformed system.8 Subsequent chapters will treat these principia and their influence on Reformed thought in more detail. In terms of scholasticism, for now it is sufficient to state that early orthodoxy gradually included the reincorporation of scholastic method into Reformed thought. The primary goal in doing so was to develop a method of teaching confessional Reformed theology that was suitable to theological schools.9

James T. Dennison, Reformed Confessions of the 16th and 17th Centuries in English Translation, 4 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2008). 5 Muller, PRRD, 1:63–4; Byung Soo Han, Symphonia Catholica: The Merger of Patristic and Contemporary Sources in the Theological Method of Amandus Polanus (1561–1610), vol. 30, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015), 30:64–5. 6 F. A. van Lieburg and Aza Goudriaan, Revisiting the Synod of Dordt (1618–1619) (Leiden: Brill, 2011). 7 W. Bradford Littlejohn and Scott N. Kindred-Barnes, eds., Richard Hooker and Reformed Orthodoxy, vol. 40, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), 40:12. 8 Muller, PRRD, 1:126–7. 9 The entirety of Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, eds., Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013) is devoted to this theme. 4

98

Reformed Scholasticism

Reflection on methodology marked the work of authors such as Andreas Hyperius at the inception of this period as well as that of Franciscus Junius nearer to its end.10 Hyperius, in particular, argued for a distinction between scholastic and popular theology.11 Both modes of theology were designed to disseminate Reformed orthodoxy, but they differed in form depending on their intended audiences. Scholastic theology aimed at students in the schools while popular theology aimed at people in the pews. Scholastic theology informed popular theology while each retained its appropriate form and depth of content.

High orthodoxy (1620–1700) High orthodoxy represents Reformed orthodox theology in full bloom. This period generally covers 1620, following Dort, until the full onset of the Enlightenment somewhere around 1700. Now that a Reformed confessional identity had been largely established, Reformed authors developed their systems of thought with greater depth and precision. This expansion of Reformed thought found confessional expressions as well in documents such as the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), the Savoy Declaration of Faith and Order (1658), the Formula Consensus Helvetica (1675), and even in the so-called London Baptist Confession (1689). Savoy and the Baptist Confession overtly built on the Westminster Confession while the less widely accepted Consensus Helvetic addressed more specific developments, such as a form of hypothetical universalism. As noted in an early chapter, many notable theologians arose during this period in various parts of the Reformed world who produced extensive and lengthy expositions of Reformed doctrine, especially in the schools. Scholasticism and orthodoxy became much more thoroughly and self-consciously intertwined during this period. Reformed and Lutheran authors alike drew more extensively from medieval scholastic distinctions

Andreas Hyperius, Methodus Theologiae Adj. Eft. De Ejusdem Vita Et Obita Oratis Wigandi Arthii (Basileae, 1562); Franciscus Junius, De Theologia Vera; Ortu, Natura, Formis, Partibus, Et Modo (Lugduni Batavorum, 1594). 11 Sinnema, “The Distinction between Scholastic and Popular: Andreas Hyperius and Reformed Scholasticism.” 10

General History and Terminology

99

to express and defend their systems of thought. Muller has noted well that it is questionable whether Reformed theology could have survived this period without doing so, due to the fact that Reformed authors needed a more precise apparatus to develop their systems of theology in light of current challenges.12 Accordingly, this period is marked by some of the fullest expressions of the Reformed system of theology, most of which were written in Latin and were presented in scholastic dress. As a subsequent chapter will demonstrate, this is why some modern authors have tried to identify a decisive breach between Reformation and post-Reformation theology.13 Evaluating this contention depends largely on how one defines scholasticism and how one evaluates the effect of using scholastic method on the fundamental content and character of Reformed thought.

Late orthodoxy (1700–90) I have already noted above the difficulties that characterize the late orthodox period. The name itself implies the approaching end of a movement. As is true of periodization in general, this descriptive term is more or less accurate. Yet for the sake of the historian, every historical movement has to end somewhere. Late orthodoxy broadly encompasses the time period from around 1700 to 1790, though Dolph te Velde brings this period to a close in 1750.14 This is the point at which dates become even more imprecise. The onset of this period is somewhere around the beginning of the Enlightenment. Its close, following the later date, is somewhere near the unfolding of the French Revolution (1789–99), when Enlightenment thinking had come to its own and became predominant in many countries. With regard to orthodoxy, some authors sought to redefine the boundaries of Reformed confessional theology while others took a more conservative approach. The same was true with respect to the scholastic method. The

Muller, PRRD, 1:65–6. For a survey of varying approaches to Reformed scholasticism, see van Asselt, who describes research related to this field in terms of five stages of methodological shifting. Willem J. van Asselt, “Reformed Orthodoxy: A Short History of Research,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 11–26. 14 Dolph te Velde, “Reformed Theology and Scholasticism,” 215. 12 13

100

Reformed Scholasticism

word that comes to mind in describing this period is fragmentation. The primary causes of this fragmentation were the rise of new philosophical systems, the progress of the scientific revolution, the First Great Awakening, political upheaval, and many other factors. Such features make studying late orthodoxy a more difficult task, in many respects, than studying the early and high orthodox periods due to the widening diversity of historical contexts. In spite of these facts, the general division of Reformed orthodoxy and Reformed scholasticism into early, high, and late segments is useful for students of these movements in that it enables them to make some cautious generalizations surrounding historical shifts and international developments. As a result, students of Reformed scholasticism should focus their attention primarily on the development of Reformed theology and its dissemination in theological schools from 1560–1790.

Related historical movements To study Reformed scholasticism it is important to remember and to acknowledge the significant overlap that this branch of intellectual history has with others. This includes related movements that grew up prior to and during the time period in question. Taking these things into consideration illustrates, in part, how to set a broad context for your research. This should include, but may not necessarily be limited to, delving into medieval theology and method, the influence of the Renaissance on Reformed thought, and various philosophical developments. The purpose of this section is not to provide readers with all full exposition of any of these movements as much as to state and to illustrate why they are relevant to studying Reformed scholasticism. In other words, rather than giving readers a full account of what they will find in relation to each issue treated, the author hopes to show students why they need to find out and how these issues affect their studies. Subsequent chapters will expand examples drawn from each of these areas as they grow out of relevant discussions.

General History and Terminology

101

Medieval theology and method Any sound treatment of Reformed scholasticism must include continuities and discontinuities with medieval theology and methodology. Muller exemplifies this point by the fact that roughly 20 percent (sometimes more) of each volume in his Post Reformation Reformed Dogmatics establishes medieval developments in theology. The medieval context is particularly important in relation to method, since scholastic method was both a development and a staple of medieval theology.15 The above material has largely assumed that scholastic theology entailed a method of teaching that was suited to the schools. The development of this method was not limited to but found its full fruition in the rise of medieval universities.16 Scholasticism was a means of presenting, debating, and defending theology in a manner designed to inculcate ideas among scholars. Medieval developments in this arena set a precedent for theological education for centuries to come. Even though early Reformed theology tended to react against the abuses of medieval theology and method, Protestant theologians could hardly escape the centuries of history that found reflection in their own educations. While some authors, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, wrote explicitly against scholastic theology, modern scholars have recognized more or less conscious traces of it in their works.17 As Protestants became increasingly comfortable with using elements of scholastic method, some even provided their students with criteria to help them sift through the medieval period. For example, Bernardinus de Moor divided scholasticism itself into three periods, evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of each period. He argued that earlier scholastics, such as Lombard and, were more useful than later authors, such as

Ulrich G. Leinsle, Introduction to Scholastic Theology, trans. Michael J. Miller (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2010). 16 Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 120. 17 D. V. N. Bagchi, “Sic et Non: Luther and Scholasticism,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, ed. R. Scott Clark and Carl R. Trueman (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006), 3–15; D. C. Steinmetz, “The Scholastic Calvin,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999), 16–30; Lowell C. Green, “Melanchthon’s Relation to Scholasticism,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006); Volker Leppin, “Luther’s Transformation of Medieval Thought: Continuity and Discontinuity,” in The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 115–24; Gerhard Muller, “Luther’s Transformation of Medieval Thought: Discontinuity and Continuity,” in The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 105–14. 15

102

Reformed Scholasticism

Durandus of Pourcain (1275–1334), due to the fact that they sought primarily to provide tools to help with the interpretation of Scripture.18 Eric Parker notes that Martin Bucer (1491–1551) had earlier referred to Aquinas as “the prince of the scholastics.”19 De Moor located some of the primary faults of later scholastic theology in moving away from the text of Scripture to discuss speculative questions about the Virgin Mary. Leinsle’s treatment of scholastic method corroborates this assessment by noting the vital importance of biblical commentaries in the careers of authors such as Aquinas.20 The point is that whether unconsciously or consciously, medieval theology and methodology had an inescapable influence on Reformed scholasticism.21 The content of medieval theology influenced Reformed thinking as well. Medieval reflections on the doctrine of the Trinity furnish us with a helpful preliminary example. Summarizing some of the relevant secondary literature on this issue will illustrate this point clearly, in relation both to doctrinal and pietistic elements of trinitarian doctrine. As Rik van Nieuwenhove observes, all Western reflection on the Trinity harks back to Augustine in one respect or another.22 Following Augustine, authors such as Richard St. Victor (d. 1173) taught that the historical missions of the divine persons reflected their inner processions.23 Contemporary writers, such as Bernard of Clairvaux (1090– 1153), pushed the Augustinian idea of intratrinitarian love into a model of a mystical union of the divine and human wills as mediated through Christ.24 Hugh St. Victor (1096–1141) imported such ideas into the sacraments, by stating that the sign, signification, and efficacy of the sacraments corresponded to the

Bernardinus de Moor, Continuous Commentary on Johannes Marckius’ Didactico-Elenctic Comendium of Christian Theology, trans. Stephen Dilday, vol. 1 (Culpeper, VA: L & G Reformation Translation Center, 2014). 19 Eric M. Parker, “‘Saint Dionysius:’ Martin Bucer’s Transformation of the Pseudo-Areopagite,” in Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, ed. Darren Sarisky (London: T&T Clark, 2017), 126. 20 Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 129. 21 As Muller illustrates in relation to issues surrounding necessity and contingency. Richard A. Muller, Divine Will and Human Choice: Freedom, Contingency, and Necessity in Early Modern Reformed Thought (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017), 83. 22 Rik Van Nieuwenhove, An Introduction to Medieval Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 19. 23 Van Nieuwenhove, Introduction to Medieval Theology, 24. 24 Van Nieuwenhove, Introduction to Medieval Theology, 115. 18

General History and Terminology

103

appropriate works of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.25 In line with such mystical and practical reflections on the Trinity, Richard St. Victor echoed Augustine’s emphasis on intratrinitarian love, noting that such love demanded a plurality of persons in the Godhead.26 This enabled him to push for the reflection of this divine love in the experience of believers through union and communion with Christ. These emphases consisted the background of the assertions of Reformed orthodox theologians, such as Richard Sibbes (1577–1635) and John Owen, who imported similar applications of the Trinity into the doctrine of the sacraments and of communion with God through Christ, respectively.27 Thomas Aquinas (1225–74) exemplified the theological and practical tendencies of medieval trinitarian doctrine in that his focus was primarily soteriological.28 In his theological formulation, he regarded the Father as the principle of the Godhead, the Son as the Word and image of the Father, and the Spirit as both gift and divine love.29 This would find echoes in later Reformed authors, such as Patrick Gillespie (1617–75), in treatments of the work of the divine persons in the eternal covenant of redemption and the historical covenant of grace.30 The aim in both the cases of medieval trinitarian theology and of later Reformed appropriations was soteriological, as were the theological underpinnings of the doctrine itself. Authors like Gillespie adapted the outward forms of medieval developments to meet the needs of Reformed covenant theology. In the medieval period, similar emphases appeared in relation to Bonaventure’s assertion that the Spirit as love and gift was the source of all love and gifts to believers from the Father through Christ.31 Van

Van Nieuwenhove, Introduction to Medieval Theology, 129. Van Nieuwenhove, Introduction to Medieval Theology, 141. 27 Richard Sibbes, The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes (Edinburgh: James Nichols, 1862), 4:329; John Owen, The Works of John Owen, D.D., ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1850), 2:8–9. 28 Van Nieuwenhove, Introduction to Medieval Theology, 186. 29 Van Nieuwenhove, Introduction to Medieval Theology, 190. 30 Patrick Gillespie, The Ark of the Covenant Opened, Or, a Treatise of the Covenant of Redemption Between God and Christ, as the Foundation of the Covenant of Grace the Second Part, Wherein Is Proved, That There Is Such a Covenant, the Necessity of It, the Nature, Properties, Parties Thereof, the Tenor, Articles, Subject-Matter of Redemption, the Commands, Conditions, and Promises Annexed, the Harmony of the Covenant of Reconciliation Made with Sinners, Wherein They Agree, Wherein They Differ, Grounds of Comfort from the Covenant of Suretiship (London: Printed for Thomas Pankhurst, 1677). 31 Van Nieuwenhove, Introduction to Medieval Theology, 220. 25 26

104

Reformed Scholasticism

Nieuwenhove asserts at the outset of his book that the Trinity shaped every aspect of medieval theology and spirituality.32 While Reformed theology did not always reflect this emphasis evenly, it is undeniable that Reformed trinitarian theology drew both theoretically and practically from medieval developments as much as from the early church fathers.33 In this connection, students should remember as well that Reformed scholasticism largely developed its precise vocabulary and its manner of stating and addressing questions from medieval scholasticism. Muller thus concludes that post-Reformation theology simultaneously rejected portions of medieval theology even while grew out of medieval soil.34 Such examples provide some seed thoughts as to why a basic grasp of medieval theology and methodology is essential to any responsible treatment of Reformed scholasticism.

The Renaissance The Renaissance was, in many respects, a revival of classical learning with an emphasis on returning to the sources (ad fontes) in their original languages. The influence of this movement on the Protestant Reformation is well established.35 International figures, such as Erasmus of Rotterdam (1466–1536), highlight the intersection of so-called humanist studies and theological development in light of the influence that they had on both movements. Erasmus, for example, produced a widely used edition of the Greek New Testament on the one hand while he clashed swords with Martin Luther over the freedom of the human will on the other.36 Renaissance studies inevitably led to a strong emphasis on

Van Nieuwenhove, Introduction to Medieval Theology, 2. Muller illustrates this point in light of the fifteenth-century Council of Florence and the way that it guarded against separating personhood and essence in God. This point became relevant in sixteenthand seventeenth-century debates over whether eternal generation referred to Christ’s essence and person or to his person only. Most Reformed authors followed the former position, contra Calvin, following the conclusions reached by Florence. See Muller, PRRD, 4:55–8; Brannon Ellis, Calvin, Classical Trinitarianism, and the Aseity of the Son (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), 56–60. 34 Muller, PRRD, 1:97. 35 As a representative sample, see William Roscoe Estep, Renaissance and Reformation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995). 36 Herman Selderhuis, Martin Luther: A Spiritual Biography (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017), 205–9; Robert Kolb, Irene Dingel, and L’ubomir Batka, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 19–20. 32 33

General History and Terminology

105

studying the Bible in the original Greek and Hebrew, though Hebraic studies took longer to develop.37 Humanistic studies spilled over into theological reflection. Thus, Luther translated Erasmus’s Greek New Testament into German while engaging him in wide-ranging theological debates. Renaissance studies affected both Protestant and Roman Catholic scholarship. While medieval theologians, such as Aquinas, wrote Bible commentaries, Reformation-era Roman Catholic theologians, such as Thommaso de vio Cajetan (1469–1534), interacted heavily with the original text of Scripture in lengthy volumes as well.38 The Renaissance necessarily affected education at the universities, which is where this movement intersects with scholasticism. Renaissance humanists, like many early Protestant reformers, generally wrote negatively about scholasticism, blaming it for moving students away from original texts and from classical learning.39 Petrarch (1304–74) exemplified this attitude when he rejected scholasticism and its “Aristotelian base” as being “too speculative, too sterile, and too unproductive of religious imagination and ethical fervor.”40 Though humanist influences were virtually ubiquitous by the time of the Reformation, it may surprise some to read Leinsle’s observation that humanist departments were only incorporated successfully and initially into the relatively new university at Wittenberg.41 What this meant was that Protestant university

Stephen G. Burnett, From Christian Hebraism to Jewish Studies: Johannes Buxtorf (1564–1629) and Hebrew Learning in the Seventeenth Century, Studies in the History of Christian Thought (Leiden: Brill, 1996). 38 For Old and New Testament examples, see Thommaso Cajetan, Commentarii Illustres Planeq́; Insignes in Quinque Mosaicos Libros, Thomae De Vio, Caietani, Adiectis Insuper Ad Margine[m] Annotationibus a F. Antonio Fo[n]seca Lusitano, Quibus Temporum & Locoru[m] Ratio, Tropi, Phrases, Lociq́; Intellectu Difficiles Explicantur: Accessit Rerum Maxime Insignium Index Copiosissimus (Paris: Apud Ioannem Paruum, 1539); Thommaso Cajetan, Epistolae Pauli Et Aliorum Apostolorum: Juxta Sens. Literal. Enarratae. Acc: Actus Apostol. Comm. Ejusd. Illustr (Paris, 1540). Edward Leigh acknowledged Cajetan’s usefulness as a biblical exegete without leaving his reputation untarnished: “Cajetan went over all the Scripture, saving the Canticles and the prophets, which dying he left begun, and the Revelation … He was both a learned and a moderate Papist, as Chamier and Whitaker both shew. He was chiefly intent on the literal sense, and that according to the Hebrew truth, of which Tongue he had little knowledge, but had by him those that were skilled in the Hebrew, who would interpret ad verbum, not only exactly, but superstitiously, and often absurdly, which often drew the like expositions from the Cardinal.” Edward Leigh, A Systeme or Body of Divinity Consisting of Ten Books, Wherein the Fundamentals and Main Grounds of Religion Are Opened (London, 1654), 117. 39 William Roscoe Estep, Renaissance and Reformation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995), 25. 40 Bard Thompson, Humanists and Reformers: A History of the Renaissance and Reformation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996), 210. 41 Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 245. 37

106

Reformed Scholasticism

education often grew organically from its medieval predecessors, while these universities gradually and simultaneously incorporated the humanist stress on classical learning and linguistic studies. In this author’s opinion, the Renaissance should be less prominent in the study of Reformed scholasticism than the influences of medieval theology and method should be. Nevertheless, one readily sees the clear evidences of humanist training in the plethora of allusions to Greek and Roman philosophy and mythology, even in the sermons of Reformed orthodox ministers, such as Thomas Watson (1620–86).42 For that matter, in conjunction with the Renaissance, the scientific revolution retained many scholastic terms and distinctions, such as genus and species and many others.

Philosophy With regard to philosophy, I can do little more in this section than give hints as to how and why philosophical developments are relevant to scholastic theology.43 On the surface, virtually all Reformed scholastic systems included treatments of the role of philosophy in relation to the knowledge of God in their prolegomena. Muller observes that there is “a certain degree of discontinuity” between the views of the early Reformers on the use of philosophy in theology and the developments of its use in Reformed orthodoxy.44 Early and high orthodox Reformed scholastics tended to regard philosophy largely in negative terms with regard to the development of theological content. Theophilus Gale (1628–78), for example, wrote a large tome treating the history of philosophy as the history of apostasy from man’s original knowledge of

For example, Watson assumes a knowledge of Tully, Demosthenes, Plato, and the myths of Hercules to illustrate the kind of diligence and zeal required in pursing the glory of God. Thomas Watson, A Body of Practical Divinity, Consisting of Above One Hundred Seventy Six Sermons on the Lesser Catechism Composed by the Reverend Assembly of Divines at Westminster: With a Supplement of Some Sermons on Several Texts of Scripture. by Thomas Watson, Formerly Minister at St. Stephen’s Walbrook, London. Printed from His Own Hand-Writing. Recommended by Several Ministers to Masters of Families and Others (London: Printed for Thomas Parkurst, at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside, near Mercers-Chappel, 1692), 12. 43 For a detailed and careful analysis of philosophy in high orthodox Dutch Reformed theology as an example, see Aza Goudriaan, Reformed Orthodoxy and Philosophy, 1625–1750 Gisbertus Voetius, Petrus Van Mastricht, and Anthonius Driessen (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2006). 44 Muller, PRRD, 1:360. 42

General History and Terminology

107

God.45 Late orthodoxy admitted greater diversity in relation to such themes in light of Enlightenment philosophical innovations. Dewey Wallace has written a provocative account that argues through well-chosen historical figures that such approaches to philosophy shifted in many cases during the end of the high orthodox period and into late orthodoxy.46 Among other things, this led to new approaches to prolegomena that were rooted in arguments from the natural knowledge of God instead of from divine revelation. During this period, some Reformed authors attempted to incorporate Cartesian philosophy into Reformed thought while others, such as Isaac Watts (1674–1748), sought to replace Aristotelian with Lockean logic.47 In any case, all Reformed scholastics had to address the philosophy current at the time during each of the three periods of Reformed orthodoxy. In an introductory essay to the subject, Aza Goudriaan includes Aristolelianism, Ramism, Cartesianism, Hobbes, Meijer, Spinoza, Geulinx, and others as relevant to this field.48 As Goudriaan’s list indicates, Reformed interaction with philosophy was not limited to contemporary trends. In this regard, pride of place must go to the reception of Aristotle in Reformed theology.49 Examining Reformed uses of Aristotle can be potentially a daunting task. By way of introduction, it is sufficient simply to state that Aristotle loomed large in almost every locus of Post-Reformation scholastic theology.50 This practice grew seamlessly out of medieval debates over the relationship between philosophy and theology. The

Theophilus Gale, The Court of the Gentiles, Or, a Discourse Touching the Original of Human Literature, Both Philologie and Philosophie, from the Scriptures & Jewish Church. in Order to a Demonstration Of, I. the Perfection of Gods Word, and Church-Light, Ii. the Imperfection of Natures Light, and Mischief of Vain Philosophie, Iii. the Right Use of Human Learning, and Specially, Sound Philosophie Part I. Part I (Oxon: Printed by H. Hall, for Tho. Gilbert, 1672). 46 Dewey D. Wallace, Shapers of English Calvinism, 1660–1714: Variety, Persistence, and Transformation (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011), 167–99. 47 Robert Strivens, Philip Doddridge and the Shaping of Evangelical Dissent, Ashgate Studies in Evangelicalism (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2015), 68–79. 48 Aza Goudriaan, “Theology and Philosophy,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 27–64. 49 Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, 26–42. 50 For a similar approach to tracing Aristotelian ideas through the loci of Aquinas’s Summa see, Matthew Levering and Gilles Emery, eds., Aristotle in Aquinas’ Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018). In his contribution to this volume, Corey Barnes notes, “Aristotle’s philosophical advancements become subtle tools for unexpected tasks” (188). The result is that Aquinas primarily borrowed “conceptual tools” from Aristotle to make sacra doctrina intellibible (204). These observations largely match the patterns found in Reformed orthodox authors as well. 45

108

Reformed Scholasticism

reception of Aristotle caused a great stir in medieval theology that continued for centuries.51 Coming into the Reformation period, Luther had a decidedly negative view of Aristotle and he wanted to purge him from the university.52 However, in his efforts to develop a Protestant university curriculum, Melanchthon both used Aristotle and lectured on his works.53 He went so far as to argue that scholarship was not possible without Aristotle.54 While the degree of criticism leveled against Aristotle varied among authors throughout the periods of Reformed orthodoxy, his language and categories were always present and were often explicit topics of discussion. To understand how Reformed scholastics used Aristotle’s philosophical categories, however, it is important to distinguish between appropriating ideas as Aristotle taught and understood them and employing his categories and distinctions to present a coherent theological system that assigned its own peculiar meaning to Aristotelian terms.55 In most cases, Aristotle furnished Reformed scholasticism with categories and distinctions more thoroughly than it did philosophical ideas.56 A few examples of ways in which Reformed authors used Aristotelian categories while repurposing them to express theological assertions will help readers gain a better grasp of the kinds of issues that they need to look for. Virtually all Protestant scholastics used Aristotelian categories, such as fourfold causation, or of describing things in terms of their substance and accidents.57 Aristotle divided causes into material causes, formal causes, efficient causes, and final causes. The material cause is the matter of a thing. The formal cause is what makes the material to be the thing that it is by taking the form that it does. The efficient cause produces the intended effects. The final cause is the end or goal of the thing.58 Reformed authors regarded these distinctions as

Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 131. Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 255. 53 Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 263. 54 Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, 89. 55 Carl R. Trueman, The Claims of Truth: John Owen’s Trinitarian Theology (Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster Press, 1998), 34–44. 56 Muller, PRRD, 1:375. 57 Chapter 8, below, includes Reformed uses of Aristotle’s categories of habits and acts as well. 58 Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, 39. 51 52

General History and Terminology

109

useful in breaking down an action or event into its constituent parts. In his comments on Eph. 1:5, 8, John Calvin used fourfold causation to expound Paul’s teaching about the nature of salvation in Christ. In his view, Jesus Christ was the material cause of salvation, preaching was its formal cause, the efficient cause was the good pleasure of God, and the final cause was the praise of the glory of God’s grace.59 Using similar constructions, Reformed authors developed the instrumental cause as a subordinate subdivision of the efficient cause.60 In this way, the Leiden Synopsis could affirm that the causa efficiens principalis of effectual calling was God the Father, in the Son, by the Spirit, while the causa instrumentalis ordinaria of this call was the ministry of the word through preaching.61 While this appears, on the surface, to contradict Calvin’s list of causes in salvation, it is important to note that Calvin was addressing questions surrounding predestination and its effects on the entire scheme of redemption, while the Leiden Synopsis was concerned with effectually calling more narrowly. In any case, it should be clear that fourfold causation was a tool that Reformed scholastics used to divide various actions into their parts to explain doctrine and examine it from diverse perspectives. Reformed scholasticism modified and used Aristotle’s distinction of things into their substances and accidents as well. Such categories became notoriously relevant in relation to the doctrine of the Sacraments.62 Medieval theology gradually used this distinction to explain how the Eucharist could be transubstantiated into Christ’s physical body and blood while retaining the external properties of bread and wine. Substance referred to what a thing was in itself, while accidents referred to the external properties of that thing. Ordinarily, accidental properties could change while they would retain qualities that reflected the essence of a thing. The doctrine of transubstantiation resulted in a division between the substance and accidents of the elements in

John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979), 21:200. He lists preaching as the formal cause of salvation on page 203 in connection to verse 8. 60 Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, 40. 61 A. Walaeus et al., Synopsis Purioris Theologiae = Synopsis of a Purer Theology, ed. Roelf T. te Velde, trans. Riemer A. Faber, vol. 2 (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 210, 212. 62 As noted, for example, by Scott R.. Swain, “Lutheran and Reformed Sacramental Theology: Seventeenth-Nineteenth Centuries,” in The Oxford Handbook of Sacramental Theology, ed. Hans Boersma and Matthew Levering (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015), 364–5. 59

110

Reformed Scholasticism

the sacrament, since they became Christ’s body and blood without taking on the external properties of flesh and blood. While Reformed authors treated this construction as fictional and illogical, they continued to use the distinction between substance and accidents elsewhere. Thus, when Turretin described the nature of the resurrected bodies of believers, he argued that the substance of their bodies would remain the same while their accidental properties changed.63 Other examples of using Aristotelian categories abound and they will arise frequently as students wade through Reformed scholastic primary sources. Thus Polanus appealed to Aristotle’s seven modes of composition to deny that any of them applied to God, who is a most simple being.64 Thomas Manton (1620–77) connected the wills of the flesh and of the mind to Aristotle’s distinction between the upper and lower soul.65 He also appealed to Aristotle to discuss the nature of natural desire.66 In addition, Richard Muller has detailed a complex debate over Aristotle’s treatment of determinism in relation to Reformed thought on the divine and human wills.67 Risking generalization, Reformed authors were more likely to cite Aristotle positively on matters related to physics and faculty psychology than they were on issues related directly to theological content or metaphysics. When they did appeal to Aristotle in relation to theological content, such as in relation to his definition of theology as a discourse concerning the gods, then they tended to correct, or even jettison, his ideas in light of the teaching of Scripture.68 The predominance of Aristotelian language and categories

Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George Musgrave Giger, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992), 3:617–21; 12.9.1-11. 64 Amandus Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae Ab Amando Polano a Polansdorf: Juxta Leges Ordinis Methodici Conformatum, Atque in Libros Decem Digestum Jamque Demum in Unum Volumen Compactum, Novissime Emendatum (Hanoviae, 1610), 63, 907–8. 65 Thomas Manton, A Practical Commentary, or an Exposition with Notes, on the Epistle of James (London, 1652), 106. 66 Manton, James, 111. 67 Muller, Divine Will and Human Choice. 68 Andreas Hyperius, De Theologo, Seu, De Ratione Studii Theologici Libri IV (Basileae, 1559), 24–7; John Owen, Theologoumena Pantodapa, Sive, De Natura, Ortu, Progressu, Et Studio Veræ Theologiæ, Libri Sex Quibus Etiam Origines & Processus Veri & Falsi Cultus Religiosi, Casus & Instaurationes Ecclesiæ Illustiores Ab Ipsis Rerum Primordiis, Enarrantur (Oxoniæ, 1661), 2–5; Johann Heinrich Heidegger, Corpus Theologiae Christianae, vol. 1, 2 vols. (Tiguri, 1732), 1:2; Francis Turretin, Institutio Theologiae Elencticae, vol. 1, 3 vols. (Geneva, 1679), 1.1.1-8. 63

General History and Terminology

111

in Reformed thought is partly what has led some authors to make a sharp division between Reformation and post-Reformation theology, which I will address more fully in a subsequent chapter. This cursory evaluation at least shows a measure of continuity between Reformed and medieval scholasticism on this score. In addition to Aristotelianism, Ramism became one of the most prevailing philosophical influences in Reformed scholastic theology.69 Named after Peter Ramus (1515–72), Ramism promoted a method of bifurcation, which Ramus proposed as an alternative to Aristotelian logic as outlined in Aristotle’s Organon.70 Ramus’s basic premise was that logic was not a creation of philosophy, but that it was part of God’s created order.71 He attempted to distance Aristotle’s use of logic from the earlier models of thinkers like Socrates and Plato. He identified what he regarded as a bifurcative structure in Aristotle’s predecessors, in which logical questions fell into two general categories. He thus blamed Aristotle for muddying the waters through the complexity of the distinctions that he introduced.72 This echoes some of the humanist concerns with Aristotle as noted above. In Ramus’s estimation, bifurcation promoted simplicity and clarity.73 His general aim was to simplify logic and rhetoric for introductory students. Not everyone was satisfied with his approach and it is somewhat hard to define as a whole, since clearly Aristotelian elements remain in his thought. Nonetheless, some Reformed authors, such as Giovanni Diodati (1576–1649) identified themselves as following Ramus as opposed to Aristotle.74 In practice, the general features of Ramism became one tool among many in expressing the Reformed system of theology. In terms of dividing the

For a wide-ranging series of essays on the nature and influences of Ramism, see Steven J. Reid and Emma Annette Wilson, eds., Ramus, Pedagogy and the Liberal Arts: Ramism in Britain and the Wider World (London: Routledge, 2011). 70 Petrus Ramus, Scholae Dialecticae sive Animadversionum in Organum Aristotelis Libri Viginti (Frankfurt, 1594). 71 Ramus, Scholae Dialecticae sive Animadversionum in Organum Aristotelis Libri Viginti, 4. 72 Ramus, Scholae Dialecticae sive Animadversionum in Organum Aristotelis Libri Viginti, 12. 73 Muller, PRRD, 1:62. 74 Emidio Campi, “Giovanni Diodati (1576–1649), Translator of the Bible into Italian,” in From Zwingli to Amyraut: Exploring the Growth of European Reformed Traditions, ed. Jon Balserak and Jim West, vol. 43, Reformed Historical Theology (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), 107. 69

112

Reformed Scholasticism

structure of the entire system of theology into two parts, and then those parts themselves into two more, the overarching structure of systems that followed a Ramist model was simple and clear enough. Ramus himself divided the system of doctrine along the lines of what man should believe concerning God and what duty God requires of man. He then subdivided his system along the lines of the Apostle’s Creed, the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Sacraments.75 However, among Ramist theologians, when every topic admitted a subtopic, followed by lengthy chains of further subtopics, then Ramism broke down as a means of simplifying logical procedures and of organizing ideas. One has only to peruse William Perkins’s Ramist chart in his treatment of election and reprobation to see both the simplicity and complexity of following this model. Readers should remember as well that even thorough Ramists, such as Polanus, did not follow a Ramist model of breaking everything into pairs to the exclusion of using Aristotelian categories and subdivisions as well. Though Ramus may have intended his logical method as a simplification of and correction to Aristotle’s Organon, the reality was that Reformed scholastics tended to move fluidly back and forth between Ramist divisions and Aristotelian methods. Thus, Polanus could list eleven axioms to explain the character of God’s essential properties and he could bifurcate almost ad nauseum in treating divine infinitude.76 Yet we have seen already his use of Aristotelian categories of composition in treating divine simplicity. Dividing the system of theology along Ramist lines into two parts, namely, what man is to believe concerning God and the duty that God requires of man, explains the structure of the theological systems of Polanus, Wollebius, Maccovius,77 the Westminster Larger and Shorter Catechisms, and others, though not all systems followed this pattern. It is notable, for instance, that the Westminster Confession of Faith did not do so. When used, this bifurcation of structure ordinarily retained the early church model of the Apostles Creed, the Ten Commandments, and the Lord’s Prayer, while

Petrus Ramus, Commentariorum De Religione Christiana, Libri, Quatuor, Eivsdem Vita a Theophilo Banosio Descripta (Francofvrti, 1576). 76 Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 901–3 and 924–7, respectively. 77 Johannes Maccovius, Loci Communes Theologici (Amstelodami, 1658), 3. 75

General History and Terminology

113

adding a section on word and sacraments either before or after the Lord’s Prayer to complete its bifurcative structure. This highlights the ability of Reformed scholastic authors to incorporate various strands of philosophical ideas into their theological systems. The general rule was that they often chose what they regarded to be the best tools needed to address the issue at hand. Reformed authors, such as Voetius, later revisited and questioned Ramus’s rejection of metaphysics.78 Medieval, Renaissance, and philosophical movements hovered around and permeated the development of post-Reformation scholastic theology.79 Other philosophical movements, such as Cartesianism, became pressing objects of debate in certain regions in which Reformed theology flourished.80 This section has merely provided a sample of some of the most common and prevalent philosophical considerations in Reformed thought. It is important to be aware of this fact to study Reformed scholasticism well.

Related descriptive terms At this juncture, it is important to focus more narrowly on the meaning of some key terms related to Reformed scholasticism. Research and writing can lack precision and clarity when students fail to address the fundamental meaning of such terms. Yet defining historical terminology can be notoriously difficult. For example, a cottage industry has arisen over the meaning of the term “Puritan,” with entire monographs devoted to the subject.81 To understand and to study Reformed scholasticism it is necessary to have working definitions, or at least general descriptions, of terms such as “orthodoxy,” “scholasticism,” and “Reformed.”

Goudriaan, “Theology and Philosophy,” 43. Muller, PRRD, 1:36. 80 A chapter below will touch on Cartesianism in relation to the nature of Reformed scholasticism in the Netherlands. 81 For an up-to-date survey of the quest to define “Puritanism,” for example, see Randall J. Pederson, Unity in Diversity: English Puritans and the Puritan Reformation, 1603–1689, vol. 68, Brill Studies in Church History (Leiden: Brill, 2014). 78 79

114

Reformed Scholasticism

Orthodoxy Out of the three terms singled out in this section, orthodoxy is the easiest to define. Orthodoxy is about setting boundaries by way of statement and definition, especially in relation to confessional documents. Van Asselt wrote that orthodoxy “has a normative meaning in which a close connection is established with the teaching of the church throughout the ages.”82 Orthodoxy itself refers to right teaching.83 Orthodox teaching was also meant to be normative teaching. The parameters of orthodoxy were often delineated by creeds, confessions, and the decrees of councils. This began with appeals to early church councils. For example, when Amandus Polanus, in his Syntagma, shifted from his treatment of the doctrine of Scripture to theology proper, the first thing that he did was to cite in full a list of historic creeds, beginning with the Apostle’s Creed, to set catholic parameters for his exposition of the doctrine of God.84 As noted above, post-Reformation confessional theology arose in Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Reformed, Socinian, Arminian, and other contexts. Such confessional statements set the boundaries for what each of these communions regarded to be right teaching. While Roman Catholicism took shape during this period largely through the decrees of the Council of Trent and Lutheranism did so through their Book of Concord, Reformed churches had many confessional statements. As we will see below, there were common threads that united the contents of these confessions. However, the proliferation of confessional statements makes defining Reformed orthodoxy a more difficult task than its counterparts in other communions.85

Scholasticism Scholasticism is easier to describe than it is to define. As with Puritanism, Leinsle notes that some authors have rejected the term entirely due to the

Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, 6. Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, 5–6. 84 Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 843–55. 85 The best introduction to the kind of diversity that existed within the bounds of Reformed orthodoxy remains Michael A. G. Haykin and Mark Jones, eds., Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, vol. 17, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011). 82 83

General History and Terminology

115

difficulties involved in defining it.86 However, this problem faces the use of every descriptive term used in historical research, including common designations such as “medieval” and “modernity.”87 Yet such terms reflect the recognition of broad historical shifts on the part of scholars. Sometimes this means that historians must be content with general descriptions over precise definitions. According to Leinsle, two obvious features stand out with regard to scholasticism. The first is that scholasticism refers to the method employed for teaching theology in the schools.88 Yet something is lacking in this description, both due to the fact that monastic schools taught theology without necessarily using scholastic methods in doing so and because many well-known scholastic theologians (e.g., Anselm, Abelard, etc.) were monks as well.89 Therefore, while scholasticism is not less than a theology of the schools, it must be a bit more as well for the term to retain any meaning. The second feature of scholasticism, according to Leinsle, is its attempt to teach theology using tools drawn from the scientific methods current at the time.90 With respect to high medieval and post-Reformation theology, this primarily meant using Aristotelian categories and distinctions. Scholasticism was thus a method of teaching theology in the schools in light of current scientific methods. This general outline of scholastic method still needs supplementation to approach a concrete description. We can move in this direction by noting that three “D’s” marked late medieval as well as post-Reformation scholasticism. These are disputations, declamations, and distinctions. Perhaps the idea of quaestio draws a circle around all three terms, since the scholastic method aimed to answer questions in an academic context.91 Disputations, in general, represented a method of teaching students to defend their views against

Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 7. Brill is working currently toward publishing a volume on the relationship between John Owen and modernity. 88 Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 10. 89 Gerhard Muller, “Luther’s Transformation of Medieval Thought: Discontinuity and Continuity,” in The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology, 105–14 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).; Volker Leppin, “Luther’s Transformation of Medieval Thought: Continuity and Discontinuity,” in The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology, 115–24 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).; Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 10. 90 Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 12. 91 Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker, “Introduction,” in Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, ed. Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 25. 86 87

116

Reformed Scholasticism

opposing positions. A professor might pose a question in response to which the student was expected to define what the question should include and what it should not. The student would then state his position as well as that of his opponent(s). After refuting his opponent point by point, the student would then include a positive defense of his position from Scripture and the church fathers. Francis Turretin’s Institutes of Elenctic Theology exemplifies this method in every section of the work.92 Many Reformed professors of theology wrote theological systems based on the cycle of disputations used at the university in which they taught. Some of these works were extensive, such as Voetius’s five massive volumes of disputations.93 Others appeared in summary fashion consisting of roughly five-page chapters, such as those of Franciscus Gomarus (1563–1641) and Johannes Cloppenburg (1592–1652).94 Declamations represented a more positive approach to presenting theological topics than disputations. Students were expected under this method to present their positions from the ground up rather than merely by responding to opposing viewpoints. This did not exclude refuting errors, but the starting point and the focus of the declamation differed from that of the disputation. While disputations were largely exercises in logic, declamations often tested student’s rhetorical skills.95 If Francis Turretin exemplified the disputation model clearly, then Johannes Heidegger illustrates a fuller expression of the Reformed system, including declamatory style.96 Johannes

Turretin, Institutio Theologiae Elencticae; Leonard Ryssen, Francisci Turretini Ss. Theologiae Doctoris Et Professoris Compendium Theologiae Didactico-Elencticae, Ex Theologorum Nostrorum Institutionibus Theologicis Auctum Et Illustratum: Ut Praeter Explicationes Theticas Et Problematicas in Controversiis Verum Statum Proponatur, “Prôton Pseudos” Detegatur, Vera Sententia Confirmetur, Argumentis Ad Paucas Classes Revocatis, Praecipuae Adversariorum Exceptiones Et Objectiones Diluantur, Calumniae Etiam Adversarioru, Abstergantur (Amsterdam, 1695). 93 Gijsbert Voetius, Selectarum Disputationum Theologicarum Pars Prima (Quinta. Accedunt Dissertatio Epistolica De Termino Vitæ. Exercitatio De Prognosticis Cometarum. Antehac Seorsim Editæ), 5 vols. (Ultrajecti, 1648). 94 Franciscus Gomarus, Syntagma Disputationum Theologicarum, in Academia Lugduno-Batava Quarto Repetitarum (Roterodami: Impensis Ioannis Leonardi a Berewout bibliopolae, 1615); Johannes Cloppenburg, Exercitationes Super Locos Communes Theologicos (Franekerae, 1653). 95 Theodore G. van Raalte, “Francois Lambert D’Avignon (C.a. 1487–1530): Early Ecclesial Reform and Training for the Ministry at Marburg,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 88. 96 Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology; Heidegger, Corpus Theologiae Christianae. Turretin referred to Heidegger, who taught in Zurich, as, “our particular friend.” Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:198; 18.20.18. 92

General History and Terminology

117

Markcius’s (1665–1731) full theological system generally followed the declamation pattern as well, while including elements of the disputation style in its elenctic sections.97 Finally, distinctions were a preeminent mark of scholastic theology in any century.98 Johannes Maccovius (1588–1664) illustrates this point well in that he wrote an entire book introducing his students to the terms and distinctions that they would need to know to study theology in the university.99 Richard Muller observes that Reformed scholastics employed four kinds of logical distinctions: distinctio realis, distinctio formalis, distinctio rationis ratiocinatae, and distinctio rationis ratiocinans.100 Sometimes they added the distinctio modalis, which belonged to “the vocabulary of trinitarian theology” to describe modes of subsistence in the Godhead.101 Scholasticism was a method of teaching that aimed at precision and clarity through precision. Methodologically, this stood in contrast, for example, to mystical strands of theology, which inherently defied definition and struggled for adequate description. Though readers should remember that some of the most prominent scholastics, such as Thomas Aquinas, had a mystical bent as well. Though scholastic theology aimed to explain what it did explain clearly and effectively, scholastic authors never claimed that all things were explicable. They also denied that creatures could comprehend God, even though they could apprehend him.102 While it is well known that many early Protestants used the term “scholastic” in a derogatory way to refer to perceived medieval and Roman Catholic abuses in theology, positive uses of scholastic method grew up with the Reformation

Johannes Marckius, Compendium Theologiae Christianae Didactico Elencticum: Immixtis Problematibus Plurimis & Quaestionibus Recentioribus Adauctum (Amstelodami, 1696). 98 In his conclusion to his entry on distinctio, Muller gives the following example: “In Protestasnt scholastic theology, as in the theology of the medieval scholastics, the question of distinctions is of paramount importance in the discussion of the divine attributes (attributa divina). How can theology make predications of an essentially simple being whose attributes are essentially identical? Most of the Protestant scholastics reject the formal distinction and accept the distinctio rationis ratiocinatae.” Richard A. Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), 94. 99 The Latin and English text of this work is available in Johannes Maccovius, Scholastic Discourse: Johannes Maccovius (1588–1644) on Theological and Philosophical Distinctions and Rules (Apeldoorn: Instituut voor Reformatieonderzoek, 2009). 100 Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms, 93–4. 101 Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms, 94. 102 Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 879. 97

118

Reformed Scholasticism

itself. Protestant scholasticism generally, and Reformed scholasticism particularly, reflected a well-developed and self-conscious scientific method of teaching theology in the schools during this time period.103

Reformed The last term requiring description, if not definition, is “Reformed.” As van Asselt observes, Reformed is a better historical epithet to describe this time period than Calvinism is.104 The primary reason for this assertion is that Calvinism can give the wrong impression by implying that Calvin is the bar by which to judge Reformed orthodoxy. Reformed, as a descriptive term, reflects the diverse confessional statements produced within the Reformed communion. While orthodoxy can apply to other confessional tradition, such as Lutheranism, using the term Reformed indicates what kind of orthodoxy is in view. This raises the basic question of the parameters of the core content that defines historic Reformed orthodoxy. Some authors, such as Apawo Phiri, detach the term Reformed from the bounds of confessional orthodoxy. The result is that she can write positively of “Reformed” churches in modern Africa incorporating practices, such as witchcraft and ancestor worship.105 The mission of such “Reformed” churches is, in her view, to oppose things like “homophobia,” “sexism,” and “ecumenism.”106 Regardless of the merits or demerits of opposing views on such issues, this approach voids “Reformed” of any useful meaning historically. By contrast, in the same volume Eberard Busch comes closer to helping readers understand the general content of historic Reformed theology. He provides five characteristics the Reformed confession, all of which stem from the doctrine of God and of Scripture. These are the “fundamental directing power” of Scripture, the “seminal importance” of the covenant, a “unique interpretation” of the law and the gospel, predestination, and “appreciation of church order.”107 (240–4). These characteristics developed

Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, 7. Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, 201. 105 Paul T. Nimmo and David A. F. Fergusson, The Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 289. 106 Nimmo and Fergusson, The Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, 286. 107 Nimmo and Fergusson, The Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, 240–4. 103 104

General History and Terminology

119

out of the doctrines of God and of Scripture as the two principia of historic Reformed theology, which entailed the absolute supremacy of the triune God and the absolute authority and sufficiency of Scripture for doctrine and life. Narrowing things in this way provides a general idea of what “Reformed” means in the present book in light of some of the key doctrinal emphases that tied the Reformed confessions together.

Conclusion The above material enables us to draw a few conclusions regarding common periodization, parallel historical movements, and relevant terminology used in the study of Reformed scholasticism. First, while periodization is inherently imprecise, it is necessary to build an adequate historical narrative. The lines between the medieval, Reformation, and post-Reformation periods, as well as those drawn between early, high, and late orthodoxy must remain dotted rather than solid ones. These are useful guidelines rather than hard and fast rules. Second, Reformed scholasticism was not hermetically sealed off from medieval theology and methods, from Renaissance humanism, and from philosophical trends. It grew alongside of these movements and it drew heavily from elements of all of them. Third, terms like “orthodoxy,” “scholastic,” and “Reformed” are useful and, even necessary, to understand the extent and limits of studying Reformed scholasticism. As Paul Dominiak wrote, “Protestant or Reformed ‘orthodoxy’ and ‘scholasticism’ do not exactly coincide. Rather, Protestant or Reformed orthodoxy relates to its scholasticism as a whole to a part: the latter is contained within the former but does not exhaust it; and the latter primarily describes a particular theological method, while the former circumscribes broader Protestant or Reformed theological content.”108 In short, Reformed orthodoxy is wider topic than Reformed scholasticism. Scholasticism is a smaller circle within the larger circle of orthodoxy. Reformed orthodoxy refers to the historic teachings of the Reformed faith while Reformed scholasticism refers to the method of teaching Reformed content, primarily in the universities and for the training of ministers.

W. Bradford Littlejohn and Scott N. Kindred-Barnes, eds., Richard Hooker and Reformed Orthodoxy, vol. 40, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017), 40:120.

108

120

Reformed Scholasticism

For these reasons, the chapters that follow introduce the nature and character of Reformed scholasticism in light of the fact that it was a theology of the schools. While studies related to this field should include the content of Reformed theology, they should also focus more narrowly on the relationship between Reformed orthodoxy and its scientific forms of expression and dissemination among students.

7

A Theology of the Schools As the preceding chapter noted, while scholasticism was more than a theology of the schools, it was not less than a theology of the schools. Dolph te Velde summarizes Reformed scholasticism as being characterized by confessionalization, the polemic defense of doctrine, and the need to train ministers of the Word in the schools.1 The first of these categories corresponds to orthodoxy. The second one overlaps with it. The final characteristic goes beyond it. Due to its decidedly scholastic focus, the need to train ministers in the schools receives primary attention here. The basic point of this chapter is that to study Reformed scholasticism, it is necessary to understand in the context of university and theological education as it developed in postReformation Reformed contexts. This material treats this theme in light of medieval precedents, the rise and development of early Protestant universities, and continuities with seventeenthcentury universities, using the Netherlands and England as representative examples. This chapter aims to provide students with enough background to gain a feel for the shape of scholastic theology to help them grasp the basic ideas surrounding its nature as a theology of the schools. Subsequent chapters will expand the character of scholastic theology in light of how disputations, declamations, and distinctions affected the manner and content of teaching theology in the schools.

Dolph te Velde, “Reformed Theology and Scholasticism,” in Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, ed. Paul T. Nimmo and David A. F. Ferguson (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 216–17.

1

122

Reformed Scholasticism

The rise and development of medieval theological education Rather than presenting a detailed analysis of medieval theological education, it is helpful to narrow this treatment by addressing some of the primary areas of distinction and overlap between scholastic and monastic theology in the medieval period. This will illustrate the basic continuities between medieval and Protestant scholasticism in relation to the development of the university system.

The scholastic model of theology Universities arose in the medieval period around the twelfth century.2 It was common during this period for universities to exchange both professors and students frequently.3 This set a precedent for the international and catholic character of theological education that continued into post-Reformation practices. Medieval universities often reflected a back and forth pull between lecturing on Lombard’s Senetentiae and the Bible itself. Most medieval theologians agreed that both were necessary tasks. The question was which procedure took priority. Thomas Aquinas illustrates the push back against getting too far away from the text of Scripture by lecturing exclusively on Lombard, which some schools had begun to do. This led to a proliferation of lectures on books of the Bible on his part.4 Readers should keep in mind as well that the original intent of the Senetentiae was to serve as a theological guide to the interpretation of Scripture.5 Virtually all medieval theologians believed that such a guide was necessary to pursue this task well. The question was how far removed one should be allowed to get from the direct interpretation of the Bible itself. Regardless of which direction particular theologians leaned in relation to this question, scholastic tools, which included the ability to

Charles Homer Haskins, The Rise of the Universities (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1969), 7. Ulrich G. Leinsle, Introduction to Scholastic Theology, trans. Michael J. Miller (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2010), 184. 4 Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 127; Philip McCosker and Denys Turner, eds., The Cambridge Companion to the Summa Theologiae, Cambridge Companions to Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 60–1. 5 Rik Van Nieuwenhove, An Introduction to Medieval Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 147. 2 3

A Theology of the Schools

123

make clear distinctions, to engage in disputations, and to present theological declamations, became standard features of scholastic theology in the university context.6

The monastic model of theology The scholastic model developed in the universities was not, however, the only model for doing and teaching theology. Theology flourished among various monastic orders as well. Due to the fact that many prominent theologians, such as Bonaventure and Aquinas, belonged to monastic orders while writing and teaching scholastic theology, it is easier to state that a monastic model of theology existed than it is to distinguish it fully and clearly from scholastic alternatives. In general, monastic orders stressed Christian practice and labor for the good of others, with a mystical bent, than did the theology of the schools. Bonaventure’s Franciscan order was well known for stressing the practical side of Christianity. Bernard of Clairvaux’s Cistercian order carried forward a decidedly mystical bent in theology as well. Aquinas, who was a Dominican, placed a higher emphasis than either of these other orders did on training and producing preachers. However, readers should remember the mystical bent in his theology as well, which ultimately resulted in leaving his magnum opus, the Summa, unfinished.7 His career in particular illustrates the substantial overlap between employing scholastic method while retaining the goals that grew from his commitment to his monastic order.8

Van Raalte defines declamations and disputations as follows, “The declamation was a rhetorical exercise rooted in ancient Greece and Rome wherein the student was assigned a concrete situation, usually asked to impersonate a character, and then expected to argue either pro or con using all the rhetorical moves he knew. The disputatio was a more structured exercise of logic wherein the opponens presented a thesis against which either of two things happened. In the older Greek model, his fellow student respondents could raise objections, attempting to force him to commit an error in logic; in the newer, early modern model, a respondent posited an anti-thesis and the two argued against each other.” Theodore G. van Raalte, “Francois Lambert D’Avignon (C.a. 1487–1530): Early Ecclesial Reform and Training for the Ministry at Marburg,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 88. 7 McCosker and Turner, Companion to the Summa, 33. 8 Voetius made a similar observation in light of the practice of lecturing on Lombard’s Senetentia both in universities and in monastic schools. Gijsbert Voetius, Selectarum Disputationum Theologicarum Pars Prima (Quinta. Accedunt Dissertatio Epistolica De Termino Vitæ. Exercitatio De Prognosticis Cometarum. Antehac Seorsim Editæ), 5 vols. (Ultrajecti, 1648), 13. 6

124

Reformed Scholasticism

In a Protestant context, Martin Luther illustrates well the influences of the monastic model on theology. Key medieval monastic theologians not only influenced Luther’s theological enterprise, but he retained a distinctively mystical bent in his theology.9 This often resulted in his relative comfort with unresolved theological tensions that Reformed scholastics could not ultimately live with. His refusal to resolve the issue of how the Lord’s Supper could simultaneously be bread and wine and the physical body and blood of Christ was a notorious example. Luther was also less willing to attempt to resolve perceived tensions between divine sovereignty and human freedom in his debates over free will with Erasmus than Reformed authors, such as Calvin, were.10 We will see below that this affected his approach to scholastic theology and the focus of the curriculum in relation to establishing Protestant universities. As noted in a previous chapter, Herman Selderhuis concludes appropriately that, to his dying day, Luther remained a monk at heart.11 Richard Muller observes that Luther was “the only Reformer” who challenged the idea of teaching and preaching a system or in a systematic way.12 While this does not mitigate the influences of monastic models of theology on Protestant scholasticism more broadly, it does show how particular monastic influences affected a man like Luther.

Conclusion These cursory observations highlight the fact that Protestant universities did not develop in a vacuum. Elements of scholastic and monastic theological education were incorporated into Protestant universities as professors adapted these models to suit their own purposes. Stress on the Bible as well as on the system of theology was designed to help students interpret the Bible better. This Volker Leppin, “Luther’s Roots in Monastic-Mystical Piety,” in The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 49–61. 10 Kolb notes a similar contrast between Luther and post-Reformation Lutheran theology on the question of the relationship between divine sovereignty, contingency, and the existence of evil. Robert Kolb, “God, Creation, and Providence in Early Modern Lutheranism,” in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800, ed. Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 308. 11 Herman Selderhuis, Martin Luther: A Spiritual Biography (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017), 312–13. 12 Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, Ca. 1520 to Ca. 1725, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 1:50. 9

A Theology of the Schools

125

pattern carried over into Reformed practice. For example, Calvin’s policy of directing readers of his Institutes to his biblical commentaries and of directing those reading the commentaries back to the Institutes sounds very similar to Aquinas’s way of doing things. There was virtually no aspect of Protestant approaches to establishing universities, or reforming existing ones, that did not draw critically from medieval precedents.

The early development of Protestant universities Protestant universities arose quickly during the time of the Reformation. The University of Wittenberg (founded in 1502) became one of the first in this line, and, according to Leinsle, it was one of the only institutions at which humanist learning was incorporated immediately into scholastic medieval models of teaching.13 Most Protestant universities, including this one, became distinctively Protestant only gradually. Protestant professors found themselves faced with the dilemma of searching for educational models that were adequate to teach Protestant theology in the schools. This process went through gradual shifts that resulted in a gradual reincorporation of scholastic method into Protestant theological education. The work of Luther and Melanchthon on the Lutheran side and that of Calvin, Beza, and Lambert Daneau on the Reformed side illustrate how this process took shape in general.

Luther and Melanchthon Martin Luther was notoriously anti-scholastic, at least by reputation through vigorous protest.14 One of his earliest works was a Disputation against Scholastic Theology.15 Among other things, he envisioned abolishing Aristotle from the university curriculum entirely. He also aimed to emphasize lectures on the

Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 245. For the remnants of scholastic, and even Aristotelian ideas in Luther’s thought, see D. V. N. Bagchi, “Sic et Non: Luther and Scholasticism,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, ed. R. Scott Clark and Carl R. Trueman (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006). 15 Cornelis Augustijn, “Wittenberga Contra Scholasticos,” in Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, ed. Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 66. 13 14

126

Reformed Scholasticism

Bible to the exclusion of commenting on Lombard’s Senetentiae. This again reflects a concern that raised its head continually throughout the high medieval period, though with a decidedly radical bent in the direction of commenting on the Bible. However, Fred Hall observes that in refuting scholastic theology, Luther used “scholastic methods and Scripture” to do it.16 Luther appeared to be more opposed to the perceived content of scholastic theology than he was to its academic form.17 If, in Luther’s view, Aristotle had to be kicked out of the university doors, then this required significant changes in the propaedeutic studies to theology.18 Luther reflected humanistic influences in this regard by stressing the need to develop skill in Greek and Hebrew as well as Latin. However, he was largely ambivalent about the nature and necessity of other studies that would prepare students for lecturing on the Bible and formulating theology. Melanchthon found himself dissatisfied with this procedure. He agreed with Luther on the need to gain facility in the biblical languages and he even became the first professor of Greek at the University of Wittenberg. Yet as he addressed the task of organizing the university curriculum, he was confronted with the need to teach subjects such as logic and rhetoric as well as to furnish students with the vocabulary and conceptual distinctions that they needed to teach and to defend a distinctively Lutheran theology. As Timothy Wengert observed, his curriculum played a vital role in the development of churches that were distinctively Lutheran.19 Under Melanchthon’s influence, the university required that visiting lectures and doctoral candidates adhere strictly to the Book of

Fred P. Hall, “Influences in Luther’s Reforms,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, ed. Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 62. 17 Cornelis Augustijn, “Wittenberga Contra Scholasticos,” in Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, ed. Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 68. 18 Robert Kolb, “Pastoral Education the Wittenberg Way,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, ed. Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 67–79. 19 Timothy J. Wengert, “Philip Melanchthon and Wittenberg’s Reform of the Theological Curriculum,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, ed. Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 18. 16

A Theology of the Schools

127

Concord.20 He thus illustrates a combination of scholasticism and orthodoxy. With some irony, given his close relationship with Luther, Melanchthon found partial answers in his search for education tools in Aristotle. He not only incorporated standard Aristotelian concepts into Protestant theology. He also began lecturing on some of Aristotle’s key works to develop the tools that he needed to teach and for students to learn. In this respect, Melanchthon proved to be more conservative than Luther in his approach to theological education. The result was a higher level of continuity with medieval scholastic methods of teaching while retaining a distinctively Protestant flare in the content of his teaching. Melanchthon showed just as much contempt for scholasticism as Luther did, but he was committed to being a man of letters and to applying the best up-to-date scientific methods to the study of theology.21 As noted in a previous chapter, adapting current scientific methods to suit of the needs of university education was one of the hallmark features of scholastic method. In this regard, Melanchthon served as an early model for other Protestant university professors, in terms both of method and of content.22

Calvin, Beza, and Daneau In terms of theological education, Calvin’s name stood out. The vital role that he played in forming the Geneva Academy is well known, as is his international influence on the Reformed world through training refugees, such as John Knox. By the time of Calvin’s death, however, the curriculum and methods used at the Academy were still in the early stages of development. Theodore Beza was Calvin’s hand-picked successor in Geneva. As a later chapter will demonstrate, if some scholars treat Calvin’s theology as the Garden of Eden, then they often regard Beza as marking the Fall, especially in light of his De Praedestionis Doctrina.23 This alleged fall occurred through transforming Calvin’s pristine Reformed theology through reincorporating Wengert, “Philip Melanchthon and Wittenberg’s Reform of the Theological Curriculum,” 22. Augustijn, “Wittenberga Contra Scholasticos,” 77. 22 Wengert, “Philip Melanchthon and Wittenberg’s Reform of the Theological Curriculum,” 33. 23 Raymond A. Blacketer, “The Man in the Black Hat: Theodore Beza and Reorientation of Early Reformed Historiography,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, ed. Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 20 21

128

Reformed Scholasticism

scholastic methods and distinctions into Reformed thought. The reality was that Beza furthered Calvin’s aim to interpret and apply Scripture, even if he necessarily presented his theology in a more scholastic form that was suited to theological education.24 The final product of Beza’s theological enterprise was ultimately pastoral in tone as well.25 If, under the Calvin versus the Calvinists thesis, John Calvin is the Garden of Eden and Theodore Beza is the fall, then Lambert Daneau virtually becomes Satan incarnate. The problems with this assessment remain to be seen in a subsequent chapter. Together with a fresh generation of professors, Daneau represents the process of reincorporating scholastic methodology into Reformed theological education in Geneva.26 The best example of this lies in the fact that he wrote a commentary on the first book of Lombard’s Senetentia.27 Daneau was the only Protestant author who attempted to follow this practice that we know of. However, the practice of commenting critically on a key theological text as an aid to interpreting the Bible continued in Reformed practice, as exemplified by Ryssen’s condensed summary of Turretin and de Moor’s extensive commentary on Marckius.28 Moreover, lectures on the

2013), 231. He notes, “The narrative in which Theodore Beza plays the villain who ruined Reformed theology has been current since at least the mid-seventeenth century, when Moise Amyraut sought to identify his own speculative schema of decrees with the primordial thought of Calvin and to drive a wedge between the teachings of Calvin and Beza to further his own theological agenda, thus presaging the historiographic mythology that pitted ‘Calvin Against the Calvinists.’” 24 Blacketer, “The Man in the Black Hat,” 236–7. 25 Blacketer, “The Man in the Black Hat,” 238. 26 Irena Backus, “G. W. Leibniz and Protestant Scholasticism in the Years 1698–1704,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, ed. Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 679–96. 27 Lambert Daneau, In Petri Lombardi Episcopi Parisiensis (qui Magister Sententiarum Appellatur) Librum Primum Sententiarum, Qui Est De Vero Deo, Essentiâ Quidem Uno: Personis Autem Trino: Lamberti Danaei Commentarius Triplex. Unus, Ad Marginem Ipsius Libri, in Quo Singularum Distinctionum Artificium Breviter Explicatur. Alter, Ubi Locorum À Lombardo Prolatorum Accurata Collatio Facta Est. Tertius, Qui Censuram Doctrinae, Methodique Lombardi, Tum Ex Ipso Dei Verbo, Tum Ex Veris Sententiarum Scribendarum Praeceptis Habet (Genevae: Apud Eustathium Vignon, 1580). 28 Leonard Ryssen, Francisci Turretini Ss. Theologiae Doctoris Et Professoris Compendium Theologiae Didactico-Elencticae, Ex Theologorum Nostrorum Institutionibus Theologicis Auctum Et Illustratum: Ut Praeter Explicationes Theticas Et Problematicas in Controversiis Verum Statum Proponatur, “Prôton Pseudos” Detegatur, Vera Sententia Confirmetur, Argumentis Ad Paucas Classes Revocatis, Praecipuae Adversariorum Exceptiones Et Objectiones Diluantur, Calumniae Etiam Adversarioru, Abstergantur (Amsterdam, 1695); Bernardinus de Moor, Continuous Commentary on Johannes Marckius’ Didactico-Elenctic Comendium of Christian Theology, trans. Stephen Dilday, vol. 1 (Culpeper, VA: L & G Reformation Translation Center, 2014).

A Theology of the Schools

129

Senetentia continued in Protestant universities, even among authors, such as Melanchthon, who wrote their own theological systems. Parallel to continuing the practice of commenting on the Senetentia, postReformation Roman Catholic theologians began to produce commentaries on Aquinas’s Summa. The most famous of these was that of Thommaso de vio Cajetan (1469–1534), who set the standard for such commentaries for centuries.29 The point is that Protestants and Roman Catholics alike continued to legitimize this carry over from medieval scholasticism, though with widely differing goals in doing so. The examples of Calvin, Beza, and Daneau’s work in the Genevan Academy reflects similar trends that existed related to theological education in Lutheran and Reformed contexts. As Protestants faced the challenge of developing their own educational institutions, they increasingly drew critically from medieval scholastic practices. This does not so much mark a departure from an early pristine Protestant theology as it does a conservative bent that tried to avoid reinventing the educational wheel. As demonstrated through Melanchthon’s work as an educator, this shift coincided with the development of Protestant prolegomena to theology and the revision of the propaedeutic studies to theology. Aristotle was wounded in the process, but he did not die. He was resurrected and transformed into the image of the Protestant professors who re-created him. The same was true with regard to medieval scholastic method more broadly.

The development of universities under Reformed orthodoxy Two examples from the high orthodox period show the mature development of Reformed scholasticism as a theology of the schools. While many examples could serve this purpose, the universities in the Netherlands and England in the seventeenth century were particularly noteworthy and influential on an international scale.30 I will use the universities in the Netherlands to McCosker and Turner, Companion to the Summa, 323. Switzerland stands out in this regard as well. I have omitted the Swiss educational influence here because I treat it below in relation to describing the regional character of Reformed scholasticism in relation to various countries.

29 30

130

Reformed Scholasticism

illustrate scholastic characteristics related to theological education, including disputations and distinctions. The examples drawn from England will demonstrate the character of this educational process from the standpoint of university practices and preparatory studies to theology.

The Netherlands Several Reformed universities arose in the Netherlands in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Rather than arising within established medieval schools, many of them arose locally what in what were know as illustrious schools. As some of these schools did well, they gained government recognition and were constituted as universities. Two institutions that stand out in this regard were the Universities of Leiden and Utrecht.31 The University of Leiden arose in 1575. Leiden offered degree programs in fields beyond the realm of theology, but its theology department produced both famous and infamous professors. The purpose here is not to provide readers with a history of the university, but to show the scholastic character of education present in it. The rise of the controversy over Remonstrant theology enables us to do this simply and clearly.32 The controversy arose through Jacob Arminius presenting a disputation on free well that was of questionable orthodoxy.33 However, it was not until after his death that the controversy came into full bloom with the publication of a remonstrance by some of the Leiden faculty. The remonstrance rejected standard Reformed teachings on the extent of Christ’s atonement, the nature of human depravity resulting from Adam’s Fall, the absolute sovereign freedom of God in election to salvation, the irresistible nature of the Spirit’s call to saving faith, and the final perseverance of the saints to glory. After Leiden effectively fired the Remonstrants among

For the development of Reformed schools in Leiden, Dort, Franeker, Herderwijk, Middelburg, Gronigen, Deventer, Amsterdam, Utrecht, Hertogenbosch, Breda, Nijmegen, Rotterdam, and Maastricht, see Antonie Vos, “Reformed Orthodoxy in The Netherlands,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 126–40. Most of these schools disbanded in the nineteenth century. 32 For an extensive treatment of Remonstrant theology, particularly in relation to Leiden in the early-seventeenth-century Netherlands, see Martin Mulsow and Jan Rohls, eds., Socinianism and Arminianism: Antitrinitarians, Calvinists, and Cultural Exchange in Seventeenth-Century Europe (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2005). 33 Vos, “The Netherlands,” 167–8. 31

A Theology of the Schools

131

its faculty, the new faculty of theology collaborated to write the Synopsis Purioris Theologiae.34 The purpose of this volume was to show to the rest of the Reformed world that Leiden had retained its Reformed character through the controversy. The relevant point in relation to the scholastic character of the university curriculum is that the Synopsis followed the regular disputation cycle that was current at the time.35 This largely mirrored the medieval method of holding theological disputations throughout the course of theological training. The four authors of the Synopsis presented most of the system of Reformed thought through each professor developing the disputation assigned to him. The recent critical text and translation of this work, therefore, offers students vital insights into the scholastic character of high orthodox Reformed theology in the Netherlands. It is not only an ideal introduction to the character of scholastic disputations, but it is virtually indispensable to those pursuing research in this field. Utrecht University was established in 1636 during the high orthodox period. Unlike Leiden, Utrecht arose exclusively for the study of theology.36 It is somewhat ironic, therefore, that the university voted recently to disband its theology department.37 Gisbertus Voetius was the most famous professor at this institution. He was trained in theology at Leiden and taught theology at Utrecht beginning in 1634. Voetius gained international acclaim in the Reformed world for the depth of his theological precision as well as through his influence on many students. He taught well-known men, such as Johannes Hoornbeeck, Herman Witsius, and Wilhelmus a Brakel. The last of these men wrote a four-volume theological handbook in Dutch that bridged the gap between scholastic and popular theology by simplifying the Reformed system for the average believer.38 Voetius’s five volumes of disputations show the use of precise scholastic distinctions at their height.

A. Walaeus et al., Synopsis Purioris Theologiae = Synopsis of a Purer Theology, ed. Henk van den Belt, trans. Riemer A. Faber (Leiden: Brill, 2015). 35 Walaeus et al., Synopsis Purioris Theologiae. 36 Vos, “The Netherlands,” 137–8. 37 Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, eds., Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honour of Willem J. Van Asselt, vol. 14, Studies in Theology and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 5. 38 Wilhemus A’Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012). 34

132

Reformed Scholasticism

The use of disputations and of maintaining clearly and precise scholastic distinctions did not result in a sterile theology at Utrecht, Leiden, or in other Reformed Universities. This is illustrated the incident in which Utrecht invited the English divine, William Ames, to teach at the university establishing a new chair of practical theology. The invitation was rescinded when the English monarch opposed the appointment. However, it soon became clear that the Utrecht theology faculty wanted Ames rather than a chair of practical theology, which was merely a convenient place to put him at the university. With Ames off the table, they eventually argued that they did not need a chair of practical theology on the grounds that every area of practice and pastoral ministry was encompassed already in the theological curriculum.39 This fact is obvious on the surface of Voetius’s lengthy and precise Latin disputations as well as from the fact that Peter van Mastricht wrote his Theoretico-Practica Theologiae primarily to help students learn how to be better preachers.40 This was not an exclusively Dutch focus either.41 Other continental authors, such as Amandus Polanus, included usus at the end of nearly every section in their theological systems and even Francis Turretin connected his selection of topics to promoting genuine piety.42 Even in a scholastic university context, practica marked the educational process and, in many cases, served as its primary purpose.43 Franciscus Junius captured this point well in the first published Reformed prolegomena by noting that our theology, which is a dim reflection

For a sketch of this historical narrative, see Donald Sinnema, “The Attempt to Establish a Chair in Practical Theology at Leiden University (1618–1626),” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 415–42. 40 Voetius, Selectarum Disputationum Theologicarum Pars Prima (Quinta. Accedunt Dissertatio Epistolica De Termino Vitæ. Exercitatio De Prognosticis Cometarum. Antehac Seorsim Editæ); Peter van Mastricht, Theoretico-Practica Theologia. Qua, Per Singula Capita Theologica, Pars Exegetica, Dogmatica, Elenchtica & Practica, Perpetua Successione Conjugantur (Trajecti ad Rhenum, and Amstelodami: Sumptibus Societatis, 1715). 41 For example, Junius made a similar point about connecting true theology to the aims of preaching. See, Franciscus Junius, A Treatise on True Theology: With the Life of Franciscus Junius, trans. David C. Noe (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), 233. 42 Amandus Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae Ab Amando Polano a Polansdorf: Juxta Leges Ordinis Methodici Conformatum, Atque in Libros Decem Digestum Jamque Demum in Unum Volumen Compactum, Novissime Emendatum (Hanoviae, 1610); Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George Musgrave Giger, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992), 1:xli. 43 Johannes Hoornbeeck, Theologia Practica Pars 1, 2 vols. (Francofurti and Lipsiae: Bailliar, 1698). 39

A Theology of the Schools

133

of God’s self-knowledge, transforms us into his image through theology by the power of the Holy Spirit.44

Seventeenth-century England England reveals the nature of the scholastic development of Reformed theological education from another angle. It illustrates what were relatively standard practices in pursuing the study of theology in the context of a relatively unique historical setting. In contrast to places such as the Netherlands, English scholastic theology developed in the context of two well-established medieval schools. Reformed scholars either studied at Cambridge or Oxford, both of which were founded hundreds of years earlier in the high medieval period. Cambridge took pride of place in the sixteenth century.45 Internationally respected teachers, such as Peter Martyr Vermigli, influenced a generation of Reformed scholastics there.46 This school produced such well-known early orthodox ministers as William Perkins, Richard Sibbes, and William Ames.47 In the seventeenth century, the focus shifted somewhat to Oxford, at least in terms of the flourishing of the so-called Puritan branch of Reformed theology, which receives closer attention in a subsequent chapter. Seventeenth-century Oxford is an important example of the nature of what scholastic theological education looked like, since it retained a scholastic model of theological training before, during, and after the English Civil War (1642–51). In the 1630s, the university was subject to the reforms introduced by William Laud (1573–1645). Many English Protestants believed that Laud was moving the English church in a decisively Roman Catholic direction. Following the Civil War, the Puritan party, under the leadership of Oliver Cromwell took over. This gave opportunity to some, such as the Quakers, to raise their voices against the legitimacy of theological education itself. Yet John Owen became dean of Christ Church and vice chancellor the university during this time as

Junius, A Treatise on True Theology, 218–19. Paul R. Schaefer, The Spiritual Brotherhood: Cambridge Puritans and the Nature of Christian Piety (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 19–35. 46 Schaefer, Spiritual Brotherhood, 63. 47 Schaefer, Spiritual Brotherhood, 15. 44 45

134

Reformed Scholasticism

well.48 Westminster divine Edward Reynolds (1599–1676) both preceded and succeeded Owen in his post at Christ Church, serving in that capacity under two kings with little Puritan sympathies. The committed Episcopalian bishop Thomas Barlow (1608–91), who was Owen’s tutor in theology in the 1630s, spanned the entire period in his tenure at the university.49 Such radical and complex historical shifts during this period make the relative stability of the nature and methods of theological studies at Oxford a significant example of Reformed scholasticism in this regard. The atmosphere of theological studies at seventeenth-century Oxford exemplifies a standard scholastic model that largely reflected its continental counterparts at the time pursuing a Bachelor of Divinity course were expected first to complete a BA, which transitioned into an MA. Ordinarily, they began these studies between the ages of twelve and sixteen years of age, though Thomas Goodwin was regarded as being on the young side of the spectrum when he enrolled at Cambridge at age twelve.50 A Bachelor of Divinity degree ordinarily took seven years to complete.51 Students were expected to be fluent in Greek and Latin by this stage and students caught speaking any language other than these on campus were subject to disciplinary measures. They also aimed at proficiency in Hebrew. All instruction occurred in Latin and regular disputations were woven into the curriculum. Tutors expected students to read broadly from lists such as that provided by Barlow.52 Reading Peter Toon, God’s Statesman: The Life and Work of John Owen, Pastor, Educator, Theologian (Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1971), 50–1. 49 Richard A. Muller, “Thomas Barlow on the Liabilities of the ‘New Philosophy’: Perceptions of a Rebellious Ancilla in the Era of Protestant Orthodoxy,” in Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honour of Willem J. Van Asselt, ed. Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, vol. 14, Studies in Theology and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 180. 50 Mark Jones, Why Heaven Kissed Earth: The Christology of the Puritan Reformed Orthodox Theologian, Thomas Goodwin (1600–1680), vol. 13, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 13:38–40. 51 Van Dixhoorn asserts that “only three percent of the clergy had a bachelor of divinity degree.” However, this is difficult to substantiate and he does not cite any sources to do so. Chad B. Van Dixhoorn, God’s Ambassadors: The Westminster Assembly and the Reformation of the English Pulpit, 1643–1653, Studies on the Westminster Assembly (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2017), 120. 52 Thomas Barlow, The Genuine Remains of That Learned Prelate Dr. Thomas Barlow, Late Lord Bishop of Lincoln Containing Divers Discourses Theological, Philosophical, Historical, &c., in Letters to Several Persons of Honour and Quality: To Which Is Added the Resolution of Many Abstruse Points: As Also Directions to a Young Divine for His Study of Divinity, and Choice of Books, &c., with Great Variety of Other Subjects (London, 1693); Gisbertus Voetius, Exercitia Et Bibliotheca Studiosi Theologiæ (Rheno-Trajecti: Apud Wilhelmum Strick, 1644). 48

A Theology of the Schools

135

included linguistic studies, biblical commentaries, and theological works from Reformed, Lutheran, Roman Catholic, early church, and medieval sources, as well as works related to various heretical movements. The disputations occurred at least quarterly and every student engaged in a final disputation to complete his degree. This shows the juxtaposition of humanist linguistic studies with medieval scholastic methods that would be familiar to students in other countries as well. As demonstrated above with regard to the rise of early Reformed universities, this model represented the adaptation of medieval scholastic precedents to suit the needs of teaching a theology that was distinctively Reformed in content. It is noteworthy that very few Latin theological systems appeared in seventeenth-century England.53 Reading lists drew heavily from continental resources, cementing the ties between English universities and their Reformed counterparts on the continent. The implication was that the scholastic method ensured that all universities were speaking the same language, were employing the same theological distinctions, and were following the same methods of instruction. Coupled with the examples drawn from the Netherlands, students can begin to get a feel for the nature and development of Reformed scholasticism under high orthodoxy.

Conclusions: The character of the theology of the schools This brief introduction to the nature of Reformed scholasticism as a theology of the schools leads to several general conclusions that will help students pursue research in this field. First, the character of scholastic and popular theology differed widely while remaining integrally related. Most scholastic theology was written in Latin while popular theology appeared in vernacular languages. Some authors, such as John Owen, wrote both scholastic and popular theology in the vernacular. This explains the different character of works such as Christologia and Meditations on the Glory of Christ. It is also a reason why comparing authors

A rare example would be John Prideaux, Fasciulus Controversarium Theologicarum (London, 1649).

53

136

Reformed Scholasticism

such as Calvin and Turretin creates problems.54 They wrote different genres, for different audiences, in different centuries. Second, scholastic theology informed popular theology. The example of Calvin’s appeal to Aristotelian fourfold causation to explain Ephesians 1:5, 8, cited in a previous chapter, illustrates this well. Likewise Thomas Manton, in his sermons on John 17, could indicate that while God does not pray, he who was God prayed.55 Scholastic Christological distinctions enabled him to explain in his preaching why both of Christ’s natures in one person facilitated and shaped the character of his intercession for believers. Wilhelmus a Brakel’s theological system, noted above, displays at length how this transition from scholastic to popular theology occurred in relation to the entire system of Reformed thought. This shows that while Reformed ministers during this period were trained using a scholastic methods and distinctions, they were expected to be able to “translate” scholastic ideas into material that could benefit the church more broadly. The fact that many institutions, such as Utrecht, produced notable pastors as well as professors further reinforces this feature of Reformed scholasticism. This also strengthens the point made in an earlier chapter that studying Reformed scholasticism should include popular modes of expressing theology, such as sermons. Third, scholastic theology both adopted and transformed medieval precedents in light of Reformed prolegomena. It does not overstate the case to say that Reformed prolegomena gave birth to a self-conscious Reformed scholastic method. This process involved critical engagements with the Christian tradition as well as distinctively Reformed developments. Junius’s prolegomena exemplifies this point well, as he provided other Reformed authors with ideas, terms, and a structure that would enable them to learn and to teach Reformed orthodox theology in the universities. Fourth, scholastic theology developed, in part, under polemic responses to post-Trent Roman Catholic theology. Van Asselt points to the example of Polanus’s responses on the doctrine of Scripture to Robert Bellarmine to show the nature of how this worked.56 Polanus wrote nearly 700 pages on the doctrine Carl R. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 120–9. 55 Thomas Manton, The Complete Works (London: Nisbet, 1870), 10:114. 56 Willem J. van Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, trans. Albert Gootjes (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 109. 54

A Theology of the Schools

137

of Scripture in his Syntagma while refuting Robert Bellarmine’s treatise on Scripture point by point. This shows that the incorporation of scholastic method into Reformed theological education was not merely abstraction nor did it arise in a historical vacuum. Polemic theology, ironically, increased the catholicity of Reformed theological method since both Protestants and Roman Catholics employed scholastic terms and structure in their cross-confessional skirmishes. Finally, this last point leads this author to reiterate Muller’s simple observation that the development of Reformed scholasticism was necessary for the survival and propagation of the Reformed system of theology.57 Post-Reformation Reformed theology and scholasticism were not synonyms. Scholasticism referred decisively to an educational model. As such, scholasticism was a tool, or rather a set of tools, that was most immediately relevant for the purpose of training Reformed pastors. It provided theological students with the vocabulary, distinctions, and skills that they needed to defend the Reformed faith. It also brought Reformed theology into conversation with the entire catholic Christian tradition, which is the subject of the next chapter.

Muller, PRRD, 1:65–6.

57

138

8

A Theology in Conversation with the Entire Catholic Tradition Catholicity may not be a word that some associate with Reformed orthodoxy. For better or for worse, the Protestant Reformation resulted in the institutional fragmentation of European Christianity.1 However, reintroducing scholastic methodology into theological education effectively brought Reformed orthodoxy into engagement with the entire Christian tradition, including the early church fathers, the medieval period, and contemporary crossconfessional theology. To study Reformed scholasticism, therefore, it is necessary to understand that scholastic method enabled Reformed authors to interact critically with the entire catholic Christian tradition. To grasp this point adequately, it is important to make a few brief observations about the Reformed orthodox doctrine of Scripture, followed by two examples of the shaping of the Reformed system of theology from Amandus Polanus and Francis Turretin. The chapter then expands this picture of Reformed catholicity by giving instances in which Reformed scholasticism appropriated medieval and contemporary theological ideas. These examples demonstrate that Reformed scholastic authors prioritized engagement with the church fathers through the lenses of Scripture while framing their theological systems in light of medieval models.

Sola scriptura not solo scriptura The Reformed doctrine of sola scirptura is easily misunderstood. As Henk van den Belt has argued, the so-called five solas themselves were a later Matthew Levering, Was the Reformation a Mistake?: Why Catholic Doctrine Is Not Unbiblical (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017), 15.

1

140

Reformed Scholasticism

construction used to describe an earlier Reformed theology. They likely arose in the nineteenth century and became popular in the early twentieth century.2 This does not mean that these slogans lack value as descriptive categories of the content of classic Reformed theology.3 Their origin after the fact, however, should caution readers against importing later concepts into earlier Reformed theology. To understand the nature of Reformed scholasticism as a movement involving critical engagement with the catholic Christian tradition, some points of clarification are in order with regard to the Reformed doctrine of Scripture. It is a popular misconception that in Reformed theology, sola scriptura meant what a recent author calls, solo scriptura.4 The mistake lies in the idea that Scripture was not only the supreme authority in matters of faith and life, but that it was the only authority to which Reformed authors appealed. Yet Polanus, for example, taught plainly that while the Scriptures alone possessed magisterial authority, the church retained ministerial authority to aid believers in interpreting Scripture.5 The Westminster Confession of Faith reflects this emphasis when it asserts that the Holy Scriptures in their original languages are the supreme judge and final appeal in all religious controversies.6 The Holy Spirit speaking in the Scriptures with magisterial authority did not preclude the ministerial authority of the church and what we would now call historical theology as aids to understanding what Scripture teaches and requires. The material below demonstrates that Reformed scholastic authors operated on the conviction that Christ spoke to the church throughout the ages. Although they by no means treated the tradition of the church as infallible, they believed that it was vital to demonstrate that the church expressed the seed thoughts of Reformed teaching at various points over the

Henk van den Belt, “The Problematic Character of Sola Scriptura,” in Sola Scriptura: Biblical and Theological Perspectives on Scripture, Authority, and Hermeneutics, ed. Hans Burger, Arnold Huijgen, and Eric Peels, vol. 32, Studies in Reformed Theology (Leiden: Brill, 2017), 39–40. 3 This is in partial contrast to van den Belt’s argument that sola scriptura is inadequate or misleading as a descriptive term. 4 Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain, Reformed Catholicity: The Promise of Retrieval for Theology and Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015), 85. 5 Amandus Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae Ab Amando Polano a Polansdorf: Juxta Leges Ordinis Methodici Conformatum, Atque in Libros Decem Digestum Jamque Demum in Unum Volumen Compactum, Novissime Emendatum (Hanoviae, 1610), 671–82. 6 WCF 1.10. 2

Conversation with Entire Catholic Tradition

141

centuries. From a Reformed vantage point, while the tradition of the church admitted amendments and corrections, theology should never operate in a vacuum or present its teachings from Scripture de novo.7 To borrow a different expression, this is why Matthew Barrett reminds his readers that sola scriptura did not mean nuda scriptura for Reformed scholastic authors.8 The latter was a Socinian rather than a Reformed practice.9 The way in which Polanus and Turretin developed their theological systems reflects such convictions.10

Test case one: Amandus Polanus Amandus Polanus enables us to see how a Reformed scholastic author developed a system of theology by engaging with the catholic Christian tradition. His critical use of the church fathers highlights his adoption of catholic content in his theology while the form of his system shows medieval and contemporary appropriations, including organizing the entire Syntagma around a twofold Ramist division between faith and duty. This implied division between form and content, however, is not absolute. Polanus loosely retained the early church form of structuring of theology around the Apostle’s Creed, the Ten Commandments, and the Lord’s Prayer. In addition, he freely borrowed the content and ideas of medieval authors, most openly and notably Thomas Aquinas. The process through which he developed his theology in the course of his academic career illustrates some standard catholic characteristics For a thorough example of this way of thinking in early modern England, see Jean-Louis Quantin, The Church of England and Christian Antiquity: The Construction of a Confessional Identity in the 17th Century (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2009). 8 Matthew Barrett, God’s Word Alone: The Authority of Scripture, The 5 Solas (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2016), 55. 9 Sarah Mortimer, Reason and Religion in the English Revolution: The Challenge of Socinianism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010); John Coffey and Paul C. H. Lim, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Puritanism (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008). 10 Van den Belt argues against making a distinction between sola scriptura and nuda scriptura, since both expressions appear in early modern Reformed primary sources. Van den Belt, “The Problematic Character of Sola Scriptura,” 55–6. However, this distinction, as explained above, illustrates clearly the ideas connected to Reformed views on the interpretation of Scripture. This author believes that Van den Belt’s arguments for dropping sola scriptura as a useful term are overstated, since conveying ideas clearly are more important in historical writing than particular terms. This author believes that dropping such language at this stage in history would result in greater confusion rather than greater clarity in expressing Reformed views on these subjects. 7

142

Reformed Scholasticism

of Reformed scholasticism, which are interlaced with the influences of Renaissance humanism.11 Characteristics of both affected the nature of Reformed theological education. For the sake of simplicity, this treatment draws heavily from Bynung Soo Han’s description of the making of Polanus’s theology.12 Many Reformed systematic theologians began their careers as biblical commentators.13 Polanus began his career with what would become his widely accepted commentary on Malachi.14 Such biblical commentaries related to the broader system of theology in various ways. Authors such as Bucer on Romans and James Durham (1622–58) on Revelation included various loci communes interspersed among their comments on biblical books.15 Calvin disliked this procedure due to unwieldy length and chose to write his Institutes as a companion to the commentaries.16 In either case, loci communes grew out of sedes doctrinae found in biblical books. Sedes doctrinae were key texts of Scripture that served as seats of doctrinal discussions on various topics.17 Loci communes were common places of theological discussion that arose from key passages of Scripture that were often arranged into broader theological systems.18 Calvin followed Melanchthon in this regard by modeling his

Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker, “Introduction,” in Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, ed. Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 25. 12 Byung Soo Han, Symphonia Catholica: The Merger of Patristic and Contemporary Sources in the Theological Method of Amandus Polanus (1561–1610), vol. 30, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015). 13 Concerning Mastricht, Neele wrote, “Mastricht ws a professor of Hebrew for fifteen years, prior to his appointment as professor of theology at Utrecht University. Such a vocational path was not uncommon for the post-Reformation orthodox theologians.” Adriaan C. Neele, Petrus Van Mastricht (1630–1706) Reformed Orthodoxy: Method and Piety (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2009), 162. 14 Han, Symphonia Catholica, 128. 15 Martin Bucer, Metaphrasis Et Enarratio in Epist. D. Pauli Apostoli Ad Romanos, in Quibus Singulatim Apostoli Omnia, Cum Argumenta, Tum Sententiae & Verba, Ad Autoritatem Divinae Scripturae, Fidemque Ecclesiae Catholicae Tam Priscae Qum̉ Praesentis, Religios ̈ac Paul ̣fusius Excutiuntur (Basileae, 1562); James Durham, A Commentarie Upon the Book of the Revelation Wherein the Text Is Explained, the Series of the Several Prophecies Contained in That Book, Deduced the Periods and Succession of Times At, or About Which, These Prophecies Began to Be and Those That Are yet to Be Fulfilled: Together with Some Practical Observations, and Several Digressions: Delivered in Several Lectures (London, 1658). 16 John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 1979), 19:xxiii–xxiv (Epistle Dedicatory). 17 Richard A. Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985), 278. 18 Muller, Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms, 179. 11

Conversation with Entire Catholic Tradition

143

theological system after the book of Romans.19 Burnett and Neele note that Reformed systematicians also ordinarily served as professors of Hebrew before teaching the system of theology at the university level.20 Han observed the same pattern in Polanus.21 This reinforces the influence of the Renaissance emphasis on linguistic studies on Reformed scholastic theology. Prior to writing his full-scale Sytntagma Christianae Theologiae, Polanus wrote his Symphonia Catholica. This book presented the Reformed system of doctrine in light of the writings of the church fathers, which was reminiscent of medieval works, including Lombard’s famous Senetentiae. Polanus wrote Symphonia Catholica to bolster Reformed doctrine in conversation with the early church. This material was not the foundation of his theology in the way that Scripture was, but it played a vital role in establishing the catholicity of Reformed thought. Other notable Reformed authors, such as John Daille (1594–1670) and Andreas Rivetus (1572–1651), wrote their own treatments of the theology of the church fathers with the same end in view.22 In Polanus’s case, this method marked a second step toward his final project, which was to present the entire system of Reformed theology that drew explicitly from these earlier projects. Accordingly, Polanus’s commentaries and his work on the Fathers provided the framework for his massive Syntagma Christianae Theologiae. Throughout this work, he drew frequently from his Symphonia Catholica, especially in connection to his doctrine of Scripture.23 The Syntagma represents the mature development of a Reformed scholastic professor’s career, drawing from biblical exegesis and interacting heavily with the early church tradition. It is marked by disputations (most notably with Cardinal Robert Bellarmine), by

Richard A. Muller, The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of a Theological Tradition, Oxford Studies in Historical Theology (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 125–7. 20 Stephen G. Burnett, From Christian Hebraism to Jewish Studies: Johannes Buxtorf (1564–1629) and Hebrew Learning in the Seventeenth Century, Studies in the History of Christian Thought (Leiden: Brill, 1996); Adriaan C. Neele, Petrus Van Mastricht (1630–1706) Reformed Orthodoxy: Method and Piety (Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2009), 162. 21 Han, Symphonia Catholica, 51. 22 Jean Daille, De Usu Patrum Ad Ea Definienda Religionis Capita, Quae Sunt Hodie Controversa, Libri Duo (Geneva, 1656); Jean Daille, A Treatise on the Right Use of the Fathers in the Decision of Controversies Existing at This Day in Religion, trans. Thomas Smith (London: H. G. Bohn, 1843); Andreas Rivetus, Criticus Sacrus, Praefixus Est Tractatus de Patrum Authoritate (Geneva, 1626). 23 Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, e.g., 442, 556, 620, 672, 673, 702, 740, 742, 765, 825. 19

144

Reformed Scholasticism

an overall declamatory style, and by scholastic distinctions filtered through the then recent introduction of Ramistic bifurcation. His dependence on the church fathers in his interpretation of Scripture is pervasive, and his method and content draw explicitly from medieval authors throughout. His heavy interaction with Aquinas in his theology proper evidences this fact.24 Early in his treatment of theology proper, he even rejected Scotus’s nominalism by name in favor of a Thomistic approach to the relationship between the divine nature and attributes.25 All of this illustrates the historic catholic breadth of Reformed scholastic theology in the early seventeenth century at least. Polanus shows that Reformed scholastic theology was holistic, drawing from exegesis, historical and contemporary theology, polemic treatments, and all with an aim toward praxis. Most of his chapters from the doctrine of God onwards included four areas of uses structured around Paul’s four uses of Scripture outlined in 2 Timothy 3:16–17. Polanus followed the typical pattern of doing Reformed theology in the schools by aiming to be biblically grounded, historically sensitive, practically oriented, and scholastically structured. Interaction with the catholic Christian tradition was woven into the system of theology.

Test case two: Francis Turretin Francis Turretin’s Institutes of Elenctic Theology narrows the focus of the catholic character of Reformed scholasticism by putting the disputation method under a microscope for readers to examine. While Mastricht divided each chapter of his system into exegetical, systematic, elenctic, and practical segments, Turretin singled out the elenctic task of theology exclusively. His theological work incorporated the same catholic elements present in Polanus’s Syntagma filtered more narrowly through polemical engagement with opponents. While readers can consult virtually any section of his Institutes to illustrate this point, his treatment of the resurrection of the dead illustrates well how he integrated

Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae. For representative citations of Aquinas, both positive and negative, in his theology proper, see 864, 800, 902, 1000, 1003, and many other places. 25 Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 800. 24

Conversation with Entire Catholic Tradition

145

an evaluation of early and medieval church theology with his interpretation of Scripture on the subject. Understanding the structure and method of this disputation is more important for our purposes than explaining its contents in detail. Turretin followed the standard disputation model in presenting his topics and questions. His treatment of the resurrection of the dead began with a statement of what the question was not and what it was, a statement of his own position and its opposite, followed by a refutation of arguments against his position, and concluded a positive case for his teaching.26 Negatively, he argued that the resurrection did not merely mean deliverance from calamities, that the general resurrection would encompass all people, and yet that not all would be raised in union with Christ though all would be raised by his power.27 Positively, the topic of the resurrection of the dead should stress the resurrection of believers, which includes the spiritual resurrection of their minds in this world through regeneration. However, properly speaking, the universal resurrection of mankind and the transformation of flesh and blood by assuming immortality is the focus of this disputation.28 Reflecting the fact that praxis was one of the primary goals of Reformed scholastic theology, even in a polemic context, Turretin concluded his introduction to his topic and his statement of the question with three assertions. First, the resurrection is the peculiar treasure of the Christian church and proper to the Christian faith. Second, the resurrection is the highest object of the Christian’s hope. As such, it is “the foundation of all solid consolation.” Third, the resurrection should be “a most effectual stimulus to piety.”29 These observations emphasize the fact that scholasticism and piety were neither contradictory terms nor alternative approaches to theology. Even in a system such as Turretin’s, in which the practical elements of theology received little attention by design, they were never far from view. Turretin then proceeded to defend his position regarding the resurrection of the dead primarily from Scripture in opposition to false teaching. He first

Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:562–8. Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:562. 28 Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:562. 29 Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:563. 26 27

146

Reformed Scholasticism

outlined the gradual unfolding of this doctrine from the Old Testament, expounding numerous passages of Scripture in the chronological order in which they appear in the history of biblical revelation.30 As readers should expect, this chronological treatment of the doctrine of resurrection culminated in the New Testament, in which the doctrine found its clearest expression.31 This chronological method of defending the doctrine of the resurrection had the advantage, in Turretin’s view, of showing the unified message of the entire Bible on this subject as well as the gradual way that God disclosed it throughout redemptive history. The remainder of the disputation is comprised of additional theological arguments deduced from Scripture, especially with reference to the believer’s union with Christ.32 This last section falls under what Turretin ordinarily called, in English translation at least, “sources of explanation.” It is here that he cited and interacted with the church fathers most heavily. The stress of his treatment clearly fell on the development of doctrine from Scripture. The form of his material reflected the disputation model, which was current with some variations in both medieval and in Protestant universities. His interaction with writers from the early and medieval church shows once again the fact that critical interaction with the entire catholic Christian tradition featured prominent in Reformed theology. Coupled with the pattern of Polanus’s career and theological output, we gain a clearer view of the nature of the catholic character of Reformed scholastic theology. In practice, Reformed scholastics assigned magisterial authority to Scripture without neglecting the ministerial authority of the church as a Godgiven interpreter of Scripture. Such practices grew out of Reformed theological principles and they illustrate the nature, at least in part, of the kind of catholicity that marked the Reformed scholastic period.

Medieval and contemporary appropriations Reformed interaction with the entire catholic Christian tradition did not stop with the early church. The material above has already shown in passing that Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:563–4. Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:564–5. 32 Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 565–8. 30 31

Conversation with Entire Catholic Tradition

147

Reformed authors drew constructively from medieval authors. This issue requires a bit more elaboration to appreciate it fully. In addition to using medieval ideas, Reformed authors did not shy away from incorporating ideas into their theological systems drawn from across confessional bounds. Its self-conscious appropriation of medieval theology gave Reformed scholasticism a greater catholic quality than some earlier Reformed thought. In a previous chapter, I noted that the scholastics were often the proverbial “bad guys” in the writings of early Reformers, such as Calvin and, especially, Luther. To circumvent the problem of potential discontinuities between Reformation and post-Reformation thought, it has become commonplace for many scholars in this field to note that scholasticism referred to a particular method of teaching rather than to theological content.33 This observation is both valid in general and important to keep in view. However, we should not press scholasticism as a method to the extent that this excludes appropriating theological ideas. Scholars have abundantly identified features of scholastic theology in early Reformed thinkers, such as Luther, Calvin, and, notably, Vermigli.34 Richard Muller cautions scholars as well that the fact that scholasticism referred primarily to a method of teaching does not preclude the incorporation of ideas from medieval scholastic authors into Reformed theology.35 Sketching some prevalent examples briefly, especially in relation to Thomism, show how this occurred. One of the clearest examples of critical incorporation of medieval theology into Reformed thought is Lambert Daneau’s commentary on the first book of Lombard’s Senetentia, introduced above. Reformed appeals to Aquinas were even clearer and more common than those to Lombard. For instance, Aquinas famously explained divine immutability by describing God as purus actus. This meant that in God there was no potentiality and all actuality. This was

Willem J. van Asselt, “Scholasticism Revisited: Methodological Reflections on the Study of Seventeenth-Century Reformed Thought,” in Seeing Things Their Way, ed. Alister Chapman, John Coffey, and Brad S. Gregory (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009), 154–74. 34 D. V. N. Bagchi, “Sic et Non: Luther and Scholasticism,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, ed. R. Scott Clark and Carl R. Trueman (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006); D. C. Steinmetz, “The Scholastic Calvin,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999), 16–30; Emidio Campi, Shifting Patterns of Reformed Tradition, vol. 27, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014). 35 Richard A. Muller, Divine Will and Human Choice: Freedom, Contingency, and Necessity in Early Modern Reformed Thought (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017), 41, 39–45. 33

148

Reformed Scholasticism

an effort to defend divine immutability without reducing the God of Scripture to an abstract limiting concept of an unmoved mover. God as purus actus became a commonplace in Reformed thought, as exemplified by Polanus.36 The Christianized Aristotelian ideas of habits and acts expressed in Aquinas flowed naturally into Reformed thinking as well. While Aristotle treated a habit as a disposition of the soul resulting from repeated action, Aquinas added the concept that a habit could be disposition or bent of the soul that preceded subsequent acts. Thus both original sin and regeneration could be classified as habits that determined actions rather than dispositions resulting from repeated actions (though subsequent acts of sin or of grace could solidify an existing habit). Reformed authors such as John Owen incorporated these ideas into his concept of sanctification.37 In addition to these examples, medieval debates over whether the being of God took priority over the will of God (Aquinas) or vice versa (Duns Scotus) also found their way into Reformed theology, particularly in relation to the necessity of Christ’s atonement.38 A previous section noted in passing that Polanus adopted the Thomistic position on this issue, as did most Reformed authors. However, notable theologians and members of the Westminster Assembly, such as William Twisse (1578–1646) and Samuel Rutherford (1600–61), leaned in a Scotist direction in their treatments of the relationship between the divine will and attributes. Examples like these of medieval ideas passing into Reformed theology could be multiplied, but the ones presented here should suffice to give students of Reformed scholasticism a general sense of the catholic character of the movement. The catholic character of Reformed scholastic theology did not stop with the middle ages, however. Reformed scholastics appropriated ideas from crossconfessional and contemporary sources as well. For example, John Owen drew extensively from Jesuit Francisco Suarez in his treatment of divine justice as an essential attribute of God in relation to Christ’s atonement.39 More surprisingly, Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 860, 966. Christopher Cleveland, Thomism in John Owen (Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2013), 79–80. 38 Carl R. Trueman, “The Necessity of the Atonement,” in Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, ed. Mark Jones and Michael A. G. Haykin, vol. 17, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011), 207. 39 Carl R. Trueman, John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man (Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007), 43–4. 36 37

Conversation with Entire Catholic Tradition

149

perhaps, Aaron Denlinger has argued at length that Reformed authors partly developed their doctrine of the covenant of works through the influence of Ambrogio Catarino, who was a member of the counter-Reformation Council of Trent.40 The irony of this story lies in the fact that Catarino believed his doctrine of a covenant between God and Adam on behalf of the human race bolstered the Roman Catholic concept of merit while Reformed authors drew from the idea to strengthen the representative parallels between Adam and Christ. Reformed authors, such as Bernardinus de Moor, also drew appreciatively from Johann Gerhard, who was a prominent seventeenthcentury Lutheran theologian, in explaining their doctrines of Scripture.41 In counseling people to interpret Scripture, Edward Leigh commended reading, “The Jewish expositors, the ancient Fathers, and other Interpreters, ancient and modern, Popish and Protestant,” all in subject to the analogy of faith. He concluded that such sources can be useful, “if they be read with judgment.”42 What is most striking about this kind of cross-confessional interaction is that Reformed authors borrowed ideas in this way while retaining their distinctively Reformed confessional identities. Arguably, the scholastic method coupled with clearly defined confessional boundaries made this kind of catholic critical interaction possible.

Conclusions This brief treatment of one aspect of the catholicity of Reformed scholasticism should give readers seed thoughts as to why Reformed scholasticism provides a critical model of how to benefit critically from the tradition of the entire history of the church. Doing so was one of the goals of medieval theology, especially via Lombard and through subsequent commentaries on his Senetentiae. Though only one Reformed author (partially) followed the tradition of commenting Aaron C. Denlinger, Omnes in Adam Ex Pacto Dei: Ambrogio Catarino’s Doctrine of Covenantal Solidarity and Its Influence on Post-Reformation Reformed Theologians (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010). 41 Bernardinus de Moor, Continuous Commentary on Johannes Marckius’ Didactico-Elenctic Comendium of Christian Theology, trans. Stephen Dilday, vol. 1 (Culpeper, VA: L & G Reformation Translation Center, 2014), 192, 201, 241. 42 Edward Leigh, A Systeme or Body of Divinity Consisting of Ten Books, Wherein the Fundamentals and Main Grounds of Religion Are Opened (London, 1654), 111. 40

150

Reformed Scholasticism

on the Senetentiae, interaction with historical and contemporary theology consistently marked the development of Reformed theological systems. The increasing stability of the Reformed system of doctrine, coupled with the extensive use of scholastic method, provided Reformed authors with the stability to do this without leaving their theological commitments behind. As van Asselt and Dekker have pointed out, a common scholastic method and terminology provided scholastic authors from diverse confessional traditions with the apparatus needed to converse meaningfully about theological issues without erasing theological differences.43 By contrast, such boundary lines tend to disappear in modern ecumenical conversations in which a common methodological apparatus is largely absent. In this connection, Matthew Levering’s provocatively titled volume, Was the Reformation a Mistake?, raises some interesting considerations. He rightly highlights that late medieval theology and piety was not entirely a “desolate drought,” as some Protestants seem to assume.44 He even agrees that though the Reformers, in his estimation, made some mistakes, the Reformation itself was not a mistake.45 Levering recognizes that Protestants and Roman Catholics drew their theological systems from Scripture read in light of a Catholic interpretative tradition that they shared in common. While he argues that this fact may ultimately provide grounds for ecumenical conversations,46 it is important to note here that engaging the catholic interpretive tradition of the church was as integral to classic Reformed thought as it was to its Roman Catholic and Lutheran counterparts. William Perkins illustrates the Reformed attitude to the Christian tradition well in his book, The Reformed Catholic. The first line of his epistle to the reader defined a Reformed catholic as that man who believed the same articles of faith as the Church of Rome while purging that faith of the errors and corruption introduced by the Roman Church.47 Reformed scholastics desired to go along Asselt and Dekker, “Introduction,” 38. Levering, Was the Reformation a Mistake? 30. 45 Levering, Was the Reformation a Mistake? 31. 46 Levering, Was the Reformation a Mistake? 189–90. 47 William Perkins, Catholicus Reformatus, Hoc Est, Expositio et Declaratio Praecipiuarum Aliquot Religionis Controversiarum: Quae Ostendit, Quatenus Ecclesiae Ex Dei Verbo Reformatae in Iis Cum Ecclesia Rom. Qualis Est Hodie Est, Consentiunt, et Quatenus Ab Edadem Dissentiunt, Adeoque in Quibus Numquam Ei Consentire Debent (Hanoviae, 1601). The epistle to the reader has no pagination. 43 44

Conversation with Entire Catholic Tradition

151

with Roman Catholic theology as far as they could within the bounds of Scripture.48 Where Roman Catholicism departed from Scripture, Reformed orthodox theologians regarded themselves as the true catholics. Andreas Rivetus exemplified this conviction by entitling his three-volume refutation of Jesuit theology, Catholicus Orthodoxus, Oppositus Catholico Papistae.49 Perkins added that the “Pontificos” had no warrant to accuse Protestants of schism because the so-called Roman Catholics were the true schismatics by departing from the historic catholic faith.50 What is important to note here is that, from a Reformed viewpoint, the catholic Christian tradition as well as Scripture, which was the foundation of their theology, drove them to teach a distinctively Reformed theology in distinctively Reformed churches and universities. Reformed theology itself demanded critical interaction with the entire catholic Christian tradition without enslaving theologians to the opinions of anyone other than God himself, who spoke by the Spirit in Scripture. This leads to the question of the continuities and discontinuities that existed between Reformation theology and the various stages of Reformed orthodoxy.

For example, Manton cites Roman Catholic cardinal Cajetan as providing a helpful interpretation of James 1:15. Thomas Manton, A Practical Commentary, or an Exposition with Notes, on the Epistle of James (London, 1652), 113. 49 Andreas Rivetus, Catholicus Orthodoxus, Oppositus Catholico Papistae, vol. 1, 3 vols. (Geneva, 1644). 50 Perkins, Catholicus Reformatus, 12. 48

152

9

A Theology of Continuities and Discontinuities Throughout the twentieth century, authors such as Basil Hall, Brian Armstrong, and R.T Kendall, and others popularized a theory pitting Calvin against the later Calvinists.1 This approach generally taught that Reformed orthodoxy marked a fall from Calvin’s earlier Scripturally based theology. Reformed scholasticism was the primary perpetrator of this fall, according to these authors. Recent scholarship has largely overturned these conclusions, in large part due to the herculean labors of Richard Muller, whose Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics should be regarded as nailing the coffin to the Calvin versus the Calvinist theory shut so tightly that it will be difficult to resurrect this theory from the primary source evidence under which it is buried.2 Other scholars have sung the funeral song of this theory as well, resulting in what may (hopefully) prove to be an irreversible shift in scholarship surrounding Reformed scholasticism. Those rejecting the Calvin versus the Calvinists approach have noted clearly as well that Calvin was not the founder of a theological tradition, but that he was one prominent teacher among others known as Reformed.3 Andreas Rivetus certainly represented the Reformed For a treatment of the history of research on Reformed scholasticism in light of three general approaches to the subject and five methodological shifts, see Willem J. van Asselt, “Reformed Orthodoxy: A Short History of Research,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013). 2 Though Muller has noted subsequently that the Calvin versus the Calvinists approach continues to persist in some circles. Richard A. Muller, “The Problem of Protestant Scholasticism—A Review and Definition,” in Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, ed. Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 45–50. 3 Yet as Gary Jenkins points out, Thomas Stapleton (1535–98) reserved his sharpest invectives for John Calvin. He accused Calvin of being a “shape changer.” In his treatment of the chief authors of Protestantism, which spanned 53 pages, he devoted 18 pages to Luther, 4 to Melanchthon, and 31 to Calvin. This shows that while it is a mistake to regard Calvin as the founder of the Reformed 1

154

Reformed Scholasticism

tradition on this score when he wrote that while Calvin was a faithful servant and honorable teacher, he nevertheless was not the head of Reformed religion nor did Reformed theologians acknowledge him to be its author.4 Nevertheless, the doctrinal continuity between Reformation and postReformation theology does not preclude development and elements of discontinuity. In some ways, development is a form of discontinuity. This author believes that Reformed scholasticism stood in basic continuity with early Reformed thought while it developed the implications of this theology and expressed it in a more scholastic form.5 The purpose of this chapter is to show that to study Reformed scholasticism, it is necessary to grasp theological and methodological continuities and discontinuities within Reformed thought. Rather that provide an extensive list of relevant issues, this material treats representative examples of substantive and methodological continuities and discontinuities to show the general nature of Reformed scholastic theology as it developed in the sixteenth through the eighteenth centuries.

Continuities and developments Continuities While one could select many areas of continuity between early Reformed theology and its orthodox counterparts, the doctrines of Scripture and of union with Christ and the resultant order of salvation illustrate the point well that strong continuities existed.

tradition, we should be careful not to mitigate his influence. Gary W. Jenkins, “Thomas Stapleton: Loathes Calvin, Will Travel,” in Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, ed. Darren Sarisky (London: T&T Clark, 2017), 71. 4 Andreas Rivetus, Catholicus Orthodoxus, Oppositus Catholico Papistae, vol. 1, 3 vols (Geneva, 1644), 1:4. 5 Scholarly approaches to the relationship between Reformation theology and orthodoxy/ scholasticism fall generally under three categories: (1) Discontinuity, (2) Negative continuity, and (3) Positive continuity. Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker, “Introduction,” in Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, ed. Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001), 29–32. The present chapter reflects a positive continuity approach without precluding elements of discontinuity.

Continuities and Discontinuities

155

Early Reformed authors believed that the Bible was the Word of God.6 The divine authorship of Scripture resulted in the divine authority of Scripture. Since the purpose of Scripture was to make people wise for salvation through faith in Christ, the Scriptures must also be perspicuous in themselves. However, Scripture is not clear to all readers. The problem was not with the Bible, but with the hearts of unregenerate people who sought to understand it.7 The Holy Spirit must overcome people’s sinful prejudices to enable them by faith to receive the message of the Bible, especially as it regarded Christ and the way of salvation through him. The Scriptures were also sufficient to make believers complete for every good work.8 This meant that the Bible was a final and complete rule of all matters concerning faith and practice, requiring no additional revelation or magisterial interpretation of the church. The canon of Scripture was closed, it excluded the apocryphal books accepted by the Roman Catholic Church, and the Spirit used the reading and preaching of the Scriptures to bring people to faith in Christ and to the true knowledge of God through him.9 Reformed orthodox authors retained all of these elements of the doctrine of Scripture, organizing them in a systematic fashion.10 They also stated more explicitly that Scripture was the principium cognoscendi, or cognitive foundation of theology.11 Yet Scripture was more than a cognitive

For a cogent defense of this claim against neo-orthodox denials of it, see J. V. Fesko, “The Doctrine of Scripture in Reformed Orthodoxy,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 429–64. 7 Amandus Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae Ab Amando Polano a Polansdorf: Juxta Leges Ordinis Methodici Conformatum, Atque in Libros Decem Digestum Jamque Demum in Unum Volumen Compactum, Novissime Emendatum (Hanoviae, 1610), 610. 8 Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 688. 9 Second Helvetic Confession 1; Westminster Confession of Faith 1.1. 10 Peter van Mastricht, Theoretico-Practica Theologia. Qua, Per Singula Capita Theologica, Pars Exegetica, Dogmatica, Elenchtica & Practica, Perpetua Successione Conjugantur (Trajecti ad Rhenum, and Amstelodami: Sumptibus Societatis, 1715), 21–2; Edward Leigh, A Systeme or Body of Divinity Consisting of Ten Books, Wherein the Fundamentals and Main Grounds of Religion Are Opened (London, 1654), 81. Concerning the attributes of Scripture, Mastricht included (1) Authority, (2) Truth, (3) Integrity and preservation, (4) Sanctity and purity, (5) Perspicuity, (6) Perfection (including sufficiency), (7) Necessity, (8) Efficaciousness and power. As a point of comparison, Leigh treated the following: (1) Divine authority, (2) Truth and certainty, (3) Scripture as the rule of faith and manners, (4) Necessity, (5) Purity and holiness, (6) Sufficiency and perfection, (7) Perspicuity. The basic coincidence of these lists from a Dutch and English author highlights the relative stability of such treatments during this period. 11 Franciscus Junius, De Theologia Vera; Ortu, Natura, Formis, Partibus, Et Modo (Lugduni Batavorum, 1594), 82–92; Mastricht, Theoretico-Practica Theologia, 17. 6

156

Reformed Scholasticism

foundation, since receiving Scripture as the Word of God and knowing God through faith in Christ was a product of the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. This meant that the goal of theology as regards the one studying it was the true knowledge of the true God.12 Jesus Christ was the sum and substance of the Reformed gospel. In summarizing his counsel on preaching, Perkins (or at least his English translator) reduced “the summe of the summe” to “Preach one Christ, by Christ, to the praise of Christ.”13 Christ accomplished everything necessary for the salvation of God’s elect through his incarnation, his perfect obedience, his suffering and, especially, his atoning death, his resurrection, and his ascension and session in heaven.14 Salvation, in all its aspects, must be by Christ alone to the exclusion of human merit and to the exclusion of any other intermediaries, whether saints, angels, or even the Virgin Mary.15 Christ alone can reconcile sinners to God because, as the Westminster Larger Catechism stated, “there is none in heaven or earth appointed to or fit for that glorious work but Christ alone.”16 Christ did all that he did in the place of his people and they can contribute nothing to this work. Yet Calvin asked what good it would do us if Christ accomplished all of these things while remaining apart from us.17 We must be united to him through faith to receive him and all of the benefits of redemption in him. We must first be born of the Spirit to receive Christ by faith. This leads to genuine repentance, which then marks the entire Christian life. In Christ, we are justified freely through his blood, in which our sins are forgiven and we are counted righteous through the imputation of Christ’s Thus Junius’s well-received definition of theology: “Theologia est sapeientia rerum divinarum.” Sapientia entailed the experimental knowledge of divine things as they related to God. Junius, De theologia vera., 25. 13 William Perkins, The Arte of Prophecying, Or, a Treatise Concerning the Sacred and Onely True Manner and Methode of Preaching (London, 1607), 148. This summary page is not included in the original Latin edition of this work. 14 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, vol. XX–XXI, 2 vols., Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960), 2.16.19; A. Walaeus et al., Synopsis Purioris Theologiae = Synopsis of a Purer Theology, ed. Henk van den Belt, trans. Riemer A. Faber, vol. 1 (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 2:183. 15 Consider Westminster Larger Catechism 179: “God only being able to search the hearts, hear the requests, pardon the sins, and fulfill the desires of all; and only to be believed in, and worshipped with religious worship; prayer, which is a special part thereof, is to be made by all to him alone, and to none other.” 16 Westminster Larger Catechism 181. 17 Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 3.1.1. 12

Continuities and Discontinuities

157

righteousness. Union with Christ occurs through faith and union alone applies Christ’s finished work to believers. According to Calvin, the second grace inseparably tied to union with Christ is what he called regeneration.18 This referred to the renewal of life that began at the new birth and stretched through the course of the Christian life. Adoption referred to the rights and privileges belonging to those united to Christ, resulting in their eternal inheritance as joint heirs with Christ.19 While the place of adoption in relation to the other benefits flowing from union with Christ was somewhat unclear in earlier Reformed authors, Reformed orthodox authors generally treated adoption as logically following justification, since justification constituted the right leading to the legal transaction inherent in adoption.20 The relationship between adoption and justification in the context of union with Christ in Reformed orthodoxy merits further exploration. In any case, it is unfortunate that some have blamed Turretin for leading adoption into neglect by subordinating it to justification.21 Such assertions short-change the Reformed tradition by failing to research the development of historical ideas in historical contexts. Finally, glorification marked the end of the process of salvation. Salvation in its entirety came to believers through faith in Christ alone. While the so-called five solas were a later historical construct, they capture well the continuities that existed between Reformation and post-Reformation theology in relation to Scripture and union with Christ. The true knowledge of the true God through Christ came by the reading and preaching of Scripture alone. The grace of God alone was its foundation to the exclusion of creaturely merit. Christ alone was the only mediator between God and man. Believers received Christ and hits benefits by faith alone. All of these things reached toward the end of true theology, which was the glory of God alone.

Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 3.3. Leigh, Body of Divinity, 511: “It is the gracious sentence of God the Father on a believer, whereby for Christ’s sake he calls believers his children, and really admits them into the state and condition of children.” 20 William Ames, Medulla S.S. Theologiæ, in Fine Adjuncta Est Disputatio De Fidei Divinæ Veritate. Editio Tertia Priori Longe Correctior (Londini: Apud Robertum Allottum, 1629), 143–8; Watson, Body of Divinity, 134–9; Mastricht, Theoretico-Practica Theologia, 823–32; Johann Heinrich Heidegger, Corpus Theologiae Christianae, vol. 1, 2 vols. (Tiguri, 1732), Locus XXII, 85–93. 21 David B. Garner, Sons in the Son: The Riches and Reach of Adoption in Christ (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2016), 302–3; Sinclair B. Ferguson, Some Pastors and Teachers: Reflecting a Biblical Vision of What Every Minister Is Called to Be (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2017), 57. 18 19

158

Reformed Scholasticism

Developments Developments in Reformed theology surrounded and undergirded such basic points of continuity as those described above. One aspect of development was an increasingly Thomistic doctrine of God, which began to characterize most Reformed treatments of theology proper.22 Reformed orthodoxy began to follow standard medieval questions in their treatments of theology proper, such as an sit, quails/quid sit, and quis sit deus.23 The first question addressed whether or not there was a God; the second what kind of God he is; and the third who he is, which corresponded to the doctrine of the Trinity. This order of proceeding did not represent building one piece at a time from natural theology with the result that the unity of God was central and his Triunity was an afterthought or appendix to theology proper.24 Polanus, for example, appealed to the Trinity throughout his treatment of divine oneness and of the particular divine attributes, giving readers the impression that he intended God’s Triunity to take center stage.25 Following the Heidelberg Catechism, Theodorus Vandergroe (1705–84) developed God’s Triunity prior to introducing the divine attributes.26 This pattern holds true with Ursinus’s commentary on the catechism and Chamier’s refutation of Roman Catholicism.27 The fact that the abovementioned logical method of treating the doctrine of God largely became the standard one, however, shows a measure of development

Sebastian Rehnman, “The Doctrine of God in Reformed Orthodoxy,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. Herman J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 353–401; Andreas J. Beck, “God, Creation, and Providence in Post-Reformation Reformed Theology,” in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800, ed. Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 195–212. 23 For example, Johannes Cloppenburg, Exercitationes Super Locos Communes Theologicos (Franekerae, 1653), Disputation I in Loci De Deo. Unfortunately, the original text includes no page numbers. 24 Contra Gijsbert Van den Brink, “Reformed Scholasticism and the Trinitarian Renaissance,” in Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honour of Willem J. van Asselt, ed. Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, vol. 14, Studies in Theology and Religion (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 333. 25 For representative samples, see Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 857–8, 861, 878, 885, 895, 901, 911, 922, 955, 985, 997, etc. 26 Theodorus Vandergroe, The Christians Only Comfort in Life and Death: An Exposition of the Heidelberg Catechism, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016). 27 Zacharias Ursinus and David Pareus, Corpus Doctrinae Orthodoxae: Sive, Catecharum Explicationum D. Zachariae Ursini Opus Absolutum D. Davidis Parei Opera Extrema Recognitum … Adiuncta Sunt Miscellanea Catechetica … ([Genevae]: sumptibus Samuelis Crispini, 1616); Daniel Chamier, Panstratiae Catholicae Corpus, Sive Controversarium de Religione Adversus Pontificos Corpus, vol. 1, 5 vols (Genevae, 1626). 22

Continuities and Discontinuities

159

in Reformed theological method. In early Protestant thought, Calvin and Melanchthon included the doctrine of the Trinity in their theological systems with little reference to the divine attributes while Wolfgang Musculus added a lengthy exposition of the divine attributes that was permeated with trinitarian and soteriological overtones.28 Reformed orthodoxy largely standardized how theologians addressed such questions in relation to whether there was a God, what he is, and who he is. This more scholastic way of doing things retained the content of earlier Reformed teaching on theology proper while it unified theologians with respect to the questions that they should be asking and answering. Another area of development from Reformation to post-Reformation theology relates to Calvin’s use of “regeneration” to refer both to the new birth and to sanctification. While using the term “regeneration” to refer to both the inception and the progress of the Spirit’s renewing work in believers retained the organic unity between his initial and later work, it could result in a measure of confusion as well. Given that distinctions lay at the heart of scholastic methodology, distinguishing between regeneration and sanctification enabled later Reformed authors to delineate more clearly the distinctions in the initial and ongoing work of the Spirit in the lives of believers without sacrificing the relationship between them. The goal of such scholastic development in relation to the doctrine of sanctification was to clarify ideas that were always present implicitly in Reformed theology. This was true with regard to other areas of thought as well, such as the nature of Christ’s presence in the Lord’s Supper,29 the distinction between antecedent and consequent necessity,30 and many others. In this regard, Reformed scholasticism was inherently a theology of continuity as well as of development, both with respect to the content and to the method of theology. Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, Ca. 1520 to Ca. 1725, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 4:145. 29 Johannes Wollebius, Compendium Theologiæ Christianæ, Editio Ultima Prioribus Multo Correctior, 9th ed. (Cantabrigiæ, 1655), 141. Wollebius taught that Christ is present in the Lord’s Supper in three ways: symbolically in the elements, by faith through which his merits are applied to us, and by his power (virtus et fructus). 30 Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George Musgrave Giger, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992), 1:226, 3.16.1-4; Jeongmo Yoo, John Edwards (1637–1716) on Human Free Choice and Divine Necessity: The Debate on the Relation between Divine Necessity and Human Freedom in Late Seventeenth-Century and Early Eighteenth-Century England, vol. 22 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013), 179–83. 28

160

Reformed Scholasticism

Discontinuities of method and substance? While the Calvin versus the Calvinist thesis is no longer tenable, we must remember that historical errors ordinarily reflect some measure of truth. Continuity of content and method does not preclude discontinuity. As noted above, one could argue that development is itself a form of discontinuity. While this is a simple point to make, it is worth singling out. While students should understand authors such as Turretin and Calvin in their respective contexts, it remains a fact that the final products of their theological systems look very different from one another.31 While this author believes that an organic unity exists between them, bearing a Reformed family resemblance, it should be clear that something like Turretin’s Elenctic Theology not only did not but it could not likely appear in the mid-sixteenth century. This observation is not meant to be a value judgment as much as a statement of fact. While Reformed authors continued to write popular works of theology, the fact was that, even on the surface, the Reformed system of theology looked different in form in the periods of orthodoxy from its earlier counterparts. This development represents some discontinuity without constituting a breach with earlier Reformed thought. Development entailed discontinuity of substance to some degree as well. This author’s purpose here is simply to list some areas that make this point evident so that students of Reformed scholasticism will know what to look for in their research. Reformed authors tended to defend Calvin’s orthodoxy regarding the aseity of the Son without (in most cases) adopting his position that eternal generation referred to the Son’s personhood rather than his deity.32 On the one hand, Reformed orthodoxy was conservative on this point finding itself more in line with the fifteenth-century Council of Florence.33 On the other hand, Reformed orthodoxy continued to defend Calvin and revamped the practical outworking of its trinitarian theology in light of Soteriology.34 Carl R. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 120–9. 32 Brannon Ellis, Calvin, Classical Trinitarianism, and the Aseity of the Son (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), 167–8. 33 Muller, PRRD, 4:55–8. 34 Francis Cheynell, Divine Triunity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, Or, the Blessed Doctrine of the Three Coessentiall Subsistents in the Eternall Godhead Without Any Confusion or Division of the Distinct Subsistences or Multiplication of the Most Single and Entire Godhead Acknowledged, Beleeved, 31

Continuities and Discontinuities

161

The development of a Reformed doctrine of a so-called covenant of works included elements of continuity and discontinuity as well. While it is arguable that Calvin and others believed implicitly in a covenant between God and Adam affecting the entire human race,35 there is no question that orthodoxy alone clarified and codified the both the covenants of works and of grace.36 By the time of the Westminster Assembly, omitting the idea of the covenant of works from Reformed theology, even if one preferred to call it something else, was virtually unthinkable.37 During this time period in the Netherlands, a Brakel could go so far as to write, “Acquaintance with this covenant is of the greatest importance, for whoever errs here or denies the existence of the covenant of works, will not understand the covenant of grace, and will readily err concerning the mediatorship of the Lord Jesus.”38 If this assessment refers to the language of the covenant of works, then most early Reformed authors would fall under Brakel’s severe censure. If ideas are in view instead, then one can see the seed thoughts of a covenantal Adam/Christ parallel in Reformed thought from the beginning.39

Adored by Christians, in Opposition to Pagans, Jewes, Mahumetans, Blasphemous and Antichristian Hereticks, Who Say They Are Christians, but Are Not (London, 1650), 232–4. 35 Peter A. Lillback, The Binding of God: Calvin’s Role in the Development of Covenant Theology (Grand Rapids, MI, and Carlisle, Cumbria: Baker Academic; Paternoster, 2001); Jordan J. Ballor, Covenant, Casuality, and Law: A Study in the Theology of Wolfgang Musculus, vol. 3. Refo500 Academic Studies (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012). 36 R. A. Muller, “The Covenant of Works and the Stability of Divine Law in Seventeenth-Century Reformed Orthodoxy: A Study in the Theology of Herman Witsius and Wilhelmus À Brakel,” Calvin Theological Journal 29, no. 1 (1994): 75–101; Lyle D. Bierma, The Covenant Theology of Caspar Olevianus (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2005); Stephen J. Casselli, Divine Rule Maintained: Anthony Burgess, Covenant Theology, and the Place of the Law in Reformed Scholasticism (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016).; Andrew A. Woolsey, Unity and Continuity in Covenantal Thought: A Study in the Reformed Tradition to the Westminster Assembly, Reformed Historical-Theological Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012). 37 Andrew A. Woolsey, Unity and Continuity in Covenantal Thought: A Study in the Reformed Tradition to the Westminster Assembly. Reformed Historical-Theological Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 52. 38 Wilhemus A’Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 1:355. 39 In describing development of covenant theology in relation to Caspar Olevianus, Lyle Bierma represents continuities and distcontinuities in the broader Reformed tradition well by stating, “Only the first outlines of the later Reformed doctrines of a pactum salutis and foederus operum can be detected. One ought to be careful, therefore, to claim neither too little nor too much for these other covenants in Olevianus’ theology. His covenant theology is dominated by, though not restricted to, the foedus gratiae.” Bierma, The Covenant Theology of Caspar Olevianus Lyle D. Bierma, The Covenant Theology of Caspar Olevianus (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2005), 140.

162

Reformed Scholasticism

Perhaps one of the fullest instances of discontinuity between Reformation and post-Reformation Reformed theology relates to issues surrounding church polity.40 Implicit differences existed between Protestant churches from the beginning in relation to the proper form of Church government and the relationship between the church and the state.41 Lutheranism and the Church of England, each in their own ways, tended to retain the basic episcopal structure of Roman Catholicism, minus the pope. Reformed churches generally developed elder-governed local churches. The interrelation between these churches and the nature of synods and synodical representation, however, branched out into various directions in the seventeenth century. The Dutch churches did not apply the term “church” to their synods42 while Scottish Presbyterians argued that this was the primary mark of Presbyterian polity.43 Presbyterian polity arose in France, but it became detached from the question of establishing the Reformed church in the land due to the fact that French Huguenots were a persecuted minority.44 Congregationalism grew in importance in England and in New England, though it began to mean different things in different settings. For many English Congregationalists, congregationalism meant that the term “church” in the New Testament applied to local bodies only. For some New England churches, congregationalism entailed government by the congregation as opposed to church elders who represented the congregation. In the former case, Congregationalism was a description of the relationship of a local church to other churches while in the latter case it referred to the parties

For the complexity of such issues in a British context, see Hunter Powell, The Crisis of British Protestantism: Church Power in the Puritan Revolution 1638–44, Politics, Culture and Society in Early Modern Britain (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2015). 41 For some seed thoughts of the development of church/state relations in Reformed thought from the perspectives of Zwingli, Bullinger, and Musculus, see Jordan J. Ballor, “State, Church, and the Reformational Roots of Subsidiarity,” in The Myth of the Reformation, ed. Peter Opitz, vol. 9, Refo500 Academic Studies (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013), 148–59; For a general survey, see Ian Hazlett, “Church and Church/State Relations in the Post-Reformation Reformed Tradition,” in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800, ed. Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 242–58. 42 A’Brakel, Christian’s Reasonable Service, 2:1–9. 43 Samuel Rutherford, The Due Right of Presbyteries (London, 1644), 53. Thanks to Rob McCurley for helping me find this reference. 44 Martin I. Klauber, ed., The Theology of the French Reformed Churches: From Henri IV to the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes, Reformed Historical-Theological Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), 69; Raymond A. Mentzer and Bertrand Van Ruymbeke, eds., A Companion to the Huguenots, vol. 68, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2016). 40

Continuities and Discontinuities

163

who had the right to exercise church power. In general, most post-Reformation Reformed churches seemed to have adopted some form of Presbyterianism, or at least of local church government by elders. Yet it is clear that the periods of orthodoxy reflected a diversity of viewpoints on church polity that developed beyond those of the Reformation period. To borrow Pederson’s description of Puritanism, unity still existed within diversity.45 Yet the level of diversity on matters of church polity, especially under high and late orthodoxy, is a clear example of discontinuity. In short, Reformed scholasticism was a theology of discontinuity as well as of development. In fact, development implies both continuity and discontinuity at the same time. The number of examples given here could be (and should be) multiplied in any serious studies of Reformed scholastic thought.

Conclusions Reformed scholasticism is a theology of radical continuity with respect to the Protestant Reformation rather than radical discontinuity. By “radical,” this author means that Reformation and post-Reformation theology were essentially rooted in the same soil, resulting in the same kinds of plants and fruit. However, if no discontinuity existed between Reformed scholasticism and earlier Reformed theology, then we could not examine it as a distinct time period. These basic facts lead to the following brief conclusions. First, theological continuity does not preclude theological and methodological development. Second, new centuries and shifting international contexts often bring new questions and diverse answers with them. Third, Reformed scholasticism was relatively uniform in methodology, but it admitted a relative diversity in content and theological emphases. Fourth, and lastly, late orthodoxy heightened levels of discontinuity with earlier Reformed thought. Among other things, it did so by elevating the use of reason in theology and, at times, by seeking to reduce the Reformed system to “fundamental articles.”46 Randall J. Pederson, Unity in Diversity: English Puritans and the Puritan Reformation, 1603–1689, vol. 68, Brill Studies in Church History (Leiden: Brill, 2014). 46 Martin I. Klauber, “Theological Transition in Geneva from Jean-Alphonse Turretin to Jacob Vernet,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006), 256–70. 45

164

Reformed Scholasticism

To regard Reformed scholasticism as continuous with earlier Reformed thought, it must be marked by development rather than mere disjuncture. Yet development is always discontinuous as well as continuous with what goes before it. This analysis coupled with the above chapters in this part has given us with a canvass on which we can now paint a picture of the character of Reformed scholasticism more clearly in light of its international catholicity and the piety inherent in the Reformed system.

Part Four

The Character of Reformed Scholasticism: International Catholicity and Piety

166

10

International Catholicity Reformed scholasticism was an educational movement. Scholastic method and vocabulary unified Reformed thinking on an international scale that would not have been possible otherwise. However, unity of method and vocabulary does not negate the fact that national contexts affected Reformed thought as well. A previous chapter argued that Reformed scholasticism was a theology in conversation with the entire catholic Christian tradition. This chapter shows that the character of scholastic education promoted catholic unity among Reformed churches that transcended international boundaries without negating the importance of national contexts. It argues that to understand Reformed scholasticism, it is vital to understand its international character. “International” here describes both the educational process and various localized expressions of Reformed theology. The international catholicity of Reformed scholasticism furnishes us with the opportunity to introduce the character of Reformed scholasticism in the various nations in which it flourished.

International education and teaching Reformed scholasticism was inherently international. Under the medieval university system, universities commonly exchanged both professors and students.1 This practice continued under Reformed scholasticism and it largely

Ulrich G. Leinsle, Introduction to Scholastic Theology, trans. Michael J. Miller (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2010), 184.

1

168

Reformed Scholasticism

offset the provincial character of theological education.2 These so-called peregrinatio academica constituted a unifying factor in Reformed theology. Coupled with the standardization of theological language and vocabulary, the very process of education under Reformed scholasticism had the tendency to promote catholic unity among Reformed churches. The careers of Peter Martyr Vermigli, Franciscus Junius, and Francis Turretin illustrate this clearly. Peter Martyr illustrates the international catholicity of Reformed scholasticism by the nature of his career. Though he was one of the magisterial Reformers, the form of his theology was more overtly scholastic and medieval than many of his Reformed counterparts. In light of the fact that the lifeexpectancy of a Reformer in sixteenth-century Italy was frequently low, Vermigli became more of an international figure in the Reformed world. He taught in England and influenced a generation of Reformed ministers.3 His Loci Communes, which was actually comprised of a collection of his writings by his students arranged topically, continued to exert influence in England into the coming century. The Latin language allowed him to transcend national and cultural boundaries, in relation to both his teaching and his writing. Vermigli was not unique in this regard, though he gives a clear example of the wandering Protestant professor. The life of Franciscus Junius highlights the international character of Reformed theological training and teaching as well. He studied in law Bourges and Lyon and theology in Geneva.4 Much like Calvin, Junius always had his heart set on France, though he was never able to return there effectively or permanently. As a result, Junius spend most of his career pastoring churches and teaching in the Netherlands and Germany, with the occasional and often troubled hiatus into France.5 Once again, Junius’s use of the Latin language, coupled with scholastic distinctions and vocabulary, made it possible to translate and to transfer Reformed theological instruction from nation to nation with relative ease. Leinsle, Scholastic Theology, 279. Paul R. Schaefer, The Spiritual Brotherhood: Cambridge Puritans and the Nature of Christian Piety (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 63. 4 Franciscus Junius, A Treatise on True Theology: With the Life of Franciscus Junius, trans. David C. Noe (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), xii. 5 Junius, A Treatise on True Theology, xiii–xiv. 2 3

International Catholicity

169

The experience of Francis Turretin reinforces the above picture while, if anything, reflecting an even more international experience with regard to theological education than in the cases of Vermigli and Junius. Turretin studied at Geneva, Leiden, Utrecht, Paris, and under the controversial professors of Saumur, before eventually teaching theology in Geneva.6 The peregrinatio academica helped offset the theological imbalances of some of these schools while exposing Turretin to some of the best teachers in the European Reformed world at the time. This kind of international crossover was possible only in light of a common way of doing Reformed theology conveyed through the medium of a common language. Scholastic method facilitated the former while writing in Latin constituted that latter. Moreover, books like Maccovius’s Scholastic Discourse show students of Reformed scholasticism what both of these features could look like in practice and how they promoted catholic unity in Reformed thinking across internal lines.

Reformed orthodoxy in various regions of Europe While scholasticism made international crossover possible between Reformed universities, national contexts still played a role in giving distinct flavors to Reformed churches that otherwise shared a general catholic unity. The survey below is not an exhaustive treatment of all of the nations in which Reformed theology developed as much as it is a general introduction that draws from representative samples. Major omissions in this section, such as Reformed scholasticism in North America and Scotland, reflect the fact that the author does not need to treat every area in which Reformed theology flourished to convey its international catholicity to readers. Philip Benedict’s Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed remains an unparalleled introduction to the growth of Reformed theology internationally through the Reformation and postReformation periods and students should become familiar with his panoramic survey. While the chapter treating Reformed piety below will highlight some of the differences that existed between Reformed churches internationally,

Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George Musgrave Giger, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992), 642.

6

170

Reformed Scholasticism

this chapter stresses their catholic unity while remaining sensitive to national contexts. The goal is to give readers a sweeping overview of the dissemination of Reformed scholasticism at a glance.

England Reformed theology developed in its own unique way in England. While this could be said of every nation in which Reformed theology developed, it applies particularly to England in light of the tumultuous origin of the Protestant church there. From its inception under Henry VIII (r. 1509–47), the Reformed church in England struggled to define itself. Initial attempts at reform were relatively modest, with Henry seeking to retain a Roman Catholic Church minus the pope. Simultaneously Lutheran influences gained traction in England during this time.7 This struggle was exacerbated after Henry’s death. His son Edward VI (r. 1547–63) took the English church in a decidedly Reformed direction with the help of influential theologians such as Thomas Cranmer (1489–1556). “Bloody” Mary (r. 1553–8) succeeded Edward and swung the English church violently back toward Rome, executing Cranmer and other Protestant leaders. When Elizabeth I (r. 1558–1603) ascended the throne, her primary goals regarding the church related to its peace and unity under the headship of the monarchy. She aimed at uniformity of religion under the crown. She retained the confessional character of Reformed theology while reintroducing less-Reformed sounding language into the prayer book, such as priests and altars in relation to the Lord’s Supper. In many ways, the Elizabethan settlement embodies all of the preceding historical factors that contributed to the rise of the Protestant church in England. The idea that the monarch was the head of the church instead of the pope carried over from Henry VIII’s reign into Elizabeth’s. A Reformed orthodox confession that originated under Edward VI via Cranmer continued in the form of the Thirty-Nine Articles under Elizabeth. The hands of Calvin, Vermigli, Bucer, and, especially, Cranmer found lasting expression in the English liturgy as well. Some believed, especially those who came to be known

James Edward McGoldrick, Luther’s English Connection: The Reformation Thought of Robert Barnes and William Tyndale (Milwaukee, WI: Northwestern Publishing House, 1979).

7

International Catholicity

171

as Puritans, that the English Reformation was half-baked and that the English church needed further reform to match their continental counterparts.8 Others liked the current state of things and others still, such as William Laud (1573– 1645), tried to push the English church even more solidly in the direction of Roman Catholic doctrines and practices.9 For the most part, however, English Protestants from Elizabeth onward agreed that the English church should be decisively Protestant and not Roman Catholic and distinctively Reformed and not Lutheran in its confession. A previous chapter outlined already the ways in which scholasticism flourished in Cambridge and Oxford during this time period, with a special emphasis on Oxford. William Laud and his amended prayer book led to deep concerns for public worship and piety. John Owen illustrates this in his four undated sermons entitled, “Providential Changes, An Argument for Universal Holiness” in which he summarized the work of continuing reformation in the Church of England under two headings. In the first of these sermons, he argued that the two primary pursuits of Christians should be holiness and godliness. Holiness referred to the principles and practice (doctrine and piety) of the Christian life. Godliness referred to “the worship of God according to the appointment and institution of Christ.”10 Some of the major contributions of the English church to Reformed scholasticism are found in the large body of devotional literature produced by English ministers who studied scholastic theology at Cambridge and Oxford. This observation will naturally raise questions in the minds of some readers over how these devotional emphases relate to Puritanism. The next chapter seeks to outline how Puritanism related to Reformed orthodoxy and scholasticism. In the meantime, it is enough to note that piety came to the forefront even in the writings of decidedly anti-Puritan authors, such as

Patrick Collinson, The Elizabethan Puritan Movement (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967). 9 Charles Carlton, Archbishop William Laud (London and New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1987). 10 John Owen, The Works of John Owen, D.D., ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1850), 9:137. Owen based these distinctions on his understanding of the Greek terms in his text. The three above sentences are taken from Ryan M. McGraw, A Heavenly Directory: Trinitarian Piety, Public Worship, and a Reassessment of John Owen’s Theology, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014). 8

172

Reformed Scholasticism

Richard Hooker.11 Reformed scholasticism in Scotland deserves extended treatment in its own right as well and its omission here reflects only the highly selective character of this narrative of international catholicity.12

France/Gaul The Reformed churches in France/Gaul were always a decided minority.13 By 1685, they constituted roughly 4 to 5 percent of the French population.14 Their confessional tradition mirrored standard emphases in other countries. However, the persecuted and precarious status of Reformed religion in France shifted the focus of these churches away from some features that marked Reformed churches in other lands. While other Reformed churches sought to establish their churches through official government sanction, French Reformed churches increasingly sought to justify their existence and to survive under a hostile Roman Catholic government. French Reformed churches, and to a lesser extent universities, were officially tolerated under the Edict of Nantes (1598–1685). Practically, they were increasingly marginalized, suffering forms of persecution such as Reformed church members not being permitted to hold public office in France. The Edict of Nantes allowed Reformed churches to exist and to meet for worship for a time without offering much comfort beyond this. When Louis XIV revoked the edict, French Protestants faced severe forms of persecution. In addition to execution, imprisonment, or exile, they also faced the possibility of having their children taken from them and placed in Roman Catholic homes permanently. This echoed medieval precedent, since the Fourth Council of Toledo had decreed that the children of Jews who were forcibly converted to Catholicism

W. Bradford Littlejohn and Scott N. Kindred-Barnes, eds., Richard Hooker and Reformed Orthodoxy, vol. 40, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017). 12 Aaron C. Denlinger, Reformed Orthodoxy in Scotland: Essays on Scottish Theology, 1560–1775 (New York: T&T Clark, 2014). 13 While “France” is not entirely an anachronistic term, Gaul was still the preferred term at the time. For example, page 2 of the unpaginated “ad lectorem” section of Daniel Chamier’s (1565–1621) polemical work against Roman Catholicism states that he was called to preach the gospel “in Gallia.” Daniel Chamier, Panstratiae Catholicae Corpus, Sive Controversarium de Religione Adversus Pontificos Corpus, vol. 1, 5 vols (Genevae, 1626). 14 Raymond A. Mentzer and Bertrand Van Ruymbeke, eds., A Companion to the Huguenots, vol. 68, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 68:274. 11

International Catholicity

173

could be taken from their families and placed either in monasteries or Catholic homes for proper education.15 Estimates suggest that nearly 200,000 French Protestants went into exile in the late seventeenth century, approaching a total of nearly 750,000 exiles.16 The existence of French Reformed churches was always tenuous under the period covering Reformed orthodoxy.17 The revocation of the Edict of Nantes resulted in a massive exodus of French Reformed refugees, especially to Switzerland and to the New World.18 Many notable French theologians contributed to Reformed scholasticism, such as Franciscus Junius, John Daille, Andreas Rivetus, and Pierre du Moulin, but most of them gained influence and renown through teaching in other places such as Germany or Switzerland instead of in France. Ramus’s pedagogical influences also rose in France during this time period.19 Reformed scholasticism flourished in the academies of Sammur, Montauban, Montpelier, and Nimes through the efforts of a national synod in Montpelier in 1598 for a time.20 Controversies arose as well in Sammur over the hypothetical universalism of men such as John Cameron (1579–1625), Claude Pajon (1626–86), and Moses Amyraut (1596–1664).21 French Protestantism enjoyed international influence, largely resulting from persecution, and Reformed orthodoxy was res-established to some extent after the death of Louis XIV, facing the new challenge of addressing and adapting to Enlightenment ideas.22

German/holy roman empire Germany was, from the outset, divided regionally between Reformed, Lutheran, and Roman Catholic confessions. The Reformed churches in

Gavin D’Costa, “Retrieval and Religions: Roman Catholic Christians and the Jewish People after the Holocaust,” in Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, ed. Darren Sarisky (London: T&T Clark, 2017), 300. 16 Mentzer and Van Ruymbeke, A Companion to the Huguenots, 254. 17 Tobias Sarx, “Reformed Protestantism in France,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 226. 18 Mentzer and Van Ruymbeke, A Companion to the Huguenots, 68:285–6. 19 Sarx, “France,” 232–5. 20 Sarx, “France,” 241. 21 Sarx, “France,” 242–7. 22 Sarx, “France,” 259–60. 15

174

Reformed Scholasticism

the Palatinate resisted efforts by Elizabeth I to create a Protestant league in Germany to Lutheranize this region under Elector Johann Casmir, pushing instead to retain a distinctively reformed confessional identity.23 Rather than following the model of the Genevan academy, German schools followed the Strasbourg model set up by Johannes Sturm.24 Reformed theological education took root only in the Universities of Heidelberg and Marburg, resulting in the establishment of “high schools” that served the purposes of university education without partaking of their privileges.25 Ursinus taught at Heidelberg, while Caspar Olevianus taught there and at the high school at Herborn, bolstering the reputation of the latter.26 Controversies over the theology of Johannes Piscator, which gained international attention, arose in Herborn as well. Well-known Reformed high schools also arose in Steinfurt and Bremen.27 In the seventeenth century, much of these educational efforts were interrupted by war.28 The close proximity of early modern Germany to surrounding nations in Europe ensured the importing and exporting of theological ideas, controversies, professors, and students. Reformed scholasticism in Germany left a lasting mark on the Reformed world. Ursinus and Olievianus, both of whom taught at Heidelberg, gained prominence through their teaching as well as through the pervasive use the Heidelberg Catechism. Musculus came from German origins during the early orthodox period as did Heidegger under high orthodoxy, though both men spent most of their academic careers in Switzerland (Bern and Geneva, respectively). Jerome Zanchius deserves special mention for his international renown as a Hebraist, for his De Tribus Elohim, and through his debates with the Lutheran Martin Chemnitz over Christology and sacramental theology.29

Andreas Muhling, “Reformed High Schools in Sixteenth-Century Germany,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 177. 24 Muhling, “High Schools,” 180. 25 Muhling, “High Schools,” 180. 26 Muhling, “High Schools,” 182. 27 Muhling, “High Schools,”188–92. 28 Muhling, “High Schools,”193. 29 Benjamin R. Merkle, Defending the Trinity in the Reformed Palatinate: The Elohistae, Oxford Theology and Religion Monographs (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016); Stefan Lindholm, Jerome Zanchi (1516–90) and the Analysis of Reformed Scholastic Christology, vol. 37, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016). 23

International Catholicity

175

De Tribus Elohim sought to establish the doctrine of the Trinity from the Old Testament based largely on Zanchi’s understanding of Hebrew grammar and exegesis. It became one of the predominant works on the Trinity throughout all subsequent periods of Reformed orthodoxy.

Poland and Eastern Europe Reformed churches flourished in Poland and Eastern Europe, though with unique circumstances and a checkered history. Populations were lower in Eastern Europe and “the power and privileges of the aristocracy increased.”30 Protestantism grew in these regions primarily through influencing the political elite. The evangelical movement grew quickly in this region due to the virtual absence of monarchical authority. The Roman Catholic Church “virtually collapsed from within” after an Ottoman triumph in 1526.31 Benedict observes that it is difficult to determine why Reformed churches prospered while Lutheran ones generally did not.32 Though Poland had officially adopted Christianity in 966, the country tolerated considerable religious diversity, including Orthodox Christians, Muslims, Jews, and others.33 Paganism also flourished in some regions. Close trade with Germany brought Luther’s ideas quickly into Poland and Lithuania, though there were initial attempts to stamp them out.34 The influences of the nobility soon prevailed in favor of the new reforms, however.35 Though Protestant churches remained outside of the law, the nobility secured a measure of toleration in practice by the midsixteenth century. As a result, Benedict notes, “The polish Reformation was a reformation without martyrs.”36 Threats to orthodoxy rose early in the Polish Reformation and continued with it. John Calvin recommended John a Lasco (1499–1560) to help with the

Philip Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002), 255. 31 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 256. 32 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 257. 33 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 259. 34 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 260. 35 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 261. 36 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 264. 30

176

Reformed Scholasticism

efforts, who returned to his homeland of Poland in 1556.37 Lasco implemented synods independent of the state, but refused to implement a national confession of faith due to his Erastian leanings. Arian views of the Trinity soon came into the Polish church through Francisco Stancaro (1501–74), who had helped found it.38 After the death of Lasco, the majority of native Protestant ministers in Poland had embraced antitrinitarian views. This resulted in a loss of momentum in the Protestant cause.39 Reformed noblemen sought political alliances with Lutheran and Czech Brethren to stave of anti-trinitarian influences, which was successful to some extent.40 They also tightened their relations with the Swiss and adopted the Second Helvetic Confession.41 These trinitarian debates spilled into the later Socinian controversy, with the Socinian Raccovian Catechism being published in Poland in 1605. Some Polish Reformed orthodox theologians, notably Johannes Maccovius, exerted international influence. Maccovius studied in Danzig, Marburg, and Heidelberg and spent his teaching career at Franeker in the Netherlands. He was a prominent figure in the Synod of Dort and spent much of his life combating Socinian theology. With regard to Eastern Europe more broadly, Graeme Murdock notes that Hungary and Transylvania were the only two countries in this part of the world in which substantial Reformed churches survived the periods of orthodoxy.42 Bullinger and Musculus were some of the dominating theological influences in Hungary in particular.43 Socinian ideas and attacks on the Trinity continued to spread throughout Eastern Europe. Partially in response to this threat, the Reformed churches there stressed trinitarian theology as well as sacramental theology.44 Many Hungarian theologians studied abroad in the Netherlands, and David Pareus (1548–1622), who was Ursinus’s successor at Heidelberg,

Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 264. Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 266. 39 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 267. 40 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 268. 41 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, 269. 42 Graeme Murdock, “Reformed Orthodoxy in East-Central Europe,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 296. 43 Murdock, “East-Central Europe,” 297. 44 Murdock, “East-Central Europe,” 300–2. 37 38

International Catholicity

177

exercised considerable influence in this part of the world through at least one prominent student.45 Puritan piety and Presbyterian polity also came to Hungary via England, though these emphases were blunted to a large extent in the mid-seventeenth century.46 When the Habsburg monarchs restored Roman Catholicism as the dominant religion in these regions, Reformed churches persisted in Hungary and Transylvania throughout the early modern period.47 This brief sketch of Reformed orthodoxy in Poland and Eastern Europe helps build the overarching picture of the international catholicity of Reformed scholasticism. Both orthodox and heretical views moved fluidly across national lines, resulting in corresponding Reformed responses and developments. Universities and prominent professors, particularly abroad in this case, became the primary mechanism of disseminating Reformed thought among pastors and churches. This shows the pivotal role of scholasticism in transferring ideas using a common language and method across national lines with a far reach.

Spain There is less to say about Reformed scholasticism in Spain than there is about other national contexts. Spain became a stronghold of Roman Catholicism, especially after the long-fought and hard-won battle against Islam through the Reconquista. The inquisition also came back into use in sixteenth-century Spain with Protestants serving as their primary target. As a recent monograph captures well, Reformed orthodoxy in Spain was largely an “underground” movement.48 A few Reformed orthodox writers, such as Juan de Valdez (1490– 1541), lived and wrote in seventeenth-century Spain, but they were few in number. This means that Protestant influences through Spanish universities were virtually null and void. There were also few examples of Spanish Reformed theologians serving as professors at other universities throughout Europe. This was due, in large part, to the fact that Spanish Protestants were persecuted severely and they were small in number. The reason why this author includes Murdock, “East-Central Europe,” 311–13. Murdock, “East-Central Europe,” 314–15. 47 Murdock, “East-Central Europe,” 320. 48 Luttikhuizen, Underground Spanish Protestantism. 45 46

178

Reformed Scholasticism

Spain in this survey is at least to remind readers that Reformed orthodoxy stretched to Spain as well as to other countries in Europe.

The Netherlands The Netherlands became an international center for Reformed theology and education. It was marked during this period by religious toleration and, accordingly, became a relatively safe place for numerous refugees.49 Because the Netherlands has factored into a previous chapter and will receive greater attention in the next, this section will be brief. It focuses on at least one theological controversy in the Netherlands as well as the importance of the Dutch university system in the realm of Reformed scholasticism. The Arminian controversy loomed large in the Netherlands and abroad. The Synopsis Purioris was a response from an international group of authors (Polyander, Thysius, Rivetus, and Waleaus). This volume followed the ordinary disputation cycle used at the University of Leiden to demonstrate that the University had been thoroughly purged of Arminian teaching. Leiden had a large student body that was composed of an international group of students.50 Early in its history, Franciscus Junius, Lucas Trelcatius, and Francicus Gomarus taught at Leiden in addition to Jacobus Arminus. Arminius revised the Reformed theology of grace based on his innovative views of the will of God, borrowed partly by the Roman Catholic theologian, Louis de Molina (1536– 1600).51 In his view, God knew all things, including all possibilities. Instead of the divine will determining the actions of rational creatures, he taught that God predestinated people to eternal life because he knew the outcome of the contingent choices of his free and rational creatures. This created a middle category between the standard ones of God’s necessary knowledge (of himself and of all things in relation to himself) and his free knowledge (of those things that God chose freely to create and ordain).52 This amounted to God electing

Antonie Vos, “Reformed Orthodoxy in The Netherlands,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 122–3. 50 Vos, “The Netherlands,” 128. 51 Vos, “The Netherlands,” 166–7. 52 Vos, “The Netherlands,” 167. 49

International Catholicity

179

and predestinating people to everlasting life based on their foreseen faith rather than on the basis of God’s prior determination. These core ideas led Arminus’s followers, such as Simon Episcopius (1583–1643), to conclude that humanity was not totally depraved by sin (still able to choose God and receive Christ), that the Spirit’s call in conversion was not irresistible (people could resist his call), that election was conditioned on foreseen faith, that Christ’s atonement was universal for all people, and that the saints might not necessary persevere to the end.53 This led many Arminians to deny the substitutionary nature of Christ’s atonement as well as to question whether the Trinity was a fundamental article of the faith. For these reasons, many Reformed authors associated them with Socinianism. The appointment of Conrad Vorstius as Arminius’s successor in teaching theology exacerbated these concerns due to his radical ideas and Socinian leanings.54 The Synod of Dort as well as the Synopsis Purioris marked key responses to Arminian ideas. The international influence of the Dutch universities entailed the international dissemination of both Arminian and Reformed orthodox theology, though Reformed influences continued to dominate these universities. These Reformed schools also increasingly addressed the onset of Enlightenment ideas, most notably Cartesian philosophy, into the late orthodox period. Some of the major contributions of the Netherlands to Reformed scholasticism include a robust emphasis on piety, particularly in relation to the practical use of the Trinity, as well as developing some of the best Reformed universities in the world. The next chapter expands the place of the Netherlands in relation to piety and a previous chapter introduced the Dutch university model in relation to Leiden and Utrecht. The important point here is that Dutch universities exercised an international influence on Reformed thought and education. Benedict even notes that Johannes Hoornbeeck, who was an important figure in the Netherlands under high orthodoxy, likely coined the phrase, “Ecclesia reformata, quia semper reformanda,” which continues to be a popular slogan in Reformed churches to the present day.55 These observations For Episcopius’s point by point refutation of Dort along these lines, see Simon Episcopius, Antidotum Contines Pressiorem Declaratioem Propriae et Genuine Senetentiae Quae in Synodo Nationali Dordracena Est et Stabilita (Leiden, 1620). 54 Muhling, “High Schools,” 189–90. 55 Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed, xvi. 53

180

Reformed Scholasticism

show why we should assign a special role to the Netherlands in the realm of Reformed scholasticism.

Switzerland Eberard Busch notes that “Switzerland is the country of origin for the Reformed churches.”56 Peter Opitz goes so far as to suggest that it is possible to say that Calvinism was “made in Switzerland” and was “Switzerland’s most successful export.”57 Like the Netherlands, Swiss universities and professors had international sway in light of relatively tolerant immigration policies. However, the faculties at the Swiss universities had an even greater international representation and the position of Switzerland in Europe made it ideally suited to disseminate Reformed ideas. Reformed theology flourished in Zurich, Bern, and Geneva in particular. As Christian Moser has noted, scholars have devoted more attention to Geneva than to Zurich and Bern.58 Zwingli and Bullinger taught at Zurich. Musculus and Vermigli also taught there, the former dying one year before Calvin and one year after Vermigli. Bullinger’s Second Helvetic Confession was the most prominent confessional statement in Switzerland during the periods of orthodoxy. The Canons of Dort proved to be the hinge linking the early and high orthodox periods in Switzerland while the Formula Consensus Helvetica (1675) appeared toward the end of this period.59 The Genevan academy become the dominant academic institution during the period of orthodoxy, boasting names such as Calvin, Beza, Daneau, John Diodati (1576–1648), Theodore Tronchin (1587–1657), and Benedict Turretin (1588–1631).60 Francis Turretin later took the chair of theology in Geneva as well. In Basel, Simon Grynaeus (1540–1617), following Zwingli and Bullinger, subordinated the church to

Eberard Busch, “Reformed Theology in Continental Europe,” in Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016), 231. 57 Peter Opitz, “Calvin in the Context of the Swiss Reformation: Detecting the Traces,” in Calvinus Pastor Ecclesiae Papers of the Eleventh International Congress on Calvin Research, ed. Herman J. Selderhuis, vol. 39, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016), 26. 58 Christian Moser, “Reformed Orthodoxy in Switzerland,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 196. 59 Moser, “Switzerland,” 197. 60 Moser, “Switzerland,” 198. 56

International Catholicity

181

the state under the view that would come to be known as Erastianism. Basel boasted its own high order of theologians with Amandus Polanus, Johannes Wollebius, and the famed Hebraist, Johann Buxtorf the Elder (1564–1629), teaching there.61 Johann Heidegger later taught there as well and he introduced tempered Cocceian influences into Swiss theology.62 This small sample of names from the early and high orthodox periods illustrates the international character and influence of Swiss theological education, including figures of French, Italian, German, Polish, and other national origins. The primary sources cited frequently in the present book reflect the importance of Swiss Reformed scholasticism in the movement as a whole. Controversies arose during this period in Swiss theology over Johannes Piscator’s (1546–1625) denial of the imputation of Christ’s active obedience as well as the hypothetical universalism of the Sammur theologians.63 The Formula Consensus Helvetica targeted the latter, though it never received widespread acceptance in the broader Reformed world. Moser notes that this confession simultaneously marked the peak of Reformed orthodoxy in Switzerland as well as the beginning of its decline.64 Benedict Pictet (1655–1724) was Francis Turretin’s successor in Geneva and he served as a transition figure to Jean-Alphonse Turretin (1671– 1737), who sought to reduce Reformed theology to a list of fundamental articles that could be derived largely from natural principles.65 As a result, the Canons of Dort and the Formula Consensus Helvetica had diminishing influence in the Swiss churches and universities, accompanied by a decline in scholastic methodology in favor of incorporating new Enlightenment ideas into Reformed thought.66 Swiss Reformed theological education illustrates perhaps most clearly the international character of Reformed scholasticism. If Reformation theology

Moser, “Switzerland,” 199. Moser, “Switzerland,” 210. 63 For a treatment of Piscator’s teaching on justification, see Heber Carlos de Campos, Doctrine in Development: Johannes Piscator and Debates over Christ’s Active Obedience, Reformed HistoricalTheological Studies (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2018). 64 Moser, “Switzerland,” 220. 65 Moser, “Switzerland,” 225; James T. Dennison, “The Twilight of Scholasticism: Francis Turretin and the Dawn of the Enlightenment,” in Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006). 66 Moser, “Switzerland,” 226. 61 62

182

Reformed Scholasticism

was Switzerland’s most successful export, then Reformed ideas were both imported and exported through Swiss universities during the periods of orthodoxy. These universities boasted some of the best Reformed teachers of the time period and they attracted an eclectic group of students from all throughout Europe.

Conclusions Reformed scholasticism did not develop in national isolation. In spite of the absence of modern methods of travel and communication, Reformed ideas spread remarkably well and fluidly across national lines. National differences gave rise to particular controversies and differences in emphasis without losing common ground in terms of orthodox theology and scholastic method. Scholastic methods and vocabulary circulated through a common use of the Latin language and promoted catholic unity among Reformed churches in a way that often superseded and subsumed national differences. This kind of international catholicity is perhaps one of the features of Reformed scholasticism that stands in the greatest contrast, in some respects, to Reformed theology today. The last chapter in this volume shows that many modern theological institutions have become separated from their historical roots and from one another, both in terms of language and of methodology. Even when Reformed institutions teach in the same language, many theologians aim to develop their own methodologies and theological vocabularies. It is questionable, in such an environment, whether we possess the tools to achieve the kind of international catholic unity that marked Reformed scholasticism. This is simultaneously one of the most remarkable features of Reformed scholasticism, from a historical standpoint, and one of the areas that modern Reformed churches stand to learn most from.

11

Piety Some movements in church history have drawn special attention to piety. Whether this refers to Puritanism in England or Pietism in Germany, piety is often singled out as their distinguishing mark. However, Reformed scholastic systems of theology embedded piety into to the task, goals, and content of theology. To study Reformed scholasticism, it thus is important to understand the relationship between piety/praxis and the Reformed system of theology. It is only in this light that students of Reformed scholasticism can determine adequately what made so-called Reformed pietistic movements stand out in their historical contexts. After outlining the place of piety in Reformed scholastic theology broadly, this author has selected English Puritanism and the Dutch Nadere Reformatie as representatives of pietistic movements. The author will conclude that such movements often represented the development of standard emphases in Reformed scholastic theology in ways that spoke the common language of Reformed theology with their particular regional accents and emphases.

Piety and the nature of theology in Reformed scholasticism Reformed scholastic definitions of theology were calculated to wed doctrine and practice.1 We can see this in light of medieval debates over the nature of theology, the Reformed development of defining theology as a term, and the implicitly trinitarian cast that definitions of theology began to take. In this section, I intend only to bring readers up to speed on these maters without fully This entire section has been adopted and adapted from my, “What Is Theology? A Puritan and Reformed Vision of Living to God, through Christ, by the Spirit,” unpublished.

1

184

Reformed Scholasticism

developing the historical backgrounds influencing this question.2 As such, this treatment aims to shed enough light on the subject to avoid stumbling while we walk through it, yet not enough to make clear all of the objects in the room. In the medieval period, theologians debated whether theology was theoretical, practical, or some combination of the two.3 This grew out of a longstanding discussion in the church about the nature of theology as an academic discipline. Reformed authors generally concluded that theology as a discipline had both theoretical and practical components.4 Peter Martyr Vermigli (1499–1562) was an exception that proved the rule in that he appeared to treat theology as theoretical and philosophy as including practical elements.5 This point was important because it set the stage for defining theology in a way that incorporated its theoretical and practical components. In spite of the widespread attention that the church has given historically to defining theology, it may surprise some readers to learn that the term, “theology,” does not appear in Scripture. However, other terms, such as “Trinity” and “incarnation,” do not appear in Scripture either, yet theologians have argued why they remained useful in describing biblical ideas.6 Reformed authors believed that if they used the term “theology” at all, then they had to define it in a way that honored Scripture. Following Peter Ramus (1515–72) as mediated via William Perkins (1558–1602) and William Ames (1576–1633),7 most Reformed authors

For a full treatment of the subject, see volume one of Muller’s PRRD. Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, Ca. 1520 to Ca. 1725, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 1:340–2. 4 A. Walaeus et al., Synopsis Purioris Theologiae = Synopsis of a Purer Theology, ed. Roelf T. te Velde, trans. Reimer A. Faber, vol. 1 (Leiden: Brill, 2015), 43: “Therefore in Theology theory and practice are not placed in opposition to one another, but they are conditions associated with each other for the purpose of obtaining everlasting life, and placed in their proper order.” [Non ergo theoria et praxis sunt in Theologia differentiae oppositae: sed conditiones inter se ad vitam aeternam consequendam consociatae, suoque ordine collocatae.] 5 Sebastian Rehnman, “Moral Philosophy and Moral Theology in Vermigli,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, ed. Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 203. 6 Francis Cheynell, Divine Triunity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, Or, the Blessed Doctrine of the Three Coessentiall Subsistents in the Eternall Godhead Without Any Confusion or Division of the Distinct Subsistences or Multiplication of the Most Single and Entire Godhead Acknowledged, Beleeved, Adored by Christians, in Opposition to Pagans, Jewes, Mahumetans, Blasphemous and Antichristian Hereticks, Who Say They Are Christians, but Are Not (London, 1650), 94. 7 Donald Sinnema, “The Attempt to Establish a Chair in Practical Theology at Leiden University (1618–1626),” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. H. J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 416–17. 2 3

Piety

185

defined theology as, “the doctrine of living to God.”8 This carried the advantage of recognizing that the term “theology” as it reflected the teaching of Scripture addressed questions relating to the knowledge of God. Reformed scholastics taught that the Bible is concerned not simply with knowing about God, but with knowing God personally. The Reformed definition of theology had the advantage of recognizing that while theology must involve sound doctrine it must include more than doctrine alone. Theology is “the truth that accords with godliness.”9 Those who profess to know God must not deny him in their works. The consensus was that the church must define theology in a way that honors the biblical teaching that the knowledge of God is experimental. As Edward Reynolds (1599–1676) wrote, “Christ is not truly apprehended either by the fancy or the understanding. He is at once known and possessed. It is an experimental, and not a speculative knowledge that conceives him; he understands him that feels him. We see him in his grace and truth, not in any carnal or gross pretense.”10 Reformed scholastic definitions of theology were trinitarian as well. While many have struggled historically with the question of whether there are any practical implications to the doctrine of the Trinity, older authors believed that the Trinity was the primary locus in which doctrine and practice converged in experimental piety.11 Since theology involved knowing God, it also involved knowing God as triune. Johannes Cloppenburg (1592–1652) argued that without the doctrine of the Trinity, we can never know who God is (quis sit), even if we know that He (an sit) is and what He is (quid sit).12 Petrus Ramus, Commentariorum De Religione Christiana, Libri, Quatuor, Eivsdem Vita a Theophilo Banosio Descripta (Francofvrti, 1576), 6. Ramus defined theology as the doctrine of living well (“Theologia est doctrina bene vivendi”), which, he argued, we could do only if we looked to God as the source of our blessedness, through faith in Christ, as the Spirit teaches us through Scripture alone. 9 Peter van Mastricht, Theoretico-Practica Theologia. Qua, Per Singula Capita Theologica, Pars Exegetica, Dogmatica, Elenchtica & Practica, Perpetua Successione Conjugantur (Trajecti ad Rhenum, and Amstelodami: Sumptibus Societatis, 1715), 1. The Scripture citation is taken from 1 Tim. 6:2–3, which is the head of Mastricht’s chapter on the nature of theology. 10 Edward Reynolds, Meditations on the Fall and Rising of St. Peter (London, 1677), 58. 11 Gijsbert Voetius, Selectarum Disputationum Theologicarum Pars Prima (Quinta. Accedunt Dissertatio Epistolica De Termino Vitæ. Exercitatio De Prognosticis Cometarum. Antehac Seorsim Editæ) (Ultrajecti, 1648), 1:473; Johannes Hoornbeeck, Theologia Practica Pars 1 (Francofurti & Lipsiae: Bailliar, 1698), 1:136. 12 Johannes Cloppenburg, Exercitationes Super Locos Communes Theologicos (Franekerae, 1653), 97. The original text is not paginated. The page listed here reflects the numbering in Google Books. The section comes from the first disputation on the Trinity, paragraph 18. For the common division of the Reformed doctrine of God in light of the three categories listed here, see Sebastian Rehnman, “The Doctrine of God in Reformed Orthodoxy,” in A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, ed. Herman J. Selderhuis, vol. 40, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 386. 8

186

Reformed Scholasticism

The trinitarian knowledge of God was embedded in most basic Reformed definitions of theology. For example, though Ramus defined theology simply as the doctrine of living well, he explained that we can live well only if we look to God as the fountain of all good.13 This true knowledge of God comes only through Christ, whom both the Old and New Testaments revealed in relation to piety and to the remission of sin.14 Yet the Spirit reveals Christ to believers by teaching them true heavenly doctrine through Scripture alone.15 In spite of this trinitarian expansion, it still seems strange that Ramus omitted God from the definition of theology. Later theologians appeared gradually to make the implications of Ramus’s definition clearer. Ames added the phrase, “living to God” (deo vivendi) to explain what it meant to live well.16 Most Reformed scholastics followed in his footsteps.17 Mastricht added more explicitly that theology was the doctrine of living to God “through Christ” (per Christum).18 John Owen (1616–83) brought the trinitarian implications of Reformed definitions of theology to their fullest expression by adding that we must live to God, through Christ, by the Spirit.19 Whether in the shortened definition of theology as doctrina deo vivendi or in longer versions found in authors like Mastricht and Owen, Reformed explanations of the nature of theology were simultaneously trinitarian and practical. The definitions of theology from which Reformed scholastic authors drew were designed to address the whole person. Just as human beings need to be saved every part of their souls and bodies, so they must be subjected to God through faith and repentance in every part of their beings. The great insight of historic Reformed theology on this point is that theology is inherently Ramus, De Religione Christiana, 6. Ramus, De Religione Christiana, 7. 15 Ramus, De Religione Christiana, 9. 16 William Ames, Medulla S.S. Theologiæ, in Fine Adjuncta Est Disputatio De Fidei Divinæ Veritate. Editio Tertia Priori Longe Correctior (Londini: Apud Robertum Allottum, 1629), 1. 17 Van Vliet overstates his case somewhat when he refers to Ames’s “very unique definition of theology as the doctrine of living to God.” Jan van Vliet, Rise of the Reformed System: The Intellectual Heritage of William Ames (Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2013), 50. 18 Mastricht, Theoretico-Practica Theologia, 1. 19 John Owen, Theologoumena Pantodapa, Sive, De Natura, Ortu, Progressu, Et Studio Veræ Theologiæ, Libri Sex Quibus Etiam Origines & Processus Veri & Falsi Cultus Religiosi, Casus & Instaurationes Ecclesiæ Illustiores Ab Ipsis Rerum Primordiis, Enarrantur (Oxoniæ, 1661), 5–6, 462–3. My description of Owen’s trinitarian definition of theology is a summary and conclusion primarily of books I and VI of this work. The pages cited are representative only. 13 14

Piety

187

experimental because it is trinitarian. These general observations about the nature of theology according to Reformed scholasticism provide the context needed to evaluate how Puritanism and the Dutch Nadere Reformatie related to Reformed orthodox theology more broadly.

Puritanism Puritanism is notoriously difficult to define. For this reason, Trueman largely rejects the Puritan epithet in his excellent treatment of John Owen’s theology.20 Randall Pederson observes that not all “Puritans” were Reformed orthodox either.21 Puritanism encompassed such diverse figures as the Arian-leaning John Milton (1608–74),22 “antinomians” such as Tobias Crisp (1600–43) and John Saltmarsh (d. 1647),23 “neonomians” such as Richard Baxter (1615–91) and Thomas Jackson (1578–1648),24 the Arminian John Goodwin (1594– 1665),25 as well as standard Reformed orthodox writers such as Owen, Thomas Goodwin (1600–80), Anthony Burgess (d. 1664),26 and the internationally respected William Twisse (1577–1646).27 Nicolas Tyacke even notes that the notorious Socinians, John Fry (1609–57) and John Biddle (1615–62) “belonged to the world of puritanism.”28 Virtually the one thing that scholars agree on

Carl R. Trueman, John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man (Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007), 5. 21 Randall J. Pederson, Unity in Diversity: English Puritans and the Puritan Reformation, 1603–1689, vol. 68, Brill Studies in Church History (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 210–12. 22 Dewey D. Wallace, Shapers of English Calvinism, 1660–1714: Variety, Persistence, and Transformation (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011); Philip Dixon, Nice and Hot Disputes : The Doctrine of the Trinity in the Seventeenth Century (London and New York: T&T Clark, 2003), 102–4. 23 Theodore Dwight Bozeman, The Precisianist Strain: Disciplinary Religion & Antinomian Backlash in Puritanism to 1638, Omohundro Institute of Early American History & Culture (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004); Mark Jones, Antinomianism: Reformed Theology’s Unwelcome Guest? (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2013); Pederson, Unity in Diversity. 24 Pederson, Unity in Diversity, 82–4. 25 John Coffey, John Goodwin and the Puritan Revolution: Religion and Intellectual Change in Seventeenth-Century England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). 26 Stephen J. Casselli, Divine Rule Maintained: Anthony Burgess, Covenant Theology, and the Place of the Law in Reformed Scholasticism (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016).. 27 Chad B. Van Dixhoorn, The Minutes and Papers of the Westminster Assembly, 1643–1652, 5 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012), 1:140–1. 28 Nicholas Tyacke, “Religious Controversy,” in A History of the University of Oxford Volume IV: Seventeenth-Century Oxford, ed. Nicholas Tyacke (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), 599. 20

188

Reformed Scholasticism

with regard to Puritanism is the Puritan emphasis on personal piety. However, in light of the brief sketch above of the role of piety even in the most scholastic Reformed systems of theology, this raises the question of how emphasizing piety made orthodox Puritans stand out from Reformed orthodoxy more broadly. We have seen above that John Owen helpfully reduced the concerns of Puritanism to two things: the desire to reform the worship of the Church of England, and the cultivation of personal holiness. The first of these concerns demanded a distinctively English context while the latter was largely common to Reformed orthodoxy in general. This makes Puritanism a distinctively English movement. The decidedly English focus of Puritanism has led some authors to question, for example, whether or not Scottish Presbyterians qualify.29 The relationship of Puritanism to the Church of England as a reform movement helps readers evaluate how Puritanism fit in the broader Reformed world. As noted above, the university system in England during the Puritan period was decidedly scholastic, whether before, during, or after the decade or so during which Puritans dominated the English government. While concerns over reforming the worship and piety of the Church of England did not necessary require orthodoxy, the fact remains that most Puritans were Reformed orthodox in their theology as well. Rightly or wrongly, most Puritans believed that they were simply seeking to promote what was common to Reformed churches on the continent. Puritan concerns sometimes led to excesses. On the one hand, Thomas Watson (1620–86) urged people to press into the kingdom with little mention of faith in Jesus Christ.30 On one occasion, he even misstated the role of Christ’s blood as the ground of Christian hope, and later amended his statement, in his work on the Beatitudes.31 His concerns over antinomianism led to sporadic Margo Todd, “The Problem of Scotland’s Puritans,” in The Cambridge Companion to Puritanism, ed. John Coffey and Paul C. H. Lim (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008), 174–88. 30 Thomas Watson, Heaven Taken by Storm, Or, the Holy Violence a Christian Is to Put Forth in the Pursuit After Glory (London: Printed by R.W. for Tho. Parkhurst, 1669). 31 Thomas Watson, The Beatitudes (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1989), 67, 98, respectively. Stressing the necessity of tears of repentance he wrote, “A ship that is always sinking must have the water continually pumped out. While the soul leaks by sin, we must be still pumping at the leak by repentance. Think not, O Christian, that your sins are washed away only by Christ’s blood, but by water and blood” (67). Later he partly retracted this statement, noting that many falsely placed hope in their tears of repentance instead of in Christ: “They go to their tears when they should go to Christ’s blood. It is a kind of idolatry to make our tears the ground of our comfort. Mourning is not meritorious. It is the way to joy, not to the cause” (98). The first statement is potentially ambiguous. 29

Piety

189

theological imbalances that do not mark all of his books.32 On the other hand, many Puritans, such as Owen, Manton, and Goodwin, were marked by scholastic precision and theological and pastoral balance. This resulted in some of the best theological and devotional literature in the history of the church. The point to take away at this juncture is that piety did not distinguish Puritanism from Reformed orthodoxy or even from Reformed scholasticism. Piety was inherent in classic Reformed theology by virtue of Reformed definitions of theology as an academic discipline. Puritanism largely represents, therefore, an attempt to single out certain aspects of Reformed orthodox and scholastic teaching that they believed were deficient in their own national context. Such concerns are even more evident in the Dutch Nadere Reformatie.

The Dutch Nadere Reformatie In many respects, the Dutch Nadere Reformatie ran parallel to English Puritanism. Puritan refugees such as William Ames, Thomas Goodwin, and many others influenced this movement through their time in exile in the Netherlands.33 This movement arose out of a perceived dead orthodoxy in which theologians and pastors taught the right things in the wrong spirit.34 In other words, this movement was rooted in a concern over a perception of orthodoxy without devotional fervor. Authors like Jean Taufin (1529– 1602) and, especially, Jean de Labadie (1610–74) raised the bar for church membership and assurance of salvation, seeking to come as close as possible to admitting regenerate people only to the Lord’s Supper. This resulted in a In light of the subsequent clarification, he appears to have meant that Christ not only forgives sinners but cleanses them from the practice of sin. However, the tension over the two statements about Christ’s blood remains. 32 For example, Thomas Watson, A Divine Cordial, Or, The Transcendent Priviledge of Those That Love God and Are Savingly Called (London, 1663). 33 Keith L. Sprunger, The Learned Doctor William Ames; Dutch Backgrounds of English and American Puritanism (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1972); Keith L. Sprunger, Dutch Puritanism a History of English and Scottish Churches of the Netherlands in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (Leiden: Brill, 1982); Mark Jones, Why Heaven Kissed Earth: The Christology of the Puritan Reformed Orthodox Theologian, Thomas Goodwin (1600–1680), vol. 13, Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010), 42–4. 34 A. De Reuver, Sweet Communion: Trajectories of Spirituality from the Middle Ages through the Further Reformation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007), 106–10 (introducing the life of William Teelinck).

190

Reformed Scholasticism

crisis over the assurance of salvation with fewer and fewer people coming to the Lord’s Table.35 Labadism pressed concerns over personal godliness to such an extent that it verged on seeking to establish a pure visible church consisting of elect regenerate people only.36 Like Puritanism, many Nadere Reformatie theologians did not take this movement to such extremes. Wihelmus a Brakel, introduced in a previous chapter, was once a Labadist who began to see the devastating pastoral effects that the movement had in local churches.37 For this reason, his Christian’s Reasonable Service is filled with comforting Christ-centered pastoral applications. In this case, the excesses of the movement led to successes in other areas. This movement encompassed both Voetians and Cocceians, though they differed, sometimes sharply, over doctrinal matters, such as whether Old Testament saints experienced the forgiveness of sins, and practical ones, such as the place of the Sabbath in the Christian life.38 Debates over the propriety of incorporating Carteisan philosophy into Reformed theology raged into the high orthodox period as well.39 Voetius wrote about the necessity of piety in the first part of volume three in his series of disputations and Cocceius taught in a notable book on covenant theology that doxology must be the test of all true theology.40 The Nadere Reformatie was decidedly Reformed orthodox and,

In his introduction to a book by Wilhelmus Schortinghuis (1700–50), James de Young notes concerning his ministry to a congregation of 1500: “During his sixteen years as pastor there, only twenty-three made a profession that admitted them into full communion. Two of these were from a neighboring congregation and two were his own daughters. One student of his life calculates that by the end of his ministry, the Midwolda congregation had fewer than one hundred communicant members despite his regular baptism of several dozen babies every year.” Wilhelmus Schortinghuis, Essential Truths in the Heart of a Christian, ed. James A. De Jong, trans. Harry Boonstra and Gerrit W. Sheeres, Classics of Reformed Spirituality (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2009), 17–18. 36 Even those who pulled away from the Labadist movement, such as Brakel, still restricted membership of the church in every respect to true believers only. See Wilhemus A’Brakel, The Christian’s Reasonable Service, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 2:7. 37 A’Brakel, Christian’s Reasonable Service. 38 Willem J. van Asselt, The Federal Theology of Johannes Cocceius (1603–1669) (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2001), 28, 76–7. 39 Aza Goudriaan, “Descartes, Cartesianism, and Early Modern Theology,” in The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800, ed. Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 533–49. 40 Voetius, Selectarum Disputationum Theologicarum Pars Prima (Quinta. Accedunt Dissertatio Epistolica De Termino Vitæ. Exercitatio De Prognosticis Cometarum. Antehac Seorsim Editæ); Johannes Cocceius, The Doctrine of the Covenant and Testament of God, trans. Casey Carmichael, vol. 3, Classic Reformed Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016), 166–7.

35

Piety

191

like Puritanism, its proponents believed that they were merely seeking what Reformed churches enjoyed elsewhere. Once again, the perception of such authors that piety was inherent to Reformed theology is significant. The extreme influences on this movement, however, altered the theology of the movement. This is evident in relation to how high and late orthodox Dutch theologians defined the visible and invisible church. Early Reformed theology taught that there were visible and invisible aspects of the church from the beginning to explain why not all who were in the church by profession were truly of the church through regeneration. Early statements, such as the Belgic Confession of Faith, were somewhat ambiguous on this point, stating that the church consisted of “a holy congregation or gathering of true Christian believers,” urging people that “since this holy assembly and congregation is the gathering of those who are saved and there is no salvation apart from it, people ought not to withdraw from it.”41 Article twenty-nine then urged people to identify and join this church by appealing to its outward marks through its ordinances. While most Reformed authors began to argue that the visible church consisted of those professing the true religion together with their children and the invisible church consisted of the elect only,42 the Dutch church took a slightly different direction. Nadere Reformatie theologians began to define the church exclusively in terms of what other Reformed authors called its invisible aspects.43 Consequently, they redefined the visible church in terms of the church of the elect making itself visible in local bodies. In this light, Theodorus Vandergroe (1705–84) recommended discarding the distinction between the visible and invisible aspects of the church entirely.44 This raised significant pastoral problems, such as whether or not baptized people whom God alone knows remain unregenerate were actually church members. Authors such as Brakel and Vandergroe effectively answered no while other continental author such as Turretin effectively said yes.45 The Dutch position transformed Beglic Confession of Faith, articles 27–8. For example, Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, ed. James T. Dennison, trans. George Musgrave Giger, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992), 3:12; 18.3.6. See also Westminster Larger Catechism, questions 62–65. 43 A’Brakel, Christian’s Reasonable Service, 2:5–7. 44 Theodorus Vandergroe, The Christians Only Comfort in Life and Death: An Exposition of the Heidelberg Catechism, ed. Joel R. Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016), 1:461–2. 45 Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3:12; 18.3.6. 41 42

192

Reformed Scholasticism

the distinction between the visible and invisible aspects of the church into two different forms of the invisible church, the one considered ideally and the other partially and imperfectly manifested in time. The Belgic Confession did not require this conclusion since the terms “visible” and “invisible” are absent in that document. The seventeenth-century shift in Dutch definitions of the church doubtless resulted from the Labadist controversy. This feature of the Nadere Reformatie has not been explored adequately by historians of this movement. The Dutch Nadere Reformatie was shaped by international factors. It was influenced by English Puritan refugees, by French theologians (Taufin and Labadie), and even by Scots such as Alexander Comrie (1706–74). It was Reformed orthodox in theology and promoted Reformed theology through its universities, which had some of the most notable Reformed scholastics on their faculties. Piety marked both Voetians and Cocceians, despite their other differences. In addition, piety in itself did not distinguish the Nadere Reformatie from Reformed churches in other lands, even though piety took distinctive shape in the Netherlands in light of peculiar national circumstances.

Conclusions The above material shows that piety or praxis was an inherent characteristic of Reformed scholastic theology. This potentially makes Reformed scholasticism a rich resource for pastors in their ministries to the church today. Additionally, the integration of piety into the system of theology should caution historians and others from distancing pietistic movements that arose from within Reformed orthodoxy too much from the character of Reformed orthodoxy in general. As Jason Zuidema has argued, we cannot afford to ignore piety as part of the picture of Reformation and post-Reformation theology.46 Nevertheless, the Nadere Reformatie and Puritanism warn readers that regional peculiarities and excesses could result from legitimate concerns, which could lead to

Jason Zuidema, “Word and Spirit in the Piety of Peter Martyr Vermigli as Seen in His Commentaryon 1 Corinthians,” in Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, ed. Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, vol. 170, Studies in the History of Christian Traditions (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 224.

46

Piety

193

theological imbalances in comparison to the broader Reformed community. The best authors in such movements remained grounded solidly in the scholastic and orthodox roots of their theological education. They tended to speak the same language furnished by scholastic theology as other Reformed churches and universities did, though with different accents. At the same time, readers should remember that there was no pristine model of Reformed orthodoxy that served as the measure by which we should judge Reformed churches in all regions of the world. The point here is that scholars cannot mitigate the relationship between pietistic movements and the general stream of Reformed orthodox theology simply on the grounds that piety was central to such movements. Piety was integrated into the goals, tasks, and system of Reformed scholasticism. As with theological method and content, the function of piety in Reformed scholasticism was a story of continuities, discontinuities, and developments.

194

Part Five

Contemporary Appropriations of Reformed Scholasticism

196

12

What Is Next?: Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, and Service to the Church In C.S. Lewis’s famous book, The Screwtape Letters, senior demon Screwtape informs Wormwood, his nephew, Only the learned read old books, and we have now so dealt with the learned that they are of all men the least likely to acquire wisdom by doing so. We have done this by inculcating the Historical Point of View. The Historical Point of View, put briefly, means that when a learned man is presented with any statement in an ancient author, the one question he never asks is whether it is true. He asks who influenced the ancient writer, and how far the statement is consistent with what he said in other books, and what phase in the writer’s development, or in the general history of thought, it illustrates, and how it affected later writers, and how often it has been misunderstood (especially by the learned man’s own colleagues) and what the general course of criticism of it has been for the last ten years, and what is “the present state of the question.” To regard the ancient writer as a possible source of knowledge—to anticipate that what he said could possibly modify your thoughts or your behavior—this would be rejected as unutterably simpleminded. And since we cannot deceive the whole human race all the time, it is most important thus to cut every generation off from all others; for where learning makes a free commerce between the ages there is always the danger that the characteristic errors of one may be corrected by the characteristic truths of another. But, thanks to Our Father and the Historical Point of View, great scholars are now as little nourished by the past as the most ignorant mechanic who holds that “history is bunk.”1

C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters (New York: Touchstone Books, 1996), 99.

1

198

Reformed Scholasticism

So far the present book has sought to cultivate what Lewis calls the “Historical Point of View” in relation to Reformed scholasticism. This final chapter argues that the “Historical Point of View” is simultaneously vitally important and insufficient to profit fully from this field of study. Now that this book has introduced some of the necessary skills and information for the proper study of Reformed scholasticism, this concluding chapter shifts the reader’s attention to contemporary uses. I have divided the remaining material into three parts: reflecting on what you have gained through your studies, remembering your goals in writing, and recognizing potential avenues for theological and pastoral uses. The unifying theme of these exhortations is that to profit from studying Reformed scholasticism, you should learn how to integrate historical theology, which you previously separated as a discipline, into theological and practical uses through critical reflection. While this section is briefer than preceding ones, it reflects one of the primary aims of this book. It is at this juncture that the author’s roles as historian, theologian, and pastor become most obvious. The interrelationship between these roles draws readers back to the intended audiences of this work as well, which includes students, historians, and pastors and teachers.

Reflect on what you have gained Profiting from any field of study demands reflection. Writing contextual historical theology can be an arduous task. After finishing this task, students should naturally reflect on what they have gained from their studies. Reflecting on what you have gained from your studies lays a foundation for remembering the goals of your studies as well as reflecting on your studies and applying them to other ends. Such reflection should lead to thanksgiving, humility, progress, and potential for further studies. These ideas will likely be most valuable to those pursuing higher degrees related to Reformed scholasticism, yet the general principles treated here can help Christian students in this field more generally. However, the entire book of Ecclesiastes teaches believers to reflect on what they do in life as well as why and how they do what they do.

Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, Service to Church

199

Thanksgiving Completing any large-scale research project should lead to thanksgiving. Give thanks to God for his mercies in enabling you to do your research well by finding the sources you needed, in writing and in responding to criticism to your writing, and in carrying you through to the end. If you have completed a higher degree, then remember the remarkable providences of the Lord in bringing you to the right institution and in bringing the right people and resources along the way. The triune God is sovereign over our faculties (Dan. 4:16, 33, 36), what we learn (1 Jn. 5:20), and who we know. We should thank the Father for giving us good work to do and the resources needed to do it. We should thank the Son, in whose name we labor to the Father’s glory (Col. 3:17). We should thank the Spirit, who gives wisdom to craftsmen (Num. 31:1–6) and who gives wisdom and understanding (Prov. 4:7; 1 Cor. 2:6–16). For a Christian, prayer should permeate his or her studies and these studies should result in prayers of thanksgiving.

Humility Academic studies should be humbling. Researchers who finish a project ordinarily realize how they should have begun after completing their work. Students also go through the process of struggling to ask the right questions at the outset of their work to completing a project with more questions than they can possibly answer in a lifetime. History is a vast field. Reformed scholasticism is only one narrow branch of historical theology. There will always be gaps in the research and more questions that require further research. Even as you are thankful for what you have learned, be humbled by what you do not know and by what you will never know. Doing so will keep you modest in your conclusions and make you patient with others. There are many people with PhD’s with chips on their shoulders, seeking to prove that everyone else is ignorant by comparison. By contrast, those who are trained in academic historical theology should aim humbly to teach others, whether through writing, in the classroom, or from the pulpit. Someone somewhere always knows something that we do not, and professional quality works of history will likely always admit of correction. The Apostle Paul exhorted believers not

200

Reformed Scholasticism

to think of themselves more highly than they ought to, but to think soberly, “as God has dealt a measure of faith to each one” (Rom. 12:3). This principle is just as true with regard to academic gifts as it is with spiritual gifts. If you have been paying attention during your work and have done due diligence in your studies, then you will likely close your project by discovering that there are more unanswered questions than you thought possible when you started. Knowledge and experience should promote humility rather than hinder it.

Progress Academic research should be a beginning and not an end. If executed well, it will furnish students with useful materials to draw from for the rest of their lives. This point is reminiscent of Trueman’s statement that historians are like “fine wines and Scotch whisky in the barrel”; they improve with age (and practice).2 Learning how to do sound historical research opens avenues for more and more fruitful research. As an illustration, the present author prepared the initial outlines for this book and the course on which it is based from memory. This was only possible due to years of research and writing related to critical book reviews, articles, and other projects. Seminary students learn the skills needed for ministry ultimately by doing ministry. So students of history develop skill in their field by writing history.

Potential Historical theology has great potential for many uses. This is preeminently true for students researching Reformed scholasticism with other applications in view. Students can use their historical studies as a sounding board for everything else they do in whatever the Lord calls them to do. This is equally true for those pursuing careers in academic historical research and teaching, seminary professors, and the select group of ministers who will benefit from higher degree programs. The last section of this chapter illustrates this point more fully in relation to theology and pastoral ministry.

Carl R. Trueman, Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010), 178.

2

Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, Service to Church

201

Remember your goals Christian living entails asking why believers do what they do. Classic Reformed prolegomena made theological students self-conscious of the fact that the fruition of the triune God is the end of theology.3 The glory of God is the ultimate goal of human life. This simultaneously makes God our summum bonum and it places a premium on enjoying our work to God’s glory and for the good of the church.4 This means that to profit from your studies of Reformed scholasticism, you should keep your goals in view. These goals may be both personal and public.

Personal goals Two biblical principles stand out in this connection. The first is, “Therefore, whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Cor. 10:31). In the context of 1 Corinthians, the Apostle Paul sought to teach believers how to avoid strife in the church and how to exercise charity toward believers with differing consciences and practices. As a wise pastor, he cut through the heart of such problems by appealing to a general principle. If Christians are consumed with doing all things to the glory of God, in Christ’s name, with the Spirit’s help, then they will do all things well. This principle has implications for believing historians, seminary professors, and pastors. First, aim to be the best historian that you can be to the glory of God. This reflects the dignity of all lawful vocations before the Lord, and not pastoral ministry only. With regard to academic historical research and writing, this means applying methodology as well as possible, aiming to deal with evidence objectively while recognizing that it is neither possible nor desirable to abandon convictions or proper biases.

Franciscus Junius, A Treatise on True Theology: With the Life of Franciscus Junius, trans. David C. Noe (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014), 210–11; Amandus Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae Ab Amando Polano a Polansdorf: Juxta Leges Ordinis Methodici Conformatum, Atque in Libros Decem Digestum Jamque Demum in Unum Volumen Compactum, Novissime Emendatum (Hanoviae, 1610), 54–62. 4 Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 15–54. 3

202

Reformed Scholasticism

Second, pray for the Spirit’s blessings over all your labors. Just as the Spirit can expand the gifts of pastors, so he can expand the gifts of historians. This counsel applies equally to seminary professors as the labor primarily to train future ministers of the gospel. You will often be surprised at finding unanticipated sources, making everything appear to come together at the right time and in the right way in answer to prayer. This is not a substitute for hard work and due diligence. Neither is it a pretext for any kind of supposed divine inspiration or infallibility of your research. Prayer simply recognizes the sovereignty of the triune God over every area of life, including writing about Reformed scholasticism, and it reorients researchers toward the overarching goals of life. Third, search the Scriptures as you study. This advice is most pertinent to pastors who have one foot in academic studies and one in the ministry of the church. Testing all things by Scripture should not play into historical conclusions resulting from academic research. Yet doing so is vital to shift from historical theology to contemporary appropriations. Though your study of Scripture and personal growth in the Lord is a different discipline, in this respect, from writing history, it is nevertheless a related goal for ministers. The materials that you are studying inherently lend themselves to the prayerful study of Scripture, which should increase your communion with the triune God and growth in godliness. Some authors have argued that even though historical theology shares a methodology in common with historical studies more generally, it is proper to regard historical theology as a subdiscipline of systematic theology as well. The reason for this connection is that historical theology enters into conversation with systematic theology. The form in which ministers apply ideas from historical theology in the context of the ministry of the church will necessarily take on a far less academic tone. Yet in systematic and pastoral theology, searching the Scriptures alongside historical studies is the key to making these kinds of transitions.

Public goals The second biblical principle in view relates to public goals. In relation to spiritual gifts, the Apostle Paul wrote, “Let it be for the edification of the church that you seek to excel” (1 Cor. 14:12). Like the above-cited text, Paul

Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, Service to Church

203

appealed here to a general principle to correct a specific problem in the church in Corinth. Christians should do all things to the glory of God as well as for the edification of the church. The second of these principles is more immediately pressing for teachers in theological seminaries and those engaged in the ministry of the church. Edifying the church through historical theology entails moving beyond historical research, using historical material to teach and preach theological ideas.

Professors in Theological Seminaries Teachers and students alike in theological seminaries should keep the goal of edifying the church in view. Many students attending theological seminaries naturally develop the desire to teach. This is particularly true when they learn under good teachers. This is the point at which educational models drawn from Reformed scholasticism can be helpful. Professors of theology often moved fluidly back and forth from the pastorate to the classroom, and sometimes back again. Professors of theology were predominantly ministers of the gospel training future gospel ministers. This author believes that this model is healthy for the church. Few people, for example, would want to study to be surgeons from people who have never operated on patients. Students should ask themselves why they want to teach at a theological seminary. They should recognize that their primary emphasis in this context will lie in training future ministers. It is desirable to have more seminary professors who have served as pastors before becoming professors. In the sixteenth century, the Scottish Second Book of Discipline required that Doctors of the church primarily had the duties of teaching students in theological schools as well as catechizing the children in the church. The idea was that such men would be equipped to teach theology at every level. The author once met a man who told him that he wanted to be a seminary professor, but that he became a pastor only because no other options were open to him. This seems to invert, at least in part, the relationship between theological seminaries and the church. It is my conviction that professors of theology should love the church and desire to serve her above all other things. This is what made men such as Turretin, Witsius, and Voetius useful to Christ’s kingdom. Remember as well, as Carl Trueman periodically reminds his students, that very few people with PhD’s in theology will find academic posts. While all people should labor to the glory of God in their

204

Reformed Scholasticism

work and seek to help the church, professors of theology labor immediately for the edification of the church through training her future ministers. This makes it imperative to keep the public goals of the research and teaching that they do constantly in view. The church is God’s primary institution for spreading the gospel. Seminaries exist as auxiliary aids to the church. More directly related to the content of this book, prayerfully think through ways in which your studies can serve the church through other avenues. Studying and writing for the edification of the church applies most directly to ministers pursuing higher degrees. Postgraduate studies in historical theology are not for every minister. Yet those who have the gifts, the inclination, a good topic, and good people to work with can benefit greatly from a solid academic program. This illustrates the point, however, that not everything a minister does directly promotes the edification of the church. Few congregants, for example, will read an academic thesis or book. The next section below gives some ideas regarding how to use an academic project for other purposes. In the meantime, edifying the church carries farther-reaching implications than the content of one’s studies. Ministers must assess whether they are developing the self-discipline to maintain their goals in life. For example, it is always sad to see an acknowledgments page in a PhD thesis that asks forgiveness of neglected families during the process of research and writing. This is a price that any author should be unwilling to pay. In addition, the chosen subject of research must be applicable in more than one direction. For example, a student doing research on seventeenth-century trinitarian theology who is preaching through the gospel of John can use the primary sources read to further academic work as well as to foster ideas to preach and apply this doctrine from the text of Scripture. While the form that this material takes will differ widely in each of these contexts, developing the skill to combine tasks in this way may be the only way of making such a project possible, especially if the student is already active in ministry. Ministers should also find ways to use their Latin. They should find something to read daily, or at least weekly, if at all possible. This author has sought to do this by reading Marckius on Zechariah, Bucer and Aquinas on John, and other Latin commentaries while preaching through those books on Scripture. Doing so also gave rise to finding theological observations that expanded his academic research beyond dogmatic works into biblical commentaries, which were an important part of

Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, Service to Church

205

Reformed orthodox theology. Laboring for the edification of the church in conjunction with academic labors requires prayerful creativity that results in using the same texts in more than one way at the same time.

Recognize potential avenues for theological and pastoral uses This final exhortation delves more deeply into evaluating the theological and methodological content of Reformed scholasticism. As Richard Muller reminds his readers, students of Reformed thought should begin with Reformed scholasticism as a starting point for engaging contemporary Reformed theology, since “most of the doctrinal principles and definitions” of Reformed theology come from this time period.5 Therefore, to profit from your study of Reformed scholasticism, you should be aware of some of its uses in relation to method, preaching, theology, and catholicity.

Methodological potential Studying Reformed scholasticism can help provide a stable methodological starting point for contemporary Reformed theology. Many modern authors have recovered Reformed theological content to a greater or lesser extent while bypassing classic Reformed theological method. Each system of theology in recent years appears to implement a new way of doing things. While this is not inherently a bad thing, it runs the risk of fragmenting contemporary Reformed theology. Some theological systems are largely ahistorical, claiming to build theology from the ground up from Scripture alone.6 Such systems often develop new epistemological models for theology, such as tri-perspectivalism, that run the risk of cutting classic Reformed theology out of the conversation.7

Richard A. Muller, Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, Ca. 1520 to Ca. 1725, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003), 1:37. 6 John Frame, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Pub. Co., 2013). 7 For a critical evaluation of this procedure, see Ryan M. McGraw, “Toward a Biblical, Catholic, and Reformed Theology: An Assessment of John Frame’s Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief,” Puritan Reformed Journal 8, no. 2 (July 2016): 197–211. 5

206

Reformed Scholasticism

Other systems draw self-consciously from classic Christian sources while bypassing the historical contexts of the authors cited.8 The result is that such works give the appearance that Augustine, Anselm, Karl Barth, and others all meant essentially the same thing. While successfully reintegrating classic theological expressions into systematic theology, this can also result in transforming theological content in a way that historical figures would not have recognized.9 The danger on the other side is simply repristinating historical ideas without applying them adequately to a contemporary setting, or of turning systematic theology into historical theology rather than a serious engagement with Scripture itself. As Darren Sarisky concludes, “A theology of repetition is a dead end.”10 Still others, in bypassing classic methods of organizing the system of theology, have produced systems without a clear order and purpose.11 Some try as well to reorder the system of theology in light of other disciplines, such as biblical theology.12 This can result both in a lack of precision in terms and definitions and in a partial redefinition of the nature and purposes of systematic theology.13 Reflecting the concerns of classic Reformed theology, contemporary authors can also seek to incorporate important modern philosophical concepts, such as speech-act theory, into theological prolegomena and epistemology, both of which can affect the content of the system in dramatic ways.14 While this process is not inherently illegitimate, it has often created methodological distance both from classic

Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain, Christian Dogmatics: Reformed Theology for the Church Catholic (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016). 9 For my assessment, see Ryan M. McGraw, “Catholic Retrieval and Theological Transformation: An Assessment of Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain’s, Christian Dogmatics: Reformed Theology for the Church Catholic,” Westminster Theological Journal 79, no. 1 (Spring 2017): 147–59. 8

Darren Sarisky, “Tradition II: Thinking with Historical Texts—Reflections on Theologies of Retrieval,” in Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, ed. Darren Sarisky (London: T&T Clark, 2017), 200. 11 Douglas F Kelly, Systematic Theology Volume One: Grounded in Holy Scripture and Understood in the Light of the Church, vol. 1 (Fearn: Mentor, 2008). 12 Richard C. Gamble, The Whole Counsel of God: God’s Mighty Acts in the Old Testament, vol. 1, 3 vols. (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Pub., 2009). 13 Ryan M. McGraw, “Redefining Systematic Theology? A Review Article of Richard C. Gamble’s The Whole Counsel of God: Volume 1: God’s Mighty Acts in the Old Testament,” Mid-America Journal of Theology 23 (2012): 139–50. 14 For an example in a conservative Reformed context, see Michael Scott Horton, The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011). 10

Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, Service to Church

207

Reformed prolegomena and from contemporary authors who employ their own methodologies.15 Such methodological diversity potentially fragments the way Reformed theology is taught today. While the answer to this problem does not lie merely in regurgitating scholastic methods and terms, it highlights the need to give heed to Muller’s challenge. The scholastic method of teaching with its accompanying precise theological vocabulary promoted a more fluid exchange of ideas for roughly 1500 years of church history in a way that did not preclude theological and terminological development. We do not appear to have anything approximating this at the present time. Studying Reformed scholasticism has the potential of helping modern theologians speak the same language by reading the same books and even starting on the same page. There are more positive recent examples as well, however, of developing theological systems in conversation with classic Reformed thought. For instance, Herman Bavinck drew heavily from Reformed scholastic authors, such as Polanus and Mastricht, filtering their thought through robust biblical exegesis, and engaging with contemporary theological and philosophical movements.16 More recently, Velema and van Genderen have followed a similar model, building their theology from Scripture in conversation with the confessional theology of the Reformed churches as well as modern authors and theological movements.17 Willem van Vlaustuin’s, Be Renewed, stands out as a preeminent example of what the present author has in mind.18 Van Vlaustuin treats questions related to union with Christ and sanctification by drawing from a wide range of historic Christian thought, picking out legitimate questions raised by the authors treated, and evaluating, appropriating, modifying, or rejecting their ideas in light of Scripture exegesis. His historical analyses are contextually oriented, yet he presents distinctively Reformed view of sanctification without becoming a slave to any single part of the catholic Ryan M. McGraw, “Shifting Paradigms in Reformed Systematic Theology: A Review Article of Michael Horton’s The Christian Faith: A Theology for Pilgrims on the Way,” Puritan Reformed Journal 5, no. 2 (July 2013): 245–62. 16 Herman Bavinck, Reformed Dogmatics, trans. John Bolt (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003). 17 J. van Genderen and W. H. Velema, Concise Reformed Dogmatics, ed. Gerrit Bilkes and Ed M. Van Der Maas (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Pub., 2008). 18 Willem van Vlastuin, Be Renewed: A Theology of Personal Renewal, vol. 26. Reformed Historical Theology (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014). 15

208

Reformed Scholasticism

Christian tradition. Such models set a high bar for theology that is difficult to reach; yet they illustrate the methodological potential for systematic theology of drawing from Reformed scholastic authors and many others.

Homiletical potential The homiletical use of academic historical theology is largely indirect. This point applies to ministers as well as to teachers. Developing and proving a single thesis in a paper or book-length project trains scholars how to focus. Many people have complained that they have heard sermons, for example, without understanding clearly what the point of the sermon was. A sermon text has one overarching point. The individual sermon points should show how the text proves this point and expands and applies it. The conclusion should leave hearers with the primary significance and relevance of the text. While the form of a sermon differs from academic writing, the focused thought process builds overlapping skills in the student. Academic writing should make preachers simpler and more effective in their preaching by learning to narrow things down in an organized and helpful manner. This rule applies to teaching as well. This author often includes a course thesis with accompanying objectives, with subtheses and goals heading every lesson in the course. In addition, the content and method of Reformed scholastic authors can help promote crisp expressions and clear distinctions in teaching or in preaching. Hearers need to know what the teacher is talking about, why they are doing so, and how they intend to prove their points to benefit fully from their teaching.

Theological potential While the church today does not need theological repristination (i.e., simple regurgitation of historical ideas), it needs theological adaptation and application.19 Three areas in which contemporary theology may benefit from

This section is slightly edited from the conclusions found in McGraw, “Catholic Retrieval and Theological Transformation: An Assessment of Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain’s, Christian Dogmatics: Reformed Theology for the Church Catholic.” Used with permission from Westminster Theological Journal.

19

Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, Service to Church

209

Reformed orthodox formulations can illustrate this point. These areas flow out of some of the topics treated in previous chapters. First, moving the beatific vision back into Prolegomena in relation to Christ’s knowledge of God has potential to move eschatology into the core of the system of theology. This relates to how Christ mediates the knowledge of God to man.20 After distinguishing theology into archetypal and ectypal theology (God’s self-knowledge and creaturely knowledge of God), Reformed authors addressed three levels of the knowledge of God.21 The first was Christ’s knowledge of God as incarnate (theologia unionis). This was the first and highest level of ectypal theology.22 On one level, Christ’s knowledge of God was unique and incommunicable by virtue of his divine nature, including the union between his divine and human natures. On another level, Christ’s knowledge of God became the pattern of the believer’s knowledge of God in the context of the covenant of grace by virtue of union with him through faith. The connecting point between the two was that the Spirit who filled Christ now dwells in believers.23 The beatific vision came next in the cycle, since this represented the highest knowledge of God redeemed humanity was capable of. The beatific vision thus set the goal for theologians in via, who were on pilgrimage to the celestial city.24 The knowledge of God possessed by these pilgrims was the same in kind, though differing in degree, with the saints in glory.25 These connections can help keep believers on track by reminding them that as they do theology their chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever. This construction retains the distinction between Christ revealing Treier approaches something along these lines in passing. Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain, Christian Dogmatics: Reformed Theology for the Church Catholic (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016), 237. 21 Junius, A Treatise on True Theology, 107–20. 22 Bernardinus de Moor, Continuous Commentary on Johannes Marckius’ Didactico-Elenctic Comendium of Christian Theology, trans. Stephen Dilday, vol. 1 (Culpeper, VA: L & G Reformation Translation Center, 2014), 1:96. 23 Polanus, Syntagma Theologiae Christianae, 63. 24 Allusion to Pilgrim’s Progress intended. 25 See Westminster Larger Catechism 83: “Q. What is the communion in glory with Christ which the members of the invisible church enjoy in this life? A. The members of the invisible church have communicated to them in this life the firstfruits of glory with Christ, as they are members of him their head, and so in him are interested in that glory which he is fully possessed of, and, as an earnest thereof, enjoy the sense of God’s love, peace of conscience, joy in the Holy Ghost, and hope of glory; as, on the contrary, sense of God’s revenging wrath, horror of conscience, and a fearful expectation of judgment, are to the wicked the beginning of their torments which they shall endure after death.” 20

210

Reformed Scholasticism

God as he is God the Son and Christ revealing God as he is God incarnate. It also results in a Christological view of glory that affects the Christian life now.26 Second, the Reformed distinction between habitual and actual sanctification shows the organic relationship between the new birth and the Christian life. This grew from an Aristotelian distinction in which habits described the disposition of the soul and acts referred to actions resulting from that disposition. In contrast to Aristotle, the Reformed (following the medieval doctors) argued that habits did not simply result from repeated actions.27 Thus, original sin entailed the guilt of Adam’s first sin as well as a habitual disposition toward sin, which resulted in all actual transgressions.28 Conversely, the new birth implanted a habitual sanctification in redeemed humanity, by which believers became disposed to all good by the Spirit’s work in regeneration. This included the seeds of repentance unto life and all other saving graces, which resulted in sanctified actions, though imperfect and incomplete in this life.29 This later distinction explains why, for example, an earlier author, such as Calvin, used “regeneration” to refer both to the new birth and to sanctification proper.30 While it is tempting for some to read John Murray’s distinction between definitive and progressive sanctification into this scheme, it says both more and less than he did. It says more by connecting sanctification to

Though Suzanne McDonald overstates her case slightly with regard to Owen’s uniqueness on this point, she provides an intriguing analysis of what such Christological views of the beatific vision might look like in practice. Suzanne McDonald, “Beholding the Glory of God in the Face of Jesus Christ: John Owen and the ‘Reforming’ of the Beatific Vision,” in The Ashgate Research Companion to John Owen’s Theology (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012), 141–58. 27 Cleveland, Thomism in Owen, 91–120. 28 See Westminster Larger Catechism 25: “Q. Wherein consisteth the sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell? A. The sinfulness of that estate whereinto man fell, consisteth in the guilt of Adam’s first sin, the want of that righteousness wherein he was created, and the corruption of his nature, whereby he is utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite unto all that is spiritually good, and wholly inclined to all evil, and that continually; which is commonly called original sin, and from which do proceed all actual transgressions.” 29 See Westminster Larger Catechism 75: “What is sanctification? A. Sanctification is a work of God’s grace, whereby they whom God hath, before the foundation of the world, chosen to be holy, are in time, through the powerful operation of his Spirit applying the death and resurrection of Christ unto them, renewed in their whole man after the image of God; having the seeds of repentance unto life, and all other saving graces, put into their hearts, and those graces so stirred up, increased, and strengthened, as that they more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life.” 30 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles, vol. XX–XXI, 2 vols., Library of Christian Classics (Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960), book 3, chapter 3. This section treats regeneration as encompassing sanctification and repentance. 26

Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, Service to Church

211

regeneration more solidly and it says less by omitting possible Scripture uses for God setting believers apart to himself. This old distinction is useful for developing the organic relationship between sanctification and union with Christ by the Spirit. Third, believers in Reformed churches can become confused over the meaning of the sacramental language embedded in our Reformed confessions. The Westminster Standards, for example, use terms such as represented, signified, exhibited, sealed, conferred, and applied to describe the meaning of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.31 Such Reformed doctrinal standards are historical documents as well as contemporary documents. They have a historical context with a historical meaning and they have contemporary uses in contemporary churches. Older authors, such as Johannes Wollebius, can help bridge the gap from historic terminology to contemporary meaning. For example, after describing the sacramental union between the sign and the thing signified, including differing ways in which we can refer to God’s presence, he created a spectrum of terms ranging from signifying, to exhibiting, to applying, to sealing.32 Sacraments as signs pointed to a spiritual reality. Sacraments exhibited Christ when the minister held them forth for the faith of the recipients. Believers then received the application of Christ’s benefits through the ministerial exhibition of the sign. The last element is sealing, which Wollebius left largely undefined, yet which had an objective element in God sealing his promises and a subjective element in God sealing Christ and his benefits to his people.33 This thought is similar For two examples, see Westminster Confession of Faith 27.3 and Larger Catechism 162. Johannes Wollebius, Compendium Theologiæ Christianæ, Editio Ultima Prioribus Multo Correctior, 9th ed. (Cantabrigiæ, 1655), 126–7. 33 Wollebius, Compendium, 126–7. “These four species of signs should be observed well, against those who cry out against us to have nothing but signs in the sacraments. Signs, therefore, either signify only, as a painted image signifies a man, or they exhibit also, as a scepter, keys, or similar things, which being exhibited, regal power and the right to enter the house is conferred. Or, in addition to these things, there are applying signs, as it is with regard to God’s promise concerning the protection of the 144,000, who also have a sign applied and impressed on their foreheads by the Angel. Rev. 7:3. Or, finally, sealing signs, which are of the same nature as down-payments, seals, and similar things. Now these four degrees of signs certainly agree with the Sacraments. For, first, the external symbols signify and represent Christ’s body and his blood also. Second, the sign simultaneously exhibits the thing signified, not in the sign only, but in the sacramental action by which the minister exhibits the sign while Christ the Lord is giving the thing signified. Third, the thing signified which is promised to the faithful generally by the word of the Gospel, is applied to each one of the faithful through exhibition by a sign. Fourth, the same promise is sealed by the Sacrament. For this reason [Sacraments] are not only called signs, but seals. Rom. 4:11.” My translation. 31 32

212

Reformed Scholasticism

to how Heidelberg Catechism Question 66 described the sacraments as seals: “The sacraments are holy visible signs and seals, appointed of God for this end, that by the use thereof, he may the more fully declare and seal to us the promise of the gospel.” The first two of Wollebius’s terms generally describe what the sacraments show or say. The last two terms represent the personal or applicatory elements involved in the sacraments. John Owen gave additional evidence that Wollebius’s classifications were common when he argued that Christ is present in the Lord’s Supper through representation, exhibition, and “obsignation or sealing.”34 Owen subsumed application under sealing, while Wollebius distinguished the two slightly. Such historic descriptions can greatly help ministers in particular as they seek to make sense of sacramental language in Reformed confessional documents. While historical theology is insufficient for grounding systematic theology in Scripture, it can expand contemporary reflection on and application of Scripture. This kind of research is fruitful in light of the recent quest for catholic retrieval through historical theology.35 It should also help us draw clearer lines between catholic retrieval of historical ideas and the theological transformation of Reformed theology. The church today needs to understand, adapt, and learn from Reformed orthodoxy in prayerful submission to Scripture aiming at the hearts of believers.

Potential for catholicity As van Asselt suggested, study Reformed scholasticism can teach us how to cultivate a theology that is genuinely and biblically catholic.36 The examples provided in preceding chapters illustrate the aim of Reformed scholastic theology to create a biblical ecumenicity by drawing from historical and

John Owen, The Works of John Owen, D.D., ed. William H. Goold (Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1850), 9:572. 35 For a recent cross-confessional survey of these attempts, see Darren Sarisky, ed., Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal (London: T&T Clark, 2017). Sarisky wrote that retrieval theology “attempts to dig into a past era in order to open up new vistas for today Theologies of retrieval unsettle present discussions by offering resources from beyond the current horizon with a view toward enriching ongoing debates” (2). This represents well what the present author is attempting to do in this concluding chapter. 36 Willem J. van Asselt et al., Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism, trans. Albert Gootjes (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011), 197. 34

Personal Growth, Theological Reflection, Service to Church

213

contemporary theology. Reformed authors filtered and used this information in the context of promoting the doctrines taught within Reformed confessional bounds. They also illustrate a level of tolerance that was present within confessional bounds. While this model developed in contexts differing widely from our own, it shows that this kind of critical interaction with historic Christian thought within the bounds of Reformed theology is both possible and desirable. Studying Reformed scholasticism with a critical eye is one way that Reformed churches today can potentially achieve greater unity in method and content as they adapt and apply Reformed thought to contemporary questions. Doing so can help offset and blunt to some degree the fragmentary character of much of modern Reformed systematic theology. It also puts Reformed theology back in the stream of the catholic Christian tradition as a whole, which was one of the primary characteristics and developments of the Reformed scholastic movement.

Conclusion The subject of this book has been why and how to study Reformed scholasticism. The question that this concluding chapter has sought to answer in part is what to do with the material that students gain from historical research in this field. This field requires developing a “Historical Point of View,” but it need not stop there. This book has aimed to cultivate interest in Reformed scholastic theology, to inculcate proper research methodology and writing practices, to introduce the general characteristics of scholastic method and theology, and to press students, historians, professors, and pastors to appropriate ideas from their studies both for professional and for pastoral use. However, practice is essential to learning. The ultimate goal of these studies is for readers to take what they have learned and reflected on and to pursue the study of Reformed scholasticism. As the subtitle of this book indicates, these goals should help lead to recovering the tools of Reformed theology. This is true both with regard to historical investigation and for contemporary appropriation of historic Reformed method and thought. The final challenge this author presents to readers, therefore, is to apply these principles to academic historical research

214

Reformed Scholasticism

and to use what they learn in their various fields of labor. Doing so will help bring the voices of classic Reformed authors into modern theological conversations. Perhaps in doing so, as C.S. Lewis pointed out in his inimitable way, “the characteristic errors of one [era] may be corrected by the characteristic truths of another.”37

Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, 99.

37

Works Cited A’Brakel, Wilhemus. The Christian’s Reasonable Service. Edited by Joel R. Beeke. Translated by Bartel Elshout. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012. Adler, Mortimer J., and Charles Lincoln Van Doren. How to Read a Book. New York: A Touchstone Book, 2014. Allen, Michael, and Scott R. Swain. Christian Dogmatics: Reformed Theology for the Church Catholic. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2016. Allen, Michael, and Scott R. Swain. Reformed Catholicity: The Promise of Retrieval for Theology and Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2015. Ames, William. Medulla S.S. Theologiæ, in Fine Adjuncta Est Disputatio De Fidei Divinæ Veritate. Editio Tertia Priori Longe Correctior. Londini: Apud Robertum Allottum, 1629. Appleby, Joyce Oldham, Lynn Hunt, and Margaret C. Jacob. Telling the Truth about History. New York: Norton, 1994. Asselt, Willem J. van. “Reformed Orthodoxy: A Short History of Research.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 40:11–26. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Asselt, Willem J. van. “Scholasticism Revisited: Methodological Reflections on the Study of Seventeenth-Century Reformed Thought.” In Seeing Things Their Way, edited by Alister Chapman, John Coffey, and Brad S. Gregory, 154–74. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009. Asselt, Willem J. van. The Federal Theology of Johannes Cocceius (1603–1669). Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2001. Asselt, Willem J. van. “The Fundamental Meaning of Theology: Archetypal and Ectypal Theology in Seventeentt-Century Reformed Thought.” Westminster Theological Journal 64, no. 2 (2002): 319–35. Asselt, Willem J. van, and Eef Dekker. “Introduction.” In Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, edited by Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker, 11–44. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001. Asselt, Willem J. van, T. Theo J. Pleizier, P. L. Rouwendal, and Maarten Wisse. Introduction to Reformed Scholasticism. Translated by Albert Gootjes. Grand Rapids, MI.: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011.

216

Works Cited

Augustijn, Cornelis. “Wittenberga Contra Scholasticos.” In Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, edited by Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker, 45–64. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001. Bac, Martijn, and Theo Pleizier. “Reentering the Sites of Truth: Teaching Reformed Scholasticism in the Contemporary Classroom.” In Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honor of Willem J. van Asselt, edited by Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, 14:31–54. Studies in Theology and Religion. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Backus, Irena. “G. W. Leibniz and Protestant Scholasticism in the Years 1698–1704.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, edited by Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, 170:679–96. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Bagchi, D. V. N. “Sic et Non: Luther and Scholasticism.” In Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, edited by R. Scott Clark and Carl R. Trueman, 3–15. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006. Ballor, Jordan J. Covenant, Casuality, and Law: A Study in the Theology of Wolfgang Musculus. Vol. 3. Refo500 Academic Studies. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012. Ballor, Jordan J. “State, Church, and the Reformational Roots of Subsidiarity.” In The Myth of the Reformation, edited by Peter Opitz, 9:148–59. Refo500 Academic Studies. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013. Ballor, Jordan J., David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, eds. Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition. Vol. 170. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Barlow, Thomas. The Genuine Remains of That Learned Prelate Dr. Thomas Barlow, Late Lord Bishop of Lincoln Containing Divers Discourses Theological, Philosophical, Historical, &c., in Letters to Several Persons of Honour and Quality: To Which Is Added the Resolution of Many Abstruse Points: As Also Directions to a Young Divine for His Study of Divinity, and Choice of Books, &c., with Great Variety of Other Subjects. London, 1693. Barrett, Matthew. God’s Word Alone: The Authority of Scripture. The 5 Solas. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2016. Bavinck, Herman. Reformed Dogmatics. Translated by John Bolt. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003. Beach, J. Mark. Christ and the Covenant: Francis Turretin’s Federal Theology as a Defense of the Doctrine of Grace. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007. Beck, Andreas J. Gisbertus Voetius 1589–1676 Sein Theologieverständnis Und Seine Gotteslehre. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2007.

Works Cited

217

Beck, Andreas J. “God, Creation, and Providence in Post-Reformation Reformed Theology.” In The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800, edited by Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber, 195–212. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Beeke, Joel R. Debated Issues in Sovereign Predestination: Early Lutheran Predestination, Calvinian Reprobation, and Variations in Genevan Lapsarianism. Vol. 42. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017. Beeke, Joel R., and Mark Jones. A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012. Benedict, Philip. Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002. Beza, Theodorus. Confessio Christianae Fidei, et Eiusdem Collatio Cum Papisticis Haeresibus (Geneva, 1560). Beza, Theodorus. Theodori Bezae Annotationes Maiores in Novum Dn. Nostri Iesu Christi Testamentum: In Duas Distinctae Partes, Quarum Prior Explicationem in Quatuor Evangelistas Et Acta Apostolorum, Posterior Verò in Epistolas Et Apocalypsin Continet: Quibus Etiam Adiuncti Sunt Indices Rerum Ac Verborum Locupletissimi. Genevae: J. des Planches, 1594. Bierma, Lyle D. The Covenant Theology of Caspar Olevianus. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2005. Blacketer, Raymond A. “The Man in the Black Hat: Theodore Beza and Reorientation of Early Reformed Historiography.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, edited by Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, 170:227–41. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Boersma, Hans, and Matthew Levering, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Sacramental Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Boston, Thomas. The Complete Works of the Late Rev. Thomas Boston, Ettrick: Including His Memoirs. Wheaton, IL: R.O. Roberts, 1980. Bozeman, Theodore Dwight. The Precisianist Strain: Disciplinary Religion & Antinomian Backlash in Puritanism to 1638. Omohundro Institute of Early American History & Culture. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 2004. Brink, Gijsbert van den. “Reformed Scholasticism and the Trinitarian Renaissance.” In Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honour of Willem J. van Asselt, edited by Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, 14:322–40. Studies in Theology and Religion. Leiden: Brill, 2010.

218

Works Cited

Bruce, James E. Rights in the Law: The Importance of God’s Free Choices in the Thought of Francis Turretin. Vol. 24. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013. Bucanus, William. Institutiones Theolgicae, Seu, Locorum Communium Christanae Religionis. Geneva, 1648. Bucer, Martin. Metaphrasis Et Enarratio in Epist. D. Pauli Apostoli Ad Romanos, in Quibus Singulatim Apostoli Omnia, Cum Argumenta, Tum Sententiae & Verba, Ad Autoritatem Divinae Scripturae, Fidemque Ecclesiae Catholicae Tam Priscae Qum̉ Praesentis, Religios ̈ac Paul ̣fusius Excutiuntur. Basileae, 1562. Bullinger, Heinrich. The Decades of Henry Bullinger. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1849. Burnett, Stephen G. From Christian Hebraism to Jewish Studies: Johannes Buxtorf (1564–1629) and Hebrew Learning in the Seventeenth Century. Studies in the History of Christian Thought. Leiden: Brill, 1996. Burton, Simon J. G. The Hallowing of Logic the Trinitarian Method of Richard Baxter’s Methodus Theologiae. Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2012. Busch, Eberard. “Reformed Theology in Continental Europe.” In Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, 230–47. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016. Cajetan, Thomas. Epistolae Pauli Et Aliorum Apostolorum: Juxta Sens. Literal. Enarratae. Acc: Actus Apostol. Comm. Ejusd. Illustr. Paris, 1540. Cajetan, Tommaso. Commentarii Illustres Planeq́; Insignes in Quinque Mosaicos Libros, Thomae De Vio, Caietani, Adiectis Insuper Ad Margine[m] Annotationibus a F. Antonio Fo[n]seca Lusitano, Quibus Temporum & Locoru[m] Ratio, Tropi, Phrases, Lociq́; Intellectu Difficiles Explicantur: Accessit Rerum Maxime Insignium Index Copiosissimus. Paris: Apud Ioannem Paruum, 1539. Calvin, John. Calvin’s Commentaries. 22 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker, 1979. Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Edited by John T. McNeill. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Vol. XX–XXI. 2 vols. Library of Christian Classics. Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960. Campi, Emidio. “Giovanni Diodati (1576–1649), Translator of the Bible into Italian.” In From Zwingli to Amyraut: Exploring the Growth of European Reformed Traditions, edited by Jon Balserak and Jim West, 43:105–22. Reformed Historical Theology. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017. Campi, Emidio. Shifting Patterns of Reformed Tradition. Vol. 27. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. http://search.ebscohost. com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=780645 Campos, Heber. Doctrine in Development: Johannes Piscator and Debates over Christ’s Active Obedience. Reformed Historical-Theological Studies. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2018.

Works Cited

219

Carlton, Charles. Archbishop William Laud. London and New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1987. Casselli, Stephen J. Divine Rule Maintained: Anthony Burgess, Covenant Theology, and the Place of the Law in Reformed Scholasticism. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016. Chamier, Daniel. Panstratiae Catholicae Corpus, Sive Controversarium de Religione Adversus Pontificos Corpus. Vol. 1. 5 vols. Genevae, 1626. Chapman, Alister, John Coffey, and Brad S. Gregory, eds. Seeing Things Their Way: Intellectual History and the Return of Religion. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2009. Cheynell, Francis. The Divine Triunity of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, Or, the Blessed Doctrine of the Three Coessentiall Subsistents in the Eternall Godhead Without Any Confusion or Division of the Distinct Subsistences or Multiplication of the Most Single and Entire Godhead Acknowledged, Beleeved, Adored by Christians, in Opposition to Pagans, Jewes, Mahumetans, Blasphemous and Antichristian Hereticks, Who Say They Are Christians, but Are Not. London, 1650. Cleveland, Christopher. Thomism in John Owen. Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2013. Cloppenburg, Johannes. Exercitationes Super Locos Communes Theologicos. Franekerae, 1653. Cocceius, Johannes. Collationes De Foedere Et Testamento Dei: Ad Illustrandam Methodum & Analogian Doctrinæ Pietatis in Scripturis Traditam. Franekeræ: Apud I. Balck, 1648. Cocceius, Johannes. The Doctrine of the Covenant and Testament of God. Translated by Casey Carmichael. Vol. 3. Classic Reformed Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016. Coffey, John. John Goodwin and the Puritan Revolution: Religion and Intellectual Change in Seventeenth-Century England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Coffey, John. Politics, Religion and the British Revolutions: The Mind of Samuel Rutherford. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Coffey, John, and Paul C. H. Lim, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Puritanism. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Collinson, Patrick. The Elizabethan Puritan Movement. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967. Cooper, Derek. “The Ecumenical Exegete: Thomas Manton’s Commentary on James in Relation to Its Protestant Predecessors, Contemporaries, and Successors.” PhD dissertation, Lutheran Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, 2008.

220

Works Cited

Cooper, Tim. John Owen, Richard Baxter, and the Formation of Nonconformity. Farnham, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011. Cunningham, William. Theological Lectures. London: James Nisbet & Co., 1878. Daille, Jean. A Treatise on the Right Use of the Fathers in the Decision of Controversies Existing at This Day in Religion. Translated by Thomas Smith. London: H.G. Bohn, 1843. Daille, Jean. De Usu Patrum Ad Ea Definienda Religionis Capita, Quae Sunt Hodie Controversa, Libri Duo. Geneva, 1656. Daneau, Lambert. In Petri Lombardi Episcopi Parisiensis (qui Magister Sententiarum Appellatur) Librum Primum Sententiarum, Qui Est De Vero Deo, Essentiâ Quidem Uno: Personis Autem Trino: Lamberti Danaei Commentarius Triplex. Unus, Ad Marginem Ipsius Libri, in Quo Singularum Distinctionum Artificium Breviter Explicatur. Alter, Ubi Locorum À Lombardo Prolatorum Accurata Collatio Facta Est. Tertius, Qui Censuram Doctrinae, Methodique Lombardi, Tum Ex Ipso Dei Verbo, Tum Ex Veris Sententiarum Scribendarum Praeceptis Habet. Genevae: Apud Eustathium Vignon, 1580. D’Costa, Gavin. “Retrieval and Religions: Roman Catholic Christians and the Jewish People after the Holocaust.” In Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, edited by Darren Sarisky, 297–312. London: T&T Clark, 2017. Denlinger, Aaron C. Omnes in Adam Ex Pacto Dei: Ambrogio Catarino’s Doctrine of Covenantal Solidarity and Its Influence on Post-Reformation Reformed Theologians. Vol. 8. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010. Denlinger, Aaron C. Reformed Orthodoxy in Scotland: Essays on Scottish Theology, 1560–1775. New York: T&T Clark, 2014. Dennison, James T. Reformed Confessions of the 16th and 17th Centuries in English Translation. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2008. Dennison, James T. “The Twilight of Scholasticism: Francis Turretin and the Dawn of the Enlightenment.” In Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006. Dixon, Philip. Nice and Hot Disputes : The Doctrine of the Trinity in the Seventeenth Century. London and New York: T&T Clark, 2003. Durham, James. A Commentarie Upon the Book of the Revelation Wherein the Text Is Explained, the Series of the Several Prophecies Contained in That Book, Deduced the Periods and Succession of Times At, or About Which, These Prophecies Began to Be and Those That Are yet to Be Fulfilled: Together with Some Practical Observations, and Several Digressions: Delivered in Several Lectures. London, 1658. Ellis, Brannon. Calvin, Classical Trinitarianism, and the Aseity of the Son. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Emery, Gilles, and Matthew Levering, eds. The Oxford Handbook of the Trinity. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Works Cited

221

Episcopius, Simon. Antidotum Contines Pressiorem Declaratioem Propriae et Genuine Senetentiae Quae in Synodo Nationali Dordracena Est et Stabilita. Leiden, 1620. Estep, William Roscoe. Renaissance and Reformation. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1995. Farmer, Craig S. The Gospel of John in the Sixteenth Century: The Johannine Exegesis of Wolfgang Musculus. Oxford Studies in Historical Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997. Fatio, Olivier. Méthode Et Théologie: Lambert Daneau Et Les Débuts De La Scolastique Réformée. Genève: Droz, 1976. Ferguson, Sinclair B. Some Pastors and Teachers: Reflecting a Biblical Vision of What Every Minister Is Called to Be. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 2017. Fesko, J. V. Beyond Calvin: Union with Christ and Justification in Early Modern Reformed Theology (1517–1700). Vol. 20. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012. Fesko, J. V. “Lapsarian Diversity at the Synod of Dort.” In Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, edited by Mark Jones and Michael A. G. Haykin, 17: 99–123.Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. Fesko, J. V. The Covenant of Redemption: Origins, Development, and Reception. Vol. 35. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Fesko, J. V. “The Doctrine of Scripture in Reformed Orthodoxy.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 40:429–64. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Frame, John. Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Pub. Co., 2013. Gale, Theophilus. The Court of the Gentiles, Or, a Discourse Touching the Original of Human Literature, Both Philologie and Philosophie, from the Scriptures & Jewish Church. in Order to a Demonstration Of, I. the Perfection of Gods Word, and Church-Light, Ii. the Imperfection of Natures Light, and Mischief of Vain Philosophie, Iii. the Right Use of Human Learning, and Specially, Sound Philosophie Part I. Part I. Oxon: Printed by H. Hall, for Tho. Gilbert, 1672. Gamble, Richard C. The Whole Counsel of God: God’s Mighty Acts in the Old Testament. Vol. 1. 3 vols. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2009. Garner, David B. Sons in the Son: The Riches and Reach of Adoption in Christ. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2016. Genderen, J. van, and W. H Velema. Concise Reformed Dogmatics. Edited by Gerrit Bilkes and Ed M Van Der Maas. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2008.

222

Works Cited

Gerhard, Johann. Loci Theologici Cum Pro Adstruenda Veritate Tum Pro Destruenda Quorumvis Contradicentium Falsitate Per Theses Nervose Solide Et Copiose Explicati. 5. 5. Edited by Johann Friedrich Cotta. 20 vols. Tubingae: Cotta, 1766. Gill, John. A Body of Doctrinal Divinity: Or, a System of Evangelical Truths, Deduced from the Sacred Scriptures. in Two Volumes. by John Gill … London: Printed for the author, and sold by George Keith, 1769. Gillespie, Patrick. The Ark of the Covenant Opened, Or, a Treatise of the Covenant of Redemption Between God and Christ, as the Foundation of the Covenant of Grace the Second Part, Wherein Is Proved, That There Is Such a Covenant, the Necessity of It, the Nature, Properties, Parties Thereof, the Tenor, Articles, Subject-Matter of Redemption, the Commands, Conditions, and Promises Annexed, the Harmony of the Covenant of Reconciliation Made with Sinners, Wherein They Agree, Wherein They Differ, Grounds of Comfort from the Covenant of Suretiship. London: Printed for Thomas Pankhurst, 1677. Gomarus, Franciscus. Syntagma Disputationum Theologicarum, in Academia Lugduno-Batava Quarto Repetitarum. Roterodami: Impensis Ioannis Leonardi a Berewout bibliopolae, 1615. Goudriaan, Aza. “Descartes, Cartesianism, and Early Modern Theology.” In The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800, edited by Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber, 533–49. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Goudriaan, Aza. Reformed Orthodoxy and Philosophy, 1625–1750 Gisbertus Voetius, Petrus Van Mastricht, and Anthonius Driessen. Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2006. Goudriaan, Aza. “Theology and Philosophy.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 27–64. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Green, Lowell C. “Melanchthon’s Relation to Scholasticism.” In Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006. Gribben, Crawford. John Owen and English Puritanism: Experiences of Defeat. Oxford Studies in Historical Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Hall, Fred P. “Influences in Luther’s Reforms.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, edited by Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, 170:49–66. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Han, Byung Soo. Symphonia Catholica: The Merger of Patristic and Contemporary Sources in the Theological Method of Amandus Polanus (1561–1610). Vol. 30. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015.

Works Cited

223

Haskins, Charles Homer. The Rise of the Universities. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1969. Haykin, Michael A. G., ed. The Life and Thought of John Gill (1697–1771): A Tercentennial Appreciation. Leiden: Brill, 1997. Haykin, Michael A. G., and Mark Jones, eds. Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates Within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism. Vol. 17. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. Hazlett, Ian. “Church and Church/State Relations in the Post-Reformation Reformed Tradition.” In The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800, edited by Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber, 242–58. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Heidegger, Johann Heinrich. Corpus Theologiae Christianae. Vol. 1. 2 vols. Tiguri, 1732. Heppe, Heinrich. Reformed Dogmatics: Set Out and Illustrated from the Sources. Translated by Ernst Bizer. London: Allen, & Unwin, 1950. Hoornbeeck, Johannes. Theologia Practica Pars 1. 2 vols. Francofurti & Lipsiae: Bailliar, 1698. Horton, Michael Scott. The Christian Faith: A Systematic Theology for Pilgrims on the Way. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011. Hyperius, Andreas. De Theologo, Seu, De Ratione Studii Theologici Libri IV. Basileae, 1559. Hyperius, Andreas. Methodus Theologiae Adj. Eft. De Ejusdem Vita Et Obita Oratis Wigandi Arthii. Basileae, 1562. Jenkins, Gary W. “Thomas Stapleton: Loathes Calvin, Will Travel.” In Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, edited by Darren Sarisky, 67–83. London: T&T Clark, 2017. Jones, Mark. Antinomianism: Reformed Theology’s Unwelcome Guest? (Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 2013). Jones, Mark. “The ‘Old’ Covenant.” In Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, edited by Michael A. G. Haykin and Mark Jones, 17:183–203. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011. Jones, Mark. Why Heaven Kissed Earth: The Christology of the Puritan Reformed Orthodox Theologian, Thomas Goodwin (1600–1680). Vol. 13. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010. Junius, Franciscus. A Treatise on True Theology: With the Life of Franciscus Junius. Translated by David C Noe. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014.

224

Works Cited

Junius, Franciscus. De Theologia Vera; Ortu, Natura, Formis, Partibus, Et Modo. Lugduni Batavorum, 1594. Kapic, Kelly M., and Mark Jones, eds. The Ashgate Research Companion to John Owen’s Theology. Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012. Kay, Brian. Trinitarian Spirituality: John Owen and the Doctrine of God in Western Devotion. Bletchley, Milton Keynes, and Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2007. Kelly, Douglas F. Systematic Theology Volume One: Grounded in Holy Scripture and Understood in the Light of the Church. Vol. 1. Fearn, Ross-shire: Mentor, 2008. Kibbe, Michael. From Topic to Thesis: A Guide to Theological Research. Downer’s Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2016. Klauber, Martin I., ed. The Theology of the French Reformed Churches: From Henri IV to the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. Reformed Historical-Theological Studies . Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2014. Klauber, Martin I. “Theological Transition in Geneva from Jean-Alphonse Turretin to Jacob Vernet.” In Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, 256–70. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006. Knapp, Henry M. “Understanding the Mind of God: John Owen and SeventeenthCentury Exegetical Methodology.” Unpublished PhD thesis, Calvin Theological Seminary, 2002. Kolb, Robert. “God, Creation, and Providence in Early Modern Lutheranism.” In The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800, edited by Ulrich L. Lehner, Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber, 298–310. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Kolb, Robert. “Pastoral Education the Wittenberg Way.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, edited by Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, 170:67–79. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Kolb, Robert, Irene Dingel, and L’ubomir Batka, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Lee, Brian J. Johannes Cocceius and the Exegetical Roots of Federal Theology. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008. Lehner, Ulrich L., Richard A. Muller, and A. G. Roeber, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Early Modern Theology, 1600–1800. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Leigh, Edward. A Systeme or Body of Divinity Consisting of Ten Books, Wherein the Fundamentals and Main Grounds of Religion Are Opened. London, 1654. Leinsle, Ulrich G. Introduction to Scholastic Theology. Translated by Michael J. Miller. Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2010.

Works Cited

225

Leppin, Volker. “Luther’s Roots in Monastic-Mystical Piety.” In The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology, 49–61. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Leppin, Volker. “Luther’s Transformation of Medieval Thought: Continuity and Discontinuity.” In The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology, 115–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Leslie, Andrew M. The Light of Grace: John Owen on the Authority of Scripture and Christian Faith. Vol. 34. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2015. Letham, Robert. “John Owen’s Doctrine of the Trinity in Its Catholic Context.” In The Ashgate Research Companion to John Owen’s Theology, 185–98. Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012. Levering, Matthew. Was the Reformation a Mistake?: Why Catholic Doctrine Is Not Unbiblical. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2017. Levering, Matthew, and Gilles Emery, eds. Aristotle in Aquinas’ Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. Lewis, C. S. The Screwtape Letters. New York: Touchstone Books, 1996. Lewis, C. S. Till We Have Faces: A Myth Retold. London: Geoffrey Bles, 1956. Lieburg, F. A. van, and Aza Goudriaan. Revisiting the Synod of Dordt (1618–1619). Leiden: Brill, 2011. Lillback, Peter A. The Binding of God: Calvin’s Role in the Development of Covenant Theology. Grand Rapids, MI, and Carlisle, Cumbria: Baker Academic and Paternoster, 2001. Lim, Paul Chang-Ha. Mystery Unveiled: The Crisis of the Trinity in Early Modern England. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. Lindholm, Stefan. Jerome Zanchi (1516–90) and the Analysis of Reformed Scholastic Christology. Vol. 37. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Little, Patrick. Oliver Cromwell: New Perspectives. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Littlejohn, W. Bradford, and Scott N. Kindred-Barnes, eds. Richard Hooker and Reformed Orthodoxy. Vol. 40. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017. Luttikhuizen, Frances. Underground Protestantism in Sixteenth Century Spain: AMuch Ignored Side of Spanish History. Vol. 30. Refo500 Academic Studies. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2017. Maccovius, Johannes. Loci Communes Theologici. Amstelodami, 1658. Maccovius, Johannes. Scholastic Discourse: Johannes Maccovius (1588–1644) on Theological and Philosophical Distinctions and Rules. Apeldoorn: Instituut voor Reformatieonderzoek, 2009.

226

Works Cited

Manton, Thomas. A Practical Commentary, or an Exposition with Notes, on the Epistle of James. London, 1652. Manton, Thomas. The Complete Works. London: Nisbet, 1870. Marckius, Johannes. Compendium Theologiae Christianae Didactico Elencticum: Immixtis Problematibus Plurimis & Quaestionibus Recentioribus Adauctum. Amstelodami, 1696. Marckius, Johannes. In Haggaeum, Zecharijam, et Malachiam Commentarius, Seu Analysis Exegetica. Amsterdam, 1701. Martin, A. Lynn. “An Irish-American Jesuit in the Madison Mafia.” In From Rome to Zurich, Between Ignatius and Vermigli: Essays in Honor of John Patrick Donnelly, edited by Kathleen M. Comerford, Gary W. Jenkins, and William John Torrance Kirby, 184: 3–13. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2017. Mastricht, Peter van. The Best Method of Preaching: The Use of Theoretical-Practical Theology. Translated by Todd Rester. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2013. Mastricht, Peter Van. Theoretico-Practica Theologia. Qua, Per Singula Capita Theologica, Pars Exegetica, Dogmatica, Elenchtica & Practica, Perpetua Successione Conjugantur. Trajecti ad Rhenum, & Amstelodami: Sumptibus Societatis, 1715. McCosker, Philip, and Denys Turner, eds. The Cambridge Companion to the Summa Theologiae. Cambridge Companions to Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016. McDonald, Suzanne. “Beholding the Glory of God in the Face of Jesus Christ: John Owen and the ‘Reforming’ of the Beatific Vision.” In The Ashgate Research Companion to John Owen’s Theology, 141–58. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2012. McGoldrick, James Edward. Luther’s English Connection: The Reformation Thought of Robert Barnes and William Tyndale. Milwaukee, WI: Northwestern Publishing House, 1979. McGraw, Ryan M. A Heavenly Directory: Trinitarian Piety, Public Worship, and a Reassessment of John Owen’s Theology. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. McGraw, Ryan M. “A Review of Crawford Gribben, John Owen and English Puritanism: Experiences of Defeat.” Westminster Theological Journal, 78, no. 2 (2016): 353–5. McGraw, Ryan M. “A Review of Randall J. Pederson, Unity and Diversity: English Puritans and the Puritan Reformation 1603–1689.” Calvin Theological Journal, 50, no. 2 (2015): 307–9. McGraw, Ryan M. “Catholic Retrieval and Theological Transformation: An Assessment of Michael Allen and Scott R. Swain’s, Christian Dogmatics: Reformed

Works Cited

227

Theology for the Church Catholic.” Westminster Theological Journal 79, no. 1 (2017): 147–60. McGraw, Ryan M. “Continuing Education for Ministers: A Guide for Ministers and Congregations.” Puritan Reformed Journal 4, no. 1 (January 2012): 307–23. McGraw, Ryan M. John Owen: Trajectories in Reformed Orthodox Theology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. McGraw, Ryan M. “Redefining Systematic Theology? A Review Article of Richard C. Gamble’s The Whole Counsel of God: Volume 1: God’s Mighty Acts in the Old Testament.” Mid-America Journal of Theology 23 (2012): 139–50. McGraw, Ryan M. “Shifting Paradigms in Reformed Systematic Theology: A Review Article of Michael Horton’s The Christian Faith: A Theology for Pilgrims on the Way.” Puritan Reformed Journal 5, no. 2 (July 2013): 245–62. McGraw, Ryan M. “The Threats of the Gospel: John Owen on What the Law/Gospel Distinction Is Not.” Calvin Theological Journal 51 (2016): 79–111. McGraw, Ryan M. “Toward a Biblical, Catholic, and Reformed Theology: An Assessment of John Frame’s Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Christian Belief.” Puritan Reformed Journal 8, no. 2 (July 2016): 197–211. McGraw, Ryan M. “Trinitarian Doxology: Reassessing John Owen’s Contribution to Reformed Orthodox Trinitarian Theology.” Westminster Theological Journal 77, no. 2 (Fall 2015): 293–316. Melanchthon, Philip. Loci Communes Theologici. Basel, 1550. Melanchthon, Philipp. Melanchthon on Christian Doctrine: Loci Communes, 1555. Translated by Clyde Leonard Manschreck. New York: Oxford University Press, 1965. Mentzer, Raymond A., and Bertrand Van Ruymbeke, eds. A Companion to the Huguenots. Vol. 68. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2016. Merkle, Benjamin R. Defending the Trinity in the Reformed Palatinate: The Elohistae. Oxford Theology and Religion Monographs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. Moor, Bernardinus de. Continuous Commentary on Johannes Marckius’ DidacticoElenctic Comendium of Christian Theology. Translated by Stephen Dilday. Vol. 1. 7 vols. Culpeper, VA: L & G Reformation Translation Center, 2014. Mortimer, Sarah. Reason and Religion in the English Revolution: The Challenge of Socinianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. Moser, Christian. “Reformed Orthodoxy in Switzerland.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 40:195–226. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013.

228

Works Cited

Muhling, Andreas. “Reformed High Schools in Sixteenth-Century Germany.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 40:177–93. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Muller, Gerhard. “Luther’s Transformation of Medieval Thought: Discontinuity and Continuity.” In The Oxford Handbook of Martin Luther’s Theology, 105–14. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. Muller, Richard A. Christ and the Decree: Christology and Predestination in Reformed Theology from Calvin to Perkins. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008. Muller, Richard A. Dictionary of Latin and Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1985. Muller, Richard A. Divine Will and Human Choice: Freedom, Contingency, and Necessity in Early Modern Reformed Thought. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2017. Muller, Richard A. Post-Reformation Reformed Dogmatics: The Rise and Development of Reformed Orthodoxy, Ca. 1520 to Ca. 1725. 2nd ed. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003. Muller, Richard A. “The Covenant of Works and the Stability of Divine Law in Seventeenth-Century Reformed Orthodoxy: A Study in the Theology of Herman Witsius and Wilhelmus À Brakel.” Calvin Theological Journal 29, no. 1 (1994): 75–101. Muller, Richard A. “The Problem of Protestant Scholasticism—A Review and Definition.” In Reformation and Scholasticism: An Ecumenical Enterprise, edited by Willem J. van Asselt and Eef Dekker, 45–64. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001. Muller, Richard A. The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of a Theological Tradition. Oxford Studies in Historical Theology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Muller, Richard A. “Thomas Barlow on the Liabilities of the ‘New Philosophy’: Perceptions of a Rebellious Ancilla in the Era of Protestant Orthodoxy.” In Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honour of Willem J. Van Asselt, edited by Maarten Wisse, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, 14:179–95. Studies in Theology and Religion. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Mulsow, Martin, and Jan Rohls, eds. Socinianism and Arminianism: Antitrinitarians, Calvinists, and Cultural Exchange in Seventeenth-Century Europe. Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2005. Murdock, Graeme. “Reformed Orthodoxy in East-Central Europe.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 40:293–321. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013.

Works Cited

229

Murphy, Francesca Aran, ed. The Oxford Handbook of Christology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015. Musculus, Wolfgang. Common Places of Christian Religion, Gathered by Wolfgangus Musculus, for the Vse of Suche as Desire the Knowledge of Godly Truthe. Translated Out of Latine into Englishe. Hereunto Are Added Two Other Treatises, Made by the Same Author, One of Othes, and an Other of Vsurye. with a Moste Perfecte and Plentifull Table. Translated by John Man. London: Printed by Reginalde Wolfe, 1563. Musculus, Wolfgang. Loci Communes Sacrae Theologiae. Basel, 1567. Neele, Adriaan C. Petrus Van Mastricht (1630–1706) Reformed Orthodoxy: Method and Piety. Leiden and Boston, MA: Brill, 2009. Neumann, Jeanne Marie. A Companion to Familia Romana: Based on Hans Orberg’s Latine Disco, with Vocabulary and Grammar. 2nd ed. Newburyport, MA: Focus Publishing, 2016. Neumann, Jeanne Marie. Lingua Latina: A College Companion Based on Hans Ørberg’s Latine Disco, with Vocabulary and Grammar. Newburyport, MA: Focus Publishing, 2007. Nimmo, Paul T., and David A. F. Fergusson. The Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016. Oerberg, Hans H. Lingua Latina: Per Se Illustrata, Pars 1: Familia Latina. Newburyport, MA: Domus Latina and Focus Publishing, 1990. Oerberg, Hans H. Lingua Latina Per Se Illustrata. Pars 2. Newburyport, MA: Domus Latina and Focus Publishing, 2003. Opitz, Peter. “Calvin in the Context of the Swiss Reformation: Detecting the Traces.” In Calvinus Pastor Ecclesiae Papers of the Eleventh International Congress on Calvin Research, edited by Herman J. Selderhuis, 39:13–28. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Opitz, Peter, ed. The Myth of the Reformation. Vol. 9. Refo500 Academic Studies. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013. Owen, John. Diatriba de Iustitia Divina. Oxford, 1653. Owen, John. The Works of John Owen, D.D. Edited by William H. Goold. 24 vols. Edinburgh: Johnstone & Hunter, 1850. Owen, John. Theologoumena Pantodapa, Sive, De Natura, Ortu, Progressu, Et Studio Veræ Theologiæ, Libri Sex Quibus Etiam Origines & Processus Veri & Falsi Cultus Religiosi, Casus & Instaurationes Ecclesiæ Illustiores Ab Ipsis Rerum Primordiis, Enarrantur. Oxoniæ, 1661. Pak, G. Sujin. The Judaizing Calvin: Sixteenth-Century Debates over the Messianic Psalms. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

230

Works Cited

Parker, Eric M. “‘Saint Dionysius’: Martin Bucer’s Transformation of the PseudoAreopagite.” In Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, edited by Darren Sarisky, 121–45. London: T&T Clark, 2017. Pederson, Randall J. Unity in Diversity: English Puritans and the Puritan Reformation, 1603–1689. Vol. 68. Brill Studies in Church History. Leiden: Brill, 2014. Perkins, William. Catholicus Reformatus, Hoc Est, Expositio et Declaratio Praecipiuarum Aliquot Religionis Controversiarum: Quae Ostendit, Quatenus Ecclesiae Ex Dei Verbo Reformatae in Iis Cum Ecclesia Rom. Qualis Est Hodie Est, Consentiunt, et Quatenus Ab Edadem Dissentiunt, Adeoque in Quibus Numquam Ei Consentire Debent. Hanoviae, 1601. Perkins, William. Prophetica; sive, De Sacra et Unica Ratione Concionandi, Tractatus. Cambridge, 1602. Perkins, William. The Arte of Prophecying, Or, a Treatise Concerning the Sacred and Onely True Manner and Methode of Preaching. London, 1607. Phan, Peter C. The Cambridge Companion to the Trinity. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Polanus, Amandus. Analysis Libelli Prophetae Malachiae: Aliquot Praelectionibus Genevae Proposita a Amando Polando a Polansdorf; Praemissi Sunt Duo Indices, Adiunctae Sunt Orationes Quatuor: I. De Incarnatione Immanuelis Nostri Iesv Christi, Ii. De Crucis Christi Scientia & Communione, Iii. De Vita & Obitu Oecolampadii, Cui Disputatio De Primatu Papae Inserta, Iv. De Prophetia Danielis. Basileae: Per Conradum Waldkirch, 1597. Polanus, Amandus. Syntagma Theologiae Christianae Ab Amando Polano a Polansdorf: Juxta Leges Ordinis Methodici Conformatum, Atque in Libros Decem Digestum Jamque Demum in Unum Volumen Compactum, Novissime Emendatum. Hanoviae, 1610. Pope, Stephanie M. Cambridge Latin Course, Unit 1. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001. Powell, Hunter. “October 1643: The Dissenting Brethren on the Proton Dektikon.” In Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, edited by Mark Jones and Michael A. G. Haykin, 17: 52–82. Reformed Historical Theology. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011. Powell, Hunter. The Crisis of British Protestantism: Church Power in the Puritan Revolution 1638-44. Politics, Culture and Society in Early Modern Britain. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2015. Prideaux, John. Fasciulus Controversarium Theologicarum. London, 1649. Quantin, Jean-Louis. The Church of England and Christian Antiquity:The Construction of a Confessional Identity in the 17th Century. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Works Cited

231

Raalte, Theodore G. van. “Francois Lambert D’Avignon (C.a. 1487–1530): Early Ecclesial Reform and Training for the Ministry at Marburg.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, 170: 81–93. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Ramus, Petrus. Commentariorum De Religione Christiana, Libri, Quatuor, Eivsdem Vita a Theophilo Banosio Descripta. Francofvrti, 1576. Ramus, Petrus. Scholae Dialecticae sive Animadversionum in Organum Aristotelis Libri Viginti. Frankfurt, 1594. Rehnman, Sebastian. “Moral Philosophy and Moral Theology in Vermigli.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, edited by Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, 170:199–214. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Rehnman, Sebastian. “The Doctrine of God in Reformed Orthodoxy.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by Herman J. Selderhuis, 40:353–401. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Reid, Steven J. and Emma Annette Wilson, eds. Ramus, Pedagogy and the Liberal Arts: Ramism in Brittain and the Wider World. London: Routledge, 2011. Reuver, A. de. Sweet Communion: Trajectories of Spirituality from the Middle Ages through the Further Reformation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2007. Reynolds, Edward. Meditations on the Fall and Rising of St. Peter. London, 1677. Richard, Guy M. The Supremacy of God in the Theology of Samuel Rutherford. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2009. Ridgley, Thomas. A Body of Divinity. London, 1731. Rivetus, Andreas. Catholicus Orthodoxus, Oppositus Catholico Papistae. Vol. 1. 3 vols. Geneva, 1644. Rivetus, Andreas. Criticus Sacrus, Praefixus Est Tractatus de Patrum Authoritate. Geneva, 1626. Rutherford, Samuel. Disputatio Scholastica de Divina Providentia. Edinburgh, 1649. Rutherford, Samuel. Examen Arminianismi. Utrecht, 1668. Rutherford, Samuel. The Due Right of Presbyteries. London, 1644. Ryssen, Leonard. Francisci Turretini Ss. Theologiae Doctoris Et Professoris Compendium Theologiae Didactico-Elencticae, Ex Theologorum Nostrorum Institutionibus Theologicis Auctum Et Illustratum: Ut Praeter Explicationes Theticas Et Problematicas in Controversiis Verum Statum Proponatur, “Prôton Pseudos” Detegatur, Vera Sententia Confirmetur, Argumentis Ad Paucas Classes Revocatis, Praecipuae Adversariorum Exceptiones Et Objectiones Diluantur, Calumniae Etiam Adversarioru, Abstergantur. Amsterdam, 1695.

232

Works Cited

Sanders, Fred. “Back to the Trinity.” In Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, edited by Darren Sarisky, 213–28. London: T&T Clark, 2017. Sarisky, Darren, ed. Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal. London: T&T Clark, 2017. Sarisky, Darren. “Tradition II: Thinking with Historical Texts—Reflections on Theologies of Retrieval.” In Theologies of Retrieval: An Exploration and Appraisal, edited by Darren Sarisky, 193–209. London: T&T Clark, 2017. Sarx, Tobias. “Reformed Protestantism in France.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 40:227–60. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Scaer, David P. “Johann Gerhard’s Doctrine of the Sacraments.” In Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, edited by R. Scott Clark and Carl R. Trueman. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006. Schaefer, Paul R. The Spiritual Brotherhood: Cambridge Puritans and the Nature of Christian Piety. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011. Schaff, Philip. The Creeds of Christendom: With a History and Critical Notes. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1983. Schortinghuis, Wilhelmus. Essential Truths in the Heart of a Christian. Edited by James A. De Jong. Translated by Harry Boonstra and Gerrit W. Sheeres. Classics of Reformed Spirituality. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2009. Selderhuis, Herman J., ed. A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Selderhuis, Herman J. Calvinus Pastor Ecclesiae Papers of the Eleventh International Congress on Calvin Research. Vol. 39. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Selderhuis, Herman J. Martin Luther: A Spiritual Biography. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2017. Sibbes, Richard. The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes. 7 vols. Edinburgh: James Nichols, 1862. Siecienski, A. Edward. The Filioque: History of a Doctrinal Controversy. Oxford Studies in Historical Theology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010. Siedl, P. Suitbertus H. Cursus Linguae Latinae Vivae. 2nd ed. Clearwater, FL: Editiones Familiae Sancti Hieronymi, 1998. Sinnema, Donald. “The Attempt to Establish a Chair in Practical Theology at Leiden University (1618–1626).” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 40:415–42. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Sinnema, Donald. “The Distinction between Scholastic and Popular: Andreas Hyperius and Reformed Scholasticism.” In Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, 127–44. Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2006.

Works Cited

233

Skinner, Quentin. Visions of Politics: Volume 1: Regarding Method. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002. Spence, Alan. Incarnation and Inspiration John Owen and the Coherence of Christology. London and New York: T&T Clark, 2007. Sprunger, Keith L. Dutch Puritanism a History of English and Scottish Churches of the Netherlands in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. Leiden: Brill, 1982. Sprunger, Keith L. The Learned Doctor William Ames; Dutch Backgrounds of English and American Puritanism. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1972. Steinmetz, David C. Calvin in Context. New York: Oxford University Press, 1995. Steinmetz, D. C. “The Scholastic Calvin.” In Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment, 16–30. Carlisle: Paternoster, 1999. Strivens, Robert. Philip Doddridge and the Shaping of Evangelical Dissent. Ashgate Studies in Evangelicalism. Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2015. Swain, Scott R. “Lutheran and Reformed Sacramental Theology: SeventeenthNineteenth Centuries.” In The Oxford Handbook of Sacramental Theology, edited by Hans Boersma and Matthew Levering, 362–79. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. Tay, Edwin E. M. “The Priesthood of Christ in the Atonement Theology of John Owen (1616–1683).” PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh, 2009. Telfer, Charles K. Wrestling with Isaiah: The Exegetical Methodology of Campegius Vitringa (1659–1722). Vol. 38. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2016. Thompson, Bard. Humanists and Reformers: A History of the Renaissance and Reformation. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996. Todd, Margo. “The Problem of Scotland’s Puritans.” In The Cambridge Companion to Puritanism, edited by John Coffey and Paul C. H. Lim, 174–88. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Toon, Peter. God’s Statesman: The Life and Work of John Owen, Pastor, Educator, Theologian. Exeter: Paternoster Press, 1971. Trueman, Carl R. Histories and Fallacies: Problems Faced in the Writing of History. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2010. Trueman, Carl R. John Owen: Reformed Catholic, Renaissance Man. Aldershot and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2007. Trueman, Carl R. The Claims of Truth: John Owen’s Trinitarian Theology. Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster Press, 1998. Trueman, Carl R. “The Necessity of the Atonement.” In Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism, edited by Mark Jones and Michael A. G. Haykin, 17: 204–22. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2011.

234

Works Cited

Trueman, Carl R., and R. Scott Clark, eds. Protestant Scholasticism: Essays in Reassessment. Carlisle, Cumbria: Paternoster, 1999. Turretin, Francis. Institutes of Elenctic Theology. Edited by James T. Dennison. Translated by George Musgrave Giger. 3 vols. Phillipsburg, NJ: P & R Publishing, 1992. Turretin, Francis. Institutio Theologiae Elencticae. Vol. 1. 3 vols. Geneva, 1679. Twisse, William. Dissertatio de Scientia Media, Tribus Libris Absoluta. Arnheimium, 1639. Twisse, William. The Riches of God’s Love Unto the Vessels of Mercy, Consistent with His Absolute Hatred or Reprobation of the Vessels of Wrath, Or, An Answer unto a Book Entitled, God’s Love unto Mankind. Oxford, 1653. Twisse, William. Vindiciae Gratiae, Potestatis ac Providentiae Dei, hoc est, ad Examen Libelli Perkinsiani de Praedestinationis Mode et Ordine, Institutum a Jacobo Arminio, Responsio Scholastica. Amsterdam, 1632. Tyacke, Nicholas. “Religious Controversy.” In A History of the University of Oxford Volume IV: Seventeenth-Century Oxford, edited by Nicholas Tyacke, 569–620. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. Ursinus, Zacharias, and David Pareus. Corpus Doctrinae Orthodoxae: Sive, Catecharum Explicationum D. Zachariae Ursini Opus Absolutum D. Davidis Parei Opera Extrema Recognitum … Adiuncta Sunt Miscellanea Catechetica … [Genevae]: sumptibus Samuelis Crispini, 1616. Valdes, Juan de. Dialogo de Doctrina Christiana. Mexico: Casa Unida de Publicationes, 1946. Van den Belt, Henk. The Authority of Scripture in Reformed Theology: Truth and Trust. Studies in Reformed Theology. Leiden: Brill, 2014. Van den Belt, Henk. “The Problematic Character of Sola Scriptura.” In Sola Scriptura: Biblical and Theological Perspectives on Scripture, Authority, and Hermeneutics, edited by Hans Burger, Arnold Huijgen, and Eric Peels, 32:38–56. Studies in Reformed Theology. Leiden: Brill, 2017. Van Dixhoorn, Chad B. Confessing the Faith: A Reader’s Guide to the Westminster Confession of Faith. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 2014. Van Dixhoorn, Chad B. God’s Ambassadors: The Westminster Assembly and the Reformation of the English Pulpit, 1643–1653. Studies on the Westminster Assembly. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2017. Van Dixhoorn, Chad B. The Minutes and Papers of the Westminster Assembly, 1643–1652. 5 vols. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012. Van Nieuwenhove, Rik. An Introduction to Medieval Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. Van Til, Cornelius. A Christian Theology of Knowledge. Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publications, 1969.

Works Cited

235

Vandergroe, Theodorus. The Christians Only Comfort in Life and Death: An Exposition of the Heidelberg Catechism. Edited by Joel R. Beeke. Translated by Bartel Elshout. 2 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2016. VanDoodewaard, William. The Marrow Controversy and Seceder Tradition: Marrow Theology in the Associate Presbytery and Associate Synod Secession Churches of Scotland (1733–1799). Reformed Historical-Theological Studies. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2011. Velde, Dolph te. “Reformed Theology and Scholasticism.” In Cambridge Companion to Reformed Theology, edited by Paul T. Nimmo and David A. F. Ferguson, 215–29. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2016. Vermigli, Pietro Martire. Loci Communes. London, 1576. Vermigli, Pietro Martire. The Common Places of the Most Famous and Renowmed Diuine Doctor Peter Martyr: Diuided into Foure Principall Parts: With a Large Addition of Manie Theologicall and Necessarie Discourses, Some Neuer Extant Before. Translated and Partlie Gathered by Anthonie Marten, One of the Sewers of Hir Maiesties Most Honourable Chamber. London: In Pater noster Rovve [by Henry Denham and Henry Middleton] at the costs and charges of Henrie Denham, Thomas Chard, VVilliam Broome, and Andrew Maunsell, 1583. Vlastuin, Willem van. Be Renewed: A Theology of Personal Renewal. Vol. 26. Reformed Historical Theology. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2014. Vliet, Jan van. Rise of the Reformed System: The Intellectual Heritage of William Ames. Milton Keynes: Paternoster, 2013. Voet, Gijsbert, and Johannes Hoornbeeck. Spiritual Desertion. Translated by M. Eugene Osterhaven. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2003. Voetius, Gijsbert. Selectarum Disputationum Theologicarum Pars Prima (Quinta. Accedunt Dissertatio Epistolica De Termino Vitæ. Exercitatio De Prognosticis Cometarum. Antehac Seorsim Editæ). 5 vols. Ultrajecti, 1648. Voetius, Gisbertus. Exercitia Et Bibliotheca Studiosi Theologiæ. Rheno-Trajecti: Apud Wilhelmum Strick, 1644. Vos, Antonie. “Reformed Orthodoxy in The Netherlands.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, edited by H. J. Selderhuis, 40:121–76. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Walaeus, A., A. Thysius, J. Polyander, and A. Rivetus. Synopsis Purioris Theologiae = Synopsis of a Purer Theology. Edited by Henk van den Belt. Translated by Riemer A. Faber. Vol. 1. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 2015. Walaeus, A., A. Thysius, J. Polyander, and A. Rivetus. Synopsis Purioris Theologiae = Synopsis of a Purer Theology. Edited by Roelf T. te Velde. Translated by Riemer A. Faber. Vol. 2. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 2016.

236

Works Cited

Wallace, Dewey D. Shapers of English Calvinism, 1660–1714: Variety, Persistence, and Transformation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2011. Watson, Thomas. A Body of Practical Divinity, Consisting of Above One Hundred Seventy Six Sermons on the Lesser Catechism Composed by the Reverend Assembly of Divines at Westminster: With a Supplement of Some Sermons on Several Texts of Scripture. by Thomas Watson, Formerly Minister at St. Stephen’s Walbrook, London. Printed from His Own Hand-Writing. Recommended by Several Ministers to Masters of Families and Others. London: Printed for Thomas Parkurst, at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside, near Mercers-Chappel, 1692. Watson, Thomas. A Divine Cordial, or, The Transcendent Priviledge of Those That Love God and Are Savingly Called. London, 1663. Watson, Thomas. Heaven Taken by Storm, Or, the Holy Violence a Christian Is to Put Forth in the Pursuit After Glory. London: Printed by R.W. for Tho. Parkhurst …, 1669. Watson, Thomas. The Beatitudes. Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1989. Weber, Robert, and Roger Gryson, eds. Biblia Sacra: Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2007. Wengert, Timothy J. Law and Gospel: Philip Melanchthon’s Debate with John Agricola of Eisleben over Poenitentia. Carlisle, Cumbria, and Grand Rapids, MI: Paternoster and Baker Books, 1997. Wengert, Timothy J. “Philip Melanchthon and Wittenberg’s Reform of the Theological Curriculum.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, edited by Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, 170:18–33. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Wisse, Maarten, and Hugo Meijer. “Pneumatology: Tradition and Renewal.” In A Companion to Reformed Orthodoxy, 40:465–518. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Wisse, Maarten, Marcel Sarot, and Willemien Otten, eds. Scholasticism Reformed: Essays in Honour of Willem J. Van Asselt. Vol. 14. Studies in Theology and Religion. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Witsius, Herman. De Oeconomia Foederum Dei Cum Hominibus Libri Quatuor. 2 vols. Trajecti ad Rhenum: apud Franciscum Halmam, Gulielmum van de Water, 1694. Witsius, Herman. Sacred Dissertations: On the Apostles’ Creed. Translated by Donald Fraser. 2 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010. Witsius, Herman. Sacred Dissertations on the Lord’s Prayer. Edited by Joel R. Beeke. Translated by William Pringle. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010.

Works Cited

237

Witsius, Herman. The Economy of the Covenants between God and Man. Edited by Joel R. Beeke. Translated by William Crookshank. 2 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2010. Wollebius, Johannes. Compendium Theologiæ Christianæ, Editio Ultima Prioribus Multo Correctior. 9th ed. Cantabrigiæ, 1655. Woolsey, Andrew A. Unity and Continuity in Covenantal Thought: A Study in the Reformed Tradition to the Westminster Assembly. Reformed Historical-Theological Studies. Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012. Yoo, Jeongmo. John Edwards (1637–1716) on Human Free Choice and Divine Necessity: The Debate on the Relation between Divine Necessity and Human Freedom in Late Seventeenth-Century and Early Eighteenth-Century England. Vol. 22. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2013. Zanchius, Jerome. De Tribus Elohim, Aeterno Patre, Filio, Et Spiritu Sancto, Uno Eodemque Iehova, Libri Xiii. in Duas Distincti Partes. Pars Prior: Ad Edmundum Grindallum, Archiepiscopum Eboracensem, Angliaeque Primatem Amplissimum. in Qua, Tota Orthodoxa De Hoc Magno Mysterio Doctrina, Ex Sacrarum Literarum Fontibus, Explicatur, & Confirmatur. Cum Indice Triplici. Neostadii Palatinorum, 1589. Zuidema, Jason. “Word and Spirit in the Piety of Peter Martyr Vermigli as Seen in His Commentaryon 1 Corinthians.” In Church and School in Early Modern Protestantism: Studies in Honor of Richard A. Muller on the Maturation of a Theological Tradition, edited by Jordan J. Ballor, David S. Sytsma, and Jason Zuidema, 170: 215–25. Studies in the History of Christian Traditions. Leiden: Brill, 2013. Zwingli, Ulrich. De Vera Et Falsa Religione, Commentarius. Zurich: Christoph Froschauer, 1545.

Index Abelard 115 Ames, William 57 n.39, 132, 133, 157 n.20, 185, 186, 186 n.16, 186 n.17, 189, 189 n.33 Amyraut, Moses 173, 128 n.23 Anselm 115, 206 antinomianism 32, 59, 59 n.42, 187 n.23 Aquinas, Thomas 5, 41, 102, 103, 105, 107 n.50, 117, 122, 123, 125, 129, 141, 144, 144 n.24, 147, 148, 204 Aristotle 107, 107 n.50, 108, 108 n.57, 109, 110, 111, 112, 125, 126, 127, 129, 148, 210 Arminus, Jacobus 178 Augustine 38, 71, 102, 206 Ballie, Robert 29, 31 Barlow, Thomas 134, 134 n.49, 134 n.52 Barth, Karl 3, 3 n.1, 76, 206 Baxter, Richard 20, 32, 32 n.37, 47, 47 n.93, 56 n.29, 62, 187 beatific vision 209, 210 Belgic Confession 96, 191 Bellarmine, Robert 46, 97, 136, 137, 143 Beza, Theodore 25, 46, 46 n.83, 46 n.84, 60, 125, 127, 127 n.23, 128, 129, 180 Biddle, John 187 Bonaventure 103, 123 Boston, Thomas 48, 49 n.100 Brakel, Wilhelmus a 31, 31 n.28, 31 n.30, 131, 131 n.38, 136, 161, 161 n.36, 161 n.38, 162 n.42, 190, 190 n.36, 190 n.37, 191, 191 n.43 Bucer, Martin 43, 43 n.64, 102, 102 n.19, 142, 142 n.15, 170, 204 Bullinger, Heinrich 44, 44 n.67, 162 n.41, 176, 180 Burgess, Anthony 76, 76 n.21, 187 Buxtorf, Johann 105 n.37, 181 Cajetan, Thomaso de vio 105, 105 n.38, 129, 151 n.48 Calvin, John 21, 23, 24, 24 n.16, 24 n.17, 25, 25 n.18, 25 n.19, 26, 42, 43, 43 n.63,

44, 45, 54, 54 n.9, 54 n.16, 55, 55 n.26, 55 n.28, 60, 62, 73 n.11, 80, 88, 101, 101 n.17, 104 n.33, 109, 109 n.59, 118, 124, 125, 127, 128, 128 n.23, 129, 136, 142, 142 n.16, 143 n.19, 147, 147 n.34, 153, 153 n.2, 153 n.3, 154, 156, 156 n.14, 156 n.17, 157, 157 n.18, 159, 160, 160 n.32, 161, 161 n.35, 161 n.36, 168, 170, 175, 180, 180 n.57, 210, 210 n.30 Cameron, John 81, 173 Caracciolo, Galeazzo 21 Cartesianism 107, 113, 113 n.80, 190 n.39 Catarino, Ambrogio 21, 32, 32 n.34, 149 Chamier, Daniel 105 n.38, 158, 158 n.27, 172 n.13 Chemnitz, Martin 174 Cloppenburg, Johannes 116, 116 n.94, 158 n.23, 185, 185 n.12 Cocceius, Johannes 47, 47 n.88, 53, 53 n.2, 55 n.27, 190, 190 n.38, 190 n.40 Comrie, Alexander 192 Cranmer, Thomas 170 Cromwell, Oliver 62, 62 n.47, 133 Cunningham, William 34, 34 n.46 Daille, John 143, 143 n.22, 173 Daneau, Lambert 46, 46 n.85, 125, 127, 128, 128 n.26, 129, 147, 180 Diodati, Giovanni 111, 180 Dissenting Brethren 29, 29 n.24 Dort 22 n.13, 97, 98, 130 n.31, 176, 179, 179 n.53, 180, 181 Durandus 102 Edict of Nantes 162 n.44, 172, 173 Edward VI 170 Edwards, Jonathan 29, 47, 55, 55 n.23, 159 n.30 Edwards, Thomas 29 Elizabeth I 170, 174 English Civil War 28, 133

Index Enlightenment 49, 98, 99, 107, 173, 179, 181, 181 n.65 epistemology 67, 68, 68 n.3, 69, 70, 71 n.6, 206 Erasmus 104, 105, 124 First Great Awakening 100 Formula Consensus Helvetica 48, 98, 180 French Revolution 99 Fry, John 187 Gale, Theophilus 106, 107 n.45 Gerhard, Johannes 32, 48, 48 n.98, 101 n.17, 149 Gill, John 49, 49 n.101 Gillespie, Patrick 103, 103 n.30 Gomarus, Francisus 116, 116 n.94, 178 Goodwin, Thomas 21, 33, 33 n.40, 55, 62, 134, 187, 189 Heidegger, Johannes 48, 48 n.96, 110 n.68, 116, 116 n.96, 157 n.20, 174, 181 Heidelberg Catechism 45, 96, 158, 158 n.26, 174, 191 n.44, 212 Henry VIII 170 Hoornbeeck, Johannes 34, 34 n.43, 131, 132 n.43, 179, 185 n.11 Hyperius, Andreas 45, 45 n.76, 98 n.10, 98 n.11, 98, 110 n.68 Jackson, Thomas 187 Junius, Franciscus 33 n.42, 45, 45 n.77, 68 n.4, 98, 98 n.10, 132, 132 n.41, 133 n.44, 136, 155 n.11, 156 n.12, 168, 168 n.4, 168 n.5, 169, 173, 178, 201 n.3, 209 n.20 Knox, John 127 Labadie, Jean de 189, 192 Lasco, John a 175, 176 Latimer, Hugh 70 Laud, William 21, 21 n.10, 62, 62 n.48, 133, 171, 171 n.9 Leiden Synopsis 34 n.42, 92, 109 Leigh, Edward 34 n.44, 47, 48 n.94, 105 n.38, 149, 149 n.42, 155 n.10, 157 n.19 Letham, Robert 19, 19 n.6 Lewis, C. S. 43 n.63, 81, 82, 82 n.36, 197, 197 n.1, 198, 210 n.30, 214, 214 n.37

239

Lombard 46, 101, 122, 123 n.8, 126, 128, 143, 147, 149 London Baptist Confession 5, 98 Louis XIV 172, 173 Luther, Martin 45, 45 n.74, 54, 54 n.15, 95, 96, 96 n.1, 101, 101 n.17, 104, 104 n.36, 105, 108, 115 n.89, 124, 124 n.9, 124 n.10, 124 n.11, 125, 125 n.14, 126, 126 n.16, 127, 147, 147 n.34, 153 n.3, 170 n.7, 175 Maccovius, Johnannes 5 n.4, 11, 11 n.12, 36 n.50, 51 n.1, 112, 112 n.77, 117, 117 n.99, 169, 176 Manton, Thomas 24, 87, 88 n.7, 110, 110 n.65, 110 n.66, 136, 136 n.55, 151 n.48, 189 Markcius, Johannes 49, 117 Marrow Controversy 49, 49 n.100 Mastricht, Petrus van 5, 5 n.5, 21, 47, 47 n.89, 53 n.3, 116 n.93, 132, 142 n.13, 143 n.19, 144, 155 n.10, 155 n.11, 157 n.20, 185 n.9, 186, 186 n.18, 207 Melanchthon, Philip 45, 45 n.75, 101 n.17, 108, 125, 126, 126 n.19, 127, 127 n.21, 129, 142, 153 n.3, 159 Milton, John 57 n.36, 57 n.39, 187 Molina, Louis de 178 Moor, Bernardinus de 32, 32 n.33, 34 n.42, 49, 49 n.103, 49 n.104, 101, 102, 102 n.18, 128, 128 n.28, 149, 149 n.41, 209 n.22 Mosaic covenant 18, 73 Muller, Richard A. 4 n.2, 17, 19, 19 n.8, 24, 24 n.17, 25 n.18, 36 n.50, 43, 43 n.62, 53, 53 n.7, 54 n.14, 55, 58, 59, 77 n.23, 88, 88 n.8, 96, 96 n.2, 96 n.3, 97, 97 n.5, 97 n.8, 99, 99 n.12, 101, 101 n.17, 102 n.21, 104, 104 n.33, 104 n.34, 106, 106 n.44, 108 n.55, 110, 110 n.67, 111 n.73, 113 n.79, 115 n.89, 116 n.95, 117, 117 n.98, 117 n.100, 117 n.101, 124, 124 n.10, 124 n.12, 126 n.16, 126 n.18, 126 n.19, 127 n.23, 128 n.26, 134 n.49, 137, 137 n.57, 142 n.17, 142 n.18, 143 n.19, 147, 147 n.35, 153, 153 n.2, 158 n.22, 159 n.28, 160 n.33, 161 n.36, 162 n.41, 184 n.2, 184 n.3, 184 n.5, 190 n.39, 192 n.46, 205, 205 n.6, 207

240

Index

Musculus, Wolfgang 44, 44 n.69, 44 n.70, 44 n.71, 159, 162 n.41, 174, 176, 180 Nadere Reformatie 9, 183, 187, 189, 190, 191, 192 Olevianus, Caspar 174, 161 n.36, 161 n.39 Owen, John 18, 18 n.4, 19, 19 n.6, 19 n.7, 20, 21, 27, 28, 32, 32 n.36, 33, 33 n.42, 35, 35 n.48, 47, 47 n.92, 47 n.93, 54, 54 n.10, 55, 55 n.21, 56, 56 n.29, 57, 57 n.35, 57 n.36, 58, 58 n.40, 59 n.43, 61, 61 n.44, 62, 62 n.49, 73, 73 n.11, 74, 79, 79 n.29, 85, 87, 89, 89 n.11, 103, 103 n.27, 108 n.55, 110 n.68, 115 n.87, 133, 134, 134 n.48, 135, 148, 148 n.37, 148 n.39, 171, 171 n.10, 186, 186 n.19, 187, 187 n.20, 188, 189, 210 n.26, 212, 212 n.34 Pajon, Claude 173 Pareus, David 45 n.78, 158 n.27, 176 peregrinatio academica 168, 169 Perkins, William 24 n.17, 78, 112, 133, 150, 150 n.47, 151, 151 n.50, 156, 156 n.13, 184 Petrarch 105 Pictet, Benedict 181 piety 171 Piscator, Johannes 174, 181, 181 n.63 Polanus, Amandus 33 n.42, 40, 40 n.57, 40 n.59, 45, 46, 46 n.79, 55, 77, 78 n.25, 110, 110 n.64, 112, 112 n.76, 114, 114 n.84, 117 n.102, 132, 132 n.42, 136, 139, 140 n.5, 140, 141, 142, 143, 143 n.23, 144, 144 n.24, 144 n.25, 146, 148, 148 n.36, 155 n.7, 155 n.8, 158, 158 n.25, 181, 201 n.3, 201 n.4, 207, 209 n.23 Powell, Hunter 29, 29 n.24, 30, 31, 31 n.31, 32, 32 n.32, 56, 56 n.31, 84, 84 n.1, 162 n.40 principia 97, 119 Ramism 9, 107, 111, 111 n.69 Ramist 45, 112, 141 Ramus, Peter 111, 111 n.69, 111 n.70, 111 n.71, 111 n.72, 112, 112 n.75, 113, 173, 184, 185 n.8, 186, 186 n.13, 186 n.14, 186 n.15

Reconquista 177 Reynolds, Edward 134, 185, 185 n.10 Ridgley, Thomas 49, 49 n.102 Ridley, Nicholas 69–70 Rivetus, Andreas 143, 143 n.22, 151, 151 n.49, 153, 154 n.4, 173, 178 Rutherford, Samuel 28, 28 n.23, 29, 35, 35 n.48, 47, 57, 57 n.38, 148, 162 n.43 Ryssen, Leonard 48, 48 n.97, 116 n.92, 128, 128 n.28 Scots Confession 96 Scotus, John Duns 144, 148 Second Helvetic Confession 5, 39, 44, 97, 155 n.9, 176, 180 Senetentiae 122, 126, 143, 149, 179 n.53 Skinner, Quentin 19, 19 n.5, 68 n.2, 71, 71 n.7, 72 sola scirptura 139 Stancaro, Francisco 176 Synopsis Purioris Theologiae 33 n.42, 92 n.13, 109 n.61, 131, 131 n.34, 184 n.4 Taufin, Jean 189 theologia unionis 209 Trelcatius, Lucas 178 Trent 21, 97, 114, 136, 149 Tronchin, Theodore 180 Trueman, Carl R. 11, 11 n.11, 26 n.20, 43 n.62, 47 n.92, 48 n.98, 56 n.29, 57, 57 n.38, 70 n.5, 74, 74 n.12, 74 n.13, 75, 75 n.15, 75 n.16, 75 n.17, 76 n.19, 76 n.20, 87, 87 n.4, 87 n.5, 91 n.12, 101 n.17, 108 n.55, 136 n.54, 148 n.38, 148 n.39, 160 n.31, 187, 187 n.20, 200, 200 n.2, 203 Turretin, Francis 30, 30 n.27, 31, 31 n.29, 32 n.32, 33, 33 n.41, 33 n.42, 48, 48 n.96, 49, 49 n.105, 55, 78, 78 n.28, 110, 110 n.63, 110 n.68, 116, 116 n.92, 116 n.96, 128, 132, 132 n.42, 136, 139, 141, 144, 145, 145 n.26, 145 n.27, 145 n.28, 145 n.29, 146, 146 n.30, 146 n.31, 146 n.32, 157, 159 n.30, 160, 163 n.46, 168, 169, 169 n.6, 180, 181, 181 n.65, 191, 191 n.42, 191 n.45, 203 Turretin, Jean-Alphonse 49, 49 n.105, 181, 163 n.46 Twisse, William 47, 48, 48 n.95, 148, 187

Index Ursinus, Zacharias 45, 45 n.78, 158, 158 n.27, 174, 176 Valdez, Juan de 44, 177 Van Asselt, Willem 10, 17 n.1, 114, 118 n.104, 131 n.37, 134 n.49, 136 Vandergroe, Theodorus 158, 158 n.26, 191, 191 n.44 Vermigli, Peter Martyr 44, 44 n.68, 86 n.3, 133, 147, 168, 169, 170, 180, 184, 184 n.5, 192 n.46 Victor, Richard St. 102, 103 Virgin Mary 102, 156 Voetius, Gisbertus 28, 31, 34, 46, 46 n.86, 47, 47 n.87, 53 n.3, 84, 113, 116, 116 n.93, 123 n.8, 131, 132, 132 n.40, 134 n.52, 185 n.11, 190, 190 n.40, 203 Vorstius, Conrad 179

241

Watson, Thomas 106, 106 n.42, 157 n.20, 188, 188 n.30, 188 n.31 Watts, Isaac 107 Westminster Assembly 22, 29, 29 n.25, 31, 47–8, 54, 54 n.13, 56, 63, 84, 134 n.51, 148, 161, 161 n.36, 187 n.27 Westminster Confession of Faith 5, 26, 61 n.45, 98, 112, 140, 155 n.9, 211 n.31 Witsius, Herman 47, 47 n.90, 47 n.91, 131, 161, 203 Wollebius, Johannes 39, 39 n.56, 46, 46 n.80, 78 n.27, 112, 159 n.29, 181, 211, 211 n.32, 211 n.33, 212 Zanhchius, Jerome 46 Zotero 41 n.61, 91 Zwingli, Ulrich 43, 44 n.65, 44, 162 n.41, 180

242

243

244