Search Results

Theology instruction at Basel’s university reflected generational change among its faculty from 1550 to 1629, resulting in a significant evolution of pastoral education. The second generation of theologians tried to maintain Basel’s non-confessional evangelical identity into the 1570s. In the last quarter of the 16th century, the third generation, led by Johann Jacob Grynaeus, introduced Reformed Orthodoxy, developed with the tools of dialectic taught in the arts faculty. While Grynaeus relied primarily on Aristotle, his colleague, Amandus Polanus von Polansdorf, was committed to Ramism and introduced its use to theology. His successors, who taught the fourth generation of pastors, saw themselves as preservers of the Reformed tradition rather than as creative theological thinkers. An analysis of theological disputations illustrates the shift from general Protestant to more specifically Reformed theology, combined with the growth of anti-Catholic polemic at the turn of the century.

An analysis of sermons by three generations of preachers illustrates the evolution of preaching in Basel. While sermons from the 1560s were primarily exegetical homilies explicating the scriptural text, sermons from the 1570s and 1580s show the gradual acceptance of topical preaching in the city. The topical sermons of Johann Jacob Grynaeus combine Christocentric piety with attention to key Reformed doctrines, especially concerning the Lord’s Supper. The sermons of his contemporary, Johann Jacob Gugger, are more expository and popular. The extant sermon schemata of the next generation are strongly influenced by Ramism. They proceed by dichotomies and emphasize Reformed Orthodoxy rather than experiential piety.

This chapter provides an introduction to the historiography of Reformed orthodoxy, an analysis of its several trajectories and problems, and a series of eleven premises reflecting the basic thrust of the current reappraisal of “orthodox” or “scholastic” Protestantism. The first premise is concerned with the basic issue of continuity and discontinuity between the Middle Ages and the Reformation, and between the Reformation and the era of orthodoxy. The last three premises elaborate the theme in terms of scholasticism, Aristotelianism, and rationalism.

Calvinistic theology after Calvin came to be heavily influenced by the philosophy of Aristotle. It developed an essentially scholastic method. This chapter raises the question of why Descartes was not more influential in Reformed circles. His actual influence on theologians such as Francis Burman is discussed, as is the nature of the opposition to Cartesianism as expressed by Gisbertus Voetius. A comparison is made between the theological thought of Descartes and Calvin. It is concluded that on balance, and given the eclectic nature of the attitude of Reformed theologians to philosophy, there is no compelling reason why Cartesianism could not have been more influential in the era of Reformed Orthodoxy than it was.

The introduction of systematic religious instruction at Basel’s most important Latin school, the reformation of its stipendiary system, and the creation of colleges intended especially for future pastors were foundational aspects of the city’s new system of pastoral training. Over time, the religious curriculum became more rigorous and the city’s catechism was interpreted to accord more fully with Reformed Orthodoxy. Stricter supervision of stipendiates and an increase in the number of stipends made it possible for more students to study for a longer time before entering the ministry. As students, they were expected to live in one of the university’s two colleges, where they received additional theological education and were subject to closer supervision.

This chapter addresses the divine law, an issue that is both hermeneutical and doctrinal. It has been one of the most consistently identified issues in the discussion of continuity and discontinuity between the Reformation and the era of orthodoxy. The analysis of Witsius and Brakel on the covenant of works demonstrates that the doctrine was not a matter of excessive legalism, or a matter of setting an absolute priority of law over grace. Rather, the doctrine was the result of the examination of a series of issues raised by biblical texts and resolved through a method of juxtaposition and collation for the sake of drawing conclusions. In the writings of Witsius and Brakel, the exposition of doctrine stood in the line of a century-long discussion of covenant, human nature, law and grace, and human responsibility.

Edwards’s theological significance is partly due to how he combined the theological conservatism of his inherited Reformed Orthodoxy (largely but not entirely, in its English Puritan expression) and a “modern” outlook, that of the world of Locke and Newton. Scholastic methods were largely abandoned in favour of Lockean psychology and Newtonian physics. This is particularly apparent in issues of freedom and determinism, Edwards’s occasionalism, and his approach to the Trinity. Comparisons are drawn between Edwards and both continental (e.g., Calvin, Turretin) and Anglophone Reformed orthodoxy (Charnock, Owen). This chapter explores how this plays out in the conceptuality and methodology of his philosophical theology, and its effect (if any) on matters of theological substance. A “control” is offered by briefly comparing Edwards and his English contemporary John Gill, whose work (some of which Edwards was acquainted with) remains indebted to many of the features of the older conceptuality.

Edwards’s debt to Protestant scholasticism, Reformed orthodoxy, and early modern Reformed theology has been largely overlooked in interpretations of his thought. The chapter argues that the model of continuity and discontinuity between the Reformation and post-Reformation era, expressed by the phrase “Calvin vs. the Calvinists,” should be considered and challenged in examining the relationship between Edwards and post-Reformation thought. Therefore, first, a broad sketch of interpretative models will be provided concerning the various appraisals of Reformed orthodoxy. Secondly, a proposal will be offered that the era of Protestant scholasticism and Reformed orthodoxy, as commonly and currently understood, should include early eighteenth-century New England history—thus treating the post-Reformation era as a transatlantic enterprise.

To understand Dissent, one must understand the role of the Bible in Protestant religious culture and theology. This chapter begins by depicting a biblical age, one marked by intensive biblical scholarship and mass circulation of the vernacular Bible. It then considers the biblically grounded theologies of the Dissenters, and their relation to the wider Reformed tradition. It argues that doctrinal disputes often cut across ecclesiastical lines. Although most Dissenters were wedded to Reformed orthodoxy, radical Dissenters presented powerful challenges to Reformed teaching on Scripture, the Trinity, predestination, and the moral law. Finally, the chapter turns to the shared quest for a biblical ecclesiology. While the practice of biblical study exercised a centripetal force, pulling Protestants together around their sacred text, it also had a centrifugal effect, throwing them outwards into rival factions. Dissenters would accuse each other, not just conformists, of being insufficiently biblical. Scripture provided them with a common reference point, a common language, and thus a powerful sense of affinity. Yet at the same time, Scripture was a textual battleground.

The Aberdeen Doctors and Henry Scougal remain the most recognized theologians of the first and second Episcopalian periods respectively in Aberdeen. This chapter examines the theologies of both the Doctors and Scougal. The Doctors’ theology is considered under the headings of their irenicism, their soteriology and sacramentology, and their approach to Scripture and tradition. Various aspects of Scougal’s theology emerging from his published works, The Life of God in the Soul of Man and an assortment of sermons, are highlighted. The doctrine of the Aberdeen Doctors is shown to lie within the boundaries of Reformed orthodoxy of their day, while Scougal’s theology is judged to be broadly Reformed but to comprise an incipient religious mysticism that would blossom in Aberdeen at the turn of the century.

This introduction presents the state of the question of the extra Calvinisticum in contemporary scholarship, defines the term and concept of the extra, and lays out the plan and method of the study. Previous scholarship has unduly focused on the doctrine of the extra in John Calvin to the neglect of other figures in the sixteenth century and largely failed to account for the historical context of polemics with Lutheranism. This book seeks to answer two main questions: When and why did Reformed theologians first articulate the extra, and how did the form and function of the extra Calvinisticum develop over the course of the sixteenth century? This work goes beyond previous studies by extending the discussion beyond Calvin by investigating the formulation and rationale for the doctrine in the works of Ulrich Zwingli and Peter Martyr Vermigli and in Reformed orthodoxy.

This chapter discusses the characteristics of scholastic thought and argues that Reformed orthodox thinkers of the seventeenth century wrote within the framework of scholastic philosophy and theology. In illustration of this genre in its Scottish manifestation, the concept of Reformed orthodox scholasticism is expounded here by means of a discussion of concepts such as those of moral action, the Fall, free will, and suicide, present in a recently discovered Scottish monograph, a manuscript entitled Idea philosophiae moralis (1679) by James Dundas, the first Lord Arniston. While Dundas attends closely to philosophers, such as Hobbes and Descartes, not generally regarded as scholastic thinkers, the scholasticism of Dundas’ philosophy is on display throughout the manuscript.

This contribution is an exercise in amalgamation: it seeks to blur the distinctions between archival and scribal culture, between form and content, and between the history of the book and history of material culture. Three leading figures of 17th-century Zurich—a clergyman and two magistrates—are spotlighted as they take respective measures to secure their memory. Although these measures and the corresponding archival situations differ quite significantly, it becomes obvious that in all of these cases materiality played a crucial role in the process of conservation. Written remains were referred to as relics, treasures, and monuments. To reduce those non-governmental collections to a cult of autographs, however, would miss the point. Copying also flourished and was thought of as a necessity as well as an act of asceticism. The argument is that ‘information’, narrowly understood, does not convey what early modern archives were all about.