1,196 432 1006KB
Pages 197 Page size 252 x 378.36 pts Year 2007
Literature and the Scottish Reformation Edited by Crawford Gribben and David George Mullan Literature and the Scottis
1,043 110 1MB Read more
Adaptations of Calvinism in Reformation Europe Brian G. Armstrong Adaptations of Calvinism in Reformation Europe Ess
2,250 1,101 947KB Read more
557 237 781KB Read more
The Monarchical Republic of Early Modern England This figure has intentionally been removed for copyright reasons. To
701 189 2MB Read more
943 109 1MB Read more
Life Writing in Reformation Europe This page intentionally left blank Life Writing in Reformation Europe Lives of Re
510 25 1MB Read more
976 348 3MB Read more
Humanism and Protestantism in Early Modern English Education Humanism and Protestantism in Early Modern English Educat
780 218 4MB Read more
John Jewel and the English National Church For my Mother, and the memory of my Father: In memoria aeterna erit iustus,
783 83 1016KB Read more
Restoring Christ’s Church
Dedicated to my mother and in memory of my father
Restoring Christ’s Church John a Lasco and the Forma ac ratio
MICHAEL S. SPRINGER
© Michael S. Springer 2007 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher. Michael S. Springer has asserted his moral right under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identiﬁed as the author of this work. Published by Ashgate Publishing Limited Gower House Croft Road Aldershot Hampshire GU11 3HR England
Ashgate Publishing Company Suite 420 101 Cherry Street Burlington, VT 05401–4405 USA
Ashgate website: http://www.ashgate.com British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Springer, Michael Stephen Restoring Christ’s church : John a Lasco and the Forma ac ratio. – (St Andrews studies in Reformation history) 1. Laski, Jan, 1499–1560. Forma ac ratio 2. Protestant churches – Liturgy – Texts - History and criticism I.Title 264’.042’0092 ISBN 978–07546–5601–2 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Springer, Michael Stephen. Restoring Christ’s church : John a Lasco and the forma ac ratio / Michael S. Springer. p. cm. – (St. Andrews studies in Reformation history) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978–0–7546–5601–2 (hard : alk. paper) 1. Laski, Jan, 1499–1560. 2. Reformation – England – Biography. 3. Church history – 16th century. I. Title. BR350.L3S67 2007 284.2’092–dc22
This book is printed on acid free paper Printed in Great Britain by MPG Books, Bodmin, Cornwall
Contents List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Abbreviations
Christ’s True Church: The Protestant Search for Unity
John a Lasco and the London Strangers’ Church: The Origins and Development of the Forma ac ratio
Ecclesiastical Administration and the London Strangers’ Church
John a Lasco’s Public Ministry
Ecclesiastical Discipline in the Forma ac ratio
The Forma ac ratio in Europe
Conclusion: Lasco’s Legacy
List of Figures 2.1 3.1 3.2
Signatories of the 1529 Marburg Articles Title page of the Forma ac ratio (1555) Comparison of Emden and Frankfurt presses
19 53 55
List of Tables 5.1 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4
Lasco’s order for worship services from the Forma ac ratio (1555) Textual comparison of the Forma ac ratio (1555) and Toute la forme (1556) Lord’s Supper in the Liturgia sacra (1554) and Forma ac ratio (1555) Contents of the Liturgia sacra (1554) and ‘Order of common prayer’ (1555) Comparison of the Liturgia sacra (1554), Forma ac ratio (1555) and Form of prayers (1556)
79 119 122 127 130
Acknowledgements This book is a revised version of my PhD dissertation submitted to the University of St Andrews, Scotland, in July 2004. I have received help from numerous institutions both as a graduate student and during the preparation for publication, whom I would like to thank here. The David and Dorothy Daniell William Tyndale Fund Scholarship and the St Andrews Department of Modern History research awards supported much of my studies and research while working on my dissertation; Karin Maag and the H. Henry Meeter Center at Calvin College generously gave me a stipend and access to their collection in the summer of 2002; Christine Gascoine and the University of St Andrews Library assisted me in tracking down research material; Henning Jürgens and the Johannes a Lasco Bibliothek in Emden, Germany, offered help on all things regarding the Polish reformer; Alexandra Kess at the Institut für Schweizerische Reformationsgeschichte assisted me with Lasco’s letters; the Deutscher Akademischer Austausch Dienst (DAAD) awarded funding to support me while ﬁnishing the book; and ﬁnally I would like to thank professors Rolf Decot and Irene Dingel, and the staff at the Institut für Europäische Geschichte, Mainz, where I was able to complete this work. I have received help from a number of individuals over the years and, unfortunately, can only thank a few of them here. Susan C. Karant-Nunn, Ann Weikel and Caroline Litzenberger offered much guidance and support during my early studies at Portland State University and opened my eyes to the exciting world of the sixteenth century. I owe a tremendous debt to my PhD supervisor Andrew Pettegree, who introduced me to John a Lasco and the Forma ac ratio. I have beneﬁted greatly from his enthusiasm for my project and his wise counsel. He has provided an exemplary model of scholarship and teaching, and has inspired me to reach for a higher standard in my own work. I hope that I can put into practice some of the many lessons he has taught me during my time in St Andrews. Bruce Gordon and Graeme Murdock examined my dissertation and offered much useful advice regarding its publication. I have incorporated many of their suggestions into this ﬁnal text. Debt is also owed to the staff and students at the St Andrews Reformation Studies Institute, who listened to many papers on Lasco and were generous with their advice. A special thanks is owed to Lauren Kim, for her help with John Calvin and her advice while writing the book, and to Elaine Fulton, for her careful proofreading of the text and her comments during the ﬁnal stages of work on the manuscript.
Finally, I owe my greatest debt to my parents, Steven and Barbara Springer, to whom I have dedicated this book. Michael S. Springer Mainz, December 2005
List of Abbreviations BDS KO
Martin Bucers Deutsche Schriften, ed. Robert Stupperich (17 vols, Gütersloh, 1960–81). Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts, ed. Emil Sehling (vols 1–6, Leipzig, 1902–13; vols 7–15, Tübingen, 1957–77). D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesammtausgabe (71 vols, Wiemar, 1826–83). Original Letters Relative to the English Reformation, Written during the Reigns of King Henry VIII., King Edward VI., and Queen Mary: Chieﬂy from the Archives of Zurich, ed. Hastings Robinson (2 vols, Cambridge, 1846). Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa, ed. Abraham Kuyper (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1866).
Conventions I have attempted to use standard English spellings for people and place names, if they exist. Thus Johann becomes Johannes or John, depending on standard English usage (John Calvin and John a Lasco, but Johannes Brenz and Johannes Bugenhagen, for example). The one exception is Strassburg, where I have used the German spelling to reﬂect its political and linguistic position in the sixteenth century. Regarding titles of published works, I have tried to use the original language of publication unless it is commonly known by an English title. Concerning capitalization, I have tried to limit its use except for proper nouns and titles. To clarify my meaning, I have restricted ‘Church’ to mean Christ’s universal Church or the Church of Rome, but use ‘church’ when talking more generally about a congregation. Likewise Reformed churches denotes congregations that are part of the religious movement led by Zwingli, Bucer and Calvin, while reformed churches refers, more generally, to congregations that have made modiﬁcations to their religious practices either along Reformed or Lutheran lines. In addition, I use Reformation to denote a speciﬁc historical event, but reformation in the more general sense. Finally, all quotations from foreign languages have been translated by myself, unless otherwise indicated. Modern spellings are used in quotations, for the readers’ ease.
This page intentionally left blank
Introduction John a Lasco (1499–1560) was one of the most dynamic church organizers in the sixteenth century. Like Johannes Brenz, Martin Bucer and Johannes Bugenhagen, he spent much of his career establishing Protestant churches and instituting evangelical practices in the German-speaking territories of the Holy Roman Empire and beyond.1 As superintendent, Lasco reformed the East Frisian territorial church and, later, he established and led the new London Strangers’ Church. In 1553, he returned to the continent and set up new exile congregations in Emden and Frankfurt. Finally, during the last three years of his life he helped establish a Calvinist church in his native Poland. In addition to these activities, Lasco also wrote and published works to aid new Protestant congregations such as his 1552 confession, the Compendium doctrinae, and his Emden catechism.2 His most signiﬁcant text, however, is the Forma ac ratio tota ecclesiastici ministerii in peregrinorum.3 He composed this ecclesiastical ordinance while superintendent of the London Strangers’ Church (1550–53) to provide a detailed account of the rites and ceremonies observed by his French and Dutch congregations. He later published the work in Frankfurt in 1555. When it appeared, it was one of the most 1 For more on these reformers’ careers and their role in organizing churches, see James M. Estes, Christian Magistrate and State Church: the reforming career of Johannes Brenz (Toronto, 1982); Amy Nelson Burnett, The Yoke of Christ: Martin Bucer and Christian Discipline (Kirksville, MO, 1994); Martin Greschat, ‘Martin Bucer und die Erneuerung der Kirche Europa’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Martin Bucer und das Recht: Beiträge zum internationalen Symposium vom 1. bis 3. März 2001 in der Johannes a Lasco Bibliothek Emden (Geneva, 2002), pp. 271–83; and Ernst Volk, Johannes Bugenhagen: der Reformator im Norden (Groß Oesingen, 1999). 2 John a Lasco, Compendium doctrinae de vera unique dei et Christi Ecclesia, eiusq[ue] ﬁde & confeßione pura: in qua Peregrinorum Ecclesia Londini institute est, auto[ri]tate atq[ue] assensu Sacrae Majestatis Regiae. Quem Deus Opt. Max. ad singulare Ecclesiae suae decus ornamentum ac defensionem (per gratiam suam) servet, guvernet [et] fortunet (London, 1551). The catechism is printed in Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa, ed. Abraham Kuyper (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1866), vol. 2, pp. 293–339. Other common spellings of Lasco’s name include: Jan Laski, Jean Alasco and Johannes a Lasco. 3 John a Lasco, Forma ac ratio tota Ecclesiastici Ministerii, in peregrinorum, potißimum vero Germanorum Ecclesia: instituta Londini in Anglia, per Pientißimum Principem Angliae &c. Regem Eduardum, eius nominis Sextu[m]: Anno post Christum natum 1550. Addito ad calcem libelli Privilegio suae maiestatis. Autore Ioanne a Lasco Polinae Barone (Frankfurt, 1555). This ordinance is reprinted in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, pp. 1–283.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
comprehensive ordinances available to Protestants. It is this important text, which has until now received little scholarly attention, that is the focus of this book. Lasco, like many Protestants during this period, began his career in the Roman Church. He was born to a Polish noble family in 1499. His father was wiowode in Sieradz and his uncle, who shared his name, served as chancellor to King Sigismund I and was archbishop of Poland from 1510 until his death in 1531.4 Under his powerful uncle’s guidance, Lasco was groomed for a clerical career. Between 1513 and 1519 he studied at the universities of Vienna, Bologna and Padua. After returning home he was appointed canon to the collegiate churches of Lezyca, Cracow and Plock, and was made coadjutor to the dean of Gneizno. He was ordained a priest two years later and quickly advanced to the ofﬁce of dean in Gneizno. He was clearly on his way to a very promising career in the Roman Church. In 1524, while on a diplomatic trip to the French court with his older brother Jerome, Lasco met the notable humanist Erasmus. The brothers had stopped in Basel on their way to Paris and lodged for a short time with the scholar at the home of the printer Johannes Froben. After a short time, they continued on to France and Lasco studied brieﬂy at the Sorbonne. He returned to Basel in 1525, however, and enrolled in Hebrew studies at the university.5 During this second meeting Lasco agreed to purchase Erasmus’s library with the stipulation that he would receive the books after the scholar’s death. The Dutch humanist died in 1536 and Lasco received 413 works from his estate the following year.6
4 Lasco’s father was wiowode, which was an administrative position granted by the king to lesser nobles. His older brother Jerome took over the ofﬁce in 1523, followed by his younger brother Stanislaw in 1543. The king promoted Stanislaw to starosta in 1548, a royal administrator for the territory that also had some judicial authority. Oscar Bartel, Jan Łaski: Leben und Werk des polnischen Reformators, trans. Arnold Starke (Berlin, 1981), pp. 28–30. See also Henryk Samsonowicz, ‘Polish politics and society under the Jagiellonian monarchy’, and Andrzej Wyczański, ‘The problem of authority in sixteenth-century Poland: an essay in reinterpretation’, in A Republic of Nobles: studies in Polish history to 1864, eds J.K. Fedorowicz, Maria Bogucka and Henryk Samsonowicz, trans. J.K. Fedorowicz (Cambridge, 1982), pp. 63–4 and 96–7. Basel and Wittenberg were among the most popular universities for Polish nobles and Lasco visited both brieﬂy in the 1520s and 1530s. Eduard Kneifel, Geschichte der Evangelisch-Augsburgischen Kirche in Polen (Niedermarschacht, 1962), p. 21. 5 Henning P. Jürgens, Johannes a Lasco in Ostfriesland: Der Werdegang eines europäischen Reformators (Tübingen, 2002), pp. 8–11, and Bartel, Jan Łaski, pp. 37–57. 6 Opus Epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterdami, ed. Percy S. Allen et al. (12 vols, Oxford, 1926), vol. 11, pp. 503–506. Lasco sent Andrzej Frycz Modrzewski to Basel to oversee transportation of the library to Poland. Upon receiving the books, he gave most of them away and kept only a few for himself. David A. Frick, Polish Sacred Philology in the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation: chapters in the history of the controversies 1551–1632 (Berkeley, CA, 1989), p. 34, n. 2. See also Bartel, Jan Łaski, pp. 48–9.
The relationship forged with Erasmus during his two visits to Basel signiﬁcantly inﬂuenced Lasco’s future ideas about ecclesiastical reform. The Dutch scholar introduced him to Christian humanism and impressed upon him the Bible’s importance for settling religious disputes. The Swiss historian Max Engammare has argued that the Polish reformer’s use of certain church fathers such as Theophylactos, Sedulius and Haymo of Auxerre in his writings after 1525 demonstrates Erasmus’s inﬂuence.7 A similar connection between the men can be seen in Lasco’s later works, especially in his orders for the churches in East Frisia and London, in which he echoes the humanist scholar’s concern for education and moral living. He shared Erasmus’s desire to reunite the dissenting factions within the universal Church which, as shall be seen later, was an important force behind the writing of the Forma ac ratio.8 The Polish reformer’s spiritual conversion to Protestantism occurred in the decade following Erasmus’s death. Lasco left his homeland in 1538 to continue his humanist studies.9 He ﬁrst travelled to Wittenberg and met Philip Melanchthon, whom he later described as the man responsible for introducing him to the religious question – referring to the conﬂict that had erupted in Germany following the publication of Luther’s 95 theses.10 After a short time, he continued on to Frankfurt where he met the theologian Albert Hardenberg.11 They matriculated together at the university in Mainz but moved to Louvain the following year, where 7 Max Engammare, ‘Jan Laski’s annotated copy of Erasmus’ New Testament’, in Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator, ed. Christoph Strohm (Tübingen, 2000), pp. 21–34. See also Volkmar Ortmann, Reformation und Einheit der Kirche: Martin Bucers Einigungsbemühungen bei den Religionsgesprächen in Leipzig, Hagenau, Worms und Regensburg 1539–1541 (Mainz, 2001), pp. 36–7. 8 Nicolette Mout, ‘Erasmianischer Humanismus und reformierter Protestantismus zur Zeit a Lascos’ in Johannes a Lasco, Strohm, pp. 283–98. 9 Lasco left Poland after failing to secure a bishop’s title, which likely was caused by two factors: his uncle died in 1531 leaving him without a powerful and inﬂuential patron, and he had fallen out of favour with the king and pope over their support for John Zapolya in the struggle for the Hungarian throne. Lasco and his brother Jerome had negotiated with the Turks to secure military support for Zapolya, who was ﬁghting the Habsburg archduke, Ferdinand, for the Hungarian throne. Ferdinand defeated Zapolya and Lasco’s family was forced to pay a heavy ﬁne and pledge their support to Ferdinand. Lasco defended the alliance with the Turks, explaining it was meant to end the war quickly and defeat Ferdinand who, he claimed, was an enemy of the Polish king. Miscellaneen zur Geschichte der evangelischen Kirche in Russland, nebst Lasciana, ed. Hermann Dalton (Berlin, 1905), pp. 268–9. See also Bartel, Jan Łaski, pp. 60–79 and Jürgens, Lasco in Ostfriesland, pp. 92–125. 10 Bartel, Jan Łaski, pp. 73–74 and Jürgens, Lasco in Ostfriesland, pp. 127–36. 11 Albert Hardenberg (1510–74) was a theologian and humanist scholar, who experienced his conversion to Protestantism at the same time as Lasco. Hardenberg worked on Archbishop Hermann von Wied’s evangelical reforms in Cologne. In 1547 he was appointed lead preacher in Bremen, where he remained until 1561. From 1565 until 1567 he was preaching in Sengwarden, part of modern-day Wilhelmshaven, and in 1567 he was made lead preacher in Emden, where he remained until his death. For more on Hardenberg’s career,
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Hardenberg was appointed to the faculty at the university. The Zurich reformer Huldrych Zwingli was especially inﬂuential in Louvain during this time and it was here that both men began showing signs of a spiritual conversion.12 Hardenberg was arrested in Brussels for evangelical preaching in 1539 and the following year Lasco married Barbara, the daughter of a local merchant.13 The nuptials, however, should not be viewed as a sign of Lasco’s Protestantism. The German historian Henning Jürgens argues persuasively in the reformer’s biography that it is more accurate to describe him as an Erasmian reformer at the time of his marriage, rather than a Protestant, and that the wedding should be viewed in this context. It was not until the following year, 1541, that Lasco’s own writings reveal a clear shift to a decidedly Protestant position – meaning he agreed with others like Luther and Zwingli concerning reform of the Roman Church’s ofﬁcial doctrine.14 Lasco began his career as an evangelical reformer in East Frisia, a small territory in northwest Germany. He moved with his wife to Emden, the territorial capital, in December 1540. Countess Anna von Oldenburg offered him the superintendency of the Lutheran territorial church, which he accepted sometime before the end of 1542.15 Under his leadership, Lasco introduced important changes that took the congregations in a decidedly Reformed direction. Most notable among his measures was the removal of images from churches, the implementation of a Reformed Emden catechism, and changes to the ecclesiastical order that included a formal discipline, the ofﬁce of deacons to care for the poor, and a weekly meeting of ministers, or coetus, to discuss doctrinal matters.16 During this same time, Lasco also participated in Archbishop Hermann von Wied’s reform movement in Cologne. Martin Bucer had invited him to help with the changes and in 1544 he travelled to the city to aid the ecclesiastical reorganization taking place there. Although his exact activities are unknown, the Polish reformer stayed with his friend Albert Hardenberg for three months before returning to Emden. He went back to Cologne for a short time the following year and was sent on a diplomatic mission to the Reichstag in Worms, presumably to defend the archbishop’s work.17 His experience with this reform movement had a signiﬁcant impact see Wim Janse, Albert Hardenberg als Theologe: Proﬁl eines Bucer-Schülers, d. 1574 (Leiden, 1994). 12 Janse, Albert Hardenberg, pp. 6–13 and Bartel, Jan Łaski, pp. 84–7. 13 Jürgens, Lasco in Ostfriesland, pp. 139 and 142. 14 Ibid., pp. 141–57. 15 Ibid., pp. 213–14. 16 Ibid., pp. 234–7, 281–99, and 304–11. The Emden catechism is printed in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 1, pp. 481–557. 17 Lasco to Hardenberg, 26 July 1544, Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 575. See also Willem van’t Spijker, ‘Die Bedeutung des Kölner Reformationsversuchs für a Lasco’, and Wim Janse,
on his own ideas about ecclesiastical discipline, which will be discussed at greater length in the following chapters. Lasco lost his job in East Frisia on account of the Augsburg Interim and moved his family to London in 1550, where he was appointed superintendent to the Strangers’ Church for the growing number of French and Dutch Protestants seeking exile in England. The foreigners were granted considerable autonomy and Lasco played a key role in shaping the administration and rites observed by the new congregations. He began recording their practices in his future Forma ac ratio, but the work was interrupted by Edward VI’s untimely death in 1553. His successor, Mary I, closed the Strangers’ Church and Lasco returned to the German lands, where he ﬁnished the ordinance and the completed text ﬁnally appeared from a Frankfurt press in 1555. As mentioned above, Lasco’s work was one of the most complete ordinances available to Protestants when it appeared. It contained more than 600 folio pages describing clerical ofﬁces and their election, the order of worship services, structure of ceremonies, what meaning they should convey to the laity, and liturgical elements such as the psalms to be sung and prayers to be spoken. In addition, it was a polemical work that defended the practices against Catholic, Lutheran and Anabaptist critics. The various editions and translations of the text that were published suggest that there was considerable interest in Lasco’s work. In 1554, one year before the Forma ac ratio appeared in Frankfurt, Marten Micron produced a Dutch summary of the order.18 A French edition appeared in 1556, followed by a complete Dutch translation the following year.19 In addition, a German ‘A Lasco und Albert Hardenberg: Einigkeit im Dissens’, in Johannes a Lasco, Strohm, pp. 248–9 and 264. 18 Marten Micron, De Christlicke Ordinancie[n] der nederla[n]tscher Ghemeinten Christi/ die vanden Christlicken Prince Co. Edewaerdt den VI. In ‘t iaer 1550. te Londen inghestelt was. De welcke met de bewillinghe der Dienaren ende Ouderlinghen der seluer, ten trooste ende nutte aller ghelooveghen, getrauwelick met alder nersticheit t’ samen gheuoecht ende wit ghestelt sijn (Emden, 1554), reprinted in De Christlicke Ordinancien, ed. Willem Frederik Dankbaar (s’Gravenhage, 1956). Marten Micron (Micronius, Mikron) served as preacher to the Dutch refugee church in London from 1550 until 1553, when he returned to East Frisia. In 1554, he began preaching in Norden where he remained until his death in 1559. 19 Toute la forme & maniere du Ministere Ecclesiastique, en l’Eglise des estra[n]gers, dressee a Londres en Angleterre, par le Prince tres ﬁdele dudit pays, le Roy Edouard. VI. De ce nom: L’an apres l’incarnation de Christ. 1550. auec le privilege de sa Maieste a la ﬁn du liure. Par M. Jean a Lasco. Baron de Polonie. Traduit de Latin en Francois, & imprimé par Giles Ctematius (Emden, 1556). The Dutch translation was published under the title of Het gheuoelen Joannis a Lasco. Baroens in Polen superintendente der ghemeynte der vremdelinghen te Londen. Of het den christenen, na dien zij het word Godes ende de godlooszheit des Pauwstdoms bekent hebben, eenighszins verorloft is, dat zy zick in den Pauwstlicken godsdiensten, ende in zonderheit in der Misse, vinden laten. Vut den latijne, in nederduydsche sprake … ouerghezett (Emden, 1557).
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
edition of Micron’s summary was published in 1565 and there survives an English manuscript copy of the original text in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, which is thought to have been written during the reign of Elizabeth I.20 The large number of surviving copies also point towards its signiﬁcance among Lasco’s contemporaries. Of the original Latin edition printed in 1555, 41 copies currently remain. A French translation appeared the following year, of which 15 copies have survived.21 Although there was considerable interest among his contemporaries, modern historians have paid little attention to the work. Most studies have focused on other aspects of Lasco’s life and career. The nineteenth-century Dutch theologian, Abraham Kuyper, was among the ﬁrst modern scholars to attempt a study of Lasco. He published a collection of the reformer’s theological writings and letters in 1866 under the title Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa.22 The London ordinance was included among the works and Kuyper’s text has become the principal source for modern studies of Lasco.23 This collection was followed by Hermann Dalton’s 1881 biography, Johannes a Lasco: Beitrag zur Reformationsgeschichte Polens, Deutschlands und Englands, 20 Kirchenordnung, wie die unter dem christliche ko[e]nig aus[s] England Edward dem VI. In der statt Londen in der niderlendischen gemeine Christi durch ko[e]n. majest. Mandat geordnet und gehalten worden. Mit der Kirchendiender und Eltsten bewilligung durch Herrn Johann von Lasco freiherren in Polen Superintendenten desselbigen Kirchen in Engelland in lateinischer Sprache weitleufftiger beschrieben, aber durch Martinum Micronium in eine kurze Summe verfasset, und jetzund verdeutschet, gedruckt in christlichen Stadt Heidelberg durch Joh. Mayer 1565 (Heidelberg, 1565). The English manuscript is found at the Bodleian Library, MS Barlow 19. Diarmaid MacCulloch argues that this manuscript was a faithful translation of the Forma ac ratio and was the work of a single translator writing for a Puritan audience. MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski’, in Strohm, Johannes a Lasco, p. 345. While I agree with his conclusions about the accuracy of the translation, it appears that at least two scribes may have been involved in producing the work. Folios 1r–187v and 279r– 318v, for example, appear to be written by the same hand. However changes to the script used for titles, alterations to the spelling of the word ‘congregation’, and the increased use of contractions such as ‘wt’ and ‘yor’ found between folios 188r–278v points to the possibility of a second scribe. These changes were not employed consistently throughout this section of the manuscript, suggesting that a second person joined the original scribe to translate this section of the work. 21 See Andrew Pettegree, Marian Protestantism: six studies (Aldershot, 1996), p. 32, and Andrew Pettegree, Emden and the Dutch Revolt: exile and the development of Reformed Protestantism (Oxford, 1992), pp. 161–2 and 266–7. Additional information about extant French editions is provided by the St Andrews French Book Project. 22 Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa, ed. Abraham Kuyper (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1886). 23 Jasper Vree referred to Kuyper’s edited collection as ‘the foundation stone of modern Lasco research’. Jasper Vree, ‘Abraham Kuyper als Erbe a Lascos’, in Johannes a Lasco, Strohm, p. 257. The same author also published a similar article, ‘The editions of John a Lasco’s works, especially the Opera Omnia edition by Abraham Kuyper, in their historical context’, in Dutch Review of Church History, 80/3 (2000): 309–26.
which was the ﬁrst attempt to study the reformer’s career. The author focused on the early part of his life – from his childhood in Poland until he moved to England in 1550 – and emphasized his relationship with humanist scholars and other reformers. Little attention was given to Lasco’s London ordinance, however, because the biography ended with his move to England. Dalton planned to continue his study of Lasco’s life after 1550 but this was never completed.25 In 1955, the Polish historian Oscar Bartel published a biography covering the reformer’s entire life.26 This work explored his activities in the communities where he lived and worked, and the Forma ac ratio was viewed within the context of the London church for whom it was written.27 The ordinance’s treatment was limited in these biographical studies, however, and the question of its importance and impact beyond England remained unaddressed. So why study the Forma ac ratio now? The most obvious reason is that the text’s role as a blueprint for churches and the reaction to it suggest that to Lasco’s contemporaries, this was an important work. Modern historians generally are agreed about the striking nature of the ordinance. Bartel alluded to the supranational appeal of the text, writing in his 1955 biography that the Polish reformer ‘gave to the foreign congregations in London a ﬁrst-rate organization, that some researchers believe to be the ﬁrst complete organization of ecclesiastical lives in the Reformed church’.28 Although the work had been composed in England, he added, ‘it could be useful in other places.’29 A short time later, the English historian Basil Hall noted that it was ‘one of the lengthiest of such documents from the Reformation period’ and that ‘the collection of all these materials into one book was unique.’30 More recently the historian Philip Benedict observed that it was one of the most comprehensive blueprints for congregations when it appeared and Diarmaid MacCulloch wrote that ‘in tandem with 24 Hermann Dalton, Johannes a Lasco: Beitrag zur Reformationsgeschichte Polens, Deutschlands und Englands (Gotha, 1881). The English translation is published as Johannes a Lasco: His Earlier Life and Labours, trans. Maurice J. Evans (London, 1886). 25 Dalton produced, however, an edited volume of source material related to Lasco’s later career, which was originally published in 1898. The work contains some of the reformer’s letters written between 1550 and 1553, seven short theological works written in England and Poland, most dealing with the Eucharist, and the synod records from Little Poland written between 1550 to 1561. Hermann Dalton, Lasciana: Nebst den ältesten evangelischen Synodalprotokollen Polens 1555–1561 (2nd edn, Nieuwkoop, 1973). 26 Oscar Bartel, Jan Łaski: Część I, 1499–1557 (Warsaw, 1955). The German translation is published as Jan Łaski: Leben und Werk des polnischen Reformators, trans. Arnold Starke (Berlin, 1981). All references are taken from this translated edition. 27 Bartel, Jan Łaski, pp. 140–43. 28 Ibid., p. 143. 29 Ibid., p. 187. 30 Basil Hall, John à Lasco 1499–1560: a Pole in Reformation England (London, 1971), p. 32.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Calvin’s monumental doctrinal statement in the Institutes, it provided a key text for the future of Reformed Christianity throughout Europe.’31 With such observations, it is surprising that only two scholarly studies have taken a closer look at the Forma ac ratio. The ﬁrst was Annaliese Sprengler-Ruppenthal’s 1967 examination of baptism and the Lord’s Supper practiced by the Dutch congregation in London during Edward VI’s reign.32 The author compared the ceremonies found in Lasco’s Forma ac ratio and Marten Micron’s Christlicke Ordinancien, the Dutch summary of the ordinance published in 1554. Her purpose was to compare the reformer’s sacramental theology to others including Huldrych Zwingli, Martin Bucer and John Calvin. The second study is Dirk Rodgers’s more recent book on John à Lasco in England.33 As the title suggests, the author focused on the Polish reformer’s role in the English Reformation and included a discussion of the Strangers’ Church and the Forma ac ratio. Although his purpose was to explore the ordinance in the context of Lasco’s career in London, Rodgers offers some brief observations about its wider inﬂuence in Elizabethan England and Scotland.34 However, a study of this ordinance within the context of the larger European Reformation has not been carried out until now. Besides helping us to judge the Forma ac ratio’s importance, an examination of the ordinance also can shed light on the career of the Polish reformer. Recent studies on the East Frisian Reformation have brought much-needed attention to Lasco and his impact in Europe. In 1991, for example, the German historian Heinz Schilling published a study of Calvin’s inﬂuence in northwestern Germany and the Netherlands. He examined Calvinism’s development in the civic churches in Emden and Groningen, observing that Emden’s rights were strengthened during the second half of the sixteenth century, leading the magistrates to assert their independence from territorial authorities. These political changes were accompanied, and inﬂuenced, by the congregational nature of the town’s civic church, which was established by Lasco and the London refugees after they had returned to the territory in 1554.35 In a similar way, Andrew Pettegree’s work on Emden and the Marian exiles has raised Lasco’s proﬁle by addressing the question of his inﬂuence beyond England. In his study on Emden and the Dutch Revolt, he noted the impact of the Polish reformer and his ordinance on the town’s congregations following 1553, when a 31
Diarmaid MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski’, p. 331. Annaliese Sprengler-Ruppenthal, Mysterium und Riten nach der Londoner Kirchenordnung der Niederländer (Cologne, 1967). 33 Dirk W. Rodgers, John à Lasco in England (New York, 1996). 34 Ibid., pp. 157–64. 35 Heinz Schilling, Civic Calvinism in Northwestern Germany and the Netherlands: sixteenth to nineteenth Centuries (Kirksville, MO, 1991), pp. 1–39. See especially pp. 26– 27. 32
large number of refugees from the London church arrived in East Frisia. This same author also argued that the English Protestants seeking refuge in the town during the reign of Mary I had organized their exile congregation following the model of the London Strangers’ Church.37 Thus this study, which will discuss the inﬂuence of the Forma ac ratio beyond London and Emden, will lead to a clearer picture of Lasco’s impact, if any, on Protestantism in Europe. The most recent studies on this Polish theologian reﬂect a growing interest in his role as a European reformer. Christoph Strohm edited a collection of essays originating from a conference held at the Johannes a Lasco Bibliothek in October 1999 marking the reformer’s 500th birthday. A number of theologians and historians contributed to the book, which explores his career as a humanist scholar and reformer.38 Although they do not address speciﬁcally his Forma ac ratio, they emphasize Lasco’s contributions to European Protestantism. This collection was followed by Henning Jürgens’s updated biography of the Polish reformer, which appeared in 2002. This most recent work focuses on his life and career until the move to London in 1550.39 Jürgens is the ﬁrst to combine both the Polish and German sources into a single examination and he emphasizes Lasco’s role as a European reformer who was not only shaped by his interactions with humanist scholars and Protestant theologians but also played an important role in building East Frisia’s Reformed church. This present study, which focuses on the Forma ac ratio and its impact, adds to these works by Strohm and Jürgens and helps us understand better Lasco’s place as a truly European reformer. In addition, this book also offers a chance to view the often complex process of confession building in the sixteenth century, or the establishment of Protestant belief and practices, through the example of Lasco’s Forma ac ratio. The following chapters will discuss his distinct order for congregations and the attempts to establish new rituals that reﬂect his own understanding of Christ’s Church and its doctrine. For Lasco, the new rites and ceremonies were the key tool for educating lay audiences about reformed beliefs, for reminding them about their duty to God, and for maintaining unity among the faithful. This study also offers a chance to explore the question of how these rituals were received. When the French and Dutch exiles returned to the continent in 1553, they created new exile churches following the model of Lasco’s Forma ac ratio. Their 36
Pettegree, Emden and the Dutch Revolt, pp. 32–40. Pettegree, Marian Protestantism, pp. 32–4. 38 Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen, 2000). 39 Henning P. Jürgens, Johannes a Lasco in Ostfriesland: der Werdegang eines europäischen Reformators (Tübingen, 2002). 37
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
determination to continue these rites and practices, and to defend them against Lutheran and Catholic opponents, suggests something about their acceptance of his doctrinal reforms. Finally, this study sheds light on the part exiles played in the spread of Protestant ideas about belief and practice. The confessional conﬂict that characterized the sixteenth-century Reformation led many people to leave their homelands and seek refuge abroad in order to escape religious persecution or to seek freedom to follow their own practices and beliefs. These refugees do not represent the average Protestant’s experience: they were relatively small in number when compared to the entire population and had both the conviction and ﬁnancial means to support themselves during their time abroad.40 Their small size and unique character, however, should not diminish their important role in the exchange of ideas during the Reformation. As this study will show, their physical presence in foreign lands made them a key conduit for transmitting religious ideas across Europe. They introduced new practices to their host communities and, in many cases, took new ideas learned abroad and carried them back to their native lands. The French and Dutch exiles played an important part in the transmission of Lasco’s order beyond London. The exchange, however, was not always pleasant and their presence often became the ﬂashpoint for confessional conﬂict, especially concerning sacramental rites. This study will also demonstrate that in these instances, the foreigners could play an important role in shaping discourse and debates with their Catholic and Lutheran adversaries about such rituals. The following chapters will examine the content of Lasco’s Forma ac ratio and its impact in Europe. Chapter Two begins with the debate over Christ’s true Church and the search for doctrinal consensus during the ﬁrst half of the sixteenth century, which was the driving force behind the text. Church ordinances and their role in the Protestant Reformation will also be discussed, especially their use in the debates over doctrinal unity, providing an important context for viewing the text. The following chapter examines the London Strangers’ Church and the development of Lasco’s work. Special attention will be paid to the autonomy granted to the French and Dutch congregations and his distinctive vision for a universal, Reformed Church. Chapters Four, Five and Six will analyze the three major parts of the Forma ac ratio: Lasco’s prescriptions for ecclesiastical administration, public ministry and discipline. The ﬁnal chapter will explore the impact of this work by looking at its inﬂuence among new refugee congregations and its part in the Protestant debates about belief and practice. When 40 Christina Hallowell Garrett, for example, offers short biographies on nearly 500 English refugees living on the continent in the 1550s in The Marian Exiles: a study in the origins of Elizabethan Puritanism (Cambridge, 1938). As she demonstrates, many were scholars, clerics, artisans or merchants.
Lasco completed the work he sent copies to Heinrich Bullinger and John Calvin but, unfortunately, their response to it, if given, is unknown. There was, however, considerable interest in the ordinance among his other contemporaries and the discussion in this chapter will attempt to judge its impact by their reactions and its legacy, particularly among the refugee churches and beyond, in places such as Poland, Scotland and France. The purpose of this book is, thus, to explore Lasco’s order established in the London Strangers’ Church, and recorded in the Forma ac ratio, and its contribution to the development of European Protestantism. In his study on Marian refugees, Andrew Pettegree wrote regarding the ordinance, that ‘the true inﬂuence of Lasco’s work is as yet only dimly reﬂected in scholarly work on other contemporary church orders; it is no doubt a subject which will bear further examination.’41 This book is a response to Pettegree’s call and will provide a clearer picture of the reformer’s plan for church reform and the important inﬂuence of his ordinance in Europe.
Pettegree, Marian Protestantism, p. 32.
This page intentionally left blank
Christ’s True Church: The Protestant Search for Unity Consensus and Orthodoxy The sixteenth-century Protestant Reformation, at its heart, was about religious unity rather than disunity. When Martin Luther criticized the sale of indulgences in 1517, his intention was not to break with Rome and inaugurate an irreparable schism, but rather to repair perceived errors in the universal, Catholic Church.1 It soon became apparent, however, that maintaining consensus and orthodoxy would be a difﬁcult task, if not an impossible one. Besides Rome’s rejection of his critique, Luther was joined by many other theologians who were also calling for reform, including Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt and Thomas Müntzer in Wittenberg, Huldrych Zwingli, Johannes Oecolampadius and Conrad Grebel in the Swiss cantons, and Wolfgang Capito and Martin Bucer in Strassburg. Although these men agreed on the urgent need for reform, they often disagreed about the nature and scope of the changes that should take place. Disunity among evangelical reformers, and the problems this could cause, is evident in the conﬂict that erupted in Wittenberg in 1521. The town’s preachers were divided over the nature and extent of religious reforms, most notably whether images should be removed from churches and whether the mass should be used in its current form. This tension spilled over among the laity, and the magistrates reported to Elector Frederick of Saxony on 3 December 1521 that a group of citizens had disrupted masses by throwing missals (Messebucher) and rocks at the 1 For a discussion of Luther’s early critiques of the Roman Church, see Heiko A. Oberman, Luther: man between God and the devil, trans. Eileen Walliser-Schwarzbart (2nd edn, New York, 1992), pp. 67–74. Luther’s desire to reform the Church, rather than break away from it, is evident in his letter to Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz, in which he writes to the archbishop that ‘papal indulgences are being spread about by the workshop of Saint Peter bearing your most illustrious title’ and argues that ‘indeed, works of piety and charity are inﬁnitely more beneﬁcial than indulgences.’ He urges the archbishop to stop the selling of indulgences in the German lands. Luther to Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz, 31 October 1517, D. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesamtausgabe (71 vols, Weimar: H. Böhlau, 1883), vol. 1, pp. 109–13. This letter was written around the same time as the reformer’s 95 theses regarding indulgences, which are reprinted in LW, vol. 1, pp. 233–8. A modern English translation appears in Works of Martin Luther, eds and trans Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed et al. (6 vols, Philadelphia, PA, 1915), vol. 1, pp. 29–38.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
priests. They wrote the following month that a group of laymen had destroyed the altar and burnt images in the city’s Augustinian church.2 Troubled by the civil unrest, the magistrates commissioned Wittenberg’s lead preacher, Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt, to write an ordinance governing worship in their city. He quickly produced a list of 16 articles for churches that addressed these controversies, and the magistrates approved it on 24 January 1522.3 Although the council supported the new ordinance, it failed to resolve the dispute over ecclesiastical reforms. Karlstadt proposed signiﬁcant changes including the establishment of new schools for the religious instruction of boys and girls, as well as a community chest to collect all incomes previously paid to Rome to help the sick, aid poor craftsmen, support young women and pay the salaries of preachers. He also prescribed more controversial measures that called for the mass to be abolished in its current form and for all altars and images to be removed from churches.4 Many of Wittenberg’s clergy, including Martin Luther, opposed Karlstadt’s drastic changes and the articles were never fully implemented in the city’s churches.5 This controversy ﬁnally was resolved in 1523 following Luther’s return to Wittenberg from Eisenach. He composed two new orders for the city; the ﬁrst created a community chest similar to Karlstadt’s, while the second instituted a reformed baptismal rite. He also wrote a new set of instructions governing worship services that replaced the Roman mass with a reformed version and eliminated Karlstadt’s controversial proposal for removing altars and images.6 Luther’s more moderate reforms were adopted by the city’s churches and helped quiet religious unrest in Wittenberg. The danger that radical reformers posed to public peace also can be seen in the case of Thomas Müntzer and the Peasants’ War. Müntzer had stayed in Wittenberg between 1517 and 1519 and had joined Luther and Karlstadt in criticizing the perceived errors of the Roman Church. In 1519, he published the Articuli per fraters minores, in which he attacked the use of fasting and the intervention of saints. Reﬂecting Luther’s idea of sola scriptura, Müntzer charged that the current practice of confession 2 Wittenberg magistrates to Frederick of Saxony, 3 December 1521, Nikolaus Müller, Die Wittenberger Bewegung, 1521–1522: die Vorgänge in und um Wittenberg während Luthers Wartburgaufenhalt (2nd edn, Leipzig, 1911), pp. 73–4 and pp. 161–9. 3 Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt, Ain lobliche ordnu[n]g der Fuerstlichen stat Wittemberg im tausent fuenfhundert und zway vnd zwaintzigsten jar auffgericht (Augsburg, 1522). A modern edition is printed in Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts, ed. Emil Sehling (15 vols, Leipzig/Tübingen, 1902–77), vol. 1, pp. 697–8. 4 KO, Sehling, vol. 1, pp. 697–8. 5 Felix Ulscenius to Wolfgang Capito, 24 January 1522, is reprinted in Müller, Wittenberger Bewegung, pp. 172–3. 6 KO, Sehling, vol. 1, pp. 3–9, 18–21, 203, and 598–604.
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
was unnecessary because no foundation existed in the Holy Scriptures.7 He soon broke away from other moderate reformers, however, over the role of faith. In 1524, he published Protestation oder Erbietung, in which he criticized Luther’s focus solely on salvation by faith alone.8 For Müntzer, it was not enough to recognize the Word of God, but a person must also suffer it – meaning they must experience the inner Word, which he also called the transforming power of the Holy Spirit.9 Müntzer began preaching his radical message in the Hegau and Klettgau regions in 1525, becoming increasingly involved in peasant unrest in those areas. For many participants, the Peasants’ War was not necessarily a religious event. Most of their demands focused on restricted liberties regarding tithes and taxation, as well as hunting and ﬁshing rights.10 For Müntzer, however, it was a religious phenomenon and an apocalyptic event, where God was seeking to return power to the faithful and restore the apostolic Church.11 This close connection between radical evangelical theology and the threat to social order caused great concern among princes and more moderate reformers. Luther himself urged temporal authorities to put down the peasant uprisings and Müntzer fell victim to their swift and powerful response. In May 1525, he travelled to Frankenhausen with a peasant army to assist in ﬁghting against Philip of Hesse and George of Saxony who, after securing victory, captured and executed Müntzer. In response to the unrest, many theologians set about the difﬁcult task of bringing the divergent evangelical parties together under a common set of beliefs. On one hand they were motivated by events such as the conﬂict in Wittenberg and the Peasants’ War, which had impressed upon them the urgent need to control the reform movement and to enforce some sort of doctrinal conformity. Their desire for unity also was driven by their understanding of the single, universal Church with its two principal elements: the invisible, universal body and the visible, physical congregation of believers. In the 1520 Address to the Christian Nobles of the German Nation, Luther discusses this dual nature. Drawing on Augustine’s claim of a single Church with its visible (worldly) and invisible (spiritual) parts, he 7 Articuli per fraters minores de observantia proposita reverendissimo domino Brandenburgensi contra Lutheranos (Ingolstadt, 1519). A modern edition is printed in Quellen zu Thomas Müntzer, eds Wieland Held and Siegfried Hoyer (Leipzig, 2004), pp. 39–41. 8 Protestation odder empietung Tome Müntzers von Stolberg am Hartzs seelwarters zu Alstedt seine lere betreffende, unnd tzum anfang von dem rechten Christen glawben, unnd der tawffe (Alstedt, 1524). 9 Abraham Friesen, Thomas Muentzer, a Destroyer of the Godless: the making of a sixteenth century religious revolutionary (Berkeley, CA, 1990), pp. 146–52. 10 See, for example, the ‘twelve articles of the Upper Swabian peasants’ and the accompanying discussion in Peter Blickle, Die Revolution von 1525 (Munich, 1975), pp. 21–7. 11 Friesen, Muentzer, pp. 146–52.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
attacks the deep man-made division between the spiritual ofﬁces of popes, bishops, priests, monks and nuns from the worldly sphere of princes, lords, craftsmen and laborers. Luther explains that the single, universal Church is a reﬂection of Christ’s nature that contains both worldly and spiritual forms, adding that according to the apostle Paul, ‘we are all of one body.’12 Doctrinal unity was important for the Wittenberg reformer because of the singular nature of the Church and because of his belief that the visible body should reﬂect accurately the spiritual, invisible one – something he believed the Roman Church no longer could claim. Philip Melanchthon further clariﬁed the Lutheran position in the 1530 Augsburg Confession, writing that there is only one Church of Christ, which has two forms: the invisible one that is the spiritual congregation of saints, distinguished by the Gospel rightly taught and the sacraments correctly administered, and the visible form comprised of worldly congregations. He explains that as Paul had written, it is a matter of ‘one faith, one baptism, one God the father of all’.13 For Melanchthon, a common doctrine is crucial for the faithful. He explains that the visible churches must not always follow the same rites and ceremonies, but above all else they must agree on the doctrine and on the correct administration of the sacraments.14 Other reformers shared this belief in the single, universal Church and the desire to maintain a common set of beliefs for all Christians. Huldrych Zwingli repeated the idea of a single body comprised of the invisible community of the faithful and the visible congregations nourished by the Word and sacraments.15 He also agreed with Luther that it was Christ and the Holy Ghost that bind the faithful together and that the pure doctrine could be found in the Holy Scriptures.16 The Strassburg reformer Martin Bucer agreed, writing in the 1540 Wormser Buch that the invisible, universal Church is a community of believers called together by God and that it is the Holy Spirit and the sacraments that bind believers together. He adds: ‘these alone are the Church and community of Christ, which St Paul calls the holy temple and house of God and the body of Christ.’17 Bucer 12 Luther, An den Christlichen Adel deutscher Nation: von des Christlichen standes besserung (Wittenberg, 1520). This is reprinted in LW, vol. 6, pp. 404–69. See especially, p. 407. Luther bases his argument largely on passages from 1 Corinthians 12. 13 A modern edition of the 1530 Augsburg Confession is printed in Latin in Philippi Melanthonis opera quae supersunt omnia, eds Carolus Gottlieb Bretschneider and Henricus Ernestus Bindseil (28 vols, Halle a.d. S./Braunschweig, 1858), vol. 26, pp. 276–7. Melanchthon draws on Paul’s letter to the Ephesians here, especially Ephesians 4:4–6. 14 Melanthonis opera, Bretschneider and Bindseil, vol. 26, p. 276. 15 Peter Stephens, Zwingli: Einführung in sein Denken (Zürich, 1992), p. 145. 16 Ibid., p. 148. See also George Richard Potter, Zwingli (Cambridge, 1976), p. 136. 17 The Wormser Buch was written by Bucer and Johannes Gropper for the 1541 diet in Regensberg. A modern edition is printed in Martin Bucers deutsche Schriften, ed. Robert Stupperich (17 vols, Gütersloh, 1960–81), vol. 9.1, p. 400. Bucer refers to Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 5, Ephesians 2 and 4, and Timothy 3.
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
describes three marks by which people can recognize this true universal Church: ‘the pure doctrine of Christ, the correct use of the sacraments and the use of the bann’.18 Although the Genevan reformer John Calvin articulates his views later than most of these other reformers, he too agrees about the dual nature of Christ’s Church and the importance of a common doctrine. He emphasizes that the visible, worldly congregations play an especially important role in promoting doctrinal purity by educating their members.19 For all of these theologians, the Reformation was about reducing the gap between the invisible and visible, or spiritual and worldly churches. Their task was to discern the true nature of Christ’s universal Church and to reform the visible congregations accordingly, making consensus and orthodoxy a crucial part of their efforts. Doctrinal unity also had important political beneﬁts. Landgrave Philip of Hesse recognized the advantages to a common confession. In 1526, he began reforming the churches in his territory and was increasingly concerned about the growing opposition posed by the Habsburgs and other Catholic princes. He felt especially threatened by the Dessau Bund, which was a military alliance formed in 1525 between the Catholic dukes George of Saxony (Philip’s father-in-law), Ernst and Heinrich of Braunschweig, and Archbishop Albrecht of Mainz, who also was the Brandenburg Margrave.20 He responded in 1528 by forming his own alliance with two powerful supporters of evangelical reform: Duke Albrecht of Prussia and King Ferdinand of Denmark. Philip wanted to strengthen their alliance against the Habsburgs by drawing together other Protestant princes and territories, especially the powerful Swiss cantons like Zurich. He hoped a common doctrinal confession, upon which all reformers could agree, might serve as the cornerstone for creating such an alliance.21 With this 18 BDS, Stupperich, vol. 9.1, p. 400. Regarding the bann, he refers to Romans 12 and Ephesians 4:3: ‘endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace’. The importance of these marks, and Lasco’s own opinion on them, will be discussed in detail on pp. 59–60. 19 John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles (2 vols, Philadelphia, PA, 1960), vol. 2, pp. 1023–25. Lasco agrees with Calvin about the important role of education for promoting doctrinal unity, which will be discussed in more detail on pp. 78–82. 20 Philip dissolved the territory’s monasteries and established a university in Marburg for training evangelical preachers in 1527. He would not, however, enforce changes to the Lord’s Supper until 1532. See KO, Sehling, vol. 8, pp. 66–79. Regarding the Dessau Bund and Philip’s concerns, see Alfred Kohler, Antihabsburgische Politik in der Epoche Karls V: die reichsständische Opposition gegen die Wahl Ferdinands I. zum römischen König und gegen die Anerkenung seines Königstums 1524–1534 (Göttingen, 1982), pp. 57–61. 21 Philip had placed himself in opposition to the Habsburgs as early as 1526 when, at the Diet of Speyer, he supported restoring his cousin to power, the evangelical Prince Ulrich of Württemberg, against the will of Ferdinand and Charles V. Kohler, Antihabsburger Politik, p. 62.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
goal in mind, the landgrave invited theologians to Marburg in 1529. He explained in a letter to Luther that he wanted to have a ‘friendly discussion’ over doctrinal matters including the contentious issue of the Eucharist.22 Several key ﬁgures attended the colloquy including Luther, Melanchthon and Justus Jonas from Wittenberg, Andreas Osiander from Nuremburg, the Augsburg preacher Stephan Agricola, Friedrich Myconius from Gotha, Johannes Brenz from Württemberg, the Swiss reformers Zwingli and Johannes Oecolampadius, and Martin Bucer, Jakob Sturm and Caspar Heido from Strassburg.23 This meeting in Marburg marks an important point in the Protestants’ struggle for consensus and orthodoxy because it was the ﬁrst concerted effort to bring the various sides together to resolve their doctrinal differences. The assembly, however, is perhaps better known as the ﬁrst face-to-face meeting between Luther and Zwingli, two key adversaries in the debate over the Lord’s Supper. The Marburg Colloquy began on 1 October 1529 with two meetings: one between Luther and Oecolampadius, and the second between Zwingli and Melanchthon. The probable climax of the discussions occurred the following day, when Zwingli and Luther met in person to discuss the key doctrinal differences between them.24 Overall, Philip’s colloquy was a success. On 4 October, the Wittenberg reformer reported to his wife that the talks were coming to an end and that the participants had found common ground on most subjects except for the Eucharist.25 The discussions ended with the writing of the Marburg Articles, which contained 15 points of doctrine debated during the meetings. The ﬁrst 14 address those areas on which they found agreement including the nature of God and the holy trinity, original sin and Christ’s sacriﬁce, the role of faith, the beneﬁts of good works and confession, preachers’ election, the meaning and use of 22 For an introduction to the colloquy, see Das Marburger Religionsgespräch 1529, ed. Gerhard May (Gütersloh, 1970). Luther accepts the initial invitation to the Marburg Colloquy in his letter to Philip of Hesse, 23 June 1529, in LW, vol. 5, pp. 101–102. Philip reiterates his desire for a ‘friendly colloquy’ (freundliches Gespräch) to take place on Michaelis Day, 29 September, in a letter to Luther and Melanchthon, 1 July 1529, ibid., pp. 108–109. 23 Most of these participants signed the 15 articles produced at the end of the colloquy. Two exceptions are Myconius and Sturm, who are mentioned in Heido’s report on the disputations but their names do not appear with the other signatures at the end of the work. The articles were originally published under the title Wes sich D. Martin Luther &c. mit Huldrichen Zwinglin &c. der Strittigen Articulhalb vereint vnd verglichen auff der Convocatz zu Marpurg/ den dritten tag Octob. M.D.xxix (Marburg, 1529). Modern editions are printed in LW, vol. 30, 3, pp. 160–71 and Das Marburger Religionsgespräch 1529, ed. Gerhard May (Gütersloh, 1970), pp. 67–70. 24 Zwingli to Joachim Vadian, 20 October 1529, Marburger Religionsgespräch, May, pp. 80–81. 25 Luther to Katharina, 4 October 1529, LW, vol. 5, p. 154. Luther sums up his opponents’ sacramental theology, writing that Zwingli believed ‘the body is not able to be without the physical form, therefore the body of Christ is not in the bread.’ He added that Oecolampadius believed that ‘this sacrament is the symbol of the body of Christ.’
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
Diesser hernach geschrieben artickeln haben sich di hierunden geschrieben zu Marpurgk verglichen 3a Octobris 1529 Martinus Luther Justus Jonas Philippus Melanchthon Andreas Osiander Stephanus agricola Joannes Brentius Ioannis Oecolampadius Ss Huldrychus Zuinglius Martinus bucerus Caspar Hedio
2.1 Signatories of the 1529 Marburg Articles
baptism, and secular authorities’ duty to protect the Church.26 The ﬁnal point concerns the contentious issue of the Lord’s Supper. The authors emphasize those areas on which the participants could agree such as the use of both bread and wine, writing that ‘we believe and follow everything from the Supper of our Lord Jesus Christ, that one should take both forms following the institution of Christ.’ Regarding more controversial matters such as the sacrament’s meaning, the authors explain that questions over whether or not the true body and blood of Christ are physically present in the bread and wine had not been answered by the colloquy, but that participants should focus on the common ground and ‘both sides should pray diligently to God, that he would show us the correct understanding through his Holy Spirit’.27 Many of the participants signed the articles at the end of the meeting including Luther, Melanchthon, Zwingli and Bucer (see Figure 2.1). There also was much interest at the imperial level to restore religious unity and orthodoxy in the German lands. The victory over the Ottomans at Vienna in 1529 meant that the Holy Roman Emperor could turn his attention to other matters and, the following year, Charles V convened an imperial diet in Augsburg to address the religious tensions in Germany.28
Marburger Religionsgespräch, May, pp. 67–9. Ibid., pp. 69–70. The conﬂict over whether Christ’s body and blood physically were present in the bread and wine (Luther) or spiritually present (Zwingli and Oecolampadius) was a key issue among reformers and is discussed in greater detail on pp. 85–9. 28 The entire text of the Augsburg Confession is printed in Melanthonis opera, Bretschneider and Bindseil, vol. 26, pp. 263–336. In the introduction, Melanchthon notes that the diet had been called to discuss measures against the Ottomans as well as the dissension 27
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
As with Philip’s previous colloquy, the emperor promoted the meeting as an open discussion, during which all sides would receive a fair hearing.29 Protestant theologians could provide their own statements of faith for discussion. Zwingli submitted a confession on behalf of Zurich, while Martin Bucer and Wolfgang Capito sent the Tetrapolitan Confession on behalf of Strassburg, Constance, Memmingen and Lindau.30 The primary focus of the diet, however, was Melanchthon’s Augsburg Confession, which the Wittenberg reformer had composed for the assembly. The 28 articles contained in the work addressed the nature of God, original sin, the holy trinity, justiﬁcation, the role of works, the deﬁnition of the Church, and the correct form of ministry. Regarding the controversial rites for the sacraments, Melanchthon defended the practice of infant baptism against Anabaptist claims that it only should be performed on adults, who could make a conscious decision to join the Church, and he defended the Lutheran understanding of the Lord’s Supper, challenging Rome’s doctrine of transubstantiation and arguing, instead, for Christ’s true presence in the bread and wine without the priest’s sacerdotal role.31 The diet failed to resolve the religious dispute in Germany. Charles V appointed the Catholic theologian Johannes Eck to review the Lutheran confession and to report his ﬁndings.32 Eck produced a thorough rebuttal to the Augsburg Confession, in which he rejected Melanchthon’s submission and reasserted Roman doctrine.33 The evangelical reformers asked the within the Christian Church. He notes that he is submitting the confession so that both sides can ‘peacefully discuss’ the religious divisions in Germany without strife. See pp. 263–7. 29 Jonathan Zophy, Patriarchal Politics and Christoph Kress (1485–1535) of Nuremberg (Lewiston, 1992), p. 165. 30 Huldrych Zwingli, Ad Carolum Rom. Imperatorem, Fidei Huldrychi Zuinglii ratio: Eiusdem quoq[ue] ad illustrißimos Germaniae Principes Augustae congregatos Epistola (Zurich, 1530), and Martin Bucer and Wolfgang Capito, Confessio religionis christianae, sacratissimo Imperatori Carolo V. Caesari Augusto in Comitijs Augustae anno MDXXX. per legatos civitatum Argentorati, Constantiae, Memmingae, et Lindaviae exhibita (Strassburg, 1531). 31 Melanthonis opera, Bretschneider and Bindseil, vol. 26, p. 278. In this work, Melanchthon emphasizes important similarities between evangelicals and Rome, but he also articulates those key doctrinal points where they differed: he reinforces the Holy Scriptures’ central role and Luther’s key criticisms against selling indulgences, private masses and the Roman Eucharist. The text was approved by Luther and signed by the dukes of Saxony and Lüneburg, the Brandenburg margrave, Philip of Hesse, the Prince of Anhalt, and the Nuremburg and Reutlingen councils. 32 Johannes Eck (1484–1543) was Professor of Theology at the University of Ingolstadt and was an outspoken critic of Luther. Eck had been the primary disputant against the Wittenberg reformer in the 1519 Leipzig debate. See, for example, Scott Hendrix, ‘We are all Hussites’, Archive for Reformation History, 65 (1974): 134–61. 33 Johannes Eck, Sub domini Ihesu et Mariae patrocinio. Articulos 404. partim ad disputations Lipsicam, Badensem, & Bernensem attinentes, partim vero ex scriptis pacem ecclesiae perturbantium extractos, coram divo caesare Carolo V (Ingolstadt, 1530). Eck
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
emperor for time to respond to the charges, but Charles refused their request, instead demanding that they renounce their claims and accept Eck’s judgment. The Protestants would not comply with his request and the diet ended without restoring religious unity in the German lands. Despite this setback for Charles, the diet had two signiﬁcant beneﬁts for the evangelical movement. The outcome underscored the Protestant princes’ need to form a military alliance to counter imperial pressure, which eventually led to the formation of the Schmalkaldic League in the winter of 1530–31. Adherence to the Augsburg Confession became a prerequisite for joining the alliance, making it a key statement of Lutheran orthodoxy that united German territories and towns under a common confession.34 In addition, the statements of belief submitted by Melanchthon, Zwingli, Bucer and Capito articulated their confessional positions and served as the foundation for future discussions over doctrinal uniformity and orthodoxy. Several attempts were made to ﬁnd agreement about doctrine following the Augsburg Diet. In 1539, Herzog George of Saxony and his chancellor, George von Karlowitz, convened a colloquy in Leipzig to discuss the differences between Melanchthon’s confession and Roman doctrine. Although they found common ground concerning justiﬁcation and good works, the participants failed to achieve overall consensus.35 This colloquy was followed by three imperial assemblies between 1540 and 1541 in the towns of Hagenau, Worms and Regensburg. Charles’ brother Ferdinand oversaw the ﬁrst of these meetings, in Hagenau, which he explained had been called to reach a settlement with Protestants or to discuss an alliance against them.36 Although no ﬁrm resolution was reached concerning these matters, a second diet was convened in Worms the following November. Eck and Melanchthon represented the two sides at this meeting and were able to ﬁnd common ground on the ﬁrst two articles of the Augsburg Confession: they agreed on the tridentine nature of God, according to the Nicean Creed, and that all people are born with sin.37 The diet was moved to Regensberg in the spring, but no additional progress was made between also responded to Zwingli’s confession in Repulsio articulorum Zvvingli C[a]es. Majestati oblatorum (Augsburg, 1530). 34 For a discussion of the Schmalkaldic League’s establishment, see Thomas A. Brady Jr., Communities, Politics and Reformation in Early Modern Europe (Leiden, 1998), pp. 109–28. For the important role of the Augsburg Confession among the league’s members, see Georg Kretschmar, ‘Die Bedeutung der Confessio Augustana als verbindliche Bekenntnisschrift der Evangelisch-Lutherischen Kirche’, in Heinrich Fries (ed.), Confessio Augustana: Hindernis oder Hilfe? (Regensburg, 1979), p. 32. 35 Volkmar Ortmann, Reformation und Einheit der Kirche: Martin Bucers Einigungsbemühungen bei den Religionsgesprächen in Leipzig, Hagenau, Worms und Regensburg 1539–1541 (Mainz, 2001), pp. 49–68. 36 Ibid., p. 117. This meeting took place during June and July of 1540. 37 Ibid., pp. 149–63, and Melanchthons opera, Bretschneider and Bindseil, vol. 26, pp. 271–4.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
the two sides. The participants remained deadlocked over the contentious issues of the mass and sacraments.38 The religious differences were addressed again by a new diet in Regensberg in 1546, which again focused on the Augsburg Confession. Trying to build on their success in Worms, the participants shifted their focus to justiﬁcation but a dispute broke out over whether the content of the debates should be recorded, or just their outcome, leading Protestants to abandon the meeting altogether.39 These attempts to resolve doctrinal differences had a signiﬁcant impact on Lasco. As discussed in the introduction to this book, the Polish reformer was deeply concerned about the religious disunity among reformers, as well as within the Christian Church. Although it does not appear that he participated directly in the colloquies and diets, most of these meetings had occurred during his time in the German lands and he certainly was aware of the discussions taking place at them. In his preface to the Forma ac ratio, published in 1555, Lasco points to the 1529 Marburg colloquy as the source of the religious tensions, where the participants were unable to ﬁnd consensus concerning the Lord’s Supper.40 He includes German and Latin translations of the ﬁnal part of the Marburg Articles, which notes the disagreement over the Eucharist. He goes on to criticize the Lutheran notion of Christ’s physical presence in the bread and wine, defending instead the Reformed idea of the spiritual body and blood of Christ (spiritualem corporis et sanguinis Christi).41 Lasco then turns his attention to Melanchthon’s Augsburg Confession. Although he lauds the diet’s attempt to overcome doctrinal divisions, he challenges the Lutheran statement that dominated the talks. He writes that ‘a great many men created the doctrine of the Augsburg Confession, and we are indebted to them, but we can not compare it to the doctrine of the prophets and apostles nor, by any means, can we think that it is equal to their doctrine.’42 His chief criticism concerned the Lutheran Eucharist and their belief that Christ’s body and blood was physically present in the bread and wine. He charges that the Wittenberg reformers retained too many Roman elements in the rite. For Lasco, the disagreement over the Lord’s Supper was the most signiﬁcant obstacle to religious unity. Although he does not mention the other colloquies and diets that followed after 1530 by name, he acknowledges that there were several other discussions in the recent past concerning doctrinal differences but no agreement has been reached. Lasco presents his Forma ac ratio as a solution to this and other controversial 38 Ortmann, Reformation und Einheit, pp. 233–41. For an additional discussion of the Worms and Regensburg debates, see Alfred Kohler, Karl V. 1500–1558: eine Biographie (Munich, 1999), pp. 226–9. 39 Ortmann, Reformation und Einheit, pp. 275–9. 40 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. γ4v. 41 Ibid., sig. γ6r. 42 Ibid., sigs γ6v– γ7r.
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
matters in the Church. His ordinance contained his own distinctive plan for restoring unity, which was his response to the ongoing debate over consensus and orthodoxy. His speciﬁc proposals for ﬁnding common ground will be discussed in more detail in the following chapters. The Role of Protestant Ordinances in the Search for Doctrinal Unity As discussed in the introduction to this book, Lasco’s Forma ac ratio was one of the most comprehensive blueprints for evangelical congregations when it appeared in 1555, and is one of many Protestant ordinances to be written in the sixteenth century. This genre of works ﬁrst appeared in the German-speaking lands of the Holy Roman Empire in the early years of the Reformation, and provided an important tool for spiritual and secular leaders to control religious reforms in their territories. Protestant ordinances appeared in many forms including confessions of faith, liturgies, visitation instructions, ecclesiastical orders or synodal statutes. They also took familiar secular forms such as princely edicts, civic constitutions, and police orders (Polizeiordnungen).43 Together, these works mark the conﬂuence between theology and law: they are constitutional documents, written by theologians, magistrates and princes, and they articulate the administration, ceremonies, and beliefs to be observed in reformed congregations. They can tell us much about establishing confessions, or the introduction of reformed belief and practice in a particular community. They demonstrate what changes were made, from the perspective of spiritual and temporal leaders, how new rites and practices were instituted, and how they were received. As we shall see with Lasco, they also played a special role in the wider debates among Protestants about doctrinal consensus and orthodoxy. In many cases, the authors used the works to present their own blueprint for reform, which they intended to be discussed and debated in hopes of reaching agreement about the true nature of Christ’s Church. The previously discussed order for Wittenberg, written by Karlstadt in 1521, is the ﬁrst known Protestant ordinance and marks a pivotal point in the Reformation, as princes and magistrates found a way to exert their 43 The label of ‘church ordinance’ or ‘ecclesiastical ordinance’ comes from the German word ‘Kirchenordnung’, which was used in the title of many of these works. It is employed in this study to describe the large body of texts that articulated ofﬁcial statements of religious policy for a town or territory. More than a thousand of these works from the sixteenth century survive to the present day and many have been reprinted in two collections: Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts, ed. Emil Sehling (15 vols, Leipzig/ Tübingen, 1902–77) and Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts, ed. Aemilius Ludwig Richter (2 vols, Stuttgart, 1967). See also the discussion of ordinances in Michael S. Springer, ‘Church Building and the Forma ac ratio: the inﬂuence of John a Lasco’s ordinance in sixteenth-century Europe’, (unpublished PhD diss., St Andrews, 2004), pp. 17–56.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
control over religious changes taking place in their towns and territories. The Wittenberg magistrates commissioned their lead preacher to create an ofﬁcial, constitutional policy governing worship services in their city, and their approval in January 1552 signals their desire to take charge of spiritual matters in their churches. The council’s assertion of religious authority in Wittenberg was, in fact, part of a growing trend during the period, as secular rulers strengthened control over spiritual matters in their lands. It should be noted that the Wittenberg council was viewed as acting within their normal, judicial rights.44 Although Elector Frederick of Saxony held rights to conﬁrm magistrates, raise taxes, levy troops and receive homage with oaths of allegiance, the Wittenberg magistrates had held judicial rights in the town since the previous century.45 They could establish constitutional policies as they saw ﬁt. In addition, there is no evidence that the prince challenged this right. The correspondence between Frederick and his adviser in the town, Hugo von Einsiedel, contains no indication that the council had overstepped their authority by adopting this new religious policy.46 Other cities and territories soon followed Wittenberg’s lead. Magistrates in the free-imperial city of Nuremberg also held signiﬁcant authority over religious affairs. They had gained the right to appoint priests and manage church endowments as early as the fourteenth century.47 More recently they had gained full patronage rights and, in 1521, the council ﬁlled four clerical posts in the city’s two churches with evangelical preachers from Wittenberg. The following summer the magistrates issued a new ordinance establishing community chests to replace the monks who had collected alms to care for 44 James M. Estes offers an excellent study on civic and territorial churches, and their increasing control over religious affairs during the sixteenth century, in Christian Magistrate and State Church: the reforming career of Johannes Brenz (Toronto, 1982). Like Wittenberg, the magistrates in the free-imperial city of Schwäbisch Hall also demonstrated a growing sense of authority over churches in their town. In 1502, for example, the council created a new preaching position at St Michael’s Church. This priest was to serve as lead preacher in the city and would be appointed by the magistrates. Johannes Brenz was appointed to the post in 1522. Estes, Christian Magistrate, pp. 4–5. In addition, John van Engen also discusses the growing regional control over churches, and the strengthening of civic and territorial churches in the German lands, in his essay ‘The Church in the Fifteenth Century’ in Handbook of European History 1400–1600: Late Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, eds Thomas A. Brady Jr., Heiko A. Oberman, and James D. Tracy (Leiden, 1994), pp. 318–19. 45 James S. Preuss, Carlstadt’s Ordinaciones and Luther’s Liberty: a study of the Wittenberg Movement 1521–1522 (Cambridge, 1974), p. 40. 46 Müller, Wittenberger Bewegung, p. 40. The author explains that judicial rights had been sold to the city in the ﬁfteenth century. 47 Gerald Strauss explains that the council had initially gained this right from Urban VI and Boniface IX in the 1380s. In 1474, Sixtus IV granted magistrates the right to nominate candidates for positions in the city’s two parish churches, and Leo X gave them full patronage rights in 1514. Strauss, Nuremberg in the Sixteenth Century: city politics and life between middle ages and modern times (2nd edn, Bloomington, 1976), pp. 155–6.
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
the poor. Like Karlstadt had done in Wittenberg, they ordered all incomes previously paid to Rome to be placed into a communal fund to aid the sick and poor, to pay the salaries of priests and to provide for strangers visiting the city. They also established a committee of ten burghers, to be selected by the council, for collecting alms and dispersing the funds.49 During this same year, the Carmelite prior Caspar Kant wrote a new liturgical order for the free-imperial city of Nordlingen, which introduced reforms to worship services including the introduction of vernacular sermons and communion with both bread and wine.50 The magistrates approved the changes for their churches. And the following year, the Saxon town of Leisnig adopted a new order creating a community chest for poor relief similar to those instituted in Wittenberg and Nuremberg.51 There is no doubt that these magistrates viewed spiritual policy as part of their domain, and that these early ordinances were a physical representation of their religious authority. The practice was not just limited to towns, however, and German princes and dukes began creating their own orders governing religious matters in the territories. Following the Prussian Duke Albrecht’s conversion in 1525, Bishop Erhardt produced a list of 22 articles introducing evangelical practices into the territory’s churches.52 This new ordinance rejected the traditional belief in seven sacraments, reafﬁrming only two: baptism and the Eucharist. It also called for communion using both bread and wine, gave permission to monks and nuns to abandon their vows, ordered preaching, singing and prayers 48 Ibid., pp. 163–4. New priors were appointed to both of the city’s parish churches – St Lorenz and St Sebald – in 1521. Hektor Bömer, a student from Wittenberg, was sent to St Lorenz and Georg Pressler, a former Wittenberg student, went to St Sebald. That same year, Andreas Osiander was named preacher at St Lorenz church and, following a recommendation from Luther, Dominicus Schleupner was appointed preacher for St Sebald. 49 Eins Rats der Stat Nüremberg ordnung des grossen allmusens Haußarmer leut (Nuremberg, 1522). A modern edition has been printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 11, pp. 23–32. 50 Ibid., vol. 12.2, pp. 285–8. For more on the Reformation in Nordlingen, see HansChristoph Rublack, Eine bürgerliche Reformation: Nördlingen (Gütersloh, 1982), especially pp. 201–37. 51 Ibid., vol. 1, pp. 598–604. Luther wrote to the council praising their new order, writing: ‘I am highly pleased with your ordinance and the institution of a common chest. I also hope it may glorify God and serve many people as a ﬁne example of Christian faith and love.’ Luther to the Leisnig magistrates, 29 January 1523, in Luther’s Works, Krodel, vol. 49, pp. 28–32. 52 Erhardt, with his seat in Pomesan, was one of two bishops in the duchy. The other, Bishop George, was located in Samlund. Physically, Prussia lay outside of the Holy Roman Empire but I have included it here because of its close political and cultural ties to Brandenburg and the Empire. Margrave Albrecht of Brandenburg-Ansbach had been granted the territory following his conversion in 1525 by the king of Poland. According to the treaty, Albrecht had agreed to relinquish his position as Grand Master of the Order of Teutonic Knights in return for the duchy, making him a Polish duke. See H.W. Koch, A History of Prussia (London, 1978), p. 33.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
be done in German, and put an end to auricular confession, processions and the mass.53 Erhardt followed this with a second, larger ordinance that provided detailed descriptions for worship services and the text for prayers to be spoken. It also included further instructions for the sacraments: baptism was to be performed with water only, without the use of oils and chrism, and three goblets were to be used for the Lord’s Supper, two for the sick and one for the healthy members of the church. He added to this instructions for marriage, burial and annual synods for the clergy. The territorial Landtag approved both ordinances on 10 December 1525.54 Later that same month, they approved a list of 80 articles regulating the Church and moral behaviour in the territory, which included penalties for public drunkenness, blasphemy and deviation from the ecclesiastical rites described in the previous ordinances.55 The following year, they approved an additional order requiring visitations to be carried out to ensure compliance with these religious reforms.56 Other territories soon followed Albrecht’s lead. In 1526, Herzog Magnus of Saxon-Lauenburg approved a new ecclesiastical ordinance for the Hadeln territory, which established evangelical practices in the region’s churches. The text contained six parts covering doctrine, schools, worship services, a community chest, visitations and the Holy Scriptures. As in Prussia, the herzog ordered that vernacular sermons should be preached in all churches, instructed that children should be taught about the Gospel, and reafﬁrmed the two sacraments of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. As seen in the earlier civic ordinances, he also instituted local community chests to pay preachers and ordered visitations to be carried out to ensure compliance with these reforms.57 In 1527, the new Elector Johannes of Saxony produced an order instructing that visitations were to be carried out to see that evangelical preaching and education were being done satisfactorily throughout the territory.58 The ecclesiastical orders’ use to institute religious reforms spread quickly. By the end of the decade, 19 towns and free-imperial cities, as well as eight territories, had adopted Protestant orders. By 1547, a year that marks a dramatic shift in Protestant fortunes following Charles V’s victory over the Schmalkaldic League, the number had risen to 38 towns and 16 territories.
KO, Sehling, vol. 5, pp. 29–30. Erhardt co-wrote this ordinance with Bishop George of Samlund. KO, Sehling, vol. 3, pp. 30–38. 55 Ibid., vol. 5, pp. 38–41. 56 Ibid., pp. 41–2. 57 KO, Sehling, vol. 5, pp. 465–76. Sehling explains that the Reformation came earlier to Hadeln than the rest of Herzog Magnus’s lands in Saxon-Lauenburg. Hadeln was an autonomous territory, which had freely elected Magnus as their protector. Ibid, p. 460. 58 Ibid., vol. 1, pp. 142–8. 54
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
These works reveal much about the concerns of early reformers. Among the most pressing issues they faced were vernacular preaching and education, clerical incomes and using both elements in the administration of the Eucharist. Although they appeared in various formats, such as princely edicts, civic constitutions or visitation instructions, they all sought to address these same concerns. These ﬁrst orders discussed above for Wittenberg, Nuremberg, Nordlingen, Prussia, Hadeln and Saxony all dealt with these issues, either in whole or in part, ordering vernacular preaching so that audiences could understand it, established schools to instruct boys and girls about the Gospel, commanded that both bread and wine be distributed during the Lord’s Supper, and created community chests to collect church incomes for the payment of ministers and to provide for the poor. It is striking that these subjects, which had been established in the ﬁrst orders, remained an important part of Protestant ordinances throughout the century. However, these were not the only issues important to reformers. As the reform movement unfolded, and as evangelical leaders encountered new challenges, the number of topics addressed by orders also increased. By the 1580s, the works continued to deal with the crucial questions of preaching, education, the sacraments and incomes, but they also expanded to cover other subjects that were important to reformers such as spiritual authority, clerical ofﬁces and their duties, a clear articulation of their confession of faith, orders for worship services, liturgies, holy days, discipline, excommunication, visitations, poor relief, marriage, and burial rites.59 Although the content of orders articulated and established new ideas and practices in the German towns and territories, their forms were not unique and were patterned on traditional forms of secular and ecclesiastical administration. For princes and magistrates, edicts, civic constitutions and police orders (Polizeiordnungen) had long been used to set legal codes, and it is not surprising that evangelical authorities would turn to these familiar devices to express ofﬁcial religious policy. Karlstadt’s articles for Wittenberg, for example, followed the familiar pattern of civic constitutions. In 1545, Countess Anna von Oldenburg issued a police order for East Frisia governing trade in the territory and containing the usual admonitions against public drunkenness. The work also included articles addressing the territorial church’s administration and established a system of ecclesiastical discipline.60 And on 13 January 1560, herzogs Ulrich and Johannes Albrecht issued a mandate that followed the familiar pattern of late medieval princely edicts, in which they announced that all ministers 59 For examples of these more comprehensive ordinances, see those for Oldenburg (1573), Saxony (1580), Hoya (1581) and Henneberg (1582). KO, Sehling, vol. 1, pp. 359– 457, vol. 2, pp. 298–324, vol. 6.2, pp. 1128–203, vol. 7.2, pp. 986–1162. 60 Ibid., vol. 7, pp. 398–413.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
must follow the territories’ 1557 Protestant ordinance.61 Although these forms of secular administration had existed long before the Reformation, they were now being applied to evangelical religious policy, reﬂecting the growing desire of magistrates and princes to take charge of spiritual affairs in their lands. Reformers also found key models for ecclesiastical ordinances in the Roman Church. Agendas were liturgical books that had been a popular form of religious instruction and an expression of personal piety in the German lands in the late medieval period. In the early part of the sixteenth century, several of these works appeared including those in Nuremberg (1502), Worms (1510), Mainz (1513), Passau (1514), Cologne (1521) and Münster (1522).62 They continued to play an important role in Catholic religious life throughout the century. The 1512 Speyer Agenda, for example, continued to be used as late as the 1580s.63 Evangelical reformers also drew on this liturgical tradition, composing works that articulated their own reformed rituals and ceremonies. Caspar Kantz’s 1522 instructions for Nordlingen included a new liturgy for the Lord’s Supper and, the following year, Martin Luther and Thomas Müntzer published their liturgies for Protestant worship services.64 Reinforcing this connection with the Catholic works, many of the Protestant liturgies included the term ‘Agenda’ in their title, including those written for Ulm (1531), Erfurt (1540), Frankfurt (1545) and Pommerania (1569).65 61
Ibid., vol. 5, pp. 137–8. George Stoechs, Agenda Numburgensia (Nuremberg, 1502); Agenda s[e]c[un]d[u]m ritu[m] & erdi ne[m] ecclesie wormaciensis (Speyer, 1510); Age[n]da Magu[n]tin[a] cum utilissimis scituq[us] dignissimis quibusda[m] notabilibus: iam nouiter ac diligenter (Mainz, 1513); Agenda sive benedictiona le de actibus ecclesie s[e]c[un]d[u]m chorum et ob seruatione[m] ecclie Patauiensis (Basel, 1514); Agenda ecclesiastica no[n] pastoribus solu[m] et capellanis (Cologne, 1521); and Agenda reru[m] ecclesiasticaru[m] (Münster, 1522). 63 Agenda Spiren [Hrsg.v.(Philippus … Episcopus Spiren] (Speyer, 1512). Marc Forster notes that the visitations of 1583–88 revealed that this liturgical book was still being used by about one half of the parishes in Speyer, even though the Mainz agenda of 1551 was to have replaced it. Marc Forster, The Counter Reformation in the Villages: religion and reform in the bishopric of Speyer, 1560–1720 (Ithaca, NY, 1992), pp. 28–32. 64 KO, Sehling, vol. 12, pp. 285–8. Luther’s order for the mass appeared under the title Von ordnung gottis dienst yn[n] der gemeyne (Wittemberg, 1523), and is printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 1, p. 203. See also Evangelischen Kirchenordnungen, Richter, vol. 1, pp. 1–2. Thomas Müntzer, Deützsch kirche[n] ampt (Eilenberg, 1523) is also printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 1, pp. 472–9. 65 Forma unnd Agenda, oder handtbüchlin, darinn begriffen ist die Ordnung vnnd weyss, wie die heiligen Sacramenten vnd Ceremonien der Kirchen zu Vlm … gehalten werden sollen (Ulm, 1531); Agenda das ist Kyrchenordnung/ wie sich die Pfarrherrn und Seelsorger in iren Ampten vnd diensten halten sollen/ (Erfurt, 1540); Agend Büchlein für die Pfarrherrn auff dem Land (Nuremberg, 1545); and Agenda, dat is ordninge der hiligen kerckenemter unde ceremonien (Wittenberg, 1569). 62
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
Finally, evangelical reformers continued the practice of parish visitations, which had long been used by bishops in the Holy Roman Empire to enforce compliance with ecclesiastical decrees. The Archbishop of Salzburg Eberhard II, for example, had conducted visits to his parishes in the thirteenth century to compel obedience to reforms he recently had introduced in his territories.66 Likewise, the Bishop of Constance, Hugo of Hohenlandenburg, had threatened visitations in 1498 to enforce compliance with his reforms in the diocese.67 However, the use of such visits to monitor parishes appears to have been sporadic. A total of ﬁve visitations occurred in Trier between 1218 and 1244, while four were held in the archdiocese of Mainz during the same period, and two each in the dioceses of Regensburg and Münster.68 Sixteenth-century reformers continued to use visitations to monitor preachers and to ensure compliance with a town or territory’s evangelical policies. In 1526, the Saxon elector Johannes appointed three men to conduct parish visits in Tenneburg: Friedrich Myconius, a preacher in Gotha, Johannes Draco, a preacher in Waltherhausen, and Diezmann Goldacker, the prince’s representative in the region.69 The visitation report explains that the three men were to judge the ‘life, nature, and abilities’ of ministers by talking to people in the parish. They also were to assess the ministers through examinations on doctrine and by hearing them preach ‘on speciﬁc points so that one can judge their understanding of the Gospel’.70 The following year, the elector appointed Hans Edler von der Plaunitz, a knight, Jerome Schurpff, a doctor of theology, Asmus von Haubitz and Philip Melanchthon to carry out territory-wide visitations. In his ordinance issued on 16 June 1527, Johannes explained that the visitor should see to it that the ‘pure Gospel of Christ’ is being preached and that a reformed Lord’s Supper rite is being followed.71 And in 1535, Herzog Heinrich issued an ordinance for Mecklenburg, announcing visitations to be carried out in all of the territory’s churches. Among his reasons for the visits was to protect congregations from ‘Zwinglian’ and ‘Anabaptist’ 66 Paul B. Pixton, The German Episcopacy and the Implementation of the Decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council 1216-1245: watchmen on the tower, vol. 64, Studies in the History of Christian Thought, (ed.) Heiko A. Oberman (Leiden, 1995), pp. 229–31. 67 Robert James Bast, Honor your Fathers: catechisms and the emergence of a patriarchal ideology in Germany 1400–1600, vol. 63, Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought, (ed.) Heiko A. Oberman (Leiden, 1997), pp. 31–2. 68 Ibid., pp. 447–9. For a brief discussion of visitations spanning the late medieval and early modern periods in Saxony, see Die Registraturen der Kirchenvisitationen im ehemals sächsischen Kurkreise, ed. Karl Pallas (Halle, 1906), pp. 1–6. 69 Tenneburg was an administrative district surrounding the town of Walterhausen, which was located southwest of Gotha in Thuringia. 70 A modern edition of the visitation report is printed in P. Drews, ‘Der Bericht des Myconius über die Visitation des Amtes Tenneberg in März 1526’, Archive for Reformation History, 3 (1905/1906): 1–17. 71 KO, Sehling, vol. 1, pp. 142–8.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
preachers, to correct any doctrinal errors held by ministers, to see that preachers are fulﬁlling the duties of their ofﬁce, and to enforce compliance with the territory’s ofﬁcial ordinance.72 These orders reﬂect the similar purpose found in Catholic and Protestant visitations: both used the practice to monitor preaching and to enforce compliance with ofﬁcial religious policy. There are two distinct differences that emerged, however, which reﬂect the growing involvement of secular rulers in religious matters. In contrast to late medieval visits, which were a clerical affair ordered by bishops and conducted by their staff, the Protestant ones were a mixture of lay and clerical participants. The princes ordered visits in their territories and appointed both secular administrators and theologians to conduct them, with the results being reported back to the princes themselves, rather than bishops.73 The frequency of visits also increased in Protestant communities. At least six territory-wide visitations were carried out in Saxony between 1527 and 1575.74 Authorities in Mecklenburg organized seven territorial visitations between 1534 and 1578, while Prussia had ﬁve during the same period.75 Other territories followed this pattern, including Anhalt, Brandenburg, Pommerania and Württemburg.76 These changes to Protestant visitations reﬂect the importance of this practice for monitoring reforms and the growing interest of secular rulers, especially the princes, in the religious affairs on their lands. The large number of Protestant ordinances produced in the sixteenth century suggests considerable support for such works among spiritual and secular leaders and the orders did, in fact, serve a number of useful functions. Perhaps most important was the ordinances’ use as an alternative to canon law. Luther provided a visible demonstration concerning his rejection of papal authority on 10 December 1520, when he deﬁantly burned the papal bull threatening his excommunication. He also made clear his rejection of Rome’s legal authority, adding Gratian’s Decretum and the four other
Ibid., vol. 5, pp. 147–8. For additional visitation orders that demonstrate the use of both clerical and lay visitors, see the ordinances for Saxony (1527) and Mecklenburg (1552), which are printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 1, p. 142, and vol. 5, p. 219. The Saxon visitors are listed in the text above, p. 29. The Mecklenburg visitors were: Johannes Aurifabrum, a doctor of theology; Johannes Hoffman, a doctor of jurisprudence; Johannes Ribeling, a minister in Parchim; Joachim Krausen; Gerhardt Ohmeken, catherdral Probst in Gustrow; and master Simon Leupolden. 74 Based on surviving evidence, territorial visitations were ordered for Saxony in 1527, 1533, 1537, 1539, 1554–55, 1569, and 1574–75. 75 Territory-wide visitations for Mecklenburg occurred in 1534–35, 1542, 1552, 1557, 1560, 1567 and 1578. For Prussia they were ordered in 1526, 1528, 1540, 1554 and 1575. 76 The surviving orders show visitations for Anhalt in 1545, 1561, 1582, 1587 and 1596; Brandenburg in 1540, 1551, 1558 and 1573; Pommerania in 1535, 1556 and 1568; and Württemburg in 1535, 1558, 1571, 1579 and 1581. 73
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
books comprising the Corpus juris canonici to the ﬁre. These works contained the most signiﬁcant collection of canon law, addressing issues from spiritual authority to practical matters of church administration. The Decretum, for example, contained speciﬁc codes governing the relationship between civil and spiritual authority, the ofﬁce and duties of priests, clerical elections, poor relief, simony, judicial procedures, penance, baptism, marriage and the Eucharist.78 Luther argued that Roman popes and bishops had no authority to create such laws. He claimed, instead, that legal authority belonged to princes and magistrates, who ought to create laws governing churches. Thus, he saw canon law as a usurpation of the temporal rulers’ rightful authority, and argued that the clergy must be subject to the laws of princes and magistrates.79 The Protestant ordinances that appeared in the 1520s provided a useful instrument for replacing canon law: they were legal, constitutional documents issued by temporal leaders for the towns and territories in Germany, which addressed many of the same issues found in the Decretum and Corpus juris canonici. Protestant orders also provided an important tool for secular and spiritual leaders to maintain peace in the communities, which was particularly important given the social upheaval that often accompanied such religious changes during the period. This concern for public order can be seen in Karlstadt’s 1521 Wittenberg ordinance, which the magistrates hoped would quell violence in their city.80 Reinforcing this notion that orders provided a tool to maintain public peace, many of the works included the apostle Paul’s words from his letter to the Corinthians: ‘God is a God not of disorder but of peace.’81 The 1533 Brandenburg-Nuremberg ordinance, for example, quoted these works and urged that peace should be observed 77 Luther makes reference to the burning in a letter to John von Staupitz, 14 January 1521, in Luther’s Works, ed. Krodel, vol. 48, pp. 191–4. Witte also provides a brief description of this event in Witte, Law and Protestantism, p. 53. 78 Gratian’s text is found in Corpus juris canonici, eds Aemilius Richter and Emil Friedberg (Leipzig, 1879–81). See also Clarence Gallagher, Church Law and Church Order in Rome and Byzantium: a comparative study (Aldershot, 2002), pp. 126–7, John Gilchrist, ‘Simoniaca Haeresis and the problem of orders from Leo IX to Gratian’, in Canon Law in the Age of Reform 11th–12th Centuries (Aldershot, 1993), pp. 209–35, and Anders Winroth, The Making of Gratian’s Decretum (Cambridge, 2000). 79 Luther to George Spalatin, 31 July 1521, Luther’s Works, Krodel, vol. 48, pp. 274–6. Luther, for example, writes to the Saxon Elector Johannes in 1525, urging him to take control of religious affairs in the territory. Luther to Elector Johannes, 31 October and 30 November 1525, LW, vol. 3, pp. 594–6 and 628–9. See also Luther’s Works, Krodel, vol. 44, pp. 130–34, and vol. 36, pp. 70–72, p. 137, and pp. 199–203. Luther believed that the secular authorities should lead the way to reform through their laws, such as regulations prohibiting the mass, and urged people to remain loyal to temporal authorities. One place that Luther discusses this is in his 1520 treatise on good works, printed in Luther’s Works, ed. James Atkinson, trans. Charles M. Jacobs, vol. 44, pp. 90–91. Witte, Law and Protestantism, pp. 55–8. 80 See above, pp. 13–14. 81 1 Corinthians 14:33.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
in all their churches.82 Bucer referred to the same verse when giving his reasons for composing the 1534 Strassburg ordinance.83 In addition, Paul’s command ‘let everything be done modestly and in good order’ became a familiar justiﬁcation for church orders and was often repeated, including in the works written for Schweinfurt (1543), Prussia (1544), Hesse (1566) and Pommerania (1569).84 The biblical references provided theological support for spiritual and secular leaders, who used these works as a tool to maintain peace and order in the community. This relationship between evangelical ordinances and religious upheaval can be seen in the increased number of works that appeared in 1524 and 1525 in response to the Peasants’ War in the German territories of the Holy Roman Empire. The number of orders written immediately following the ﬁrst order’s introduction in Wittenberg in 1522 was modest. Only ﬁve works were composed in 1522, with another eight appearing the following year. A dramatic spike in activity occurred, however, in 1524 and 1525 coinciding with peasant uprisings, which impressed upon local authorities the need to control reform and to maintain the existing social hierarchy.85 A total of 45 ordinances appeared during these two years, but receded to more modest levels immediately afterwards. Only 15 works were written in 1526, followed by six in 1527. The orders’ content conﬁrms this relationship between the revolts and the number of orders produced. In response to the peasants’ insurgency, spiritual and secular leaders used these works to restore peace, reafﬁrm the traditional hierarchy, and to assert their authority over religious matters. Among the peasants’ complaints in Brandenburg, for example, was charges of corruption among the clergy. Margraves George and Casimir responded with an order in 1525 that addressed these criticisms, blaming the current mischief (Aufrurn) on unsuitable or uneducated preachers. They recommended a system for educating and correcting ministers to solve the problem.86 Reﬂecting their concern to maintain the current social hierarchy, the order commanded all 82 This ordinance was ﬁrst published under the title KirchenOrdnung, In/ meiner gnedigen herrn der marggrauen zu Brandenburg Und eins/ Erbern Rats der Stat Nurmberg Oberkeyt und gepieten (Nuremberg, 1533). It has been reprinted in KO, Sehling, vol. 11, pp. 140–41. 83 ‘Got ist ein Got der ordnung, 1. Cor 14.’, BDS, Stupperich, vol. 5, p. 27. 84 KO, Sehling, vol. 11, p. 624, which also refers to 1 Corinthians 14:40. See also: Ordenung von eusserlichen Gots dienst und artikel der Ceremonien (Königsburg, 1544), Kirchen Ordnung: Wie sich die Pfarherrn und Sellsorger in irem beruff mit leren vnd predigen/ allerley Ceremonien und guter Christlicher Discipline unnd Kirchenzucht halten sollen (Marburg, 1566), and Kerckenordeninge im lande to Pamern (Wittenberg, 1569). 85 Peter Blickle asserts that the magisterial, or princely, Reformation was a reaction to the social upheaval suggested by the 1525 uprisings. The Revolution of 1525: the German Peasants’ War from a new perspective, (trans.) Thomas A. Brady Jr and H.C. Erik Midelfort (Baltimore, MD, 1981), pp. 183–5. 86 KO, Sehling, vol. 11, p. 84.
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
inhabitants in the territory to remain obedient to the temporal authorities and to avoid quarrelling.87 The outcome was not always so favorable for the peasants. One of their chief complaints concerning churches during the Peasants’ War had been their exclusion from clerical elections.88 Many of the orders produced after the uprisings sought to address this concern, but stopped short of granting them the right to appoint their own priests. In his 1527 order for Schwäbish Hall, Johannes Brenz urged the city’s magistrates to exert more control over choosing rural preachers. He explained that God had used the uprisings to punish governments that had not provided sufﬁciently for the peasants’ spiritual needs.89 In a similar manner, Bugenhagen instituted a form of clerical elections for Hamburg in 1529 that sought to ensure qualiﬁed men were appointed to the city’s churches, but also stressed that the peasants should not appoint their own preachers. He proposed that the superintendent should nominate candidates for teachers and preachers, and that an assembly comprised of men from the city council, preachers and the superintendent should select from the nominated candidates. Sextons and deacons would be nominated by pastors, and would be chosen by a committee of 14 burghers, the council, superintendent and their assistants – but not by the peasants themselves.90 In addition to keeping the peace, Protestant ordinances played a key role in confession building, instituting evangelical belief and practices in a predominately Catholic landscape. In Stralsund, for example, a town in the north German territory of Pommerania, Johannes Kureke and Christian Ketelhut began preaching evangelical sermons in the city’s churches as early as 1522.91 Although they found considerable support among the town’s inhabitants, the council ﬁrmly maintained their allegiance to Rome. Tensions escalated between the two groups, leading to a dramatic and violent conclusion on Whitsuntide 1524, when the burghers stormed the magistracy and replaced the councillors with men sympathetic to evangelical reform. The new council, which included Christian Ketelhut, set about reforming the city’s churches.92 Peter Suawe, a former student 87 The authors drew on Titus 3:1–2 and 1 Peter 2:13–17 to support their position. KO, Sehling, vol. 11, pp. 86–7. 88 Concerning the peasants’ demands, see Blickle, Revolution of 1525, pp. 19–20. 89 Godly Magistrates, Estes, p. 92. 90 KO, Sehling, vol. 5, p. 502. 91 Kureke arrived in 1522, followed by Ketelhut the following year. Roderich Schmidt, ‘Pommern, Cammin’, in Die Territorien des Reichs im Zeitalter der Reformation und Konfessionalisierung: Land und Konfession 1500–1650, eds Anton Schindling and Walter Ziegler (Münster, 1990), vol. 2, p. 190. 92 Ibid, pp. 190–91. Christian Ketelhut was ﬁrst among the magistrates of Stralsund to sign an ordinance published in 1528 to supplement the previous church order, printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 4, pp. 547–8.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
and friend of both Luther and Melanchthon, came to help out. He was joined by John Aepinus, also a former student from Wittenberg, who was appointed rector of the city’s schools in 1524.93 The following year, the magistrates and Council of Forty-Eight commissioned Aepinus to write an evangelical ordinance for their churches, which they approved for use in November 1525. The council followed this with a second act requiring all congregations to follow the new order.94 Aepinus’s ordinance marks an important turning point for churches in Stralsund. The work reafﬁrmed evangelical preaching and ceremonies, which had been occurring in the city for some time. More importantly, it introduced institutional reforms that set the church in a decidedly Protestant direction and helped to articulate their new confessional identity. The ordinance contained 51 articles that were divided into three sections covering preaching, education and a community chest. The instructions he provided, however, went far beyond these areas, addressing such key issues as clerical authority, sacramental rites and discipline. The council recently had declared their independence from the Bishop of Schwerin, and Aepinus began the ordinance with a description of the new clerical ofﬁces and their duties. He instituted a lead preacher (äversten Prediger) in place of the traditional Catholic bishop. The primary responsibility of this person was to oversee the other ministers, and the magistrates were to appoint someone from among the city’s preachers to this position. Aepinus instructed that the lead preacher should see to it that the ministers teach the true word of God and live a Christian life. As the overseer, he also was to educate and admonish those who strayed from the Church’s approved doctrine.95 In addition, the ordinance stipulated that nothing could be instituted in the churches without the consent of the lead preacher and, likewise, he should not institute anything without ﬁrst seeking the advice of the other ministers.96 Concerning the other preachers, Aepinus wrote that each congregation should have two men to preach God’s word ‘loudly and clearly’, to maintain order, to lead a Christian life, to follow God’s Word, and to punish acts forbidden in the Holy Scriptures. He added two additional ofﬁces to his ministry, noting that each church should have a chaplain to care for the sick and a sexton (Köster) to watch after the church and to teach people the psalms to be sung.97 As with other orders 93 Philip Melanchthon wrote to Joachim Cameraraius, 3 January 1525, that Peter Suawe had come to Wittenburg to ﬁnd a jurist for Stralsund. Melanchthons Briefwechsel: kritische und kommentierte Gesamtausgabe, ed. Heinz Scheible (Stuttgart, 1977), vol. 2, pp. 369–70. 94 Aepinus’s 1525 Stralsund ordinance is printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 4, pp. 542–5. The corresponding act of the magistrates and council can be found on pp. 545–6. 95 Ibid., vol. 4, p. 542. 96 Ibid. 97 Ibid., p. 543.
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
discussed from this period, he warned that everyone, including the clergy, must remain obedient to worldly authorities.98 Aepinus also introduced signiﬁcant reforms to education, church ﬁnances and discipline. He established two schools in the city, one for girls and the other for boys, and explained that the preachers should appoint teachers to instruct the students in Latin and in the lessons of the Holy Scriptures so that they might live ‘according to God’s word’.99 He also established a community chest to collect ecclesiastical incomes, including those previously paid to Rome, to help the sick, aid poor artisans, support poor young women, and to pay salaries to the church’s employees.100 In addition, he instructed preachers to admonish congregants to give money to the chest and he forbid begging in the city. This last article was meant to curtail the activities of monks who begged for alms.101 Aepinus established a committee of four men to oversee the chest: one person from the city magistrates, one from the Council of Forty-Eight, one shopkeeper and one artisan. The magistrates were to chose one of these four men to oversee the committee and to report on their activities to the council.102 Finally concerning discipline, Aepinus argued that unchristian behaviour was dangerous to the entire community and that preachers must punish those actions forbidden in the Holy Scriptures.103 Discipline, however, like the community chest required the cooperation of secular authorities. He explained that worldly leaders must punish offenders too, writing that magistrates should levy ﬁnes on adulterers, gossipers, sinners and those who would cause harm through violence or dishonest business practices.104 Ecclesiastical ordinances, like Aepinus’s Stralsund articles, provided an important blueprint for communities that reformed ecclesiastical institutions, such as the ministry and education, and instructed the faithful about doctrine and the meaning and observance of rituals and ceremonies. At the same time, the role of such works as ofﬁcial statements of religious policy, approved by territorial and civic rulers, made them key sources for articulating a community’s confessional identity and an important part of the larger Protestant dialogue about ecclesiastical reform. One indication that they were part of a wider exchange of ideas, which crossed local and regional boundaries, is the interest they generated outside of the communities in which they had originated. It was common for authors to borrow from existing works, in whole or in part, when comprising their own ordinances. Luther’s 1526 instructions for baptism, for example, were 98 99 100 101 102 103 104
Ibid., p. 545. Ibid., p. 543. Ibid. Ibid., p. 543–5. Ibid. Ibid., p. 545. Ibid.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
repeated in the orders for Göttingen (1530), Brandenburg-Nuremberg (1533), Northeim (1539), Saxony (1539), Halle (1541), Schleswig-Holstein (1542), Pommerania (1542), Schweinfurt (1543), Ritzebüttel (1544) and Mecklenburg (1552).105 Certain key ordinances also were published in multiple editions for larger audiences to read; at least ten German editions of the 1539 Wittenberg ordinance appeared between its original date of publication and 1616. This same work served as the principal foundation for similar works in Cologne in 1543, Prussia and Bergedorf in 1544, Mecklenberg in 1552, and Pfalz in 1554 and 1563.106 More importantly, many Protestant ordinances played a direct role in doctrinal debates during the sixteenth century and the Protestant struggle to ﬁnd consensus and orthodoxy. Karlstadt’s articles for Wittenberg, for example, generated discussion among the city’s magistrates and clergy about the nature and scope of ecclesiastical reform. Not all ministers had agreed with his proposals and had refused to implement them in their churches. When Luther returned in March 1522, he delivered a series of sermons that challenged the more radical elements such as the abolition of the mass and the removal of images. Karlstadt published a second work defending his position, but his articles were eventually replaced by Luther’s more moderate reforms.107 Melanchthon’s Augsburg Confession also became the focus of debate among theologians, although on a much larger scale. In his preface to the work, the Wittenberg reformer explains that he had written the order so that a peaceful discussion could take place and that he hoped it would provide a model for reuniting the fractured Church.108 Melanchthon’s work was the subject of Eck’s ofﬁcial response to the Protestant theologians and became the primary focus of the colloquies and diets that followed, including those in Leipzig, Hagenau, Worms and Regensburg.109 As Rolf Decot describes it, the confession became ‘a focal point in the religious question’.110 Its signiﬁcance is underscored by the reformers’ continued use of the text. Many new ecclesiastical ordinances appeared following the diet that incorporated the confession including the 1532 Hessian ordinance, which identiﬁes Melanchthon’s work as a key
Luther’s baptism order is published in KO, Sehling, vol. 1, p. 21. Ibid., vol. 11, pp. 89–90. 107 Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt, Von beyden gestalten der heylige Messze. Von zeichen in gemeyn was sie wircken und deüten. Sie seind ut Behemen od ketzer, die beyde gestalt nemen, sond Evangelische Christen (Wittenberg, 1522). 108 Melanthonis opera, Bretschneider and Bindseil, vol. 26, pp. 264–7. 109 For his response, see footnote 33. 110 Rolf Decot, ‘Confessio Augustana und Reichsverfassung: die Religionsfrage in den Reichstagsverhandlungen des 16. Jahrhunderts’, in Herbert Immenkötter and Gunther Wenz (eds), Im Schatten der Confession Augustana: die Religionsverhandlungen des Augsburger Reichstages 1530 im historischen Kontext (Münster, 1997), pp. 19–49 at p. 20. 106
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
foundation for the territorial order. The confession, indeed, continued to shape ideas about Lutheran orthodoxy for many decades to come and it was one of the principal foundations for the Lutherans’ 1580 Book of Concord.112 The way ordinances were employed to further debate over the universal Church’s doctrine, and to shape practices in the visible congregations, can be seen in Landgrave Philip’s reforms in Hesse. Philip convened a synod in October 1526 to discuss the piecemeal changes that had been taking place in the churches in his territory. This assembly commissioned the French theologian Francis Lambert to write a new ordinance for Hesse, which he completed in November. The order’s 34 articles proposed reforms to the sacramental rites, feasts, visitations, annual synods, the ministry, poor relief and education.113 The printed editions of this work suggest that there was considerable interest in it: in addition to the original Latin text, one Dutch and two German translations also appeared that same year. Philip did not immediately implement the articles, however, but rather he sent the completed work to Luther for his review. The Wittenberg reformer replied on 7 January 1527, urging the landgrave to not print the articles or distribute them because too many traces of the Roman practices remained in the ceremonies. His greatest concern, however, was not with Lambert’s prescriptions but rather the disorder they would cause. Luther warned that the territory was not ready for such a bold move and he urged Philip to move slower, reforming schools to educate the laity and train preachers in order to prepare the way for future reforms. He explained: ‘I know, and have also experienced, that when law and practices are laid out for use too early, they are seldom followed.’114 Philip took Luther’s advice and the ordinance was never implemented. Instead, in 1527 he dissolved the monasteries and created a university in Marburg for the training of evangelical preachers. He introduced stipends two years later to support theological students at the university and, in 1530, ordered that each community should establish a chest to collect church incomes and provide poor relief. Philip reorganized the clergy the following year, dissolving the traditional bishoprics and rearranging the territory into seven parishes, each with its own superintendent to 111 For further examples of works that incorporated all or part of the Augsburg Confession, see the ordinances for Lübeck (1531), Braunschweig (1531) and Hesse (1532) in KO, Sehling, vol. 5, pp. 334–68, vol. 6, pp. 906–915, and vol. 8, pp. 75–9. 112 Concordia. Pia et unanimi consensu repetita Confessio Fidei & doctrinae electorum, principum, et ordinum imperii, atque eorundem Theologorum, qui Augustanam Confessionem amplectuntur, & nomina sua huic libro subscripserunt. Cui ex sacra scriptura, unica illa veritatis norma et regula, quorundam Articulorum, qui post Doctoris Martini Lutheri felicem ex hac vita exitum, in controversiam venerunt, solida accessit Declaratio (Lepizig, 1580). 113 KO, Sehling, vol. 8, pp. 43–65. 114 Martin Luther to Philip of Hesse, 7 January 1527, LW, vol. 4, pp. 158.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
oversee the preachers. Finally, in 1532, he approved a new ordinance that introduced reformed services and sacramental ceremonies into the churches in his territory.115 Archbishop Hermann von Wied’s ordinance for Cologne was used in a similar way as a focal point for debate about ecclesiastical reform. The archbishop had commissioned Martin Bucer and Philip Melanchthon to write an ordinance for his churches, which was published in 1543 as the Einfältiges Bedencken.116 Over the next two years, three more German editions and one Latin translation appeared from the presses.117 Underscoring his desire to join the Protestant discourse over reform, the archbishop hired the theologian Albert Hardenberg to defend the work against opponents both inside and outside of the city. Hardenberg engaged in debates with critics from the cathedral chapter in Cologne, for example, and he travelled to Basel, Zurich and Constance to discuss the work. In 1545, he defended it before the Reichstag in Worms.118 Finally, Protestant ordinances became a useful tool for enforcing and maintaining doctrinal unity. When Lasco became the East Frisian superintendent in 1542, he was deeply concerned about Anabaptist preachers in the territory. David Joris, Nicolas Blesdijk and Menno Simons were using the pulpit to preach in favour of adult baptism and to question Christ’s incarnation – ideas that contradicted the Church’s ofﬁcial doctrine.119 Lasco held a series of disputations in 1544, which he hoped would convince them of their errors and strengthen the orthodox position. He explained to the Zurich reformer Heinrich Bullinger, following the disputations, that achieving doctrinal uniformity was crucial to solving the divisions in the Church.120 Lasco failed to persuade the Anabaptists to renounce their claims, so he sought other means to solve the crisis. In July 1544, he wrote to his friend Albert Hardenberg that he was preparing to institute a form of discipline modelled on the Einfältiges Bedencken, 115
KO, Sehling, vol. 8, pp. 66–79. Martin Bucer and Philip Melanchthon, Von Gottes gnaden unser Hermans Ertzbischoffs zu Coln unnd Churfürsten &c. einfaltigs bedencken/ warauff ein Christliche … Reformation/ an Lehr/ brauch der Heyligen Sacramenten und Ceremonien/ Seelsorge/ vnd anderem Kirchendienst … verbesserung … anzurichen seye (Bonn, 1543). 117 Laurentius Müllen printed the 1544 German and 1545 Latin editions. The other two German editions were printed by Antonius Tirolt in Marburg. 118 Wim Janse, Albert Hardenberg als Theologe: Proﬁl eines Bucer-Schülers, d.1547 (Leiden, 1994), pp. 20–22. See also Willem van’t Spijker, ‘Die Bedeutung des Kölner Reformationsversuchs’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen, 2000), p. 248. 119 Henning P. Jürgens, Johannes a Lasco in Ostfriesland: der Werdegang eines europäischen Reformators (Tübingen, 2002), pp. 248–52. 120 Lasco to Henry Bullinger, 14 March 1544, Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa, ed. A. Kuyper, (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1866), vol. 2, pp. 568. 116
CHRIST’S TRUE CHURCH: THE PROTESTANT SEARCH FOR UNITY
which he hoped would protect the territory against the radical preachers.121 He also wrote to Countess Anna von Oldenburg urging her to adopt his discipline, which eventually appeared in her police order for the territory in 1545.122 According to this ordinance, radical preachers and their followers were to be identiﬁed and examined by the superintendent. If they were found to hold Anabaptist beliefs, and refused to recant and swear an oath to observe the ofﬁcial confession, they would be banned from the Church and the territory.123 The order defended such drastic actions, noting that the discipline was necessary because of ‘rebellious sects of Anabaptists’ who threatened their doctrinal unity. Joris, Blesdijk and Simons refused to recant their beliefs, and in 1548 the countess expelled them and their followers from East Frisia.124 Lasco’s most signiﬁcant work, the Forma ac ratio, has much in common with other Protestant ordinances from the sixteenth century. His text follows the familiar format of other similar works and covers the same topics that concerned reformers, including clerical ofﬁces and their duties, elections of ministers, sacramental ceremonies, discipline, fasting, marriage, burial and visiting the sick. When it appeared in 1555, it provided one of the most comprehensive blueprints for ecclesiastical reform, containing the rites and practices based on Lasco’s own understanding of Christ’s universal Church. As the discussion in the following chapter will show, he hoped it would provide a clear model for congregations to follow. At the same time, its publication in Latin and the arguments he provides to support the foreigners’ doctrine suggest it also was meant to be read by a larger European audience. Lasco intended that this work would play a key role in the wider dialogue among theologians about doctrinal unity. As the following examination will also show, he was deeply concerned about the growing confessional divisions in the Church, and hoped it would provide a common ground to overcome their differences, eventually leading to a better understanding of Christ’s institution and restoring consensus and orthodoxy in the Church.
121 Lasco to Albert Hardenberg, 26 July 1544, Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, pp. 575. See also Willem van’t Spijker, ‘Kölner Reformationsversuchs’, pp. 248–9. 122 Jürgens, Lasco in Ostfriesland, p. 283. 123 KO, Sehling, vol. 7, pp. 401–403. 124 Jürgens, Lasco in Ostfriesland, p. 269.
This page intentionally left blank
John a Lasco and the London Strangers’ Church: The Origins and Development of the Forma ac ratio On 24 July, 1550, King Edward VI created the London Strangers’ Church for the growing number of foreign Protestants seeking religious refuge in England. Recent attempts to stamp out heresy on the European continent had led many to England’s shores. Among them was John a Lasco who, a short time after his arrival in 1550, was appointed superintendent of the new church.1 Over the next three years, he worked to unite the refugees under a single doctrine and common set of liturgical rites. It was with this goal in mind that he wrote his most signiﬁcant contribution to ecclesiastical organization and practice – the Forma ac ratio. The ordinance records the administration, ceremonies and discipline observed by the exiles and includes Lasco’s own explanations defending the rites. It is the most complete description of a church under his leadership that has survived, making it a principal text for understanding the reformer’s ideas about church administration and ceremonies. The document is also important for understanding Lasco’s career and how he translated theological ideas into concrete rituals for lay audiences. The comprehensive nature of the document and the distinctive model it provided makes it one of the most remarkable church ordinances to appear in the sixteenth century. This chapter explores the origins and developments of the London Strangers’ Church and Lasco’s ordinance. When he began writing the work, the Polish reformer intended it to serve as a guide to the foreigners. It was meant to instruct the faithful about belief and rites, and to defend their practices against the criticisms of local English clerics. However by
1 The Strangers’ Church was created by royal charter on 24 July 1550, reprinted in Lasco, Forma ac ratio tota Ecclessiastici Ministerii, in peregrinorum, potißimum vero Germanorum Ecclesia (Frankfurt, 1555), sigs Pp4r–Pp8v. The decree explains that the church was created for those foreigners seeking refuge on account of ‘religionis causa calamitate fractis & afﬂictis exulibus’, sig. Pp4v. See also Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series of the reign of Edward VI 1547–1553, ed. C.S. Knighton (London, 1992), pp. 166–7; J. Lindeboom, Austin Friars: History of the Dutch Reformed Church in London 1550–1950, trans. D. de Iongh (The Hague, 1950), pp. 7–11; Andrew Pettegree, Foreign Protestant Communities in Sixteenth-Century London (Oxford, 1986), pp. 23–45; and Dirk W. Rodgers, John à Lasco in England (New York, 1996), pp. 27–33.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
the time the work was published in 1555, he had much greater aspirations for it. Lasco hoped that the Forma ac ratio would provide a blueprint for ecclesiastical reform that could overcome confessional divisions and reunite Christ’s universal Church. The Refugee Church The London Strangers’ Church was created for the foreign Protestants living in England’s capital city. Many of the immigrants had come to London during the early part of the century as merchants and craftsmen seeking access to the city’s markets. By mid-century, however, they came in increasing numbers as religious refugees. An estimated 5000 to 6000 foreigners were thought to be living in London in 1550, which accounted for 5 to 8 per cent of the total population.2 With the growing numbers of Protestant exiles came the need for their own worship services. A group of French refugees began meeting in Canterbury in the summer of 1548 to hear Francis Perussel preach in their native tongue.3 A Dutch congregation assembled in the capital city by the end of that same year and many leading theologians were aiding their search for a permanent preacher. Bernardino Ochino wrote to Wolfgang Musculus in December 1548 inviting the reformer to England. He explained that work could be had lecturing at Cambridge University or preaching to the Dutch in London.4 Musculus declined the offer and the following March he wrote to Heinrich Bullinger, explaining that the congregation still had not found a suitable minister.5 Finding a leader for these refugees proved a difﬁcult task. In August 1549, nearly nine months after the Dutch Protestants began meeting, Martin Bucer sent a letter to the German theologian Albert Hardenberg 2 Pettegree, Foreign Protestant Communities, pp. 16–17. There are several other studies that examine the foreign populations in London and England during this period, including W. Cunningham, Alien Immigrants to England (2nd edn, London, 1969), pp. 137– 89; and Bernard Cottret, Terre d’exil:L’Angleterre et ses réfugiés 16e–7e siècles (Paris, 1985), pp. 73–95. 3 A Dutch refugee in England, Jan Utenhove, organized this French congregation. D. Karl Bauer, Valèrand Poullain, ein kirchengeschichtliches Zeitbild aus der Mitte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts (Elberfeld, 1927), p. 128. 4 Bernardino Ochino to Wolfgang Musculus, a theological professor in Bern, 23 December 1548, in Original Letters Relative to the English Reformation, Written during the Reigns of King Henry VIII., King Edward VI., and Queen Mary: Chieﬂy from the Archives of Zurich, ed. Hastings Robinson (2 vols, Cambridge, 1846), vol. 1, pp. 336–7. See also Pettegree, Foreign Protestant Communities, pp. 23–5. Pettegree notes that although the primary sources often describe this congregation as ‘German’ or ‘Flemish’, they actually spoke Brabant, suggesting they came from the Low Countries rather than Germany ‘in the modern sense’. 5 Wolfgang Musculus to Heinrich Bullinger, 12 March 1549, OL, Robinson, vol. 1, pp. 336–7.
JOHN A LASCO AND THE LONDON STRANGERS’ CHURCH
in Bremen seeking his assistance in the search. Their quest ﬁnally ended in the summer of 1550 when, following Lasco’s arrival in London, he was appointed superintendent of the new Strangers’ Church for the French and Dutch immigrants. It is likely that the Polish reformer’s earlier efforts to create a refugee church contributed to the decision to name him as its leader. He had received a letter from Archbishop Thomas Cranmer in 1548 inviting him to participate in a proposed synod to settle the doctrinal disputes in the English Church.7 Lasco’s offer was not unique; the English primate had sent similar letters to many leading reformers presenting England as a safe refuge for Protestants and inviting them to participate in his proposed assembly.8 Lasco accepted the offer and arrived in September 1548, lodging at Cranmer’s home at Lambeth Palace during his stay.9 Although the proposed synod never took place, the reformer used his time in England to push for the creation of a church for foreigners. His motives were personal. He still was superintendent of the East Frisian territorial church during this time and his beleaguered congregations faced an uncertain future following the emperor’s recent victory over the Protestant Schmalkaldic League. He hoped to secure a refuge for his own church.10 It appears that the Dutch congregation that had begun meeting in London in 1549 resulted from his endeavours. The Cambridge professor Paul Fagius reported to his former student, John Marbach, in April 1549, that a church for the Dutch had been formed in London through the Polish reformer’s efforts.11
Martin Bucer to Albert Hardenberg, 14 August 1549, ibid., p. 538. The original invitation has not survived, but Cranmer sent a second letter to Lasco in Emden on 4 July 1548, in which he made reference to his earlier offer. Miscellaneous Writings and Letters of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, Martyr, 1556, ed. John Edmund Cox (Cambridge, 1846), pp. 420–21. 8 For the text of Martin Bucer and Philip Melanchthon’s invitations, see OL, Robinson, vol. 1, pp. 19–22. 9 Lasco to Francis Dryander, 21 September 1548, in Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa, ed. Abraham Kuyper (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1866), vol. 2, pp. 619–620. See also Cranmer to Melanchthon, 10 February 1549, OL, Robinson, vol. 1, pp. 21–2. 10 The Groningen theologian Ubbo Emmius recounts the search for a safe refuge for the Dutch church in Rerum Frisicarum historia autore Ubbone Emmio, Frisio distincta in decades sex quarum postrema nunc primùm prodit, prioribus ita recognitis & locupletatis, ut novae prorsus videri possint … ‘ accedunt praeterea De Frisia et Republ. Frisiorum, inter Fleuum et Visurgim Flumina, libri aliquot, ab eodem autore conscripti (1616), p. 935. 11 Paul Fagius had been a professor in Strassburg before emigrating to England with Bucer. The letter is printed in Gleanings of a few scattered ears, during the period of the Reformation in England and of the times immediately succeeding; A.D. 1533 to A.D. 1588, ed. George C. Gorham (London, 1857), no. 77. Martin Micron wrote to Bullinger that Lasco had established a ‘Flemish’ church in London. Micron to Bullinger, 4 June 1550, OL, Robinson, vol. 2, p. 565. See also Diarmaid MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski in the 7
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
The East Frisian superintendent brieﬂy returned to Germany in March 1549. He travelled to Bremen to visit his friend Albert Hardenberg and then on to Hamburg and the preacher John Aepinus. He continued on to Königsberg to meet with Duke Albrecht before returning to his home in Emden.12 Upon his arrival in East Frisia in August, Lasco was confronted with the negative impact of the Augsburg Interim on his territorial church. Countess Anna von Oldenburg had agreed to a religious settlement with Charles V during the reformer’s absence that required her to relieve the superintendent of his ofﬁce and expel him from the territory.13 Having lost the support of Anna and her council, Lasco and his family returned to England. As noted above, his arrival in London in May 1550 signalled the end to the search for a suitable leader for the foreign congregations. The reformer and his wife were made denizens for life and awarded a stipend of £100 a year just one month after their arrival.14 The following month, on 24 July 1550, King Edward VI issued a letter of privilege creating the Strangers’ Church and appointing Lasco as its superintendent.15 The ofﬁcially sanctioned church for foreign Protestants was a unique institution in London. The royal charter established a corporate framework that united the French and Dutch congregations into a single ecclesiastical body.16 The king granted Austin Friars to them for worship services and
English Reformation’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen, 2000), p. 323. 12 For Lasco’s complete itinerary, see Henning P. Jürgens, Johannes a Lasco in Ostfriesland: der Werdegang eines europäischen Reformators (Tübingen, 2002), pp. 333–7. 13 Lasco to the Duke of Prussia, 21 October 1549, Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 633. See also Pettegree, Foreign Protestant Communities, p. 55, and Jürgens, Lasco in Ostfriesland, p. 344. 14 MacCulloch ‘The importance of Jan Laski’, p. 325. The author suggests that his denizen status was quickly awarded to him, and that the unusually short period of time suggests that Lasco was favoured to lead the Strangers’ Church. 15 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. Pp6v. 16 The king’s letter only mentioned the French and Brabant-speaking (German) refugees. There is some debate, however, over whether this also included a smaller Italian congregation. Cranmer had encouraged Italians to come to England in 1547 and 1548, and the preacher Michelangelo Florio accepted his invitation. There is confusion about when an ofﬁcial Italian Church was established. The historians O. Boersma and A.J. Jelsma assert that it came much later during the reign of Elizabeth I. Unity in Multiformity: the minutes of the coetus of London, 1575, and the consistory minutes of the Italian Church of London, 1570–1591 eds O. Boersma and A.J. Jelsma (London, 1997), pp. 21–5. Their claim contradicts the French preacher, Valerand Poullain, who wrote in 1552 that the king’s charter had established a church for the Dutch (Flemish), French and Italian refugees. Poullain’s remarks suggest an Italian congregation as early as 1552. Valerand Poullain, L’ordre des priers et minister ecclsiastique, auec la forme de penitence pub. & certaines prieres de l’Eglise de Londres, et la confession de foy de l’Eglise de Glastonbury en Somerset (London, 1552), sig. *iiv.
JOHN A LASCO AND THE LONDON STRANGERS’ CHURCH
appointed four ministers: Marten Micron and Gualter Delenus were to preach to the Dutch congregation; Francis Perussel and Richard Vauville were named as French ministers.17 In addition, the royal charter endowed the church with a remarkable level of religious autonomy. The French and Dutch congregations were not incorporated into the hierarchy of the English Church and they remained outside the London bishop’s jurisdiction. They answered, instead, to the king and archbishop. The letter of privilege bestowed on the foreigners the right to choose their own ministers, although the king retained ﬁnal approval for preachers and superintendents.18 Such autonomy meant that they were free to follow their own practices providing they did not contradict the English doctrine. To protect these liberties, the charter warned the bishops, ministers and other ecclesiastical ofﬁcials in London to observe these rights granted to the refugees and to not hinder their attempts to follow their own ceremonies and discipline.19 Archbishop Cranmer and the refugees both beneﬁted from the creation of the London Strangers’ Church. French and Dutch congregations already had been holding their own worship services in England and the royal letter of privilege united the foreigners into a single ecclesiastical structure and gave ofﬁcial sanction to their activities. Many in London were concerned that religious radicals were living among the immigrant population and the foundation of the church sought to remove such inﬂuences by establishing a formal structure to oversee preaching.20 Suspicion that Anabaptists and other radical groups were hiding among the foreigners was not unfounded. Marten Micron had written to Heinrich Bullinger two months before the royal charter was published, explaining that it was important for ministers to preach to the foreigners in their native language in order to protect them against the false beliefs that their own countrymen had been introducing in London.21 The creation of the Strangers’ Church brought the refugees together into a single, organized body that could promote doctrinal
17 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs Pp5r–v and Pp6v. Marten Micron also appears as Marten Flandrus, while Francis Perussel is also called Francis Riverius, and Richard Vauville appears as Richard Gallus. 18 Ibid., sigs Pp6v–Pp7r.
Ibid., sig. Pp7r.
The idea that the Strangers’ Church was founded as part of a general movement against religious radicals is discussed more thoroughly in Rodgers, Lasco in England, pp. 30–31, Diarmaid MacCulloch, Tudor Church Militant: Edward VI and the Protestant Reformation (London, 1999), p. 141, and MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski’, p. 327. 21 Marten Micron explained that there were ‘Arians, Marcionists, Libertines, Danists, and the like monstrosities, in great numbers’ in England. Micron to Bullinger, 20 May 1550, in OL, Robinson, vol. 2, pp. 558–60.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
conformity and protect these communities from the inﬂuence of such radicals. Thomas Cranmer also had personal motives for establishing this new church. The archbishop wanted to introduce ecclesiastical reforms in England similar to the practices found in Reformed congregations on the continent, and he hoped that the London foreigners could become a model for his future reforms.22 Not everyone, however, was in favour of this new ecclesiastical body. Although the king and archbishop supported the foreigners, there was powerful opposition to the autonomy that had been granted to them. Most notable among their opponents was Nicholas Ridley, the Bishop of London, who criticized their practices.23 Their adversaries presented powerful opposition and had some success in hindering the church’s development. In accordance with the king’s order, Lasco requested permission from the Lord Treasurer to begin using Austin Friars for their Sunday services in August 1550. Micron reported to Bullinger that this public ofﬁcial denied the request, explaining that the church was a gift from Edward VI and could not be used until sufﬁcient repairs were completed. He also recounted that the Lord Treasurer had criticized their liturgical privilege and demanded that they should ‘either adopt the English ceremonies or disprove them by the word of God’. The Dutch preacher concluded that ‘all this mischief is stirred up against us by the bishops, and especially by the bishop of London.’24 The Lord Treasurer eventually relented and turned over the keys to Austin Friars before the end of the year. The French and Dutch congregations were successful in securing their chapel but they continued to face attacks over their liturgical liberties.25 They suffered another serious setback in October 1550 when the opposing bishops convinced the king’s council to suspend their sacramental privileges. Micron reported this reversal to Bullinger, explaining that the French and Dutch congregations were no longer able to observe their own rites, but rather had to follow the English practices for baptism and the Lord’s Supper.26 Lasco argued for the restoration of the church’s liberties granted by the royal charter. In 1552 he published a series of lectures defending the 22 MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski’, pp. 325–6. The author adds that the remarkable autonomy held by the refugees and the use of the prominent Austin Friars chapel all pointed towards Cranmer’s plan to use the foreigners as a model for reforming his own church. 23 Micron reported that ‘some of the bishops, especially the bishop of London with certain others, are opposed to our design. But I hope their opposition will be ineffectual.’ Micron to Bullinger, 28 August 1550, in OL, Robinson, vol. 2, pp. 566–9. 24 Ibid., pp. 567–8. 25 Lasco wrote to Hardenberg that the foreigners had taken possession of the building before the year’s end. Lasco to Hardenberg, 12 December 1550, in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 644. 26 Micron to Bullinger, 13 October 1550, in OL, Robinson, vol. 2, p. 573.
JOHN A LASCO AND THE LONDON STRANGERS’ CHURCH
foreigners’ Eucharistic rite under the title of Brevis et dilucida de sacramentis Ecclesia Christi tractatio.27 The sacramental liberty was restored later that same year.28 The strong opposition in London complicated the difﬁcult task facing the superintendent. He hoped to unite the French and Dutch congregations together under a single doctrine, eliminate the inﬂuence of religious radicals and provide a model for reform. At the same time, he struggled to defend their rites and practices from powerful critics opposed to the church’s autonomy. Lasco took his ﬁrst step towards building doctrinal uniformity among the foreigners with the publication of the church’s confession in January 1551.29 The Compendium doctrinae, which he dedicated to the Zurich preacher Heinrich Bullinger, outlined the principal matters of faith for the French and Dutch congregations and was divided into two distinct parts.30 In the ﬁrst section, he addresses the deﬁnition and marks of the true Church, the nature of Christ and the priesthood, and the ofﬁce of ministers. The second part contains liturgical instructions including prayers to be spoken before and after sermons. The publication of this confession marks an important stage in the establishment of the Strangers’ Church. It codiﬁes and articulates the foreigners’ doctrine for its members and their English
27 Lasco, Brevis et dilucida de sacramentis Ecclesiae Christi tractatio, in qua et fons ipse et ratio, totius Sacramentariae nostri temporis controversiae paucis exponitur: naturaque ac vis Sacramentorum compendio et perspicue explicatur, per Ioannem à Lasco, Baronem Poloniae, superintendentem Ecclesiae peregrinorum Londini (London, 1552), printed in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 1, pp. 97–232. 28 Although it is not certain when the privilege to use their sacramental rites was restored, it appears this came in the early part of 1552. Lasco had reported to Bullinger in January 1551 that they were currently preaching in German and French, and that he hoped to have the sacramental ceremonies and discipline in place in a short time. Lasco to Bullinger, 7 January 1551, in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, pp. 646–7. Micron made the last recorded mention of this controversy in August 1551, noting that they still could not use their own rites but that the Polish reformer was working to have them restored. Micron to Bullinger, 14 August 1551, in OL, Robinson, vol. 2, p. 575. It seems likely that this liberty had been restored to the church before the spring of 1552 when the Dutch and French churches published their liturgies containing instructions for baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Rodgers, Lasco in England, pp. 36–8. 29 Lasco, Compendium doctrinae de vera unicaque dei et christi Ecclesia, eiusq[ue] ﬁde [et] confeßione pura: in qua Peregrinorum Ecclesia Londini instituta est, auto[ri]tate atq[ue] assensu Sacrae Majestatis Regiae Quem Deus Opt. Max. ad singulare Ecclesiæ suæ decus ornamentum ac defensionem (per gratiam suam) servet, guvernet & fortunet (London, 1551). See also Rodgers, Lasco in England, pp. 33–6. 30 Lasco wrote in the preface to the Compendium doctrinae that this text summarized the Church’s doctrine, followed the apostolic model, and addressed all the principal matters for their salvation. Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, pp. 289–90. Lasco sent copies of the work to Bullinger with a letter explaining that this was the doctrine of the London church. Lasco to Bullinger, 7 January 1551, ibid., p. 646.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
hosts. It also seeks to protect the refugees from religious radicals. Anyone who wished to join the church had to subscribe publicly to this confession before the ministers could record their name in the register.31 Besides articulating their doctrine, Lasco used the Compendium doctrinae to protect the foreigners’ rites and practices. He sought to defend the church by demonstrating its ancient foundations and by securing royal support. He recognized the powerful opposition on the king’s council, explaining to Edward VI: We offer to your Majesty the King this summary of our apostolic confession with the utmost respect, so that we might testify to you, and to our Church, our zealous faith and respect and, at the same time, may also resist the deceit of our rivals if, by chance, they should hope to aggravate us on these points in front of you or your most honourable Senate, or elsewhere or anywhere, either from envy, as it may be, or from suspicions in whatever way.32
The right to follow their own sacramental ceremonies had been revoked prior to the confession’s publication and Lasco appealed to the monarch to prevent the loss of any more liberties. He acknowledged the current controversy over the Lord’s Supper and baptism, and added that he would be writing more on these speciﬁc ceremonies in the near future.33 Concerning the foreigners’ connection to the ancient traditions, he explains that the true Church had been called together by God and had followed his divine doctrine, and that the model was repeated by Christ and his apostles.34 Lasco emphasizes the similarities between his confession and the apostolic doctrine. In addition, he describes three marks for discerning the true Church: continuity with antiquity, observance of the apostolic faith and a public profession of doctrine that demonstrates its foundation.35 He argues that all three elements are present in the foreign congregations and in the refugees’ new confession. Lasco hoped the Compendium doctrinae would reduce the religious radicals’ inﬂuence among the foreign populations in London, as well as expunge any remaining traces of Roman customs. The text outlines ofﬁcial doctrine and marks the boundaries of acceptable belief, making it easier to identify unorthodox elements. Lasco explains that their adversaries lacked the marks of the true Church. Unlike the French and Dutch congregations, the ‘Muslims, Roman Church, Anabaptists, and Davidists’ could not claim to be part of Christ’s Church because they all had originated ‘in more recent times’ and could not claim to be direct descendents of the ancient 31
Ibid. Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 290. 33 Ibid., vol. 2, p. 326. 34 Ibid., vol. 2, pp. 294–6. 35 Ibid., vol. 2, p. 296. Lasco discusses each of these marks in greater detail on pp. 296–300. 32
JOHN A LASCO AND THE LONDON STRANGERS’ CHURCH
Church. He warns that groups like the Anabaptists threaten to divide the Church because they maintain practices and ceremonies that had not been divinely instituted.37 The confession also served a practical function as a statement of orthodoxy. Anyone wanting to join the congregations was required to make a public oath to observe the doctrine as a requirement for membership.38 With a clear confession established, the Polish superintendent turned his attention towards a common liturgy for the French and Dutch communities. In the same letter sent to Zurich with copies of the Compendium doctrinae, Lasco informed Bullinger that he was currently writing instructions for the sacramental rites and ecclesiastical discipline observed in London, and added that he hoped to complete it in the near future.39 The ambiguous description makes it difﬁcult to identify with certainty the speciﬁc work to which he was referring. It is possible that he was speaking about the Brevis et dilucida, which was published the following year. This seems unlikely, however, since the text does not address discipline. A more probable alternative is that he was alluding to an early draft of the Forma ac ratio, which he began writing sometime before the spring of 1552. This letter would suggest that he had started composing his ordinance as early as January 1551, following the completion of the Compendium doctrinae. Although it is unclear exactly when he began writing the work and if he, in fact, was referring to it in this letter to Bullinger, his intention to bring the foreigners together under a common liturgy is certain. The Dutch elder Jan Utenhove published a vernacular translation of the confession and a new edition of Lasco’s East Frisian catechism in the spring of 1551.40 During this same year, Micron wrote a brief description of the administration and ceremonies to be followed by the Dutch congregation in London.41 De
Ibid., vol. 2, p. 300. Lasco points to the Anabaptists and their use of adult baptism to show the danger of retaining ceremonies that had not been divinely instituted. Ibid., vol. 2, p. 326. 38 Ibid., vol. 2, p. 324. 39 Lasco to Bullinger, 7 January 1551, ibid., vol. 2, p. 646. 40 Jan Utenhove, Een Kort Begrijp der leeringhe van de warachtige ende eenighe Ghemeynte Gods ende Christi ende van haer gheloone ende oprechtighe belijdinghe (London, 1551). A copy of the 1565 Emden edition is printed alongside Lasco’s Latin version in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, pp. 293–339. Utenhove’s preface to the work is dated 15 May 1551. Ibid., vol. 2, pp. 340–475. See also Rodgers, Lasco in England, p. 52. 41 Marten Micron, De Christlicke Ordinancien der nederlantscher Ghemeinten te Londen (1554), ed. Willem Frederik Dankbaar (‘s-Gravenhage, 1956). The work was not published until Micron returned to Emden in 1554 but, as the title page and content suggest, he probably wrote it in London. Ibid., p. 31. Micron also refers to the London church in the preface, supporting this claim of its earlier composition. Ibid., p. 39. See also Pettegree, Foreign Protestant Communities, pp. 56–7. 37
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Christlicke Ordinancien provided a brief summary of Lasco’s ordinance that he currently was writing. The Dutch minister explained the relationship between the two works in his introduction to the manuscript, writing that his summary was shaped by Lasco’s ‘book’.42 The similarity in content supports this connection and suggests that both men were writing their orders at the same time in 1551. This same movement towards a common liturgy could be found in London’s French congregation. Valerand Poullain published L’ordre des prieres et ministere ecclesiastique in 1552 describing the ceremonies and practices observed by the French church. This document was modelled on the Strassburg and Genevan liturgies but caused some problems among the foreigners when it appeared.43 The conﬂict centred on its lack of a public rite for discipline and its liturgical instructions for the Eucharist, which was not in complete agreement with Lasco’s symbolic understanding of the Lord’s Supper.44 Poullain published a second liturgy later that same year, the Doctrine de la penitence publique, correcting the perceived deﬁciencies of his earlier work by adopting the Polish superintendent’s prescriptions for discipline and the Lord’s Supper.45 Lasco and his ministers had made great strides in establishing the London Strangers’ Church by the end of 1552. They had secured Austin Friars for their worship services and had instituted an ofﬁcial administrative structure to govern the congregations. The Polish reformer had published a common confession to unite the foreigners and the ministers had produced liturgical orders concerning the ceremonies and practices observed in their churches. With the confession and liturgy established, Lasco was able to turn his attention to ﬁnishing his most signiﬁcant work – the Forma ac ratio – in which he was recording detailed and comprehensive descriptions, as well as a spirited defence, of the administration, ceremonies and discipline of the foreign congregations in London. The Forma ac ratio Lasco’s letter to Bullinger and Micron’s comments in the Christlicke Ordinancien suggest he had begun the ordinance in 1551. The struggle over sacramental liberties must have drawn his attention away from the work but, with the resolution of this problem in 1552, he could focus on completing
Micron, Christlicke Ordinancien, p. 39. Bauer, Valérand Poullain, pp. 141–8. 44 Rodger, Lasco in England, pp. 53–4. 45 Valerand Poullain, Doctrine de la Penitence Publique, Et La Forme d’icelle ainsi comme elle se practique en l’Eglise des estrangiers a Londres, deuant qu’on vienne a l’excommunication, Ensenble aussi la forme d’administrer la saincte Cene (London, 1552). 43
JOHN A LASCO AND THE LONDON STRANGERS’ CHURCH
it. The Polish reformer wrote to Bullinger in June 1553: ‘at present I am writing the ceremonies of our church and all of the administration in our ministry. I hope it will appear before winter.’46 The superintendent’s plan, however, again was interrupted the following month with the death of England’s young Protestant king. Mary I succeeded her half-brother to the throne and quickly dissolved the Strangers’ congregations as part of her programme to re-establish the Roman Church in England. Many French and Dutch Protestants chose to return to the continent rather than remain in London. Lasco also opted to leave and, on 17 September 1553, he joined 165 other former members of the Strangers’ Church who departed by ship from Gravesend.47 They travelled to Denmark, Holstein, and then on to Bremen before eventually arriving in Emden the following spring. The former leader of the Strangers’ Church had carried the unﬁnished manuscript on this journey and, upon settling again in East Frisia, he turned his attention toward completing and publishing the work. Despite the interruptions, Lasco had completed the majority of his ordinance before leaving London in 1553. The Polish reformer indicated in his letter to Bullinger in June that the work was nearing completion. Frequent references concerning Edward VI throughout the document conﬁrm it was written before the young sovereign’s death. Moreover the dedicatory letter, preface, and some editing were the only tasks to be carried out following Lasco’s arrival in the German territory, according to the author. The reformer reported to Hardenberg on 28 March 1554 that he currently was composing the ordinance’s preface.48 The dedicatory letter was the ﬁnal piece written and it was here that Lasco referred to revisions being made after the foreigners had left England.49 This letter was dated 6 September 1555, the same month that the completed ordinance appeared from the Frankfurt press.50 An obvious question arises over Lasco’s motivations for publishing the work. If his intention was to provide instructions about doctrine and
Lasco to Bullinger, 7 June 1553, in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 677. Pettegree, ‘The London Exile Community and the Second Sacramentarian Controversy, 1553–1560’, in Marian Protestantism, pp. 58–62. 48 The Polish reformer wrote to Hardenberg that he currently was writing the preface to the ordinance. Lasco to Hardenberg, 28 March 1555, Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 700. 49 Lasco explained in the preface to the ordinance that he had begun to record the rites and ministry in London, and that following his move back to East Frisia, ‘many of my points were revisited, and afterward the arguments of my plan and the advice for the church … were enlarged. These things, which I add to the pages in the edition of this book, should not disturb it in any way.’ Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs ζ3v–ζ4r. 50 Ibid., sig. ζ4v. This dedicatory letter and preface are the only part of the completed Forma ac ratio referring to the death of Edward VI, conﬁrming that they were written after the king’s death in July 1553. 47
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
practices for the London congregations, and to defend those practices against their English critics, why complete the work following the church’s dissolution in 1553? The answer to this question can be found in the refugees’ experience after returning to the continent. The French and Dutch Protestants re-established exile churches in several cities and towns including Emden, Wesel, Frankfurt, Zurich and Geneva. The Forma ac ratio provided an important blueprint for these new congregations, which modelled themselves on Lasco’s London church. The Polish reformer also hoped the work would add to the larger Protestant discourse about the best nature and scope of reform. The Latin text was intended to reach a wider audience of theologians and to promote Lasco’s vision for Christ’s reformed Church. The detailed description and defence of the practices, the polemical attacks on Lutheran and Catholic critics, and his emphasis on the similarity with the ancient and apostolic traditions reﬂect this larger goal. He saw the work as a model that could overcome the confessional differences and reunite the fractured Church. He explained in the preface to the Forma ac ratio: ‘I joined discipline to practice so that no further disagreement of this type, whether of doctrine or spirit, will rise up in our churches … and I hope that [the ordinance] will be raised up and instituted.’51 Lasco began printing his ordinance in Emden during the autumn of 1554. He turned to two familiar printers for this task: Nicholas Hill, or van der Berge, and Gellius Ctematius, or van der Erve. Both men had run presses in London during Edward’s reign and had produced works for the Dutch congregation there. The men returned to East Frisia following the dissolution of the Strangers’ Church, where they re-established their printing operations.52 Lasco ﬁnally could report to Bullinger on 5 October 1554 that his ordinance was ‘now under the press’.53 The publication, however, was interrupted before the text was ﬁnished. A group of Dutch exiles from London had settled in Frankfurt and were establishing a new refugee church. They invited the Polish reformer to come and organize their ﬂedgling congregation.54 Lasco accepted the offer and, in the spring of 1555, he moved to Frankfurt taking with him the printed sheets of the unﬁnished ordinance.55 Once settled, he resumed
Ibid., sig. B8r. For a discussion of the printers Hill and Ctematius, see Pettegree, Foreign Protestant Communities, pp. 88–90; and F. Isaac, ‘Egidius van der Erve and his English Printed Books,’ The Library, 4/12 (1932): 336–52. 53 Lasco to Bullinger, 5 October 1554, in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 708. 54 Bartel, Jan Łaski, pp. 171–2. Lasco explained to Bullinger that he had formed a new Dutch refugee church in Frankfurt. Lasco to Bullinger, 19 September 1555, in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 714. 55 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. ζ4r. 52
JOHN A LASCO AND THE LONDON STRANGERS’ CHURCH
Title page of the Forma ac ratio (1555)
publishing the work and the completed Forma ac ratio emerged from an unidentiﬁed press in September.56 Close examination of the text suggests the Emden printers had completed approximately two-thirds of the work before the reformer moved to Frankfurt. Although the type sets appear to be nearly identical, there are two notable characteristics that distinguish the presses. The ﬁrst of these concerns the numbers used to indicate important points in the text. Lasco often uses such numbers in the work. In his discussion of baptism, for example, he writes that parents should agree to three principal points – which he numbers – to follow the Church’s doctrine, to preserve the confession of faith, and to submit to the ecclesiastical 56 Lasco to Bullinger, 19 September 1555, Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 714. Pettegree identiﬁes ‘Egenolff’ as the possible Frankfurt printer. See Pettegree, Marian Protestantism, p. 32; and Pettegree, Dutch Revolt, p. 161.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
discipline.57 Ctematius and Hill employed Roman numerals to distinguish these elements. In contrast, Arabic numbers are used in the ﬁnal third of the document suggesting that a different printer completed this part of the work.58 A comparison with the French translation of Lasco’s ordinance, the Toute la forme & maniere du Ministere Ecclesiastique underscores this difference and suggests that the ﬁnal third of the ordinance was not printed in Emden.59 This French edition was printed entirely by Hill and Ctematius in 1556 and uses Roman numerals consistently throughout the text. A change in folio signatures also coincides with the use of Arabic numbers.60 There is no punctuation included in signatures in the section printed in Emden. A page would be marked, for example, as ‘Gg4’. This changes in the latter part of the text, where punctuation is added, making the signature read ‘Gg.4.’ or ‘Gg,4.’ (see ﬁgure 3.2). These distinct features in the ﬁnal third of the text suggest that Lasco carried at least two-thirds of the ﬁnished sheets with him when he departed Emden in 1554. Once in Frankfurt, the Polish reformer resumed printing his ordinance. The completed work begins with the last piece written: the letter to Sigismund August.61 His dedication to the Polish king is not surprising given his family connection to the country. There were also signs that the monarch was increasingly receptive to evangelical reforms. He married Barbara Radziwill in 1550, the sister of the powerful Protestant noble Nicholas Radziwill. It is possible that Lasco also was aware of important changes that recently had taken place following a diet in 1555. Like the Peace of Augsburg that same year, the king agreed that nobles were free to choose the religion for their territories and he requested permission from Rome to hold vernacular masses, to allow priests to marry and to administer both bread and wine during the Lord’s Supper.62 These requests were denied but Lasco hoped that Sigismund August would look favourably
Lasco, Form ac ratio, sig. K3r. The ﬁrst Roman numerals appear on sig. C4v and run through Ee5v. The Arabic numerals, in contrast, are found in the ﬁnal one-third of the document, sigs Iir through Oo8r. 59 Lasco, Toute la forme & maniere du Ministere Ecclesiastique, en l’Eglise des estra[n]gers, dressee a Londres en Angleterre, par le Prince tres ﬁdele dudit pays, le Roy Edouard. VI. De ce nom: L’an apres l’incarnation de Christ. 1550. auec le previlege de sa Majeste a la ﬁn duliure. Par M. Iean a Lasco. Baron de Polonie. Traduit de Latin en Francois,& imprimé par Giles Ctematius (Emden, 1556). 60 The use of punctuation in the folio signatures is ﬁrst found on sig. Ff2r, close to the same place that the changes in numbering also occur in the text. 61 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. α2r. 62 Janusz Tazbir, ‘Poland’, in The Reformation in national context, eds. Bob Scribner et al. (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 168–9; Eduard Kneifel, Geschichte der EvangelischAugsburgischen Kirche in Polen (Niedermarschacht, 1962), pp. 26–7; and William J. Rose, The Protestant Churches in Poland (London, 1944), p. 9. 58
JOHN A LASCO AND THE LONDON STRANGERS’ CHURCH
A. Comparison of numbers Emden (sig. K3r)
Frankfurt (sig. Nn5v)
B. Comparison of folio signatures Emden
3.2 Comparison of Emden and Frankfurt presses
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
on his ordinance. His dedication to the Polish king also comes from the weakened position of the reformer and his refugee congregations following Edward VI’s death in 1553. They had lost their most powerful ally. The support of secular princes and magistrates was crucial for protecting the exiles’ liberties and for defending their ordinance from critics, and Lasco hoped he would ﬁnd a potent supporter in Sigismund August. Lasco begins the letter by noting that ‘recently there has been a great complaint’ that no single description of the Church’s ministry exists – a common ministry that the apostles had established. He blames the current problems on the papacy, who led the Church to its degraded state.63 He also attacks Luther and his followers. Lasco criticizes the Marburg Colloquy and the Augsburg Confession, challenging the doctrine of Christ’s real presence in the Eucharist and calling Luther and his followers ‘Lutheropapists’.64 He then presents the Strangers’ Church as a model for reform, emphasizing their similarities with the apostolic practices. He ends the letter recounting the foreigners’ experience after leaving England, especially their difﬁculties in ﬁnding a refuge where they could follow their own sacramental rites. He reveals his motivations for the royal dedication here, urging Sigismund August to follow the lead of the ‘most Christian king’ Edward VI and to establish a national Protestant Church based on the Forma ac ratio.65 Moreover, he urges the monarch to defend the ordinance and the controversial sacramental rites with his royal authority.66 The preface was also composed after the London church’s dissolution and addresses Lasco’s reasons for writing the ordinance. He explains that the universal Church, like the religious refugees in London, need law and order, writing: Just as a house cannot stand ﬁrmly without a domestic economy, or likewise a ship cannot succeed without a navigator, a state cannot truly govern a public without a just government or a good ruler, or a good leader. So, it is indeed certain that the Church of God and of Christ cannot be preserved without law, especially among so many groups of strangers and families of exiles.67
He adds that there were two distinct elements in Christ’s Church that must be observed: a legitimate ministry and observance of only those practices found in the Holy Scriptures.68 As in the dedicatory letter, he blames the papacy for the current crisis and charges that they have strayed from Christ’s intention. He defends the practices of the Strangers’ Church by
63 64 65 66 67 68
Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. ζ8r. Ibid., sigs ζ4v–ζ7v and δ2r. Ibid., sigs β3r and ζ4r–v. Ibid., sigs ζ4r–v and ε6r. Ibid., sig. B1r. Ibid., sigs B1r–B4v.
JOHN A LASCO AND THE LONDON STRANGERS’ CHURCH
emphasizing their continuity with the apostles and presents the ordinance as a model for overcoming the current confessional divisions.69 The remainder of the text describes and defends the rites and ceremonies of the London Strangers’ Church. He focuses on three key themes: ecclesiastical administration, public ministry, and discipline. Although the title page indicates that this work contains the ‘form and manner of the church ministry’ for the Dutch congregations, considerable information is included about the French practices.70 This is an ordinance for the entire Strangers’ Church. There were some differences between the two congregations, such as the schedule for worship services, and Lasco notes these in the text. The communities also, at times, followed different liturgies. In these cases, he provides only the Dutch practice in the text.71 It is in this principal section of the Forma ac ratio that the most signiﬁcant themes in Lasco’s career can be seen: his emphasis on using the Bible to settle religious disputes, his desire to reunite the universal Church, and his concern for education and moral living. Lasco concludes the ordinance by returning to his reasons for writing it. He offers the Forma ac ratio as a model for uniting the universal Church, arguing that it advances the purity and doctrine of Christ’s institution. Responding to the controversies encountered after leaving London, he explains that the work is intended to encourage affection towards the foreigners and to justify their ministry to all.72 Finally, he returns to the controversial sacramental rites, charging that French and Dutch congregations had offended some people in England because they had refused to follow other forms of baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Reﬂecting once more one of the primary motivations for publishing this ordinance, he writes that he hopes the document will provide a response to those criticisms.73 The Forma ac ratio is signiﬁcant because it provides a detailed description of the London practices and the most complete picture of Lasco’s distinctive vision for church reform. A question remains, however, about the extent to which these rites were implemented by the French and Dutch congregations. Few records exist from the refugee community during Edward VI’s reign, making it difﬁcult to asses the level to which these prescriptions were followed. There are some indications, however, that the ordinance was widely embraced by the foreigners. The church’s administration, certainly, followed Lasco’s model: a royal charter had 69
Ibid., sig. B2v. Ibid., sig. α1r. 71 Thomas Leaver discusses the Dutch liturgy in ‘Goostly psalmes and spirituall songes’: English and Dutch metrical psalms from Coverdale to Utenhove 1535–1566 (Oxford, 1991), pp. 152–8. 72 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs Pp2r–v. 73 Ibid., sig. Pp3r. 70
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
appointed the preachers in July 1550 and, according to Micron, the remaining positions of elders and deacons had been ﬁlled by October.74 The Forma ac ratio also reﬂects the actual liturgical practices in London, demonstrated by the ordinance’s agreement with the French and Dutch liturgies written in 1551 and 1552. The records of refugee congregations established on the continent following Edward VI’s death also suggest that the Forma ac ratio is an accurate depiction of the London practices. The foreigners modelled their new refugee churches on Lasco’s Strangers’ Church and, as will be discussed in Chapter Seven, they continued to use many of the practices described in his ordinance. The Polish reformer defended these practices based on their continuity with Christ’s institutions, as found in the Holy Scriptures, and presented the work as a key to reuniting the fractured universal Church. In his conclusion to the text, he urges readers to avoid all other models and to embrace his ordinance, which follows God’s Word and the apostolic order.75 The following chapters will examine in more detail Lasco’s speciﬁc proposals for ecclesiastical administration, the public ministry and discipline. The comprehensive nature of the work and the arguments he provides in support of their practices make this a crucial text for understanding this reformer’s vision of the true nature of Christ’s Church.
74 Martin Micron reported to Bullinger that four elders and four deacons had been appointed to aid the minister. Micron to Bullinger, 13 October 1550, OL, Robinson, vol. 2, pp. 570–71. 75 Lasco explains that ‘with this [book], a most advantageous plan is brought together for the administration of our church, which follows the basic principles of God’s Word and the apostolic usage not only in our ministry but indeed in the other rites of the Church.’ Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. Pp3v.
Ecclesiastical Administration and the London Strangers’ Church Among the key problems Protestant reformers faced in the sixteenth century is the question of the best form and manner of the visible Church’s administration. Luther’s attack on indulgences and his teaching of sola ﬁde had undermined traditional beliefs about the Church and clergy’s function as mediators of salvation. Evangelical theologians rejected the priest’s traditional, sacerdotal duties, although they could not always agree on the best form a reformed ministry should take. An important ideological shift was taking place across Protestant communities in spite of any practical differences: priests were being replaced by a new class of professional ministers who were regarded as preachers and teachers of doctrine rather than mediators of salvation. Church leaders sought to put these ideas into practice and new forms of ecclesiastical government emerged reﬂecting this novel understanding of ministers and their ofﬁce.1 John a Lasco also was concerned about the Church and clergy’s part in salvation. Like many of his Protestant contemporaries, his rejection of the priests’ sacerdotal function led him to re-evaluate the meaning and role of the Church. He deﬁned it as a voluntary body, writing in his 1551 Compendium doctrinae that the ‘true Church of God and Christ’ is an assembly of those who have been ‘called out by the voice of God’, and that it has four distinguishing characteristics: it is brought together by God, observes his divine doctrine, agrees with the teachings of Christ, and follows the apostolic model. In response to Catholics who had claimed legitimacy for the Roman Church based on its unbroken history stretching back to Christ and his apostles, the Polish reformer asserted that there are three marks distinguishing this ‘true Church’ from all imposters: continuity with antiquity, a doctrine that follows the apostles’ teachings, and a public profession of faith demonstrating
1 Robert N. Swanson, ‘Before the Protestant Clergy: the construction and deconstruction of Medieval priesthood’, and R. Emmet McLaughlin, ‘The Making of the Protestant Pastor: the theological foundations of a clerical estate’, in C. Scott Dixon and Luise Schorn-Schütte (eds), The Protestant Clergy of Early Modern Europe (London, 2003), pp. 39–78. See also Scott H. Hendrix, ‘In quest of the vera ecclesia: the crises of late medieval ecclesiology’, Viator, 7 (1976): 347–78.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
these roots in antiquity.2 He again repeats his deﬁnition in the Forma ac ratio, describing the Church as a voluntary body of the faithful whom God had called together. His description of the marks underwent some modiﬁcations however. Building on his earlier Compendium doctrinae, he concludes that the three distinguishing signs are the ministry of the Word, the correct administration of the sacraments, and the use of ecclesiastical discipline.3 Lasco asserts that the faithful could recognize Christ’s true Church through its use of these three elements. Lasco’s deﬁnition was common among Protestants and suggests the special inﬂuence of Reformed theologians on the London superintendent. The predominant Lutheran position, articulated in article 7 of the Augsburg Confession, had described the visible Church as a community of believers where the Gospel is ‘rightly taught’ and the sacraments ‘rightly administered’.4 Zwingli and Calvin generally agreed with this deﬁnition. The Zurich reformer described the Church similarly as a communion of saints and Calvin reiterated the same discernable marks as the Lutheran confession: ‘the Gospel purely preached and heard’ and ‘the sacraments administered according to the institution of Christ’.5 As the historian Robert Kingdon correctly points out, this Protestant emphasis on preaching and the correct observance of the sacraments signiﬁcantly challenged the Roman assertion that their large number of adherents, traditions and wealth supported their claim as the true Church.6 Lasco goes one step further than these other reformers, however, claiming discipline as a third mark of the visible Church. He was not the only theologian advocating this position. As mentioned previously, Bucer had similarly suggested that the ‘bann’ was a third mark.7 The Italian reformer Peter Martyr Vermigli writes in his Common Places (1583) that 2 Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa, ed. Abraham Kuyper (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1866), vol. 2, pp. 294–8. 3 John a Lasco, Forma ac ratio tota Ecclesiastici Ministerii, in peregrinorum, potißimum vero Germanorum Ecclesia (Frankfurt, 1555), sig. P2v. 4 Philippi Melanthonis Opera quae supersunt omnia, eds Carolus Gottlieb Bretschneider and Henry E. Bindseil (28 vols, Braunschweig, 1858), vol. 26, p. 276. 5 Huldreich Zwinglis sämtliche Werke, eds Emil Egli and Georg Finsler (6 vols, Zurich, 1990), vol. 2, p. 55, nos 11–14. See also Fritz Büsser, Die Prophezei: Humanismus und Reformation in Zürich, Ausgewählte Aufsätze und Vorträge (Bern, 1994), pp. 77–94, John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles (2 vols, Philadelphia, PA, 1960), vol. 2, pp. 1023–5. See also William Peter Stephens, The Theology of Huldrych Zwingli (Oxford, 1986), p. 260; John T. McNeill, ‘The Church in Sixteenth-Century Reformed Theology’, in Richard C. Gamble (ed.), Calvin’s Ecclesiology: Sacraments and Deacons (New York, 1992), pp. 252–5 and 261–2; and Killian McDonnell, John Calvin, the Church, and the Eucharist (Princeton, NJ, 1967), pp. 172–3. 6 Robert M. Kingdon, ‘Peter Martyr Vermigli and the marks of the true church’, in F.F. Church and T. George (eds), Continuity and Discontinuity in Church History: essays presented to George Huntston Williams (Leiden, 1979), p. 200. 7 See pp. 16–17.
the Church ‘is a company of believers, and regenerate persons, whom God calls together in Christ, by the Word and the Holy Ghost, and whom his ministers govern with pureness of doctrine, with lawful use of the sacraments, and with discipline’. He explains that these were the three marks that could be used to identify the true Church.8 Although Lasco and Vermigli held similar views, it is unclear if there was any direct connection between them regarding this matter. Both men resided in England during the early 1550s and it is possible that the Italian reformer had some inﬂuence on Lasco or, at the very least, that the London superintendent was familiar with his ideas. The Common Places was a collection of biblical treatises that Vermigli had written throughout his life, with the particular sections about the Church and ministry originating from a series of lectures delivered at Oxford in 1548 and 1549.9 It also is possible that the two men had contact through their ofﬁcial duties: both men served on Thomas Cranmer’s committee to reform England’s ecclesiastical laws. There is no clear evidence, however, that they ever discussed ecclesiology, and any conclusions drawn about the inﬂuence of Vermigli on Lasco are circumstantial. What is important, however, is that Lasco joined other reformers in challenging the legitimacy of Rome by redeﬁning the visible Church as a voluntary community called together by God, and he included ecclesiastical discipline among its marks. Lasco’s insistence on the three distinguishing signs provides insight into his organization of the Form ac ratio. The entire work is structured around these marks, addressing each one in their order. Preaching of the Gospel is covered by the ﬁrst two sections of the ordinance, in which he discusses the Church’s administration and public ministry. Likewise, Lasco considers the second mark concerning the sacraments in this second part of the work. The ﬁnal part of the document turns attention towards ecclesiastical discipline. The remainder of this chapter will focus on the ﬁrst section of the Forma ac ratio and Lasco’s ecclesiastical polity. His prescriptions for public ministry and discipline will be discussed in detail in the following chapters. The London Administration Lasco presents his distinctive vision of a reformed Protestant polity in his London order. In it, he warns that the Church cannot survive without the ministry instituted by Christ and claims that there are two key elements 8 Peter Martyr Vermigli, Loci communes D. Petri Martyris Vermilii, Florentini, sacrarum literarum in schola Tigurina Professoris: ex varis ipsius authoris scriptis, in unum librum collecti & in quatuor Classes distribute (London, 1583), sig. Qqqvr. See also Kingdon, ‘Peter Martyr Vermigli’, p. 205. 9 Kingdon, ‘Peter Martyr Vermigli’, p. 204.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
that must be present: the ofﬁces must be divided clearly according to their function, and ministers ought to devote themselves entirely to their religious duties.10 The Polish reformer stresses these two characteristics because of his belief that the Roman clergy has become too involved in secular affairs, drawing attention away from their pastoral duties. Lasco proposes a form of ecclesiastical government based on the apostolic model. He explains that the Holy Scriptures contain both the true ministry and doctrine, and that it is necessary to ‘maintain only those parts of the ministry, which we know to have been ordained by Christ in order to strengthen the building of the Church on the foundation given, and to guard and conserve it’.11 Lasco institutes a ministry that replaced the Roman hierarchy with four types of ministers: the superintendent, preachers, elders and deacons. Superintendents At the head of the ecclesiastical polity sat the superintendent (superintendens), a type of reformed bishop who was chosen from among the preachers to oversee the clergy and congregation. Lasco writes that Christ had ordained this ofﬁce by commanding Peter to conﬁrm the other brothers in the faith. Criticizing the sweeping power of Roman bishops who had assumed considerable authority over the priests and doctrine, the Polish reformer argues that Christ had not granted Peter supremacy over the other apostles, as popes have assumed, but rather he had appointed Peter to conﬁrm the others and to maintain order among them. Lasco explains, ‘in the end there should be some order in the church government and for this it is necessary to begin with one person.’12 Their organizational role was reﬂected in their assigned duties. Lasco writes that among their speciﬁc tasks, superintendents are to supervise the congregations and their leaders, ordain and oversee the other ministers, maintain unanimous opinion and purity of doctrine, advise on matters of discipline, and defend the congregations against detractors.13 Since they also are ordained ministers of the Word, they should continue preaching in addition to their other duties. Lasco was not the only reformer to employ this type of reformed episcopate. Luther had argued that Roman bishops focused too much on secular matters and he had urged a return to their spiritual functions: watching over the congregation and its preachers, disciplining errant ministers, resolving doctrinal disputes, preaching and pastoral care,
10 11 12 13
Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs B1r–v. Ibid., sig. B4v. Ibid., sigs C8r–v. Ibid., sigs C1v and D1v–D2r.
offering marriage guidance, and defending the Church. Melanchthon further clariﬁed and codiﬁed the Lutheran position in article 28 of the Augsburg Confession, writing that the traditional Roman understanding of bishops had confused the divinely inspired ofﬁce with man-made duties.15 He argued that the Church’s power was exercised through the ministry of the Word and not through ‘interference’ in civil government. Bishops should not be concerned with worldly authority and power, but rather they should concentrate on the divinely instituted duties: preaching the Gospel, the remission of sins, administering the sacraments, maintaining doctrinal purity and excommunicating ‘wicked’ men. He also emphasized that bishops must not hold special power over other ministers when determining doctrine nor should they introduce any ceremonies contradictory to the Gospel.16 The superintendent’s ofﬁce ﬁrst appeared as an alternative episcopate in Lutheran communities around the time of the Diet of Augsburg. Among the ﬁrst examples is the city of Hamburg, where Johannes Bugenhagen’s 1529 ecclesiastical ordinance replaced bishops with a superintendent whose job description followed the spiritual duties outlined in the Augsburg Confession.17 Other communities soon followed, including the towns of Lübeck, Eisenach, Gotha and the territory of Hesse.18 The practice became widespread by the 1540s, when Lasco gained his ﬁrst practical experience during his superintendency of the East Frisian territorial church.19 The Reformed episcopate allowed Protestants to retain the traditional administrative apparatus, while refocusing attention onto the ministers’ spiritual functions. Superintendents, like Roman bishops, exercised a key role in ecclesiastical administration as overseers. Not all reformers, however, agreed that this type of Catholic polity should be retained. John Calvin, for example, rejected the ofﬁce altogether. In contrast to Luther and Melanchthon, the Geneva reformer argued that there is no difference between the divinely instituted duties of bishops and the other ministers. He explained in his Institutes of the Christian Religion that the terms ‘bishop’, ‘presbyter’, ‘pastor’ and ‘minister’ are synonymous in the Bible,
14 Markus Wriedt, ‘Luthers Gebrauch der Bischofstitulatur in seinen Briefen’, in Martin Brecht (ed.), Martin Luther und das Bischofsamt (Stuttgart, 1990), p. 91. 15 Melanthonis Opera, Bretschneider and Bindseil, vol. 26, p. 320. 16 Ibid., pp. 320–24. 17 KO, Sehling, vol. 5, pp. 501–502. 18 Some of the earliest discussions of the superintendent’s ofﬁce can be found in the 1526 Tenneburg visitation, which is printed in P. Drews, ‘Der Bericht des Myconius über die Visitation des Amtes Tenneberg in März 1526’, Archive for Reformation History, 3 (1905/1906): pp. 1–17, and in the 1527 order for visitations in Saxony, which is printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 1, p. 146. 19 The 1535 East Frisian ordinance is printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 7, pp. 383–5.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
and that they refer to all those who perform the ministry of God’s word.20 Moreover, he argued that the ofﬁce was entirely man-made and had been created to settle disputes within the congregation, but had not been granted any special authority over the other ministers as the Catholics had claimed.21 Calvin established the presbytery in Geneva as an alternative to the episcopate. He eliminated bishops and superintendents entirely, replacing them with the collegial Company of Pastors and disciplinary courts to govern the city’s churches. Lasco’s description of the London administration suggests his agreement with Melanchthon, and others, over the divinely instituted duties of bishops. The Polish reformer emphasizes the importance of this ofﬁce in organizing the church and ministry, and moves away from the man-made functions while stressing those duties instituted by Christ. He explains that the superintendent was to watch over the church but should not hold any special authority over the other ministers to determine doctrine or institute new rites. Undoubtedly, Lasco’s experiences with Catholic and Protestant episcopacies in Poland and the German territories inﬂuenced his ecclesiology. His education and early career had prepared him for the bishop’s ofﬁce. In addition, he gained valuable experience with Reformed episcopacies such as the East Frisian superintendent in the 1540s. It also seems likely that this hierarchical administration of the London Strangers’ Church must have appealed to their English hosts, who had retained a greater degree of the Roman episcopacy in their churches. Preachers and Elders In contrast to the superintendent’s ofﬁce, the remainder of Lasco’s ecclesiastical administration was similar to other Reformed congregations. Like Martin Bucer, Lasco wrote that there are only two types of ministers in the Ancient and Apostolic churches: elders (Senioris) who are also called presbyters, and the deacons who care for the poor. The ﬁrst group can be divided further into two distinct ofﬁces. On the one side is ministers of the Word: the superintendent, preachers and doctors, who are responsible for preaching and teaching. The second group is the remaining elders, who assist the other ministers in running the church.22 This larger category of elders, including the ministers of the Word and their assistants, formed the heart of Lasco’s ecclesiastical administration because it was these men who oversaw nearly every aspect of church life. The most important ofﬁce in Lasco’s ministry is that of the preachers of the Word, who instruct the congregation about doctrine, salvation and their 20 21 22
Calvin, Institutes, vol. 2, pp. 1060–61. Ibid., p. 1069. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs B3v and C1r–v.
duty to God through their public ministry. They are distinguished from all other ministers by this special duty. Lasco writes that the apostle Paul ‘had taught that those worthy men who labour in the Word are doubly honoured. The other [ministers], however, he called auxiliary administrators.’23 The description of their ofﬁce in the Forma ac ratio is similar to Calvin’s 1541 Ecclesiastical Ordinances, although the two reformers differed slightly when it came to the division of duties. The Geneva reformer had judged that there were two distinct ofﬁces for ministers of the Word: doctors who teach, and pastors who preach. Lasco takes a slightly different approach, combining both positions into a single preacher’s ofﬁce. Like Calvin, however, he assigns the same duties, emphasizing their combined function as preachers and teachers. Lasco writes that the speciﬁc duties of ministers of the Word are to educate the faithful about the ‘pure and uncorrupted’ doctrine, administer the sacraments, enforce moral discipline within the community, defend the congregation and their practices from critics, and to provide an example of how to live a godly life for all to see.24 Although he does not provide any instructions regarding the education of preachers, he explains that they must be honest men, chosen for their biblical knowledge and training, who do not seek the ofﬁce for personal gain.25 The preachers are assisted by a group of elders who, according to Lasco, are ‘like the senate of the entire church, who maintain the true religion and enforce ecclesiastical discipline’.26 In contrast to the superintendent and preachers, this is strictly an administrative ofﬁce ﬁlled by laymen to help run the church. They are not to administer the sacraments directly or to preach, he warns, but rather to oversee ‘various external aspects of governing the church’.27 More speciﬁcally, they are to aid preachers in running the congregation according to God’s law, help protect pure doctrine and see that the correct sacramental rites are observed. They were to accomplish much of this work by participating in a monthly assembly, or coetus – a meeting of preachers and elders established by Lasco to discuss administrative and doctrinal matters. In addition, he explains that the elders have special duties regarding discipline: they settle peacefully all ‘enmities, quarrels and controversies’ among the members and admonish privately and publicly those who cause offence within the church. Finally, like the preachers, they are to provide an example of a godly life.28
Ibid., sig. C6v. Ibid., sigs C4v–C5v. 25 Ibid., sig. C5v. 26 Ibid., sig. C6v. 27 Ibid., sigs B5v–B6r and C7v. 28 Ibid., sigs C6v–C8v and Gg4r–v. For a history of Lasco’s East Frisian coetus see Henning P. Jürgens, Johannes a Lasco in Ostfriesland: der Werdegang eines europäischen Reformators (Tübingen, 2002), pp. 305–11. 24
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Although Lasco’s superintendent’s ofﬁce is similar to the Lutheran episcopate and Melanchthon’s prescriptions in the Augsburg Confession, his description of preachers and elders suggests the inﬂuence of Calvin and presbyterial administration. The Polish reformer alludes to this connection in the Forma ac ratio, writing that the London order owed much to the churches in Geneva and Strassburg, where this form of ecclesiastical government ﬁrst developed.29 For example, Lasco institutes a monthly assembly of ministers to run the church that functioned like Geneva’s Company of Pastors. The Polish reformer insists, like Calvin, that no minister should have power over the others to determine doctrine. Instead, all decisions must be reached through the unanimous agreement (consensus unanimis) of the entire assembly. The London superintendent and the lead pastor in Geneva served the same function: they facilitated the meetings and were responsible for maintaining consensus among ministers but held no special authority over the other participants.30 Lasco’s lay elders also resembles their counterparts in Geneva and reﬂect the growing use of this ofﬁce within Reformed congregations.31 Calvin wrote in the 1541 Ecclesiastical Ordinances that elders should ‘supervise each person’s conduct, admonish amicably those who fall back and lead a disorderly life and, after that, when necessary, they should make a report to the Company [of Pastors] who will arrange for brotherly correction and then make them reunite with the others’.32 Lasco’s London order contains these same duties but also adds that they should help maintain doctrinal purity and ensure the legitimate use of the sacraments. This mixture of the episcopal and presbyterial administrations may seem startling given the growing confessional divisions during the period. For Lasco, however, this was not a confessional issue but rather simply a case of following Christ’s apostolic model as he interpreted it. The superintendent was a divinely inspired ofﬁce created by Christ when he appointed Peter to oversee the other ministers. His combination of the two administrative styles was uncommon when it appeared. The 1531 Lutheran ordinance 29
Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. B7v. Ibid., sigs D1v and Gg4r. Calvin, ‘Ordonnances Ecclésiastiques’, in Jean-François Bergier and Robert M. Kingdon (eds), Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Genève au Temps de Calvin (Geneva, 1964) vol. 1, p. 3. See also Robert M. Kingdon, ‘Calvin and “Presbytery”: the Geneva Company of Pastors’, Paciﬁc Theological Review, 18 (1985): 43– 55. 31 In contrast to the Reformed churches in Geneva and Strassburg, most Lutheran churches had no equivalent ofﬁce for elders during this period. For example, the ecclesiastical ordinances for Lutheran churches in Hamburg (1529), Lübeck (1531), East Frisia (1535) and Cologne (1543) described ﬁve ofﬁces for the ministry: superintendents, pastors, teachers, sextons and deacons. KO, Sehling, vol. 5, pp. 488–540 and 334–68; vol. 7, no. 2.1, pp. 373–97, and Aemilius Ludwig Richter (ed.), Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des sechszehnten Jahrhunderts (2 vols, Nieuwkoop, 1967) vol. 2, pp. 30–54. 32 Calvin, ‘Ordonnances Ecclésiatiques’, p. 6. 30
for Hesse, for example, had established six superintendents to oversee the preachers in the territory. They were to carry out annual visitations to observe the ministers and each June a synod was to be held to discuss problems encountered during the visitations, as well as poor relief and important matters for the churches. There is, however, no discussion of their authority or consent regarding doctrinal matters.33 Martin Bucer’s 1534 Strassburg ordinance supported the bishop’s ofﬁce, which he explained had been instituted by Christ and supported by Paul. He also established a weekly meeting of ministers to discuss ‘how to administer Christ’s doctrine, if the church needs to be admonished, and whatever else their ofﬁce requires’.34 Again there is no discussion of the need for the assembly’s consensus on doctrinal matters. This practice, in fact, ﬁrst appears in Geneva under Calvin, who stressed that weekly meetings of the Company of Pastors should promote doctrinal uniformity. There was no bishop or superintendent, but rather the ministers were to choose a lead preacher each year to oversee the assembly. This ofﬁcer held no special authority over the other clergy, but rather was there to keep order and promote unity. If a conﬂict in doctrine arose, the entire company was to solve it by unanimous consent. However if agreement could not be reached, the magistrates were to step in to solve the impasse.35 Lasco’s combination of the superintendent with a collegial presbytery was distinctive when it appeared and likely was shaped by his early experiences in East Frisia, where he served as superintendent and ﬁrst experimented with this uncommon mixture.36 Lasco offered what amounted to a third way, that bridged the gap between the two administrative models – episcopacies and presbyteries – that gave the ministers greater authority in doctrinal matters while retaining a sense of hierarchy that undoubtedly would have appealed to the refugees’ English hosts. The Polish reformer’s instructions regarding preachers and elders underscores the new Protestant ideas about the ministry that rejected the Catholic priest’s sacerdotal role as a mediator between man and God, and replaced it with men whose primary responsibility was to preach and teach doctrine. The historian R. Emmet McLaughlin explores this changing notion of priesthood in his recent study on pastors and the clerical estate. He argues convincingly that the Protestant belief in justiﬁcation by faith had a profound impact on priests’ role by challenging the Catholic notion 33
KO, Sehling, vol. 8, p. 72. Martin Bucers Deutsche Schriften, ed. Robert Stupperich (Gütersloh, 1960), vol. 5, pp. 29–30. 35 Calvin, ‘Ordonnances Ecclésiastiques’, pp. 1–13. See also Kingdon, ‘Calvin and “Presbytery”’: the Genevan Company of Pastors’; and E. William Monter, ‘The consistory of Geneva, 1559–1569’, Humanisme et Renaissance, 38 (1976): 467–84. 36 Heinz Schilling, Civic Calvinism in Northwestern Germany and the Netherlands: sixteenth to nineteenth centuries (Kirksville, MO, 1991), pp. 11–28. 34
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
that humans could inﬂuence their own salvation. McLaughlin explains, ‘Original Sin had so devastated the soul that humans not only could not contribute to their own salvation, but the effort was itself extremely sinful.’ Sola ﬁde drew attention away from the priest’s sacramental function while emphasizing God’s promise and Christ’s sacriﬁce as a means to salvation, which could be found in the Bible. In response to this theological development, a new type of clergy emerged that focused on preaching and teaching of Scripture.37 Lasco’s ministers of the Word and elders reﬂect this new understanding of the ofﬁce. The Polish reformer wrote that ministers are the preachers and teachers that Christ had instituted ‘for the ediﬁcation of the Church’.38 The duties he assigned to these ofﬁces reinforced their didactic role. Deacons The second ofﬁce in Lasco’s two-part ministry is the deaconate. Like the elders, these were laymen charged with caring for the church’s poor and inﬁrm. The reformer asserts that this ofﬁce also had been ordained by the apostles and that guidelines for candidates could be found in Paul’s own description of deacons. Lasco explains that they should be committed to the duties of their ofﬁce, as well as they should demonstrate the characteristics of loyalty, integrity and modesty. Repeating the apostle’s words from his letter to Timothy, he adds that they should not seek proﬁt, be duplicitous, eat or drink excessively, or have more than one wife.39 Finally, he writes that deacons should have knowledge in divine matters, demonstrate piety and grace, and be efﬁcacious in their admonitions, consolations and exhortations.40 These administrators’ primary responsibility was to collect and distribute alms. They also served a disciplinary function, admonishing the other ministers who erred in accordance with the church’s discipline and, if necessary, reminding the congregation publicly and privately about their duty to give alms. Finally, they had an administrative role: they were to attend meetings with the other ministers on the ﬁrst Thursday of each month, during which they would present an account of the funds collected and distributed under their care.41 The poor were not meant to passively receive the aid and Lasco includes instructions to them about their duty towards the deacons. He writes that although this ofﬁce is ordained by the apostles for the care and instruction 37
McLaughlin, ‘The Making of the Protestant Pastor’, pp. 60–78. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs B5r–v and C4r. 39 Ibid., sig. D4v. Luke recounts the institution of elders when seven assistants were chosen to assist the apostles in Acts 6:1–15. Lasco’s description of suitable candidates is based on 1 Timothy 3:1–13. 40 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs D4v–D5r. 41 Ibid., sigs D3r–D5v and Gg2v–Gg3r. 38
of the poor and inﬁrm, the lay congregation has certain responsibilities to fulﬁl. The recipients, he explains, should support the deacons and the church as much as possible through their diligence and labour. Lasco clariﬁes that they must not be ashamed of their poverty and should accept these gifts with tolerance and gratitude because God’s name is honoured in the Church by the sharing of riches. Finally, they should view the aid ‘not as if it was from men, but rather they should accept it as if it was alms from the hands of God himself for their nourishment’. He warns them to use these gifts soberly, frugally and only when necessary.42 Lasco’s London deaconate reﬂects some of the changes taking place to this ofﬁce during the Protestant Reformation and again suggests the Reformed inﬂuences on him. Deacons had a long history in the western Church and these ofﬁce-holders performed numerous tasks over the years. By the late Middle Ages, their role had come to include various charitable and liturgical functions: collecting and distributing alms, distributing (but not consecrating) the host during the mass, chanting the Gospel, calling on the congregation to kneel for prayers, teaching catechisms and, on some occasions, they were allowed to hear confessions or preach.43 Not surprisingly, evangelical reformers introduced some changes to this ofﬁce. The Protestant communities in Zurich and Berne, for example, retained the liturgical elements, viewing deacons as assistants to the town’s preachers. Other reformers placed greater emphasis on poor relief. In Strassburg, Martin Bucer pushed for a return to their charitable duties although he retained some of their liturgical functions. Calvin’s 1541 Ecclesiastical Ordinances instituted a simpliﬁed deaconate, which only recognized their functions of collecting alms and caring for the sick and poor.44 The description of the ofﬁce in the London order again suggests Lasco’s attempt to ﬁnd middle ground. Like Bucer, he emphasizes the charitable functions but also continues to assign limited liturgical duties. Besides collecting alms and caring for the poor, the deacons in the refugee congregations had other tasks to aid the ministers. Lasco explains that they should assist the preachers and elders during the Lord’s Supper by helping the participants to the table and reﬁlling the wine glasses. They also should help out during the weekly prophecy, a public event where the week’s sermons were discussed. In addition, they ought to instruct children in the large and small catechisms, if the parents were not able to do this on their own. Finally, they were to attend the monthly meetings with the other 42
Ibid., sig. D6v. Glenn S. Sunshine, Reforming French Protestantism: the development of Huguenot ecclesiastical institutions, 1557–1572 (Kirksville, MO, 2003), pp. 96–7. 44 Calvin, ‘Ordonnances Ecclésiastiques’, p. 7. See also Sunshine, French Protestantism, pp. 97–8, and Elsie Ann McKee, John Calvin on the Diaconate and Liturgical Almsgiving (Geneva, 1984), pp. 127, and 133–7. 43
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
ministers to discuss matters related to doctrine and church administration, as well as the quarterly meetings to discuss disciplinary matters.45 Thus, Lasco’s deaconate was not as narrowly focused as Calvin’s, but rather followed the Reformed model of theologians like Bucer, who retained a mixture of their liturgical and poor relief functions. Election of Ministers Lasco also offers detailed prescriptions for electing new ministers that emphasized continuity with the Apostolic Church and is distinguished by the prominent role assigned to the laity in choosing new preachers. When a new superintendent, preacher, elder or deacon is needed, Lasco writes, church leaders should announce the vacancy to the entire congregation and the date for forthcoming elections.46 A week before the vote, the ministers would again assemble the laity for a sermon about the duties of the ofﬁce to be ﬁlled and the qualiﬁcations sought in suitable candidates. Church members could nominate men suitable to ﬁll the post during the following seven days by giving the names to the preachers or elders. All ministers would meet to select a replacement at the end of this period. Lasco warns that they must consider who had received the most nominations from the congregation.47 Once elected, they examined the candidate publicly before presenting him to the entire church for their approval. The lay congregation had one ﬁnal opportunity to inﬂuence elections at this point: they had one week to register their objections to the appointment with the other ministers, who would investigate their complaints. Once all disagreement was resolved, or if no objections had been raised, the new minister would be ordained in front of the entire church.48 There was one additional step required for superintendents and preachers. For these positions, the king’s approval was needed prior to their ordination before the congregation. The London elections are similar to practices found in other Reformed communities, although Lasco goes further than most by granting the power to nominate candidates to the entire congregation. The Lutheran churches, for example, often gave this right to magistrates or a committee 45 Glenn Sunshine writes that the deacons’ role in the London Strangers’ Church was limited strictly to poor relief, but this clearly is not the case. Sunshine, French Protestantism, p. 100. Lasco emphasizes the deacon’s duty to care for the poor, but he also assigns to them these other liturgical responsibilities. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs K5v–K6v, V1r, and Gg4r– Gg5r. See also Timothy Fehler, ‘Diakonenamt und Armenfürsorge bei a Lasco: Theologischer Impuls und praktische Wirklichkeit’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499– 1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen, 2000), pp. 173–85. 46 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. C2v. 47 Ibid., sig. E2v. 48 Ibid., sigs E3v–E4r.
of secular and religious leaders. The 1533 Wittenberg ordinance instructed that representatives from the university, town council and congregation should choose new preachers. The magistrates and preachers would then appoint people to ﬁll the church’s other ofﬁces.49 Lasco’s instructions are more similar to Geneva, although Calvin also used cooption – where the ministers appointed their replacements – similar to Lutheran congregations. Calvin wrote in his 1541 Ecclesiastical Ordinances that ministers should nominate and then select new ofﬁcers. The chosen candidate was then sent to the magistrates for their approval before being presented to the whole church for their consent.50 The Polish reformer’s insistence on the congregation’s involvement was uncommon among Protestant communities and is a distinguishing feature of his London order. An important question remains regarding the extent to which these election procedures were used by the refugees. The lack of records makes it difﬁcult to ascertain if the laity actually exercised this right to choose new ministers. Lasco, as well as the French and Dutch preachers, in fact had been appointed by the king’s order in July 1550 rather than through formal elections. However, the refugees’ experience after leaving London suggests that they had embraced this practice and sought to reproduce it in their new locations. The French minister Valerand Poullain, for example, described the procedure for choosing new ministers in the refugee church in Frankfurt in his 1554 Liturgia sacra, seu ritus Ministerii in Ecclesia peregrinourm Francofordiae.51 He wrote that ministers should place an urn for each candidate at the front of the chapel for the congregation to deposit their votes. An additional urn was provided so that they also could nominate others who currently were not represented in the election. Upon completion, the preachers, elders and deacons counted the votes and, according to Poullain, were to choose the man with the most nominations. Finally, they examined the elected candidate before presenting him to the entire church for their approval.52 The refugees’ desire to follow this elections’ procedure can be seen in the conﬂict that erupted in 1555 within the French congregation over the laity’s role in choosing ministers. Although Poullain had originally established this congregation in 1554 with other London exiles, they were joined by a group of Walloons from Glastonbury and several newcomers from France. He had served as the refugee minister in England and continued to do so in 49
KO, Sehling, vol. 1, pp. 700 and 709. Calvin, ‘Ordonnances Ecclésiastiques’, p. 2. 51 Valeran Poullain, Liturgia sacra, seu ritus ministrii in Ecclesia peregrinourm Francoforiae ad Moenum. Addita est summa doctrinae seu ﬁdei profession eiusdem Ecclesiae. Psalm. CXLIX Laudem Deo canite in Ecclesia Sancorum. Ioan I. Veni & vide (Frankfurt, 1554). 52 Valerandus Pollanus Liturgia Sacra (1551–1555): Opnieuw uitgegeven en van een Inleiding Voorzien, ed. A.C. Honders (Leiden, 1970), p. 222. 50
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Frankfurt. With the increasing numbers of exiles who had not come from London came questions about Poullain’s legitimacy. The congregation had not elected him to the post. Many of the new arrivals including Augustin le Grand, Francis le Clerc and Jean de Poix (seigneur de Séchelles) opposed the preacher’s entitlement to the ofﬁce and in the summer of 1555 le Grand, de Poix and a third unidentiﬁed man quit their posts as elders to protest against Poullain’s authority.53 The remaining clergy held new elections to replace the three men and began proceedings to excommunicate the dissenters.54 Le Grand and his supporters complained to the town’s magistrates, who appointed three people to investigate the matter: John a Lasco, who had recently arrived in the city, the French elder Nicholas Walet and the English minister Robert Horne. They were assisted by ﬁve others from outside the town: John Calvin, the Geneva printer John Crespin, the Geneva bookseller Laurent de Normandie, the Spanish theologian Jan Pérez de Pineda and the Lusanne physician Eustache Du Quesnoy.55 This committee concluded that although many of the accusations were difﬁcult to prove because of insufﬁcient evidence, Poullain should accept some fault for claiming incorrectly that he had received the church’s approval. The preacher accepted their verdict and a new election was held, in which the congregation returned him to his former position.56 The dispute over the laity’s authority in electing ministers, however, continued after Poullain’s re-election. The following October, the French minister contradicted his 1554 ordinance when he conﬁrmed three new deacons in the church without involving the lay elders in their examination. All six elders resigned in protest, leaving the church without a consistory.57 Poullain eventually relinquished his post over the matter and the congregation elected Francis Perussel as their new preacher. Both conﬂicts reveal strong support for the laity’s role in electing ministers. They successfully challenged Poullain’s legitimacy by questioning whether he had been chosen by the entire congregation. Likewise they again protested when he deviated from the described elections policy. At least for the short
53 Philippe Denis, Les Églises d’Étrangers en Pays Rhènans 1538–1564, (Paris, 1984), pp. 327–35; and D. Karl Bauer, Valérand Poullain: ein kirchengeschichtliches Zeitbild aus der Mitte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts (Eberﬁeld, 1927), p. 240. 54 Bauer, Valérand Poullain, p. 240. Denis notes that they were excommunicated the following year in Églises d’Étrangers, p. 340. 55 Denis, Églises d’Étrangers, p. 344. 56 Ibid., pp. 345–6. 57 Bauer, Valérand Poullain, p. 241. The six elders to resign were: Nicholas Walet, Piat Du Cheune, Hans Rosenzwyg, Jaques Huain, George Paindavoine and Jean Bara. Denis, Églises d’Étrangers, pp. 347–9. Denis notes that Poullain remained in Frankfurt until his death the following year. Ibid., p. 349.
term, Lasco’s prescriptions for choosing new ministers continued to be followed.58 The refugees’ distinctive procedure for choosing clergy had both theological and practical roots. Lasco explains in the Forma ac ratio that he modelled this practice on the Ancient Church, where the congregations nominated and elected their ministers. Church ofﬁcers, he writes, ‘had been chosen by a vote of all of the people’.59 Calvin agreed, but argued that during the time of St Cyprian (d. 258 AD), the laity’s role had changed merely to approving new ministers through their consent.60 The Geneva reformer also explained that in the fourth century, the Council of Laodicea had made a wise decision when they took away this privilege from the entire congregation and bestowed it on the other ministers because it had become too difﬁcult to obtain unanimous consent among the laity.61 Lasco rejected the council’s judgment, preferring the earlier model of the Ancient Church. His election procedure was also shaped by the political situation facing the French and Dutch refugees in London. As foreigners, their relationship with English magistrates was often tenuous. The city leaders had opposed the refugee congregations’ liturgical autonomy in the conﬂict over the foreigners’ sacramental rites, as discussed in the previous chapter. Furthermore, the councillors were not members of the Strangers’ Church, and therefore had not subscribed to the foreigners’ confession, making their participation in elections problematic. If the magistrates had been allowed to choose new ministers, the ability of Lasco’s church to follow their own ceremonies and rites would have been jeopardized. Lasco found a solution to this situation in the Ancient Church, which provided a model for elections that gave greater power to the congregation while eliminating the magistrates’ more customary role in selecting clergy. Lasco’s distinctive method for choosing new ministers leads to an important question about authority within the Strangers’ congregations: who was ultimately in charge of running the church – the laity or the ministers? Although the Polish reformer believed that the entire congregation should choose their leaders, he placed the ultimate authority for doctrine and ecclesiastical administration in the hands of the collegial ministers’ assembly, which included both the professional clerics and representatives from the lay community. The monthly gathering of the superintendent, preachers, elders and deacons formed the nucleus of his ecclesiastical government and Lasco provides instructions in the London ordinance on how this body should work. He explains that the ministers should 58 The long-term impact of Lasco’s election’s policy will be discussed in greater detail in Chapter 7. 59 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. D8v. 60 Calvin, Institutes, vol. 2, pp. 1065–66. See also p. 1064. 61 Ibid., pp. 1080–81.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
meet on the ﬁrst Monday of every month to discuss any administrative matters, and that they have the power to establish or change rites and doctrine, as long as they do not contradict Holy Scriptures. The assembly begins with setting the agenda: the superintendent asks each minister if they have any items to be discussed pertaining to the whole church. After this, the matters are deliberated and, if a decision is needed, each person’s opinion ‘should be asked for (according to their rank) and collected by the superintendent’. As the overseer, it is the superintendent’s duty to gain unanimous agreement among the assembled ministers. Lasco emphasizes that for the peace of the church, all decisions must be made following this procedure, with the consensus of the entire ministry.62 Although the focal point of the church’s authority was the ministers’ assembly, and the magistrates had no part in choosing clergy, Lasco did believe that secular leaders had an important role to play regarding the church. Although they are not ministers in the ofﬁcial sense, which he deﬁnes as those who preach and teach, and those who care for the poor, Lasco explains that they are divinely ordained to protect Christ’s true Church. He writes that these lay ofﬁcials, like ministers, derive their power from God and that they are to guard and to maintain public goodness and harmony.63 They are not to ‘meddle’ in the church’s doctrinal or administrative matters, but rather their ofﬁce is a divine institution created to protect the Church by punishing public offences. Like other reformers, Lasco describes a symbiotic relationship between the ‘two tablets’ (or swords) – ecclesiastical and civil law – and argues that secular leaders should use the latter to support the body of Christ. He explains that ministers drew their authority from God’s Word to admonish and, if necessary, excommunicate unruly members according to the ecclesiastical discipline. Magistrates, on the other hand, should work together with the clergy for the ‘perfection’ of the congregation by ‘using their sword to correct public violations and crimes that disrupt the piety and tranquility of the church’.64 Magistrates, by virtue of their ofﬁce, should not want to let any offence against the church go unpunished, and should use the civil law to protect and maintain Christ’s true Church. Lasco writes these comments in his preface to the Forma ac ratio, which was composed after leaving London in 1553. His emphasis on their duty to defend the church but not meddle in doctrine suggests this is a response to magistrates in England and the German territories who had opposed the refugees’ religious autonomy and sacramental rites. It is important to note that, for Lasco, the monarch was the only person who could transcend the boundary between the spiritual and temporal 62 63 64
Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs Gg4r–v. Ibid., sig. B7r. Ibid., sig. B6v.
realms. For the London congregations this was Edward VI, who had granted their charter and, as the reformer describes, was the only outsider involved in choosing new ministers. All newly elected superintendents and preachers had to gain the sovereign’s approval before their ordination. Lasco explains that monarchs had this special function because of their position. They are ‘the highest of all on earth’ and, therefore, must use their power to protect the spiritual and temporal realms. He clariﬁes, the king ‘is an excellent minister of God, who defends with his sword, and we owe all our faith, submission, and obedience to him, according to God’.65 The Polish reformer instituted an administration for the refugee congregations in London that had clearly deﬁned roles for both secular and ecclesiastical authorities. This polity was shaped by two distinct inﬂuences. The ﬁrst was Lutherans who had created the superintendent’s ofﬁce to replace traditional Roman bishops. Here the emphasis was on removing their secular duties and returning to the divinely instituted function. In addition, the Reformed congregations in Strassburg and Geneva provided an important model for the remaining ofﬁces and the collegial assembly of ministers, which was the central institution in the London administration. Most signs of the Roman clergy had disappeared from the Strangers’ Church and were replaced by a simpler polity with only four ofﬁces, based on Lasco’s understanding of the Ancient and Apostolic churches. He rejected the sacerdotal function of priests, and his descriptions of the superintendent, preachers, elders and deacons reﬂect the characteristics of the emerging professional clergy. Priests were no longer mediators of salvation but rather focused their attention on preaching and teaching doctrine to the faithful, so that they could understand the meaning of God’s promise and Christ’s sacriﬁce. The following chapter will discuss how they carried out these duties in more detail by looking at the public ministry of the Strangers’ Church.
Ibid., sigs C1r–v.
This page intentionally left blank
John a Lasco’s Public Ministry The Protestant rejection of priests and their role as mediators of salvation had a signiﬁcant impact on ecclesiastical rites and ceremonies in the sixteenth century. Roman clerics were being replaced by evangelical ministers who emphasized preaching and teaching rather than the traditional sacerdotal duties. The historian Ian Green explores this change in his recent study on Protestant ministers.1 He argues that the clerics were in a pivotal, although precarious, position: they marked the centre of the struggle between the old and new churches, and faced added challenges from increasingly literate and critical lay audiences.2 In response to these factors, Protestant ministers turned to new forms of rites and practices to educate their own ranks, as well as lay audiences, about doctrinal matters. Sermons were preached with greater frequency, more emphasis was placed on catechetical instruction for all levels of society, and didactic ceremonies emerged that sought to convey doctrinal lessons to their lay audiences. This focus on education and instruction also can be seen in Lasco’s public ministry – the communal rites and practices instituted in the London Strangers’ Church. He stresses the clergy’s role as preachers and teachers, as well as the lessons and beneﬁts to be found in public ceremonies. The worship service was not a private rite performed by the priest in front of a passive audience, for example, but rather it was a collection of carefully crafted rituals designed to engage the audience, convey doctrinal lessons and teach about God’s promise of salvation. Lasco explains that there are four key parts to the public ministry: preaching of the Word, administration of the sacraments, the collection of alms, and enforcing compliance with the church discipline.3 His discussion of these elements accounts for the largest part of the Forma ac ratio, comprising nearly two-thirds of the entire document. This chapter examines the ﬁrst three elements in the ministry, discussing the practices instituted in London and their development in light of the larger Protestant movement. Special 1 Ian Green, ‘Teaching the Reformation: the clergy as preachers, catechists, authors and teachers’, in C. Scott Dixon and Luise Schorn-Schütte (eds), The Protestant Clergy of Early Modern Europe (London, 2003), pp. 156–75. Although Green focuses on England, the same changes to the ministers and their duties can be found among evangelical communities throughout Europe, including Switzerland, Germany and France. 2 Ibid., p. 156. 3 John a Lasco, Forma ac ratio tota Ecclesiastici Ministerii, in peregrinorum, potißimum vero Germanorum Ecclesia (Frankfurt, 1555), sig. G5v.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
attention will be given to the inﬂuences that shaped the Polish reformer’s ministry, as well as those elements that distinguish it from other churches during the period. The fourth part, ecclesiastical discipline, will be explored in detail in the following chapter. Preaching of the Word There is little question about the importance of preaching for evangelical reformers in the sixteenth century. As Andrew Pettegree observes, ‘in a world where information continued to be conveyed by word of mouth, few could doubt that preaching represented one of the primary means of communication with a wider public.’4 The worship service, with the sermon as its focal point, was the main conduit for preaching and was an important part of religious life. The assembled audiences heard the Word of God preached in the vernacular during Sunday and weekday services. Likewise, it was here that they participated in the sacraments and gave alms to the deacons to help care for the poor. Ministers also used the service to instruct the church’s lay members about doctrine and God’s gift of salvation. With fewer opportunities for pious expression such as pilgrimage or confraternities, the service became increasingly important as the heart of the lay religious experience. Lasco writes in the Forma ac ratio that the ﬁrst element of the public ministry is preaching and can be found ‘in the morning and afternoon services on Sundays and other holy days, in the catechetical lessons and examinations, and in the weekly prophecy’.5 Regarding the ﬁrst of these, he instructs that worship services should be held four times a week. The foreign congregations were to hold morning and afternoon service on Sundays and holy days. The French held additional assemblies on Tuesdays and Thursdays, while the Dutch held Latin lectures on the Holy Scriptures on Tuesdays followed by regular services on Thursdays.6 They did not always follow the same order, as Table 5.1 demonstrates: Sunday services were longer on account of the extra ceremonies observed such as baptism, the Lord’s Supper, marriage, reading of the Ten Commandments and catechetical instruction. They all, however, had a 60-minute sermon as their focal point.7 Emphasizing its important didactic role, Lasco explains that the ministers should use the sermon to discuss some part of the Old or New Testament and should preach ‘so that the entire congregation can
Andrew Pettegree, Reformation and the Culture of Persuasion (Cambridge, 2005),
p. 10. 5 6 7
Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. G5v. Ibid., sigs G6r–v. Ibid., sigs G6r–I3r.
JOHN A LASCO’S PUBLIC MINISTRY
understand and retain the information’. He adds speciﬁc instructions for doing this: the clergy should read aloud from a selected text, explain it, and then show how it relates to doctrine ‘for the ediﬁcation of the church’.9 Table 5.1 Lasco’s order for worship services from the Forma ac ratio (1555)
Sunday & Holy Days Opening prayer Singing of Psalms Sermon (sixty minutes) Large Catechismpm (thirty minutes) Announcements Public prayers Ten Commandmentsam Admonition of sins Prayer for confession of sins Remission and absolution of sins Confession of faitham Prayer for the Church Lord’s Prayer Baptisms (if any) Lord’s Supper (if scheduled) Marriages (if any) Singing of Psalms Dismissal Recommendation of the poor Collection of alms Benediction am=morning only, pm=afternoon only
Tuesdays & Thursdays Opening prayer Singing of Psalms Sermon (sixty minutes) Announcements Public prayers Prophecy* Admonition of sins Prayer for confession of sins Remission and absolution of sins Prayer for the Church Lord’s Prayer Singing of Psalms Dismissal Recommendation of the poor Collection of alms Benediction *French congregation on Tuesday, Dutch congregation on Thursday
8 Lasco adds, that ‘during the sermon, it should be explained from the book [the Bible] as much as he [the preacher] can do agreeably in the space of one hour in the every-day language: so that they [the congregation] may learn and also retain it.’ Ibid. sig. G6v. 9 Ibid. sig. G8r.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Lasco’s advice for preachers reﬂects the growing importance of sermons in Protestant worship. Andrew Pettegree examines this change in his recent study, Reformation and the Culture of Persuasion. He notes that sermons became a more prominent feature of religious life during the sixteenth century: they were preached with greater frequency and regularity, and played a key role in shaping the reform movement. However, it was their focus on the Holy Scriptures that made them so important to evangelical ministers. In a Protestant world based on sola scriptura, as Pettegree argues, sermons became the ideal tool for communicating lessons about key Protestant ideas. They had an important role to play in educating the congregation and their rhetorical style helped convey these messages to their illiterate and semi-literate audiences.10 Lasco too viewed the sermons as an important educational tool and as a key part of the public ministry, reﬂected in his emphasis on biblical exegesis and its use to instruct the laity about God’s Word and the church’s doctrine – a theme that runs throughout his Forma ac ratio. The second principal element of the public ministry is catechetical instruction, which had two distinct parts. On the one hand there was the 30-minute exposition on the large catechism given during Sunday afternoon services. Following a long tradition of using vernacular guides to educate the laity, Lasco also created a formal system to instruct children – both boys and girls – about doctrine and belief using the large and small catechisms.11 Parents were responsible for the inaugural stages of religious teaching: they were to begin instructing their children using the small catechism following the child’s ﬁfth birthday. This text covered three key points of doctrine: the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments and apostolic symbols. After their thirteenth birthday, and once they had mastered the lessons of the ﬁrst book, they moved on to the principal points of belief contained in the large catechism.12 The children had to demonstrate their proﬁciency after completion of both levels. The ministers would bring them together twice a year to examine the youths publicly in front of the whole church in order to judge if they had truly mastered the catechisms. Catechetical instruction fulﬁlled two important functions for the London congregations. It was a prerequisite for inclusion in the ecclesiastical body of Christ. Lasco argues that membership in the church begins with infant baptism, which signiﬁes the cleansing of sin and the infant’s alliance with God.13 However membership also requires a conscious agreement to 10
Pettegree, Culture of Persuasion, pp. 12–39. For a discussion of the history of catechetical instruction, see Robert James Bast, Honor your fathers: Catechisms and the emergence of a patriarchal ideology in Germany 1400–1600 (Leiden, 1997), pp. 1–52. 12 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs I7v and K1v. 13 Ibid., sigs M2r–v. 11
JOHN A LASCO’S PUBLIC MINISTRY
follow the church’s doctrine and this is accomplished through the required catechetical instruction. The public examinations that followed ensured that the youth understood the lessons and agreed to observe them.14 Once they had successfully completed their studies, the students could participate in the Lord’s Supper – a sign of their full and complete membership in the church.15 Catechetical instruction also performed a second crucial function: it served as an important tool for reinforcing doctrinal lessons and reminding adult audiences about the church’s beliefs. As indicated in Table 5.1, Lasco included a 30-minute exposition on some part of the large catechism in Sunday afternoon services. He also notes that the examinations should be held during Sunday worship services, arguing there are two principal beneﬁts to public exams: they ensure uniformity of belief among the new members and they remind the assembled audience about important matters of faith.16 The third key element in Lasco’s ministry of the Word is the prophecy – a discussion about sermons that was part of the weekday service. The practice had appeared ﬁrst in Zurich in 1525 with the introduction of public lectures for theological students each morning on the Old Testament. Following the exegetical comparison of the Hebrew, Greek and Latin texts, the audience of teachers and students from the university and Latin school could ask questions.17 With its theological foundations in the words of Paul, this practice was meant to educate current and future ministers about biblical subjects. Lasco also instituted the prophecy in his London churches, suggesting the possible inﬂuence of Zwingli on the Polish reformer, although the London ceremony focused less on the biblical exegesis and more on doctrinal instruction. He explains in the Forma ac ratio that the French observe the rite during the Tuesday service and the Dutch on Thursday, so that the foreigners could attend both if they wished.18 Following the sermon and public prayers, the ceremony begins with the preacher giving a 30-minute exposition on doctrine. The other ministers could then ask any questions or raise concerns about the lesson, or about any of the sermons they had heard the previous week. They were to address any inconsistencies with the church’s doctrine. The laity could also participate by giving their questions to the ministers, who would present them for discussion. The preacher then was given a chance 14
Ibid., sigs I3v–I4r and M2r–v. Ibid., sig. K3r. 16 Ibid., sigs I5r and K2r. 17 Bruce Gordon, Clerical Discipline and the Rural Reformation: the synod in Zürich, 1532–1580 (New York, 1992), pp. 180–81. See also Andrew Pettegree, Emden and the Dutch Revolt: exile and development of Reformed Protestantism (Oxford, 1992), pp. 23–4; and F.A. van Lieburg, De reformatorische profetie in de Nederlandse traditie (Apeldorn, 2001), pp. 8–15. See 1 Corinthians 14 for the prophecy’s biblical foundations. 18 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. L1v. 15
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
to respond. Unlike the Zurich prophecy which focused on educating preachers about the Holy Scriptures, the London practice had wider aims. Lasco explains that the ceremony was to promote doctrinal consensus and to correct any perceived errors held by the preachers or the laity.19 Lasco’s emphasis on the didactic beneﬁts of the rite can be seen in his discussion of the London prophecy. He instructs, for example, that it is necessary for the preachers, elders and deacons to ‘voice any objections they have with the sermon with modesty and seriousness for the instruction of the entire church’.20 He adds that there are three principal beneﬁts to the practice. First, this ceremony reinforces the church’s beliefs and promotes doctrinal unity among the entire congregation. The ministers and elders also could use it to protect the faithful by rooting out and correcting any doctrinal contradictions or misperceptions in a public forum. Finally, he viewed the prophecy as an important tool in the battle against religious radicals. It was suspected that Anabaptists and other unorthodox groups were living among the French and Dutch congregations in London and, as Lasco explains, the public teaching of doctrine through the prophecy and other rites helps to defend against the proliferation of such groups.21 The Sacraments Like preaching, the sacraments were a key part of religious life and provided an important opportunity to educate lay audiences about God’s promise for salvation. Lasco deﬁnes them as the visible signs of God’s covenant and agrees with other Protestants that there were only two: baptism and the Eucharist. The ceremonies he describes in the Forma ac ratio have two crucial functions. In a spiritual sense, they symbolize membership in the body of Christ. They are necessary steps that each person must take in order to consummate and demonstrate their membership in the church. They also had a practical function. They were communal rites to instruct lay audiences about God’s promise and Christ’s sacriﬁce. Like the ministry
19 Lasco explains ‘therefore on Tuesday, at the end of the sermon which we have at 9 o’clock in the morning, the preacher himself is questioned by the elders of the church and all of those who have been designated to put forward objections [to the sermon], in order that some agreement is reached with all modesty and dignity, rather than for displays of vanity, for the ediﬁcation of the church. By which act the ministers also could correct the preacher’s doctrine contained in the sermons delivered during the past week, if anyone had raised complaints about them’. He added that ‘in the end, those [decisions] which are arrived at during the prophecy by those who have been designated, must certainly and reasonably agree with the Word of God, and they shall be done for the ediﬁcation of the Church.’ Ibid., sigs K6v–K7v. 20 Ibid. 21 Ibid., sigs K7v–K8v.
JOHN A LASCO’S PUBLIC MINISTRY
of the Word, Lasco viewed them as key public rituals to engage the laity and to teach them about doctrinal matters. Baptism Lasco instructs that baptism, which was the ﬁrst step towards membership in the church, was a communal rite to take place during Sunday worship services.22 He explains in the Forma ac ratio that the minister calls forward fathers with infant children following the Lord’s Prayer.23 Emphasizing the rite’s didactic function, he explains that ‘it should be performed in front of the entire congregation since it also pertains to the whole church.’24 He writes that the preacher begins by instructing the assembly about the sacrament’s meaning which, borrowing his words from the early Church, he describes as the ‘sign and seal’ (signum atque obsignaculum) of their membership in Christ’s Church.25 The fathers must testify publicly that they understand the meaning and will raise the child according to the church’s doctrine. The preacher then calls each child by name and anoints them, placing water on their forehead and saying: ‘I baptize you in the name of God the father, the Son, and the holy spirit. The God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ gives to you, and to us with you, the gift of resurrection and grace for eternal life, for you all in Christ through his holy spirit.’26 The ceremony ends with a prayer of thanks that reiterates that the newly baptized children are part of the mystical body of Christ. Finally, the ministers are to record the names of the infants so that their catechetical instruction can begin after their ﬁfth birthday. Lasco further stresses the ceremony’s important role for educating lay audiences about the rite’s meaning and, in a larger sense, the church’s doctrine. He writes that it ‘doesn’t pertain only to the children present, but it also relates to the entire universal Church of Christ. We should think of it as if we are being baptized. That is to say, one ought to contemplate God’s grace (the great kindness and mercy of God), show true repentance and change one’s life.’27 Towards this goal, he urges ministers to explain these matters to the congregation and asserts that each person should come away from it understanding four principal lessons: baptism is a communal activity that serves as a reminder of God’s grace; it signiﬁes the cleansing of sins and reminds each person that all men are polluted by sin in the eyes of God and are cleansed by his grace; the gift of grace does not come from 22
Ibid., sig. L5v. Ibid., sigs L4v–L5r. Another member could present the infant for the rite if their father was unable or unavailable. 24 Ibid., sig. L3r. 25 Ibid., sig. M2v. 26 Ibid., sig. M4r. 27 Ibid., sig. L6r. 23
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
any man, but rather from Christ alone; and that the audience’s role is not passive, since the remission of sins requires their gratitude.28 As discussed in Chapter 3, there was powerful opposition in London to the foreigners’ sacramental practices and Lasco uses the Forma ac ratio to defend the rite from attacks by both English and Catholic opponents. His argument centres on its historical continuity. He writes that the practice follows the model established by Christ and his apostles by retaining only two elements: the use of water and the invocation of the trinity, ‘the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit’. He adds that by using only these two components, the French and Dutch churches maintain Christ’s original intention and avoid profaning the ceremony.29 The simplicity of the rite, he explains, allows all observers to witness the lesson of God’s grace and to clearly see that the baptized infant is a member in Christ’s Church.30 In an apparent critique on the Roman and English practices, the traditional elements of signing the cross on the forehead and chest, dressing the child in a chrisom, and anointing with oils are removed from the rite because they lack scriptural foundations, according to Lasco.31 Lasco also viewed baptism as another valuable tool to strengthen doctrinal consensus and to protect against religious radicals. He warns that only those children whose parents are members of the Strangers’ Church can be baptized. He writes in the Forma ac ratio that ‘we shall not allow any foreigner to offer their children for baptism in our churches if they have not sworn publicly their faith, in front of us, and in addition they must agree to follow the ecclesiastical discipline.’32 Lasco’s goal was to prevent religious radicals, especially Anabaptists, from using their children to hide among the French and Dutch communities in London.33 He incorporated two key devices in the rite to protect the Strangers’ Church. The parents must be members of the church: the father, or whoever presents the infant, must testify publicly to observe the doctrine and to raise their child in agreement with it.34 The second device is Lasco’s insistence on infant baptism, which distinguishes his churches from more radical groups like the Anabaptists. The Polish reformer argues that this practice is necessary because children 28
Ibid., sigs L6r–L7r. Such claims were common in Protestant ordinances. The Lutheran minister Johannes Bugenhagen presented similar arguments in his 1531 Lübeck order. He criticized the Roman Church’s use of chrism to anoint infants and argued, instead, that only water should be used as it had been done in the Bible. KO, Sehling, vol. 5, pp. 354–5. 30 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. L5v. 31 Cf. The Boke of common praier, and [ad]ministration of the Sacramentes and other rites and Ceremonies in the Churche of Englande (The fourme and maner of makynge bisshoppes, &c.) (London, 1552), sigs S1r–S6v. 32 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs L3v–L4r. 33 Ibid., sig. L3v. 34 Ibid., sig. M4r. 29
JOHN A LASCO’S PUBLIC MINISTRY
should not be denied the grace and acceptance of God that is gained by the sacrament.35 He draws on numerous biblical examples that support infant baptism, including stories about early church practices and the apostle Mark’s assertion that this alliance with God pertains to children too.36 He therefore instructs the ministers that ‘we baptize all the children in our church in order to witness that we, and they, are agreeable to God and to the love of Christ. And how they, by their nature, are children of divine wrath, conceived and born in sin as are we all.’37 Thus the London practice described in the Forma ac ratio sought to mitigate the radical’s inﬂuence by defending infant baptism and making it difﬁcult for unorthodox groups to hide among the foreign congregations. The Lord’s Supper Lasco’s Eucharistic rite proved to be his most controversial proposal and was criticized by English bishops who opposed the foreigners’ autonomy in London. It also would create much conﬂict with Lutheran ministers in Germany following the Forma ac ratio’s publication in 1555, which will be discussed in Chapter 7. The Polish reformer was inﬂuenced by both Zwingli and Calvin on this matter. He attacks the papal doctrine of transubstantiation, charging that Christ’s real presence in the bread and wine was ‘superstitious’ and led to idolatry. He adds that this was a manmade notion that developed after the ceremony’s apostolic institution.38 He describes, in contrast, a Lord’s Supper that is similar to Zwingli, emphasizing the bread and wine as symbols (symboli) of Christ’s sacriﬁce. He explains: As far as the breaking of bread and the pouring of wine in the Lord’s Supper, they signify to us through their symbol the passion of Christ’s body broken for us and the shedding of his blood in his death. Thus, it is the breaking of bread and pouring of wine that represents, testiﬁes, signiﬁes, and announces to us visibly by their form that God is our Lord and the judge of us all.39
The distribution of the bread and wine to the congregation was a physical representation of their communion with Christ.40 He describes the elements as ‘mystical meat and beverage’ and that the bread should not 35
Ibid., sigs L8r–v. Ibid., sigs M2r–v. 37 Ibid., sig. M1r. 38 Ibid., sig. M6r. 39 Ibid., sig. Q3v. Zwingli also advocated this symbolic understanding of the elements, arguing that the Eucharist is a remembrance of the Last Supper. Zwingli to Matthew Alber, 16 November 1524, in Huldrych Zwingli Writings, ed. H. Wayne Pipkin, trans. Henry Preble and Edward J. Furcha (2 volumes, Allison Park, PA, 1984), vol. 2, pp. 131–44. 40 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs Q4r–v. 36
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
be regarded as the natural body of Christ, but rather the sign of our union with God.41 Yet the ceremony is not strictly symbolic for Lasco and his emphasis on communion with Christ through participation – receiving the bread and wine – positions his rite somewhere between Zwingli and Calvin. He explains: ‘eating the bread and drinking the wine is at the end of the whole action in the Lord’s Supper and it demonstrates to us by their symbol that our communion with Christ, which we are given, belong to us in his body and blood.’42 It was not the elements alone that symbolized the joining with Christ, but rather the entire action of the Lord’s Supper that culminated with ingesting the host.43 However unlike Calvin, he emphasizes the symbolic nature of the ceremony. He explains that when the participants accept the bread and wine, they should see it as if they were receiving these elements from Christ himself.44 Echoing Zwingli, he writes that the Lord’s Supper is an act of remembrance (memoriam), which follows the model of Christ’s last meal with the apostles and symbolizes their union with him.45 Lasco’s understanding of the sacrament is reﬂected in the London ceremony. He writes that the Dutch congregation was to observe the Lords’ Supper on the ﬁrst Sunday in January, followed by the French church one month later.46 The ministers were to place the table ‘in view of the whole church, covered in a linen to which all the ministers and communion participants could take their place, each in his order, and they should receive the Supper of the Lord from the hands of the ministers who are present, just as Christ had done it’.47 Following the Lord’s Prayer and the baptismal rite, the minister would begin the Eucharist with a sermon on the signs, mystery and purpose of the ceremony. He then would join the other preachers, elders and deacons, who were seated at the table.48 The words spoken during the hosts’ distribution reﬂect their symbolic nature. Lasco instructs that the minister should take the bread, break it, and say: ‘the bread, which we break, is the communion with the body of Christ.’49 He then should distribute it to the others at the table, saying ‘take, eat and remember [memineritis] the body of our Lord Jesus Christ who was 41
Ibid., sigs V5r and T7r. Ibid., sig. S1r. 43 Ibid., sig. Q8r. 44 Ibid., sig. S4r. 45 Lasco explained, that ‘therefore … they themselves all believe that it is clear, that the Lord Christ (who otherwise regards the divine strength of the holy spirit in the observation of his institution) had instituted his Supper in this manner without doubt for his recollection.’ Ibid., sig. S6r. 46 Ibid., sig. M6v. 47 Ibid., sig. M7r. 48 Ibid., sigs T3v–T4r. 49 Ibid., sig. T8r. 42
JOHN A LASCO’S PUBLIC MINISTRY
delivered into death for us on the cross for the remission of all our sins.’50 He then should take the wine and say: ‘the cup of praise that we celebrate is the communion with the blood of Christ.’51 He extends the cup to each, saying ‘take, drink and remember [memineritis] the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ that was shed for us on the cross for the remission of all our sins.’52 After the ministers had received the sacrament, the deacons were to usher the remaining congregation to the table. The men were called forward ﬁrst and seated, followed by the women, and each time the distribution of bread and wine was repeated.53 Upon completion, the minister would lead the congregation in a prayer of thanks and conclude the ceremony with a brief admonition to consider the hosts’ meaning and the beneﬁt they receive through communion with Christ.54 Afterwards the deacons collected the remaining bread and wine to distribute to the poor.55 Participation in the rite symbolized full and complete membership in the church and was open to the entire adult congregation, providing they had met certain requirements: they had to be at least 14 years of age, a member of the Strangers’ Church, and must have ﬁrst been examined by the ministers in order to judge their eligibility. Concerning their preparation, Lasco instructs that the ministers should make an announcement to the church 15 days before the ceremony so that the members could prepare themselves.56 All who wished to partake in the Eucharist had to go before the ministers and elders during the following two weeks to make a public confession of faith, agree to observe the discipline and testify that they were not involved in any arguments or controversies.57 New members who had not yet attended a Lord’s Supper in the foreigners’ congregations faced a more strenuous examination to ensure their adherence to the confession.58 The ministers would then record the names of all who had met successfully the requirements and were eligible to participate in the ceremony.59 This system of examinations allowed the French and Dutch ministers to ensure compliance with the church’s doctrine and to keep close watch over who was participating in the Lord’s Supper in their congregations.
Ibid., sig. T8v. Ibid. 52 Ibid., sig. V1r. 53 Ibid., sig. V1v. 54 Ibid., sig. V4v. 55 Ibid., sig. V7v. 56 Ibid., sig. N7v. 57 Ibid., sig. M7r. The ministers and elders met at three different locations in London for the foreigners to come and make their public professions before the Lord’s Supper. Ibid., sig. P7v. 58 Ibid., sig. O4r. 59 Ibid., sigs O3r and P8v. 51
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Although Lasco shared Zwingli’s symbolic view of the sacrament, there was one signiﬁcant characteristic that distinguished the Polish reformer’s ceremony from other reformers’. Lasco insists that the participants be seated at the table to receive the bread and wine. This contrasts with the customary exercise of kneeling or standing, which was common among Lutheran, Reformed and English churches.60 The foreigners’ superintendent rejected such practices, arguing instead that the rite was a remembrance and should re-enact the last supper of Christ with his apostles, who had been seated at the table.61 He explains his position, writing, ‘in the mystical action, in the institution (I say) by Christ our Lord, we sit at the table for the distribution and the participation of the bread and cup.’62 He defends this distinctive element in his ceremony by arguing that Christ had instituted the seated communion in the Holy Scriptures, but that the same assertion could not be made for kneeling.63 This unique stipulation has become a distinguishing mark of the Polish reformer’s Eucharistic rite. Lasco attempted to convince his English hosts to take up the seated Lord’s Supper. Diarmaid MacCulloch’s study on the refugees’ superintendent and the English Reformation shows that Lasco had little success in this endeavour. Cranmer and the Polish reformer, for example, had found themselves on opposite sides of the 1550 vestment controversy. Lasco had supported John Hooper in his refusal to wear the clerical garments for his ordination based on the claim that the practice was not found in the Holy Scriptures. The matter was settled the following year when Cranmer agreed to remove the saints from the oath as long as Hooper wore the clerical vestments. MacCulloch explains that it was during this same confrontation that Lasco challenged the archbishop over kneeling during communion. John Knox repeated this criticism when he delivered a sermon in front of the king and the privy council in September 1552, which the Dutch elder Jan Utenhove (who was staying with Lasco in London) reported to Bullinger. The council ordered printing to be stopped on the revised prayer book until the matter could be resolved. Cranmer responded with an angry letter, arguing that religious matters were not to be decided by the council or private men, but rather by parliament and 60 Diarmaid MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski in the English Reformation’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen, 2000), pp. 337–8. The Hamburg ordinance indicates that members could either stand or kneel during the rite of the Lord’s Supper. KO, Sehling, vol. 5, p. 529. Although the 1549 prayer book was not clear on the matter, the 1552 revisions instructed that all were to kneel when receiving communion. boke of common praier, sig. R2r. 61 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs N3r–v. MacCulloch discusses Lasco’s dispute with Cranmer over kneeling in ‘The importance of Jan Laski’, pp. 336–7. 62 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs M8r–v. 63 Ibid., sig. M8v.
JOHN A LASCO’S PUBLIC MINISTRY
the king. Knox and the other royal chaplains drafted a list of articles in response to the archbishop which included an argument against kneeling during the Lord’s Supper. MacCulloch suggests that Lasco may have helped write this work. The reformers failed to convince Cranmer, however, and the so-called Black Rubric was added to the 1552 prayer book justifying kneeling during the Eucharist.64 Other Public Rites There are a number of other ceremonies that, although most are not part of Lasco’s ofﬁcial public ministry, will be discussed here because they are communal rites that he describes in the Forma ac ratio and are an important part of the foreigners’ religious life. The ﬁrst of these is the collection of alms, which the Polish reformer indicates is the third key element of the public ministry. It receives, in fact, much less attention in the ordinance than this description might suggest. He makes only three practical observations about the collection of alms. At the end of worship services, following the ﬁnal psalm, the preacher reminds the congregation of their duty to give to the poor. The deacons then are instructed to stand at the church doors and collect donations as the congregation exit. Finally, he instructs that following the Lord’s Supper, they are to gather leftover bread and wine and distribute it to the needy.65 Lasco’s brief comments on this third part of the public ministry, however, should not be seen as an indication of its reduced value. The limited discussion of alms collection here occurs because he addresses the deacons and their duties in other parts of the Forma ac ratio and continues to see them as an important part of the divinely instituted ministry.66 The other ceremonies include public fasting and prayers, marriage, visiting the sick and burial rites. Not surprisingly, he emphasizes their continuity with the Ancient Church, their role in maintaining order, and their didactic beneﬁts. The ﬁrst of these, the ritual for public prayers and fasting, was to be used when the church suffered some form of public danger or calamity. The Polish reformer’s use of this ceremony was not unique. Calvin had described a similar rite in the Institutes as part of his ecclesiastical discipline, but Lasco separated the two practices in the London ordinance.67 He writes that, when necessary, the French and Dutch 64
MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski’, pp. 336–9. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs V7r–v. 66 See, for example, the discussion of Lasco’s deaconate on pp. 68–70. 67 Calvin, Institutes, pp. 1241–8. The Geneva reformer explains that this ritual for fasting and prayer is a part of discipline, although not included in ‘the power of the keys’. Pastors should call the congregation to fasting and prayer when there is a need. Unlike Lasco who bases his practice on the book of Daniel, Calvin writes more generally that there are 65
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
ministers should choose a day to assemble the congregations in the early morning, before 9 o’clock for a public confession of sin based on the book of Daniel, Chapter 9.68 They then should deliver a sermon explaining the dangers or calamity that had befallen the foreigners, precipitating the need for public prayers and fasting. They were to instruct the assembly about the sins that had caused the misfortune, teaching that God uses such events to remind people of their eternal condemnation and to encourage them to remedy their behaviour. Following this sermon, they should administer the Lord’s Supper and then dismiss the congregation to pass the day praying, reading the Scriptures, and fasting. The preachers and elders would reassemble the church at 2 o’clock in the afternoon to instruct the faithful on the beneﬁts granted to them through their misfortune.69 This second ceremony ends with the congregation singing a psalm, followed by the benediction, and then a collection of alms for the poor. Lasco defends the foreigners’ observance of this rite based on its foundations in the Ancient Church and argues that they could seek deliverance from God’s afﬂiction through it, as well as educate the laity about their sins.70 Although there are no further extant records regarding this practice from the London congregations, there is evidence suggesting that the refugees embraced Lasco’s ceremony and continued to use it after they relocated to the continent. The English exiles that settled in Geneva in 1555 employed this same ceremony, including Lasco’s characteristic focus on Daniel 9.71 In Frankfurt, the Dutch consistory minutes reveal a very similar rite being used as late as the 1570s. The ministers reported on 30 November 1576, for example, that they would be joining the French congregation in ten days for public prayers and fasting. They explained that the French would assemble in the church and remain there the entire day listening to sermons, reading Holy Scriptures, praying and singing. The Dutch practice, in contrast, followed Lasco’s prescriptions more closely: the congregation came together in the morning for a sermon, after which they would be sent home to spend the day fasting and praying. The numerous examples in the Old and New Testaments showing this ritual in the Ancient and Apostolic churches. He adds, however, that there are too many to discuss. In addition, he writes, the examples demonstrate that ministers should assemble the congregation for fasting a prayer whenever a doctrinal controversy arises that must be decided, when ministers are to be elected, or when great difﬁculties arise, especially through the wrath of God, such as famine, pestilence or war. 68 Lasco bases his fasting ritual on the story of Daniel, who used fasting and prayer when faced with the catastrophic 70-year drought in Jerusalem. Daniel described the drought as a punishment from God for the Israelites for not obeying the laws of Moses. 69 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs Ii1r–Ii2r and Ii5r–Ii7v. 70 Ibid., sigs Ii5r–v and Hh8r–v. 71 See The forme of prayers and ministration of the Sacraments, &c. used in the Englishe Congregation at Geneva: and approved by the famous and godly learned man, John Calvyn (Geneva, 1556), sigs D2v–D4r.
JOHN A LASCO’S PUBLIC MINISTRY
ministers would reassemble them in the afternoon for additional sermons and prayers.72 The Geneva and Frankfurt examples suggest that at least some of the refugees continued to follow his ceremony after leaving London in 1553. Marriage was another important ceremony that was part of the Sunday worship service. Lasco explains that the rite should take place here for the whole church’s ediﬁcation.73 He writes that when two people wished to be joined together, the ministers should announce it to the assembled congregation on each of the three Sundays prior to the marriage. These declarations would allow members to report complaints or objections to the elders or ministers if they believed the ceremony should not take place.74 During worship services on the chosen Sunday, providing no reasonable protestations had been made, the marriage rite would follow the Lord’s Prayer and baptism. The minister would announce the couples’ intention to marry and instruct the congregation regarding the meaning of such unions. He explains that they should emphasize the scriptural foundations and the symbolic lesson it offers: joining two people in holy matrimony demonstrates the plurality of all people united in the divine.75 In a critique of the Roman Church, he adds that ministers should condemn celibacy in front of the congregation, since there are more biblical passages that praise marriage than promote virginity and celibacy.76 Following this sermon, the preacher calls the couple forward and asks them to declare their intention to be married in front of the congregation.77 He then asks them to join hands and, turning to the church, recites a prayer for their union. This is followed by a reading from Matthew and a public prayer for the newly married couple.78 The ceremony ends with the minister blessing the pair before the whole church. Visitations to sick members also provided preachers an important opportunity to teach the congregation about doctrine and belief. Lasco 72 Das Protokollbuch der Niederländischen Reformierten Gemeinde zu Frankfurt am Main 1570–1581, eds Hermann Meinert and Wolfram Dahmer (Frankfurt, 1977), pp. 149– 50. Cf. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs Ii5r–v. 73 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. Kk4v. 74 Ibid., sig. Kk5v. 75 Ibid., sigs Kk7v–Ll1r. 76 Ibid., sig. Ll3v. He also adds that solitude was not the best state for man, providing biblical examples to support this claim. Lasco explained that ‘indeed for this same purpose, having been decreed for all men, he [Christ] judged that the state of being alone was unbecoming for all men themselves … but that now in accordance with their corruption and nature (following our sin), the Lord himself accepted this solitude again in contrast to the solitude of all men. For Noah himself and all his children, it [marriage] had been commanded of him and of his descendents following the ﬂood, without any exception like Adam and Eve.’ Ibid., sig. Ll5r. 77 Ibid., sig. Mm6r. 78 Ibid., sigs Nn1v–Nn3r.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
writes in the Forma ac ratio that the congregations had a duty to inform ministers and elders when someone was ill or indisposed.79 The clergy should then visit the ailing brother or sister to instruct them about their sickness and to aid their recovery. As with other practices described in the ordinance, the reformer emphasizes the educational purpose for these visits. He writes that minister must warn the afﬂicted that God uses illness as a warning and evidence of his divine justice, and that the stricken should endure it with patience and gratitude.80 He further explains that because the illness had been sent as a punishment, the preacher or elder should encourage the parishioner to reconcile with anyone they had offended.81 For Lasco, these visitations were part of the clergy’s divinely instituted duties to instruct the laity about the necessary means for salvation and the lessons applied to the sick member as well as the larger congregation. He writes that ministers should name the afﬂicted and the cause of their suffering during the church’s public prayers and, following their recovery, they should present the member to the assembled congregation so that all could join in a prayer of thanks.82 The ﬁnal practice Lasco addresses in his ordinance is burial rites for the deceased. He eliminates many of the traditional Roman features while emphasizing the ritual’s instructive beneﬁts for the community. He explains that he had removed the papists’ ‘theatrical’ elements in developing this simple ceremony for the ediﬁcation of the church.83 He was careful to avoid any similarity to funeral processions, instructing that some of the brothers from the congregation should join one or two elders at the deceased’s home to carry the body to the church ‘in silence’.84 As with other rites, the funeral was another opportunity to teach the laity. He explains that during the public funeral ceremony, the preacher should instruct the assembly about several key lessons concerning death. First, he should teach that burial was not instituted in the Ancient Church for the good of the deceased’s soul, but rather for the witnesses of the funeral rite. Here Lasco criticizes the Roman Church for their belief that the deceased beneﬁted from the ceremony.85 The minister should then explain that death begins with original sin and that Christ sacriﬁced himself so that all others might have eternal life.86 Finally, the minister was to inform the 79
Ibid., sig. Nn4v. Ibid., sig. Nn5v. 81 Ibid., sig. Oo2r. 82 Ibid., sigs Oo2v–Oo3r. 83 ‘Concerning burial of the dead we must not employ any theatrics – any pagan or papal device – but rather we should retain the utmost simplicity, at the same time with the public honour of the funeral, for the ediﬁcation of the Church.’ Ibid., sig. Oo3v. 84 Ibid., sig. Oo3v. 85 Ibid., sigs Oo4r–v. 86 Ibid., sigs Oo4v–Oo5r. 80
JOHN A LASCO’S PUBLIC MINISTRY
congregation that through faith in God they could enjoy the beneﬁts of Christ’s gift.87 The Polish reformer notes that this last point is supported by unanimous consent in Scripture.88 Following the sermon, the body is buried, the entire church sings Psalm 103, and the minister leads a public prayer for the deceased.89 The ceremony ends with the benediction and a collection of alms. Lasco’s public ministry, and the various other communal ceremonies he describes in the Forma ac ratio, is a striking example of the increasingly important role Protestant ministers played as preachers and teachers. His instructions for sermons, catechesis, the weekly prophecy, sacramental rites, alms collection, public fasting, visitations to the sick and burial rites all stressed the ceremonies’ key function to educate the congregation about the Bible, God’s promise of salvation, and the principal tenets of faith. This is especially evident in the sacraments, which signalled membership in Christ’s Church and instructed lay audiences about key doctrinal lessons. Related to this didactic function, Lasco also stresses the ceremonies’ role in doctrinal consensus. They marked and conveyed orthodoxy, while protecting the French and Dutch communities from the inﬂuence of religious radicals. Monitoring preachers through the weekly prophecy, public exams on the large and small catechisms, and swearing to uphold the church’s confession in order to participate in the sacraments were practical measures designed to eliminate Anabaptists and enforce doctrinal conformity among members. As with Lasco’s ecclesiastical administration, there is some evidence to suggest that his public ministry was used by the French and Dutch refugees in London. The Polish reformer indicates in the Forma ac ratio that it is a recording of the practices already in place in the French and Dutch congregations and the ordinance’s similarity to the Christlicke Orinancien and L’ordre des priers et ministere ecclesiastique – the vernacular liturgies produced for the London refugees – supports this claim. The exiles’ continued use of these practices after leaving England also suggests that this is an accurate reﬂection of the rites observed by Lasco’s London congregations. This lasting impact of the Forma ac ratio beyond the Strangers’ Church will be explored in greater detail in Chapter 7, following an examination of the ﬁnal part of his public ministry, the ecclesiastical discipline.
87 Lasco writes that they should instruct the congregation that ‘it is taught in the Church, he who is faithful to God, and who seeks God in themselves, will not be shut out from the beneﬁts of our Lord Christ’. Ibid., sig. Oo6r. 88 Ibid., sig. Oo6r. 89 Ibid., sig. Oo8v.
This page intentionally left blank
Ecclesiastical Discipline in the Forma ac ratio As discussed in Chapter 3, Lasco added a third, and somewhat distinctive, mark to identify Christ’s true Church: that of ecclesiastical discipline (disciplina ecclesiastica). This term represents a formal system of education, ‘brotherly’ admonitions and censure to correct immoral behaviour, and had its theological foundations in Matthew, Chapter 18.1 The introduction of discipline was less prominent in Lutheran communities, where the traditional hierarchy had been retained. Moral policing of the clergy and laity continued to be carried out by the bishops or superintendents, who oversaw the priests, and through parish visitations. In the Saxon town of Altenburg, for example, the 1554 instructions for visitors noted that they should observe whether the preachers were following the territory’s order for worship services, whether the Word of God was being preached clearly so that the laity could understand it, and whether the church’s members were observing their duty to give alms for the poor.2 Reformed theologians like Zwingli, Bucer and Calvin, in contrast, rejected this traditional hierarchy and created new systems to monitor and correct behaviour. They emphasized the important relationship between discipline and salvation, and set up
1 Matthew 18:15–20. The text is as follows: ‘(15) If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. (16) But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be conﬁrmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. (17) If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. (18) Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (19) “Again I say unto you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. (20) For where two of three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”’ This translation is taken from the Greek-English New Testament, eds Kurt Aland, Matthew Black et al. (5th edn, Stuttgart, 1990), p. 50. 2 Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts, ed. Emil Sehling, (vols 1–6, Leipzig, 1902–13; vols 7–15, Tübingen, 1957–77), vol. 1, p. 518.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
consistorial courts to oversee censure, penitence and moral reform within a community.3 Although the Polish reformer retained part of the traditional hierarchy in his London church through the superintendent’s ofﬁce, he also emphasized the need for a Reformed style of discipline. He ﬁrst experimented with the practice during his East Frisian superintendency. On two separate occasions, in 1544 and 1545, Lasco travelled to Cologne to work on Archbishop Hermann von Wied’s reform efforts.4 It was there that he ﬁrst discovered Martin Bucer’s discipline, which was recorded in the city’s ordinance, the Einfältiges Bedencken, and introduced steps to correct and punish immoral behaviour. Bucer instructed that congregants should report to church leaders any known Anabaptists or other radicals. The ministers should then examine the accused and, if found guilty, expel them from the congregation.5 Upon returning from his ﬁrst trip to Cologne in 1544, Lasco urged the countess to adopt a similar practice to protect the East Frisian churches from the inﬂuence of religious radicals. Her police ordinance issued the following year contained a discipline for the territory modelled on Bucer’s practice in Cologne.6 The order encouraged private and public admonitions to warn church members about their immoral behaviour and instructed that all members should report suspected Anabaptists and other radicals to the ministers, who would examine them and, if found guilty,
3 For a discussion of these reformers, and their ideas about ecclesiastical discipline, see Amy Nelson Burnett, The Yoke of Christ: Martin Bucer and Christian Discipline (Kirksville, MO, 1994), pp. 35–40, William Peter Stephens, The Theology of Huldrych Zwingli (Oxford, 1986), pp. 270–74, and J. Wayne Baker, ‘Christian Discipline and the Early Reformed Tradition: Bullinger and Calvin’, in Calviniana: ideas and inﬂuence of Jean Calvin, ed. Robert V. Schnucker (Kirksville, MO, 1988), pp. 107–19. For additional information on the latter reformer, see Alexandre Ganoczy, Ecclesia Ministrans: dienende Kirche und kirchlicher Dienst bei Calvin (Freiburg im Breisgau, 1968), pp. 315–24. 4 Bucer invited Lasco to Cologne to work for the archbishop’s reform efforts. Bucer to Lasco, 26 July 1544, Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa, ed. Abraham Kuyper (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1866), vol. 2, p. 575. See also Willem van’t Spijker, ‘Die Bedeutung des Kölner Reformationsversuchs für a Lasco’ in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen, 2000), pp. 248–9. 5 Martin Bucer, Von Gottes gnaden unser Hermans Ertzbischoffs zu Coeln unnd Churfürsten &c. Einfaltigs bedencken warauff ein Christliche … Reformation an Lehr, brauch der Heyligen Sacramenten und Ceremonien, Seelsorge, und anderem Kirchendiesnt (Bonn, 1543), sigs N2v–N3v. 6 Lasco tells Albert Hardenberg that he was considering a form of discipline similar to Bucer’s for his East Frisian churches. Lasco to Hardenberg, 26 July 1544, Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 575. The 1545 police ordinance is found in KO, Sehling, vol. 7, p. 398–413.
ECCLESIASTICAL DISCIPLINE IN THE FORMA AC RATIO
expel them from the church. It also created a committee, or Kirchenrat, of secular guildsmen and ministers to adjudicate disciplinary cases. In addition, church leaders retained authority over excommunication and the right to appoint lay members to this assembly.8 Like Bucer, Lasco saw two key purposes for discipline: to correct dangerous behaviour and restore the faithful to the path towards salvation, and to protect the community from the inﬂuence of religious radicals. In London, Lasco continued to promote his discipline as a tool to maintain doctrinal purity among the refugees and to enforce moral reform. He employed admonitions, examinations and excommunication to eliminate Anabaptists and other radicals from the community as he had done in East Frisia. He explains in the Forma ac ratio that: since the legitimate use of ecclesiastical discipline has been nearly abolished by all, and since a large part of mankind ignore it and its principal parts, it will not be in vain to speak of it a little so that all of the faithful will be able to recognize more easily the legitimate use of discipline in our church.9
He begins with a deﬁnition of the practice: ‘ecclesiastical discipline is a certain plan taken from Holy Scriptures and observing the steps of Christian admonitions according to the Word of God.’ He writes further that it is meant to be used by the congregation’s members to maintain the church. Emphasizing the link between discipline and salvation, he notes that: if someone ﬁnds a person to be obstinate and contemptuous of these admonitions, then in the end they are to be delivered to Satan through excommunication. However if in some way they are ashamed and the ﬂesh within them perishes (which had restrained them towards their disposition) then the Holy Spirit shall carry them to repentance and ﬁnally to their salvation.10
Lasco’s instructions regarding the practice in the Forma ac ratio emphasize the steps of public and private admonitions, as well as communal rites for excommunication and reconciliation, reﬂecting the inﬂuence of Calvin on the refugee congregations.11 Regarding the practice observed 7
KO, Sehling, vol. 7, pp. 401–403. Cf. Bucer, Einfältiges Bedencken, sigs N2v–N3v. KO, Sehling, vol. 7, p. 399, and Jan Remmers Weerda, Der Emder Kirchenrat und seine Geminde: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte reformierter Kirchenordnung in Deutschland, ihrer Grundsätze und ihrer Gestaltung (2nd edn, Wuppertal, 2000), pp. 46–8. 9 John a Lasco, Forma ac ratio tota Ecclesiastici Ministerii, in peregrinorum, potißimum vero Germanorum Ecclesia (Frankfurt, 1555), sig. V8r. 10 Ibid., sig. V8v. 11 Henning Jürgens describes Lasco’s East Frisian discipline as a middle step between Bucer’s Cologne order and the Forma ac ratio. Henning P. Jürgens, Johannes a Lasco in Ostfriesland: der Werdegang eines europäischen Reformators (Tübingen, 2002), pp. 294–9. Cf. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles (2 vols, Philadelphia, PA, 1960), vol. 2, pp. 1230–31. 8
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
by the foreigners, Lasco instructs that all members must agree to receive admonitions from the ministry, reprimand those who criticize the ministers, and defend and maintain the church’s doctrine according to the steps of private and public discipline.12 The ﬁrst stage was private admonitions, as described by the apostle Matthew. If one member of the church offended another through their behaviour, dishonourable living or failure to fulﬁl their Christian duties, Lasco instructs that the injured person should approach the offender and privately admonish him.13 If the accused member rejects the warning, one or two others from the congregation should reproach the offender a second time.14 The Polish reformer explains that everyone, including the ministers, should give and receive these admonitions in a brotherly (fraterne) manner since they are meant to promote unity and peace within the community.15 If there was no resolution following the private admonitions, or if someone had committed an offence against the entire church, the matter moved to the second step of public censure. Lasco again established a Kirchenrat to oversee public discipline although, in contrast to East Frisia, preachers and elders served on this assembly rather than ministers and guildsmen. Charged with resolving disciplinary matters, this clerical committee would call the disputants for questioning, adjudicate the matter based on the testimony provided, and encourage the guilty party to reconcile with the congregation.16 If the accused member rejected their decision, the ministers could move to excommunicate them from the church.17 The Kirchenrat also played an important role in monitoring the clergy. The Polish reformer writes that this assembly should meet four times a year (on the second Thursday of March, June, September and December) to see that the ministers are observing correctly the discipline. He explains that ‘in this assembly they should see that doctrinal purity, unanimous consent, and the kindness and integrity of life are observed and guarded by all preachers, elders and deacons.’18 He instructs that they should admonish those ministers in breach of the discipline and, if necessary, suspend those who refuse to accept their censure.19
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs X8v–Y1r. Ibid., sigs X6v–X7r. Ibid., sig. Y2v. Ibid., sig. Y1v. Ibid., sigs Y3v–Y4r. Ibid., sigs Y4r and Aa7r. Ibid., sig. Gg4v. Ibid., sig. Hh1r.
ECCLESIASTICAL DISCIPLINE IN THE FORMA AC RATIO
Lasco defends the refugees’ practice based on Christ’s institution in the Holy Scriptures and its ability to protect against sin. He writes in the Forma ac ratio: The Lord Christ commanded in the writings of Matthew and Luke that we should admonish a brother who has offended the others in some way. Likewise, Paul warned the church of the Thessalonians not to neglect the warnings against disorderly brothers in any way. He also diligently urged the Hebrews to heed admonitions so that those among them who were ignoring the warnings would not be led astray through sin. In turn, he severely scolded the Corinthians because they had rejected the discipline’s use against a man who had sexual relations with his stepmother. Certainly in these places in Holy Scripture, the clear sources promote heeding admonitions in the Church of Christ. It is clear that they cannot be ignored without truly great offence.20
He explains that admonitions must be based on ‘pure Christian charity and a heart of love’, and that they are conducted for the ‘ediﬁcation of the church’.21 He adds that discipline is a divine institution, not man-made, and that admonitions come from divine rather than human authority. Lasco writes that, lately, Roman popes and bishops had ignored the practice and that a return to the order of the primitive church was necessary.22 He explains that the church’s members must be certain that the offender has acted in a manner contrary to the Holy Scriptures and doctrine, and that exhortations should be made with modesty and prudence. He also notes that the goal of admonitions is not to punish reprobate members, but rather to correct their sins, and the ‘inﬁrmity’ of the entire church.23 Even excommunication, the most severe form of censure in the discipline, was not meant to condemn men but rather to save them from eternal condemnation by encouraging them to correct their immoral behaviour.24 The redemptive nature of Lasco’s discipline led the public rites for penitence and excommunication to become the principal focus of the refugees’ discipline. The Polish reformer writes that if the Kirchenrat ﬁnds an offender to be guilty, but the member refuses to acknowledge his error and seek reconciliation, then the matter should be presented to the entire congregation in the form of a public censure. During Sunday worship services, the ministers were to recount to the assembled members the sin that had been committed and the subsequent admonitions that were made. Lasco notes that this should be done without revealing the
Ibid., sigs X1r–v. Ibid., sigs X1v–X2r. 22 Ibid., sigs X1v–X3v. 23 Ibid., sigs V8r and X1v–X4r. Lasco adds that those who reject the admonitions, and continue to sin, must be ejected from the ‘ecclesiastical society’ for the good of congregation. Ibid., sig. X5r. 24 Ibid., sigs X5r–v. 21
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
identity of the offender.25 The preachers then should lead a public prayer encouraging the transgressor to seek reconciliation, after which they set a new deadline for the accused member to repent. If the sinner agrees to accept their censure, Lasco instructs, the ministers should examine the person to determine if their desire to reconcile is genuine and if there is clear evidence of repentance.26 On the date chosen for his reconciliation, the preachers should deliver a sermon to the congregation explaining the sins committed, followed by a public prayer for the accused. The preachers then should encourage the member to recognize voluntarily their faults, ask for God’s pardon, and reconcile with the church.27 Following this, the transgressor would make a public confession of their sins. Emphasizing the didactic nature of the ritual, the ministers were to follow this with a speech instructing the congregation on the principal points of doctrine that had been breached and admonishing the accused regarding the offence.28 Lasco then instructs that the guilty person should pledge to follow the foreigners’ discipline before the minister can announce to the congregation the remission of sins. The public rite ends with the preachers and elders giving their hand to the penitent member and embracing them, signalling reconciliation with the church.29 Lasco’s public ceremony served two important functions. First, it provided a visible sign of the offender’s reuniﬁcation with the body of Christ. This redemptive quality, Lasco argues, was the principal purpose of the discipline. Second, as with the other ceremonies described in the public ministry, the rite had an important didactic function. The Polish reformer emphasizes the ministers’ duty to educate the congregation by explaining the sins that had been committed and how they contradicted the church’s doctrine. He also notes that this rite of reconciliation was a necessary part of the ecclesiastical discipline because it teaches the entire congregation about their duty to God.30 The Polish reformer describes a similar communal ritual for excommunication in the Forma ac ratio, stressing the internal redemptive
Ibid., sigs Y7r–v. Ibid., sigs Z1r–v. 27 Ibid., sigs Aa1r–v. 28 Ibid., sig. Aa2v. 29 Concerning reconciliation, Lasco explains that ‘at the end of this action of thanks, the minister questions this penitent brother if, hereafter, he wishes to follow the ecclesiastical discipline according to the Word of God. If that man responds ‘yes’, then the minister announces to them [the congregation] and calls to witness the true and clear remission of his sins in the eye of God and of the Church, not only on earth, but also in heaven … Finally, the ministers and elders embrace this penitential brother (giving their right hand), each in turn in view of the entire church, and they conﬁrm their reconciliation with him and his reconciliation with the whole Church, having given to him their kiss.’ Ibid., sigs Aa6r–v. 30 Ibid., sig. Z2v. 26
ECCLESIASTICAL DISCIPLINE IN THE FORMA AC RATIO
function and the external didactic role of the rite. He explains that if the offender refuses to reconcile with the church after the ministers have related the matter to the congregation for their prayers, the preachers and elders can set a date for excommunication. Lasco notes that they should announce the chosen date at least eight days in advance so that those who disagree with the action can report their complaints to the ministry.31 If no objections are made, ‘the silence of the church is held for their silent consent and for their approval for the forthcoming excommunication.’32 Like the reconciliation ceremony, the practice was to be held in front of the entire congregation. The Polish reformer instructs that the Dutch should perform the ritual during Sunday morning services, with the French following in the afternoon so that the foreigners could attend both if they wished. He stresses that excommunication from one congregation means a ban from the entire Strangers’ Church.33 The ceremony begins with the preachers explaining the beneﬁts of expelling the accused: to honour God, to protect and maintain the church, and to demonstrate the magnitude of the person’s sin. Lasco explains that the purpose was not to condemn the member, but rather to encourage them to correct their behaviour.34 As with the penitence rite, the ministers recount to the assembled congregation the sins of the accused and the admonitions that were given. They then lead the church in a prayer for the offender, after which the transgressor is given a ﬁnal chance to repent and reconcile before being excommunicated.35 If they remain obstinate, the ministers announce that they have been cut off from the church. The ceremony ends with the preachers instructing the congregation about the purpose of this action and about their duty to help the unrepentant. Lasco explains that the clergy should teach the laity that casting out sinners is done so that others are not infected by their impiety and that public penitence is the only way to reconcile with the church. In addition, they should urge the congregation to continue admonishing the reprobate member and to show compassion by not ‘mocking, injuring, despising or defaming’ him. Finally, they should instruct the assembled members to see the image of divine punishment in the excommunication and to pray for those who have been cast out of the church.36 Although Lasco’s ecclesiastical discipline is similar to the practices instituted by Bucer and Calvin, the London practice distinguishes itself from the others by the authority assigned to the laity over excommunication. The Polish reformer grants power to the entire congregation, writing that an 31 32 33 34 35 36
Ibid., sig. Aa8v. Ibid., sigs Aa8v–Bb1r. Ibid., sig. Cc8r. Ibid., sigs Bb5v–Bb6r. Ibid., sig. Bb7v. Ibid., sigs Cc5r–Cc6v.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
unrepentant offender was not to be cut off from the church by the ministers and elders, ‘but rather by the unanimous consent and agreement of the whole church’.37 Lay authority over excommunication was uncommon, although it was not a new idea in the 1550s. Zwingli had argued for this same right in the early stages of his career, writing in his 1523 Defense of the Reformed Faith that ‘no private person may impose the ban on anyone, except the church, that is to say the community of those among whom the person to be excommunicated lives, together with its guardian, that is to say the ministers.’38 The Zurich reformer, however, backed away from this pronounced lay role in his later works, replacing it with greater powers for lay magistrates in cutting off members.39 Vermigli’s Common places also advocated the congregation’s authority over excommunication.40 Calvin, in contrast, placed this authority in the hands of the magistrates and ministers on the consistory. It is not known if Lasco was aware of the position taken by Zwingli or Vermigli regarding excommunication. The Polish reformer had visited Zurich brieﬂy in 1525 and may have heard Vermigli discuss the topic during his time in England, but he does not refer to these men in his letters or writings on the subject, making it difﬁcult to ascertain their inﬂuence on him. What is clear, however, is that his support for lay power over excommunication in the London Strangers’ Church was shaped, in part, by the foreigners’ unique situation in London. The French and Dutch refugees did not enjoy the same close relationship with the magistracy as did other churches on the continent. Their position as exiles in a foreign land distanced them from civic leaders. Just as he needed to ﬁnd a replacement for the magistrates in elections, he also needed to replace their participation in excommunication with someone from within the congregation and he chose the lay members. The Polish reformer found support for this in the apostolic model. In the Forma ac ratio, he criticizes the Roman Church for giving powers over excommunication to the popes and bishops, arguing instead that the apostle Paul had shown in his letter to the Corinthians that this right belonged to the entire congregation.41 His understanding of the ancient practice is reﬂected in the ceremony he describes for the London church, where the consent of the entire congregation is needed in order to expel a
Ibid., sigs Aa7v–Aa8v. Huldrych Zwingli Writings: the Defense of the Reformed faith, ed. Pipkin, H. Wayne and trans. Edward J. Furcha (Allison Park, PA, 1984), p. 226. 39 Ulrich Gäbler, Huldrych Zwingli: his life and work, trans. Ruth C.L. Gritsch (Edinburgh, 1986), pp. 104–105. 40 Peter Martyr Vermigli, Loci communes D. Petri Martyris Vermilii, Florentini, sacrarum literarum in schola Tigurina Professoris: ex varies ipsius authoris scriptis, in unum librum collecti [et] in quatuor Classes distribute (London, 1583), sigs Vvvijr–v. 41 Lasco refers to 1 Corinthians 5, Forma ac ratio, sigs Aa7v–Aa8r. 38
ECCLESIASTICAL DISCIPLINE IN THE FORMA AC RATIO
member. This distinctive emphasis on lay power over excommunication is a distinguishing characteristic of his London ordinance. Lasco’s discipline served three practical functions for the refugee congregations. It was a mark of Christ’s Church which, as he argues, distinguished the true Church from all impostors. The practice also became a key component of membership in the ecclesiastical body for the foreigners. All those who wished to join the French and Dutch congregations had to swear to follow the discipline. It was a requirement to participate in the Lord’s Supper and, as the Polish reformer writes, it was necessary to maintain order in the church and to ensure that all members observe their duty to Christ.42 Finally, as it had done in East Frisia, the practice mitigated the inﬂuence of religious radicals among the refugee communities. He includes special instructions in the ordinance for dealing with such groups in the Strangers’ Church. Lasco writes that two or three elders should approach any member of the French or Dutch congregation who spoke out against the church’s doctrine or promoted radical ideas like those of the Anabaptists. They should speak to the offender regarding the source of the immoderate doctrines and, if they are agreeable, invite them to be examined publicly by the church’s ministry.43 The preachers and elders should then explain to the member why his beliefs are false and how they contradict Holy Scriptures before admonishing him to cease spreading his erroneous doctrine.44 If they refuse to obey the church leaders, Lasco instructs the ministers to denounce the offender by name in front of the entire congregation and to educate the laity regarding the false beliefs.45 He explains that they should provide a summary of the offender’s mistakes and clarify their arguments against him in their denunciation. As in the other public ceremonies described in the London discipline, the assembled members could raise any questions or objections they might have about the ministers’ decision.46 This was to serve two key purposes. It recognizes the congregation’s authority in disciplinary matters, including the expulsion of religious radicals. More importantly, the ministers could use the questions to address the public’s concerns and to educate the laity regarding the church’s doctrine and their proper behaviour. As with the other parts of Lasco’s Forma ac ratio, there is insufﬁcient evidence to ascertain the extent to which these provisions were used in London. Surviving records for the exile congregations that followed, however, shed some light on the ordinance’s impact among the French and Dutch Protestants. The Dutch Kirchenrat’s minutes from Emden have 42 43 44 45 46
Ibid., sig. X4r. Ibid., sigs Hh4r–v. Ibid., sig. Hh5v. Ibid., sig. Hh6r. Ibid.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
survived from the period between 1557 and 1620, and point towards the continued use of his discipline, especially its emphasis on private and public warnings, as well as the public rite of reconciliation. Jacob Peters, for example, was a local shoemaker who was called before the Kirchenrat, accused of impregnating the prostitute ‘Anne up de Trappe’.47 An entry in the minutes on 7 March 1558 indicates that one of the elders had admonished him privately for his offence, after which the ministers decided he should be rebuked publicly before the congregation on the following Sunday.48 Peters rejected their verdict and failed to show up, so two more elders were sent to remind him of his duty to observe the discipline.49 The following week, they recorded that the offender had agreed to return and he appeared before the congregation on 10 April 1558. This time he accepted their warnings, repented his sins and was rejoined to the church through the reconciliation ceremony.50 The minutes also reveal a similar lay authority over excommunication and an emphasis on reuniting sinners with the church. Luetke Schroer, for example, a shop owner in Emden was accused of having children steal on his behalf. After having rejected private admonitions he also was called before the Kirchenrat in 1558 to answer for his offences. The preachers and elders instructed him to appear before the entire church, to explain his sins to the congregation and to receive their prayers. If he refused, they warned, he could be cut off from the Lord’s Supper ‘with the congregation’s consent’.51 Schroer rejected their judgement and an entry in the minutes on 25 July 1558 indicates a letter was sent to inform him that he had been excommunicated from the church.52 The ministers’ action eventually produced the desired result: six months later, Schroer ﬁnally conceded his guilt and agreed to appear before the congregation. A note in the minutes on 26 January 1561 indicates that he could be reconciled to the church with the congregation’s consent.53 It appears that the members agreed, as there is no further mention of the incident in the Kirchenrat’s minutes. Other cases that came before the preachers and elders also demonstrate the laity’s authority in disciplinary matters. The ministers publicly admonished Anne Holagen in 1562 because she had missed the Lord’s Supper ‘for a long time’. She wanted to participate in the forthcoming Eucharist but the clerics were concerned about her unexplained absence and referred the matter to the Kirchenrat for investigation. The assembly’s 47 Die Kirchenratsprotokolle der Reformierten Gemeinde Emden 1557–1620, ed. Heinz Schilling (2 vols, Cologne, 1989), vol. 1, p. 30. 48 Ibid., pp. 38–9. 49 Ibid, p. 40. 50 Ibid., pp. 41 and 45. 51 20 June 1558, Ibid., p. 52. 52 Ibid., p. 58. 53 Ibid., p. 123.
ECCLESIASTICAL DISCIPLINE IN THE FORMA AC RATIO
minutes reinforced the laity’s important role by noting that she could be rejoined to the church once she had alleviated the congregation’s doubts about her actions.54 Later that same year, the ministers cut off Jasper Herman from the Lord’s Supper because he had fallen out with his wife. He disagreed with this decision and sent a letter to the ministers challenging the ban. The case was related to the Kirchenrat and the minutes indicate that the preachers and elders should investigate the matter before presenting it to the congregation for their judgment.55 Although the ﬁnal resolution of these particular cases was not recorded, the minutes do indicate that like Lasco’s London discipline, the lay congregations in East Frisia exercised greater control over excommunication and reconciliation. Other refugee communities also continued to use the London discipline in their new churches. The French minister, Valerand Poullain, had established a new exile church in Frankfurt in 1554 and maintained a similar assembly for preachers and elders to oversee disciplinary matters.56 He continued to emphasize the steps of private and public censure, as well as the ceremonies for excommunication and reconciliation.57 Like Lasco, the French minister stressed the discipline’s purpose to correct the offender’s behaviour, reunite them with the congregation and restore their chance for salvation. It was meant to encourage penitence rather than cut the transgressor off from the church forever.58 This refugee community also continued to support the entire congregation’s authority in disciplinary matters. In his ordinance for the French exiles in Frankfurt, the Liturgia sacra, Poullain explains that if someone was to be reconciled with the church, the congregation must be assembled so that the obstinate member can profess their sins publicly and be readmitted to the body ‘by the entire church’s consent’ (consensu universae Ecclesiae).59 A conﬂict erupted among the refugees in 1559 which suggests that many of the congregation’s members had embraced and supported this disciplinary model from London. The dispute began when the French preacher Francis Perussel proposed making changes to the Kirchenrat which, as in Lasco’s Strangers’ Church, was made up of preachers and elders. He announced that the nine participating elders would be replaced
54 Anne Holagen appeared before the congregation on 30 November 1562. The minutes also indicate that she currently was separated from her husband and that the ministers needed to investigate this matter ﬁrst to determine if she was ‘trustworthy’. Ibid., p. 154. 55 Ibid., pp. 143 and 154. 56 Valerand Pollanus Liturgia Sacra (1551–1555): Opnieuw uitgegeven en van een Inleiding Voorzien, ed. A.C. Honders (Leiden, 1970), pp. 78–96 and 220–240. 57 Ibid., p. 238. 58 Ibid., pp. 238–40. 59 Ibid., p. 240.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
by six popularly elected ones and two jurists appointed by the town council. The congregation was deeply divided over the changes. The Frankfurt magistrates’ advisers to the French community, Augustin le Grand and Jean de Glaubourg, supported the proposals while the preacher William Houbraque and six other elders spoke out against it.60 They were concerned that the refugee church’s autonomy would be threatened by the council’s appointments and they called for a suspension of all elections and the Lord’s Supper until the matter could be resolved.61 The civic leaders appointed three magistrates to investigate the matter: Jean de Glaubourg, Daniel zum Jungen and Conrad Humbracht. They concluded in September 1560 that the refugees should be given a new order for their churches incorporating the proposed changes.62 The majority of the congregation rejected this decision and both sides of the conﬂict continued to urge the council to resolve the problem. This dispute over the Kirchenrat had a disastrous impact on this refugee congregation. Unable to ﬁnd a suitable solution, the magistrates unexpectedly closed the church before the end of the year. A small number of the refugees remained in Frankfurt, electing Arnaud Banc as their new minister in December 1561. They submitted a revised confession to the magistrates but this was rejected by the civic authorities and they refused to reopen the exile church.63 English Protestants who followed the London refugees when they returned to the continent in 1553 also were drawn to Lasco’s model for ecclesiastical discipline. Andrew Pettegree discusses a conﬂict among the English exiles in Emden that reﬂects their similar practice.64 The dispute began in 1558 when the ministers cancelled worship services following an outbreak of the plague in a nearby house. Not everyone agreed with the decision. One critic was John Dowley who, in accordance with the discipline, admonished the leaders privately for their actions. The preachers defended themselves, claiming they had acted in accordance with the Holy Scriptures.65 Their critics remained unconvinced and the conﬂict escalated soon afterwards when laymen took on the ministers’ duties and began holding prayers at the homes of their ill brethren. Dowley admonished the clerics a second time, writing a public letter criticizing their refusal 60
Ibid., p, 363. Ibid., p. 364. 62 Ibid., p. 371. 63 Ibid., pp. 383–7. 64 Andrew Pettegree, Marian Protestantism: six studies (Aldershot, 1996), pp. 20–22. Current knowledge of the conﬂict comes from two sources. John Dowley describes the events in his submission to the French and Dutch churches, which has been translated from the Latin original by Bill Naphy and reprinted in Pettegree, Marian Protestantism, pp. 172–82. The dispute also is mentioned in the Dutch Kirchenrat’s minutes in Kirchenratsprotokolle, Schilling, vol. 1, pp. 63–4. 65 Pettegree, Marian Protestantism, pp. 172–3. 61
ECCLESIASTICAL DISCIPLINE IN THE FORMA AC RATIO
to visit the sick during a time of plague and for reducing the times of communal prayers.66 Scory and Young responded to this second rebuke the following Sunday when, before the entire congregation, they accused their chief critic of being duplicitous and distorting the Holy Scriptures.67 Dowley argued that the matter involved the entire church and should be resolved by the congregation’s authority. He proposed that four to six men be appointed to judge the case. The ministers rejected his suggestion, claiming that the elders should resolve the dispute.68 Dowley sent a new letter to the Dutch and French congregations describing the events and requesting their assistance, but this had little impact. The Dutch ministers summoned Scory and Young to appear before their consistory but they refused any external mediation, arguing that it should be solved by the English ministers.69 This matter, in fact, was never resolved. The death of Queen Mary in November 1558, and the ascension of her Protestant half-sister Elizabeth, led these refugees to close their Emden church and return to England before a solution was found. The conﬂict, however, suggests that this refugee community adopted a practice similar to the London discipline. Dowley used the steps of private and public admonitions: he rebuked the ministers privately before he produced his public letter criticizing their actions. The English community had no Kirchenrat, so he explained in his letter to the French and Dutch ministers that his private warnings had failed so he now wished to turn the matter over to them for their judgement.70 At the heart of this conﬂict, however, was the question over authority in the congregation. Scory and Young maintained that the English minister should resolve the dispute. Dowley, in contrast, argued that ‘although the pastor and elders wish to judge and determine the case themselves, and will not suffer the church to judge and determine the matter, this must be done by the church.’71 Like Lasco, he stressed the entire congregation’s authority in matters of discipline. The Form of prayers published in 1556 for the English refugees in Geneva also suggests that these exiles followed a form of discipline similar to the London Strangers’ Church.72 This ordinance, which will be discussed in greater detail in the following chapter, was modelled on Lasco’s London congregations and like the Forma ac ratio, it emphasizes the discipline’s 66
Ibid., pp. 173–4. Ibid., pp. 174–6. 68 Ibid., pp. 178–9. 69 Ibid., pp. 22 and 180–81. 70 Ibid., pp. 178–9. 71 Ibid., p. 182. 72 The forme of prayers and ministration of the Sacraments, &c. used in the Englishe Congregation at Geveva: and approved by the famous and godly learned man, John Calvyn (Geneva, 1556). 67
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
important role for promoting moral behaviour, which is necessary for salvation, and for removing perceived dangers from the church. It was not meant to cut a person off from the community, however, but to urge them to recognize and repent for their sins.73 The English refugees followed the same steps for private and public admonitions, as well as for communal reconciliation and excommunication. In addition, they repeated the characteristic element of lay authority in disciplinary matters. The author of the ordinance describes the congregation’s power, writing: As unto excommunication (which is the greatest and last punishment belonging to the spiritual ministry) it is ordained that nothing be attempted on that behalf without the determination of the whole church, wherein also they must be wary, and take good heed, that they seem not more ready to expel from the congregation then to receive again those in whom they perceive worthy fruits of repentance to appear.74
The ordinance makes clear that the ministers are not to usurp this authority on behalf of the church and that if the congregation has agreed to excommunicate an offender, the ministers must pronounce the sentence and follow through with the judgement in an orderly manner.75 A similar form of ecclesiastical discipline can be seen among a second Dutch exile congregation established in Frankfurt in the 1570s, suggesting both the potency of Lasco’s model and the signiﬁcant role played by the London refugees in spreading his ideas. The ﬁrst wave of Dutch exiles from London, led by their preacher Peter Dathenus, had invited the Polish reformer to come to Frankfurt and help establish their new church. Lasco did come for a short time, publishing his Forma ac ratio in the city before departing for Poland in the fall of 1556. Not much is known about this initial refugee community; few records remain and the city magistrates shut down the exile church in 1560, along with the French congregation, following the dispute over ecclesiastical discipline.76 Dathenus, and the majority of Dutch exiles, moved on to Frankenthal, where they re-established their church. Although the French Protestants were unsuccessful in reopening their Frankfurt congregation, a second wave of Dutch emigrants made their way to the city in the late 1560s. They petitioned the council for permission to open a new refugee church, which was approved, and the ﬁrst sermon was preached to this exile congregation on 18 November 1570.77
Ibid., sigs F5r–v. Ibid., sigs F6v–F7r. 75 Ibid, sig. C6r. 76 See p. 106. 77 The protocol book for this second Dutch church notes that on 18 November 1570, a morning service was preached to the ‘brothers’ at the house of ‘Gilles van Muijsenhole’. 74
ECCLESIASTICAL DISCIPLINE IN THE FORMA AC RATIO
The other refugee communities already established in the German territories played a signiﬁcant role in shaping the practices and beliefs of this second Dutch church. In 1571, the former London refugee and Frankenthal minister, Dathenus, sent Gaspar van der Heyden to Frankfurt to organize the new exile community.78 Dathenus also advised the new church on doctrinal matters. In March 1572, for example, he sent a letter to the Frankfurt community, warning them to not fall victim to the Lutheran Eucharist, with its notion of Christ’s real presence in the elements (vleesschelicke wijsheit).79 The inﬂuence of the other refugee communities can also be seen in the similar ecclesiastical discipline adopted by this second Dutch congregation, which is reﬂected in the surviving consistorial records from 1570 until 1581. In June 1575, for example, the Dutch ministers ordered their former deacon, Antonius de Broucker, to appear before the Kirchenrat to answer questions about a dispute he had had with one of his colleagues. He refused their ﬁrst two requests but ﬁnally appeared before the assembly on 26 August. The preachers and elders ordered him to appear before the congregation, admit his guilt, and to confess his sins regarding the dispute and his absence from the church over the previous 15 weeks.80 Broucker refused their judgement and did not appear for the public rite of penitence. The next mention of the case came in the minutes the following year, in August 1576, when his wife reported to the ministers that he was ready to reconcile with the church. It appears that Broucker and his wife did not agree, because the preachers and elders summoned him for questioning the following month but he again refused to appear. Four days later his mother-in-law reported that he had been violent towards her and had mistreated his wife.81 The preachers and elders continued to admonish Broucker and he ﬁnally appeared before them on 30 August 1577. They informed him that over the previous two years his list of offences had grown to include excessive drinking, refusing his family’s private admonitions and associating with prostitutes.82 He again rejected their judgement and the following February the ministers turned the matter over to the congregation for their prayers and, if he remained obstinate, his excommunication. The case was not resolved and Das Protokollbuch der Niederländerschen Reformierten Gemeinde zu Frankfurt am Main 1570–1581, eds Hermann Meinert and Wolfram Dahmer (Frankfurt, 1977), p. 61. 78 The Frankfurt ministers wrote to Dathenus on 22 March 1571 requesting his help in their search for a chapel. Dathenus responded that he was unable to travel to them, but would send Gaspar van der Heyden to help them. Ibid., p. 71. 79 Ibid., p. 105. 80 The initial entries regarding this case are found on pp. 134 and 136. The minutes use various spellings of his name, including Antheunis de Broucker, Anthenis de Broucker, and Antonis de Brockere. 81 Ibid., pp. 142–3 and 145. 82 Ibid., pp. 166–8.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
during the following year more complaints were made against him. The ﬁnal mention of Broucker in the Kirchenrat’s minutes came on 5 March 1579 when he appeared a third time before the assembly and again refused to recognize his guilt and spoke out against the ministers.83 There are no minutes surviving between May 1579 and April 1580 when it appears that this matter would have been resolved. Although this lacuna makes the ﬁnal outcome unclear, this case reveals that the Dutch refugees in Frankfurt continued to use a practice similar to the London discipline as late as the 1580s. The ministers followed the familiar pattern of private and public censure, as well as the communal rite for penitence. Following private warnings, they admonished Broucker twice, once in 1575 and again in 1577, but he remained unconvinced and rejected their warnings. They then related the matter to the entire congregation for their prayers and gave him a third chance to repent before the assembly on 5 March 1579, but he again refused their admonitions. The only unknown factor remaining is the congregation’s role in approving his excommunication or reconciliation, which cannot be answered given the incomplete nature of the surviving records. The refugees’ continued use of Lasco’s ecclesiastical discipline following their return to the continent after 1553 suggests the powerful and enduring model provided by his London Strangers’ Church. They followed many of the same practices including the private and public censure, as well as the public ceremonies for reconciliation and excommunication. One of the most notable links with the London church was their similar emphasis on the laity’s uncommonly high level of authority in disciplinary matters. Like Lasco, the new exile congregations maintained that it was not just the ministers who acted on behalf of the members, but rather it was the whole church who should decide who is cut off and who is rejoined to the body of Christ. The French, Dutch and English refugees also retained a similar didactic element to the communal rites as the London church. The public ceremonies for penitence, reconciliation and excommunication provided important opportunities to educate the laity about the dangers of sin, their Christian duty to God and the important link between discipline and salvation. Through its educational function, and its use to mitigate the inﬂuence of religious radicals, Lasco’s practice played an important role in maintaining pure doctrine and protecting the church’s members.
Ibid., p. 186.
The Forma ac ratio in Europe Edward VI’s death in July, 1553, signalled the end of the London Strangers’ Church. Many of the foreigners left England and returned to the continent, creating a signiﬁcant opportunity for Lasco’s reform model. The French and Dutch refugees, along with a small group of their English supporters, took with them the Polish reformer’s ecclesiastical organization and rites, establishing new exile congregations following the London model in places such as Emden, Wesel, Strassburg, Frankfurt, Zurich and Geneva. This migration played a key role in spreading his ideas beyond England and contributing to the Forma ac ratio’s impact in Europe. This chapter examines reaction to his ordinance and the impact of his ideas about reform by looking in greater detail at the exiles’ experience following the dissolution of the Strangers’ Church in 1553. The purpose is not to provide a complete history of each of the refugee congregations established on the continent, but rather to explore those parts of his work that were retained and how this was done, as they struggled to reestablish themselves. The goal is to view Lasco’s role in church building – the organization of congregations and practices – among the new exile churches. This discussion focuses on the three towns of Emden, Frankfurt and Geneva, which have been chosen because they were principal centres of refugee activity and because surviving records allow such a study to be carried out. This chapter also explores Lasco’s inﬂuence beyond the new exile churches by examining his impact in Poland, France and Scotland, as well as the ongoing debate with Lutherans in the German lands over the Lord’s Supper, to judge what appeal, if any, he had beyond the refugee communities. The New Exile Churches The ﬁrst group of refugees to leave England departed from Gravesend on 17 September 1553. Lasco and the Dutch preacher Marten Micron were among the 165 Protestants who sailed to Denmark, where they hoped to rebuild their church.1 Upon their arrival the following month, 1 The Dutch refugee Jan Utenhove was also among those sailing to Denmark, and he later recounted their journey in his Simplex et ﬁdelis narratio de institute ac demum dissipata Belgaru, aliorumque peregrinorum in Anglia, Ecclesia: et potissimum de susceptis postea
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
they petitioned King Christian III for permission to establish a refugee community.2 Local Lutheran ministers opposed the foreigners, however, criticizing their Reformed Eucharistic rite that rejected Christ’s real presence in the bread and wine. Lasco requested a disputation with the critics, but this was rejected. The king also declined their request to settle in Denmark, and on 17 November 1553, he ordered them to leave.3 The refugees split up into several smaller groups and travelled onward to various locations including Rostock, Wismar, Lübeck and Hamburg, where they experienced similar difﬁculties with Lutheran authorities. Lasco led a small number of refugees to Bremen and then on to Emden, where they arrived on 4 December 1553 and requested permission to rebuild their exile church. The following week, he reported to his friend Albert Hardenberg that he was hopeful Countess Anna von Oldenburg would grant his request. On 12 December, Lasco reported that the Emden magistrate Christopher Eusumanus supported their petition, which the countess approved a short time later.4 Marten Micron and a second group of refugees joined them in East Frisia the following spring.5
illius nominee itineribus, per Ioannem Utenhovium (Basel, 1560). A modern Latin edition is printed in Bibliotheca Reformatoria Neerlandica: Geschriften uit den Tijd der Jervorming in de Nederlanden, eds S. Cramer and F. Pijper (‘s-Gravenhage, 1912), pp. 29–186. Lasco also brieﬂy recounts this journey in his introduction to the Forma ac ratio tota Ecclesiastici Ministerii, in peregrinorum, potißimum vero Germanorum Ecclesia (Frankfurt, 1555), sigs δ4r–δ5r. Additional discussions of this journey are found in Frederick A. Norwood, ‘The London Dutch refugees in search of a home, 1553–1554’, The American Historical Review, 58/1 (1952): 64–72, Oscar Bartel, Jan Łaski: Leben und Werk des polnischen Reformators, trans. Arnold Starke (Berlin, 1981), pp. 162–6, Christina Hallowell Garrett, The Marian Exiles: a study in the origins of Elizabethan Puritanism (Cambridge, 1938), pp. 1–59, and Andrew Pettegree, ‘The London exile community and the second sacramentarian controversy, 1553–1560’, Archive for Reformation History, 78 (1987): 225–31. 2 Utenhove, Simplex et ﬁdelis narratio, pp. 39–40. 3 Ibid., p. 75. Lasco, Micron and Jan Utenhove’s request to stay in Denmark was addressed to King Christian III, 10 November 1553, and is printed in Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa, ed. Abraham Kuyper (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1866), vol. 2, pp. 680–84. See also Norwood, ‘The London Dutch Refugees’, pp. 66–8. 4 ‘Utenhove, Simplex et ﬁdelis narratio, p. 148, Lasco to Hardenberg, 12 December 1553, Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 694, and Lasco to Hardenberg, 26 December 1553, ibid., p. 695. See also Norwood, ‘The London Dutch Refugees’, pp. 68–71. It is not surprising that Lasco chose to return to East Frisia, given his history in the territory. Although he had left following the emperor’s victory over the Schmalkaldic League, the recent Peace of Passau (1552) made possible his return by guaranteeing German princes the right to choose the religion for their lands. 5 Utenhove, Simplex et ﬁdelis narratio, pp. 76–7 and 148–9, and Norwood, ‘The London Dutch Refugees’, p. 72.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
There was a close connection between the Dutch newcomers and the East Frisian territorial church. The refugees assimilated easily into the existing ecclesiastical structure because of the comparable East Frisian and Brabant dialects, and because of their similar rites and ceremonies. The exile congregation retained their own deaconate, however, and three of the former London refugees were appointed to this post in Emden: Bartholomeaus Huysmannus, Jacob Michaelis and John Riverius.6 It is not surprising that Lasco inﬂuenced this ﬁrst of the new exile congregations when considering his history in the territory. He had served as superintendent of the East Frisian territorial church from 1542 until 1548, and had instituted many of the current practices including the coetus, ecclesiastical discipline and the Reformed Eucharistic rite. He further developed and reﬁned his ideas about organization and practice during his stay in London and, following his return to the territory in 1553, continued to promote his reform model. In 1554, he published a new edition of this Emden catechism, a German translation of his London confession, and a Latin defence of his Lord’s Supper ceremony for the refugees’ use.7 In addition, Lasco began printing his Forma ac ratio and Marten Micron’s summary of the ordinance, the Christlicke Ordinancien, also appeared that same year.8 Evidence of the Polish reformer’s impact on the new refugee congregation and the territorial church can be seen in the rites and ceremonies they used, especially the ecclesiastical discipline, coetus – the assembly of ministers to discuss administrative matters – and the election of ministers. As discussed in the previous chapter, the Kirchenrat’s minutes from 1557
6 Utenhove reports that the Dutch exiles had been incorporated into the existing territorial church while maintaining their own deaconate in Simplex et ﬁdelis narratio, p. 83. Huysmannus, Michaelis and Riverius were all included among the partial list of those who had sailed to Denmark with Lasco and Micron on 17 September 1553. This list is printed in Bibliotheca Reformatoria, Cramer and Pijper, pp. 89–90. The existing Emden Kirchenrat minutes names each of these men as deacons for the Dutch refugees: Huysmannus was noted as a deacon in the minutes dated 16 July 1557; Michaelis was identiﬁed in an entry from 9 August 1557; and Riverius appeared on 4 October 1557. Die Kirchenratsprotokolle der Reformierten Gemeinde Emden 1557–1620, ed. Heinz Schilling (2 vols, Cologne, 1989), vol. 1, pp. 1–10. See also Bartel, Jan Łaski, p. 165 and Norwood, ‘The London Dutch Refugees’, p. 72. 7 Lasco, Catechismus effte kinderlehre, tho nütte der Jöget in Ostfriesslandt dorch de Deners des hilligen Godlicken Wordes tho Embden. Uppet korteste vorvatet (Emden, 1554); Lasco, Een corte ende clare beke[n]tenisse Joannis Lasco, van de Ghemeinschap, die wy met Christo den Heere hebben: Ende ooc insgelycx, van de wyse, op de welcke, d’Lichaem Christi, in d’Nachtmael ons aengebrocht (Emden, 1554); and Lasco, Confessio Ioannis à Lasco, de nostra cum Christo Domino communione, & corporis sui item in Coena sua exhibitio ne ad Ministros Ecclesia rum Frisiae Orientalis (Emden, 1554). 8 Marten Micron, De Christlicke Ordinancien der nederlantscher Ghemeinten te Londen (1554), ed. Willem Frederik Dankbaar (‘s-Gravenhage, 1956), p. 36.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
to 1620 reveals the continued use of Lasco’s discipline, especially with his distinctive emphasis on congregational authority over excommunication and reconciliation.9 Perhaps one of his most enduring inﬂuences was the introduction of the coetus. Lasco had ﬁrst implemented this practice in 1540 and it was maintained throughout much of the remainder of the century.10 Little documentation concerning the coetus has survived, but a new territorial ordinance in 1564 reafﬁrmed Lasco’s assembly. The order contained 19 points regarding ecclesiastical governance and described the same weekly meetings of ministers to discuss doctrine and administrative matters. As with the Forma ac ratio, the ordinance noted that the preachers, elders and deacons were to present all issues to be discussed during the coetus, and that each was to give their own opinion. It also stressed the collegial nature of the assembly – that all decisions must be made through the unanimous consent of the ministers.11 The East Frisian coetus suffered a critical setback in the 1590s. The problem began following Countess Anna’s death in 1575. Control of the territory passed to her sons Johannes and Edzard, who split the lands into two administrative units. Johannes, who retained control of the capital city of Emden, remained an ardent supporter of the Reformed cause, while his brother oversaw a return to the Lutheran confession in his lands. When Johannes died in 1591, control of the entire territory passed to Edzard, who dissolved the coetus as part of his plan to enforce Lutheran policies across the entire territory.12 The civic and ecclesiastical authorities in Emden rejected the count’s actions and they appealed to their powerful Dutch neighbours for ﬁnancial and military support. Hoping to avoid a costly war, Edzard agreed to the town’s demand for greater independence and for an autonomous civic church, free from the Lutheran territorial one.13 Emden’s leaders re-established the coetus and a new ordinance,
9 Ministers had maintained authority over excommunication during Lasco’s superintendency between 1542 and 1548. He revised this in London, however, granting this power to the lay congregations. The Kirchenrat minutes show that following his return, this right had passed to the laity, just as it had in London. See Jan Remmers Weerda, Der Emder Kirchenrat und seine Gemeinde: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte reformierter Kirchenordnung in Deutschland, ihrer Grundsätze und ihrer Gestaltung (2nd edn, Wuppertal, 2000), pp. 46–8 and my discussion above, pp. 103–105. 10 The 1535 Lutheran ordinance had instituted a ministers’ assembly twice a year, which Lasco changed to weekly in 1540. Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts, ed. Emil Sehling (15 vols, Leipzig/Tübingen, 1902–77), vol. 7, p. 391. See also Heinrich Schmidt, Politische Geschichte Ostfrieslands (Leer, 1975), p. 178. 11 KO, Sehling, vol. 7, pp. 452–4. 12 Heinz Schilling, Civic Calvinism in Northwestern Germany and the Netherlands: Sixteenth to Nineteenth Centuries (Kirksville, MO, 1991), p. 32. 13 Ibid.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
written in 1594, reafﬁrmed the same weekly assembly of ministers that had been described in the earlier territorial codes.14 This practice remained in use as late as the early seventeenth century. Following the death of Menso Alting in 1612, the Groningen theologian Ubbo Emmius composed a biography of Emden’s lead preacher, in which he described the assembly as a ‘medicine to treat the church’s illnesses’ and emphasized that all decisions were to be made through common consent.15 Afﬁrming the link between the seventeenth-century practice and the Polish reformer, Emmius added that Lasco had founded both the East Frisian territorial church and the current weekly assembly of ministers described in his book.16 There is one noticeable change that occurred to Lasco’s coetus that reﬂects the growing inﬂuence of Calvin on the Emden congregations. The Polish reformer had instituted the clerical assembly in the 1540s with a superintendent to oversee the weekly meetings and to facilitate common consent among the participants. He continued this practice in London. However when the refugees returned, they joined a church that had no superintendent. No successor to Lasco had been appointed following his departure in 1550 and the ofﬁce would, in fact, remain unﬁlled for the remainder of the century. Without a clear administrator, the ministers adopted a model governing their weekly assembly similar to Geneva’s Company of Pastors which, as Calvin explained, elected a new moderator each year to lead the meetings but who held no special authority over the other ministers when it came to doctrinal matters.17 As with the coetus, they were to meet once a week to discuss matters of doctrine and to promote uniformity in belief and practice. The 1564 territorial order replaced references to the superintendent with a chairman (praeses) and the 1594 Emden ordinance instructed that the ministers should choose one of the preachers to lead the coetus.18 Ubbo Emmius notes, in addition, that while Menso Alting was Emden’s lead preacher from 1575 to 1612, the ministers chose a new chairman each year at their meeting immediately following Easter.19 Even though they adopted Calvin’s form of administration for the weekly assembly, they continued to follow the duties established by Lasco during his superintendency in East Frisia and London. The Genevan Company of Pastors had additional responsibilities 14 15
KO, Sehling, vol. 7, p. 499. Ubbo Emmius, Menso Altings Leben, trans. Erich von Reeken (Emden, 1982), p.
Ibid., p. 110. Kingdon notes that Calvin was the most prominent member of the Company of Pastors and often served as their spokesperson, but he was not the ‘Reformed bishop of Geneva’. Robert Kingdon, ‘Calvin and “Presbytery”’: the Geneva Company of Pastors’, Paciﬁc Theological Review, 18 (1985): 44. 18 KO, Sehling, vol. 7, pp. 452 and 499. 19 Emmius, Menso Altings Leben, p. 49. 17
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
in ordination, education and missionary work but the East Frisian and Emden assemblies continued to focus on the narrower duties of solving doctrinal questions and managing their churches.20 It appears that Lasco’s form of elections, with the uncommonly high levels of lay participation, also continued to be used in Emden following the return of the refugees. An entry in the Kirchenrat minutes dated 24 April 1564 notes that Hinrick Wilting and John van Knypes recently had been elected as elders, but more still needed to be chosen. The ministers urged the congregation to nominate more candidates.21 However by 1576, a new form for elections emerged that limited lay participation. New instructions for poor relief appeared that year, instructing that deacons ‘should be chosen by the preachers and elders and presented to the congregation’ for their approval.22 This process of cooption – where the existing ministers select new ones – appeared again in Emden’s 1594 ordinance, which instructed church leaders to select suitable candidates before presenting them to the laity for their approval.23 An entry in the Kirchenrat minutes on 3 March 1595 conﬁrms this revised elections procedure, noting that the ministers had recently elected six new elders and would present them to the congregation for conﬁrmation the following Sunday.24 Thus like the coetus, Lasco’s elections policy was also continued in East Frisia, although changes were made to bring it in line with other Calvinist churches. As mentioned in the introduction to this book, Heinz Schilling has argued that Lasco’s practices had a profound inﬂuence on the Emden church, especially his coetus and discipline, which played a key role in the town’s emancipation from the territorial count in the 1590s. After seizing control of his brother’s lands in 1591, Edzard dismissed Emden’s lead preacher, Menso Alting, and suspended the Kirchenrat as part of his program to re-establish a Lutheran confession.25 Alarmed by these actions, the town’s civic and ecclesiastical leaders forged an alliance with their Dutch neighbours and Edzhard ﬁnally conceded to their demands for autonomy.26 Their attempt to assert the town’s independence from the central authority was unprecedented in the territory and, as Schilling argues, could not have been possible without Lasco’s coetus and ecclesiastical discipline.27 He
20 Calvin, ‘Ordonnances Ecclésiastiques’, in Jean-François Bergier and Robert M. Kingdon (eds), Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Genève au Temps de Calvin (Geneva, 1964) vol. 1, p. 3. See also Kingdon, ‘Calvin and “Presbytery”’, pp. 47–55. 21 Kirchenratsprotokolle, Schilling, vol. 1, p. 182. 22 KO, Sehling, vol. 7, p. 455. 23 Ibid., p. 498. 24 Kirchenratsprotokolle, Schilling, vol. 2, p. 224. 25 Schilling, Civic Calvinism, p. 32. 26 Ibid. 27 Ibid., pp. 26–7.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
explains that the reformer’s models for administration and moral reform had vested church leaders with full governmental powers. Much like the London Strangers’ Church, the Emden congregations could function independently from territorial authorities. The institutions were already in place for an autonomous civic church by 1591 when Edzard began pushing for a Lutheran confession. Thus Lasco’s order established during his superintendency in the 1540s, and strengthened by the Dutch refugees who returned in the 1550s, played a crucial part in the town’s eventual emancipation from the count in the 1590s. The Polish reformer also inﬂuenced other refugee communities in the territory. He helped establish a congregation for French exiles in Emden, although signiﬁcantly less is known about their activities. The exact date this refugee church was founded is unclear, but it certainly was in place by 26 July 1554 when Lasco, the Dutch elder Jan Utenhove and Peter du Val sent a letter to the refugee community in Wesel, in which the latter identiﬁed himself as the preacher to Emden’s French congregation.28 The only surviving document related to their practices suggests that this community continued to follow the Strangers’ Church rites and ceremonies. The Ctematius and Hill press, which had printed the ﬁrst part of Lasco’s ordinance, published a vernacular edition of the Forma ac ratio in 1556, the Toute la forme & maniere du Ministere Ecclesiastique.29 The unknown translator replaced the Polish reformer’s dedicatory letter and preface with a much shorter introduction, in which they explained that the work contains the administration and rites currently used by the Emden refugees. The letter also makes clear the reasons for publishing the work: to instruct the French-speaking community about proper observance of doctrine and practice, and to defend the ceremonies against their critics.30 A close reading of both texts reveals little difference between the Latin and French editions. Only a small number of modiﬁcations were made to clarify the text or make it more relevant for its speciﬁc audience. One example of these changes occurs in the discussion of the Lord’s Supper, where Lasco had instructed that mystical clothes, magical bells and
28 Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, pp. 703–707. Ubbo Emmius reported that Lasco had established a congregation for French exiles from London in Menso Altings Leben, p. 26. 29 Lasco, Toute la forme & maniere du Ministere Ecclesiastique, en l’Eglise des estra[n]gers, dressee a Londres en Angleterre, par le Prince tres ﬁdele dudit pays, le Roy Edouard. VI. De ce nom: L’an apres l’incarnation de Christ. 1550. auec le privilege de sa Majeste a la ﬁn du liure. Par M. Jean Lasco. Baron de Polonie. Traduit de Latin en Francois, & imprimé par Giles Ctematius (Emden, 1556). For a general introduction to this work, see Philippe Denis, Les Églises d’Étrangers en Pays Rhénans 1538–1564 (Paris, 1984), p. 183, and Andrew Pettegree, Marian Protestantism: six studies (Aldershot, 1996), p. 64. 30 Lasco, Toute la forme, sigs B2r–v.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
candles had been eliminated because they lacked foundation in the Holy Scriptures. The new edition faithfully follows the Forma ac ratio, but adds torches, copes, chasubles and the surplice to the list of omitted elements (Table 7.1). These amendments did not change the meaning of the text, but rather clariﬁed the Polish reformer’s more general terminology, especially concerning ‘mystical clothing’.31 Other changes reﬂect the speciﬁc Frenchspeaking audience. The Latin edition’s chapter on ecclesiastical discipline, for example, was entitled ‘concerning the special use of Church discipline chieﬂy among the ministers of the German Church in London’. The new text removed speciﬁc reference to the Dutch congregation: ‘concerning the special use of the Church discipline among the ministers’.32 Likewise, the original section on ‘those Germans, who are not adjoined to our church, spreading false doctrine or nourishing some sects in the Church’ was changed to ‘those who are not adjoined to our churches spreading some false doctrine or nourishing sects in the Church’.33 Aside from these minor alterations, the work represents an accurate translation of the Latin original and suggests that there was an effort by the French community’s leaders to follow Lasco’s London model once they had resettled in Emden. More is known about a second group of French exiles, who had migrated to the free imperial city of Frankfurt during this same period. The magistrate Claus Bromm had invited the preacher Valerand Poullain to come to his city, offering it as a safe refuge for the foreigners. Poullain arrived in March 1554 with 24 other refugees from England and requested permission to practice their trades and hold their own worship services. Frankfurt’s lead preacher, Hartmann Beyer, urged the magistrates to deny their request and criticized the newcomers’ symbolic Lord’s Supper rite, which contradicted Lutheran doctrine. The council rejected these criticisms, however, and approved the request. They granted White Ladies’ Chapel to the foreigners and, on 19 April 1554, Poullain preached his ﬁrst sermon to the newly formed French congregation.34 The London refugees set about organizing their new church and its ceremonies based on Lasco’s London model. Later that year, Poullain published a new edition of the Liturgia sacra, which was an updated version of his ordinance describing the French congregation’s administration and rites in the Strangers’ Church.35 This work contained many of the same
Cf. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs M7v–M8r and Toute la forme, sigs N8r–v. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. Ff2r and Toute la forme, sig. Hh5r. 33 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. Hh4r and Toute la forme, sig. Kk7r. 34 Denis, Églises D’Étrangers, pp. 311–13, and D. Karl Bauer, Valèrand Poullain, Ein kirchengeschichtliches Zeitbild aus der Mitte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts (Elberfeld, 1927), pp. 177–8 and 182–3. 35 Valérand Poullain, Liturgia sacra, seu ritus Ministerii in Ecclesia peregrinorum Francofordiae ad Moenum. Addita est summa doctrinae seu ﬁdei professio eiusdem Ecclesiae. 32
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
Table 7.1 Textual comparison of the Forma ac ratio (1555) and Toute la forme (1556)
Forma ac Ratio
Toute la forme
We do not use the dangerous mystical clothing any more in the Lord’s Supper, or indeed the magical bells or the candles (as they certainly retain in the papacy). And we don’t think that they are beneﬁcial here for most of us towards approving, conﬁrming, endorsing or justifying this account of our plan. Indeed, we certainly do not hesitate to assert, for all pious men, that they add nothing to Christ’s institution. Moreover, they have contributed to nourishing superstition nonetheless in many men until now. It is better to remove them entirely if it can be done in any way.
We do not use the mystical clothing or other magic at all in the Lord’s Supper, as they have retained them in the papacy: neither the candles, torches, copes, chasuble, nor surplice. And they do not contribute much here towards approving our plan. Indeed, we have no doubt that all good men know that these things do not serve anything in Christ’s institution but only nourish the superstition in many, which ought to be removed if it can be done in any way.
practices as the Forma ac ratio, which was currently being printed in Emden. In the preface to the new Liturgia sacra, Poullain explains his reasons for publishing the work: to articulate and describe their doctrine and liturgy for the French congregants and for the Frankfurt magistrates; to silence those critics who had accused them of heretical preaching and who called them Anabaptists, and to defend the foreigners’ ceremonies which had come under attack from local Lutheran clerics. As Lasco had done in London, Poullain defends the ordinance claiming that all of the rites and ceremonies contained within it, including the controversial Lord’s
Plasm. CXLIX. Laudem Deo canite in Ecclesia Sanctorum. Ioan.I. Veni & vide (Frankfurt, 1554). It was again published in Frankfurt in 1555. Both are printed alongside the 1551 and 1552 London editions in Valerandus Pollanus Liturgia Sacra (1551–1555): Opnieuw uitgegeven en van een Inleiding Voorzien, ed. A.C. Honders (Leiden, 1970). See also the previous discussion concerning the original Liturgia sacra and the London Strangers’ Church on p. 50.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Supper, were modelled after the apostolic traditions and agreed with the Holy Scriptures.36 The French exiles in Frankfurt, like the Emden refugees, continued to use many of Lasco’s key London practices, including his distinctive form for elections, the collegial coetus, and his ecclesiastical discipline. When it came to the selection of new ministers, for example, they maintained the laity’s distinctive right to both nominate and approve new candidates. This pronounced role appears to have had popular support among the exile community, as the previous discussion of elections in Chapter 4 reveals. Poullain attempted to restrict the congregation’s role in elections in 1555 and 1556 by choosing and appointing new elders and deacons without the laity’s nominations or approval. Many people in the community resisted his appointments, suggesting that a large number of the lay congregation had embraced their right to select new ministers, and the conﬂict ended with the laity electing Francis Perussel as their new preacher.37 The text of the Liturgia sacra also suggests that Lasco’s coetus and ecclesiastical discipline found renewed life among these French exiles.38 Regarding the ministers’ assembly, for example, the ordinance instructed that they should continue to meet each week to discuss doctrinal and administrative matters. Maintaining the collegial spirit, Poullain wrote that all participants must be allowed to voice their opinion and all decisions must be determined by unanimous consent.39 Finally concerning discipline, Poullain continued to use the steps for private and public censure, as well as the rites for excommunication and reconciliation.40 He echoed Lasco’s belief that the purpose was to correct the offender’s behaviour and return him to the congregation rather than cut him off from the church forever.41 More importantly, however, was his reiteration of the congregation’s authority over disciplinary matters, which was a distinguishing characteristic of the Strangers’ Church. Poullain explained that if someone was to be reconciled with the church, the entire congregation must agree to the action, so that the offender is cut off or readmitted ‘by the entire church’s consent’.42 The French exiles’ most controversial practice for their Lutheran hosts in Frankfurt was the Lord’s Supper rite, which denied Christ’s real presence in the bread and wine. Although Poullain’s ordinance does not make it clear if they continued to use Lasco’s seated ceremony, there are several key similarities between the Forma ac ratio and Liturgia sacra
36 37 38 39 40 41 42
Liturgia Sacra, Honders, pp. 28–9. See also Denis, Églises d’Étrangers, pp. 314–16. See pp. 71–3. Liturgia Sacra, Honders, pp. 78–96 and 220–40. Ibid., p. 220. Ibid., p. 238. Ibid., pp. 238–40. Ibid., p. 240.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
regarding the sacrament. Both authors begin their discussion with nearly identical statements about its apostolic origins and they prescribe a similar order for the service (Table 7.2).43 Poullain’s 1554 ordinance, indeed, is very similar to his London original written in 1551. He does, however, introduce some modiﬁcations to the words spoken during the distribution of the bread and wine. Rather than saying ‘the bread, which we break, is the fellowship of the body of Christ (communicatio est corporis Christi)’, he changes it to ‘Christ said take, eat: the commemorative body of Christ (memor Christi corpus) is broken for you for the remission of your sins.’44 Regarding the wine’s distribution, he changes the wording from ‘the cup which we raise, is the fellowship of the blood of Christ (communicatio est sanguinis Christi)’, to ‘Christ said take, drink: the commemorative blood of Christ (memor Christum sanguinem) that he shed for you for the remission of your sins.’45 These changes reﬂect an even stronger sense of the symbolic nature of the rite, through the ‘commemorative’ body and blood. However Poullain, like Lasco, advocates a middle ground between Zwingli’s purely symbolic rite and Calvin, who emphasized the spiritual communion with Christ through participation in the ceremony. The Polish reformer explained that it was the entire action – receiving the bread and wine – that symbolized communion with Christ.46 Poullain echoes this understanding of the sacrament in his Frankfurt ordinance, writing that participation in the Lord’s Supper represents membership in Christ’s body, and that the bread and wine are only exterior signs that feed and nourish the recipient’s eternal life.47 As discussed in the previous chapter, Lasco’s London church and the refugee communities on the continent that followed it, also provided an important model for the second Dutch exile church in Frankfurt. In addition to adopting a similar form of discipline, this new congregation instituted similar practices for administration and the election of ministers. Gaspar van der Heyden, the advisor sent from Frankenthal to organize this congregation, assembled the members together on 17 November 1570, and they elected four preachers: ‘Jan de Hossche, Lauwereijns Ackerman, Pieter Bisschop’ and ‘Gillis van Muijsenhole’. Two days later, they elected two new deacons, ‘Antheunus Seedt’ and ‘Hans Gestens’, who would join the other preachers in caring for the
43 Poullain describes a very similar order for distributing the bread and wine as Lasco, although there is no instructions regarding sitting, standing or kneeling during the ceremony. Liturgia sacra, Honders, p. 93. Cf. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs M5v and T3v–V7v, and Liturgia Sacra, Honders, pp. 79–96. 44 Liturgia Sacra, Honders, p. 94. 45 Ibid., p. 95. 46 See pp. 85–9. 47 Liturgia Sacra, Honders, pp. 89–91.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Table 7.2 Lord’s Supper in the Liturgia sacra (1554) and Forma ac ratio (1555)
Forma ac ratio
Order of ceremony • Public prayer • Sermon on the institution of the Lord’s Supper • Lecture on the dangers of not observing the rite •Administration of bread and wine (men ﬁrst, followed by women) • Public prayer of thanks • Brief oration on the Eucharist’s signs and their meaning
Order of ceremony • Public prayer • Sermon on the institution of the Lord’s Supper • Lecture on the dangers of not observing the rite • Administration of bread and wine (men ﬁrst, followed by women) • Public prayer of thanks
poor.48 Changes were introduced the following year that brought their administration closer in line with the other refugee communities. The ministers agreed that a person could not hold two ofﬁces at once, so new elections for deacons were held, to replace the four preachers who had previously held both positions.49 They also added two elders to the ministry to aid the preachers of the Word. ‘Nicolaus van der Voorde’ and ‘Johan Martruijt’ were elected by a ‘vote of the congregation’ to this new post on 25 November 1571.50 As in the strangers’ churches, the laity had a week to make known any objections and, since none were made, the new ministers were conﬁrmed.51 By the end of 1571, this second Dutch congregation had established a similar administration as the other refugee communities, with the ofﬁces of preachers, elders and deacons, and they had instituted elections that 48 The entry in the protocol book notes that on 17 November 1570, Gaspar van der Heyden called together ten qualiﬁed men at the house of Lauwereijs Ackerman, and they choose four men to be ordained as ‘preachers of the Word: Jan de Hoosche Lauwereijns Ackerman Pieter Bisschop Gillis van Muijsenhole’. An entry made two days later notes that ten men met at the house of Muijsenhole and elected the following deacons: ‘Peeter Bisschop Gillis van Muijsenhole Antheunus Seedt Hans Gestens Jan de Hossche Lawereijns Ackerman’. Das Protokollbuch der Niederländerschen Reformierten Gemeinde zu Frankfurt am Main 1570–1581, eds Hermann Meinert and Wolfram Dahmer (Frankfurt, 1977), pp. 61–2. 49 Ibid., pp. 89–91. The four new deacons were: Fredericus Schurman, Regnier le Blancq, Jan de Wolf and Antonius de Broucker. 50 ‘in de ghemeijnte bij keurstemmen’. Ibid., p. 90. 51 Ibid., pp. 92–4.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
allowed the lay congregation to nominate and approve new ministers. This distinctive rite of the church’s members did not last long however. The following year, in 1572, the ministers introduced changes to elections. They explained that choosing new deacons and elders every year was too disruptive to the congregation, so they increased the term of ofﬁce to 24 months. Only one-half of these ministers would be elected each year, ensuring some continuity in the administration. They also extended the period between election and ordination to eight days, allowing more time for congregants to voice any objections they might have to the candidates. Reﬂecting the inﬂuence of other refugee congregations, the ministers noted that both of these amendments brought them in line with current practices in Emden.52 At the same time, the ministers limited the laity’s role in elections, replacing their nominations with candidates selected by the other clergy.53 This change also brought them closer in line with other refugee communities, including Emden, which had replaced Lasco’s distinct elections policy with cooption. In addition to the French and Dutch refugees, the London Strangers’ Church also provided an important model for the English Protestants who joined them on the continent after 1553. A small group led by John Scory and Thomas Young followed Lasco to Emden, where they established a new exile congregation.54 Moving away from the traditional English episcopacy with its bishops, priests and deacons, this refugee community instituted a new clerical format that resembled the Strangers’ Church, with nine elders and six deacons appointed to aid the preachers Scory and Young.55 As discussed in the previous chapters, this group of exiles also used the Polish reformer’s ritual for public prayers and fasting, based on Daniel, Chapter 9, and his distinctive ecclesiastical discipline.56 Not all of the English refugees on the continent agreed with such changes, which can be seen in the conﬂict that erupted among the exiles in Frankfurt. A small group had arrived in the city in 1554, including William Wittingham, Edmond Sutton, William Williams and Thomas Wood, and they petitioned the council for permission to establish an exile 52 Ibid., pp. 116–17. These changes were the last alterations made to the elections policy for the remainder of the period covered by the minutes. 53 This decisions to use cooption was made at the end of 1571, following the elections that year. Ibid., p. 91. 54 For a good introduction to Emden’s English congregation see Pettegree, Marian Protestantism, pp. 10–38. A list of the English and Scottish men who enrolled as citizens in Emden between 1554 and 1558 is published on pp. 170–71. See also Bartel, Jan Łaski, p. 165. 55 Cf. Book of Common Prayer, pp. 438–62 and Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs B3v–D6v. The suggestion that their administration was inﬂuenced by Lasco’s London church is not new. Andrew Pettegree makes a similar claim in his study of the refugees in Marian Protestantism, pp. 18–19. 56 See pp. 106–107.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
church. The magistrates granted their request by early summer, instructing them to share White Ladies’ Chapel and to observe the French confession and rites published in the Liturgia sacra.57 They accepted these conditions and ﬁve English ministers added their signatures to a new edition of Poullain’s ordinance the following year, suggesting their support for the ceremonies.58 The English exiles elected Wittingham as their preacher and he produced a liturgical order for the refugees, dated 29 July 1554, that brought together the 1552 Book of Common Prayer with the French confession by eliminating those English practices that contradicted the refugees’ doctrine. He expunged, for example, the responses to ministers, the litany, wearing the surplice and, as he explained, ‘many other things also omitted for that in those reformed churches such things would seem more than strange’.59 Not everyone approved of this more radical confession. The Frankfurt ministers wrote to other English exiles promoting their new ordinance, describing it as ‘free from all dregs of superstitious ceremonies’ and inviting the others to join them.60 The English refugees in Zurich sent a letter rejecting the offer and defending the 1552 Book of Common Prayer. The Strassburg congregation composed a similar response, urging the Frankfurt exiles to choose more moderate leaders such as John Ponet, John Scory, John Bale or Richard Cox. They added that if a suitable preacher was not chosen, they would appoint one with the help of the Zurich ministers.61 Hoping to resolve the disagreement, the Frankfurt exiles invited John Knox from Geneva, James Hadden from Strassburg and Thomas Lever from Zurich to come and lead their church. Hadden declined, but both Knox and Lever accepted the offer and moved to Frankfurt in January 1555. Their
57 Anne Hooper reported to Henry Bullinger on 19 April 1554 that the Frankfurt magistrates had instructed the English exiles to use White Ladies Chapel with the French congregation. Original Letters Relative to the English Reformation, Written during the Reigns of King Henry VIII., King Edward VI., and Queen Mary: Chieﬂy from the Archives of Zurich, ed. Hastings Robinson (2 vols, Cambridge, 1846), vol. 1, pp. 110–11. Thomas Wood wrote that the council had approved their request on 14 July 1554. See Wood, A brieff discours of the troubles begonne at Franckford in Germany Anno Domini 1554 (Heidelberg, 1575), pp. 5–6. Patrick Collinson identiﬁes Thomas Wood as the probable author of this work in ‘The Authorship of A Brieff Discours off the Troubles Begonne at Franckford’, The Journal of Ecclesiastical History 9 (April, 1958): 188–208. See also: Bartel, Jan Łaski, p. 171; A.G. Dickens, The English Reformation (New York, 1989), p. 345; Denis, Églises d’Étrangers, pp. 330–31; and Robin Leaver, ‘Ghoostly Psalmes and spirituall songes’: English and Dutch metrical psalms from Coverdale to Utenhove 1535–1566 (Oxford, 1991), pp. 146–55. 58 Liturgia Sacra, Honders, p. 208. 59 Wood, A brieff discours, p. 7. The ﬁrst liturgical order for the English congregation in Frankfurt is discussed in Wood’s work. 60 Ibid., p. 9. 61 Ibid., pp. 9–20.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
arrival exacerbated tension between the new liturgy and the traditional English order. Knox was a powerful advocate for Wittingham’s reforms, while Lever joined the prayer book’s supporters.62 A brief compromise was reached between the two sides in February 1555, but this truce was interrupted the following month. Richard Cox, an outspoken proponent of the Book of Common Prayer, and his supporters disrupted worship services by voicing the responses to the minister, which Wittingham had eliminated. One of his supporters read the litany from the pulpit the next week, re-igniting tensions within the community over their liturgy.63 The Frankfurt council ﬁnally stepped in to resolve the dispute among the English refugees. The magistrate Jean de Glaubourg asked that two men from each side of the conﬂict come together to create a new ordinance. Knox, Wittingham, Cox and Lever were chosen for the task but they failed to reach an agreement.64 Instead, the prayer book’s supporters attacked Knox and complained to the magistrates that he had made treasonous attacks on the English queen in his recent polemical treatise A Faithful Admonition.65 The council agreed and ordered the English congregation to return to the rites and practices found in the 1552 Book of Common Prayer. They expelled Knox from their city, while Wittingham and his supporters moved to Geneva.66 Although the council’s decision signalled a victory for the prayer book’s supporters, it did not mark the end of the London church’s inﬂuence on this refugee community. Before the end of 1555, Cox produced the ‘Order
62 Ibid., p. 28. Calvin sent a letter expressing his disappointment in the controversy and urged the exiles to remain calm, suggesting they might tolerate the traditional English order for a short time in order to avoid further strife in the community. Ibid., pp. 34–5. 63 Ibid., pp. 36–7. No known copy of this order exists today. It was thought that the manuscript ‘The text of the order Thorder of co[m]mon praier The ministraco[n]n of Christes holye Sacrame[n]tes And of Christian disciplyne usede in the English congregaco[n]n at Ffranckeforde (1555)’ was this compromise liturgy written by Lever, Parry, Wittingham and Knox. Both Christina Garrett and Thomas Leaver, however, have shown that Knox could not have authored this order and that this particular manuscript was written after the reformer had been expelled from Frankfurt at the end of 1555. See Garrett, Marian Exiles, p. 58, The Liturgy of the Frankfurt Exiles 1555, ed. Robin Leaver (Bramcote, 1984), pp. 3–4, Wood, A brieff discours, pp. 37–8, M.M. Knappen, Tudor Puritanism (Chicago, IL, 1939), pp. 117 and 127–8, and Hermann Dalton, Johannes a Lasco. Beitrag zur Reformationsgeschichte Polens, Deutschlands und Englands (Gotha, 1881), p. 346. 64 Wood, A brieff discours, p. 40. 65 John Knox, A Faythfull admonition made by John[n] Knox, unto the professours of Gods truthe in England, wherby thou mayest learne howe God wyll have his Churche exercised with troubles, and how he defendeth it in the same (Emden, 1554). 66 Wood, A brieff discours, pp. 40–45.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
of common prayer’, a new liturgy that reinforced many of the traditional English practices including catechetical instruction and the litany.67 In some cases, however, the order reﬂects a move towards the other refugee churches. The inﬂuence of French exiles, for example, can be seen in the similar format and content between the Liturgia sacra and the ‘Order of common prayer’ (see Table 7.3). Cox also combined elements of the English hierarchy with the refugees’ form of administration. He maintained the elders’ traditional role in collecting alms and the deacons’ duty to oversee education. Moving towards the other exile churches, however, Cox added that elders must oversee compliance with ecclesiastical discipline and ensure that congregations follow the ordinance, while deacons should help care for the poor.68 He also adopted part of the French and Dutch discipline, including the public rites for excommunication and reconciliation, and the congregation’s authority over such matters.69 The only noticeable difference concerning discipline was the number of chances given to an offender to repent: the London refugees had granted two chances to reconcile, while the new English order instructed that offenders had only one chance before being cut off from the church.70 Finally, Robin Leaver notes that Cox reinstated the prayer book’s Eucharist but removed the controversial practice of kneeling when receiving the host, which brought the English refugees closer in line with other exile congregations.71 Lasco and the London Strangers’ Church had their greatest impact on the third group of English exiles who settled in Geneva. A small number of men and women arrived from London in the spring of 1555 and Calvin approached the town’s council in June for permission to establish a refugee church.72 Before a decision was reached, they were joined by a second wave
67 The original manuscript was discovered in the nineteenth century and is now housed at the British Library, MS Egerton 2836. The text of the liturgy has been reprinted, with a brief introduction, in Liturgy of the Frankfurt Exiles, Leaver. 68 The titles given to the positions were somewhat different, but the duties remained the same. Cox wrote that a pastor was to lead the church and was to be charged with preaching, administering the sacraments, exhorting, admonishing and rebuking the congregation, and was the body’s chief spokesman. Below this position came the ministers, who aided the pastor in preaching and observing the sacramental rites. Liturgy of the Frankfurt Exiles, Leaver, pp. 19–20. 69 Ibid., pp. 19. 70 Ibid. 71 Liturgy of the Frankfurt Exiles, Leaver, pp. 23–33; and The First and Second Prayer Books of King Edward the Sixth (London, 1927), pp. 377–93. 72 The ﬁrst of the English exiles arrived in Geneva sometime around 29 March 1555. It appears that among them were Sir William Stafford, his wife Dorothy, his sister Jane, their cousin mistress Sandes, William’s children Edward and Elizabeth, and four servants. William Wittingham, John Knox, et al., ‘“Livre des Anglois” or register of the English Church at Geneva under the pastoral care of Knox and Goodman 1555–1559’, ed. A.F. Mitchell, in 21 Pamphlets Ecclesiastical and Controversial, vol. 28 (no colophon or date), pp. 3–7. For an
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
Table 7.3 Contents of the Liturgia sacra (1554) and ‘Order of common prayer’ (1555)
Liturgia sacra Preface Order of service Lord’s Supper Daily and Other Prayers Baptism Marriage Visitation of the Sick Burial Confessions of Faith Order of the ministry Discipline
‘Order of common prayer’ Preface Order of service (Common Prayer) Lord’s Supper (Communion) Baptism Marriage Visitation of the Sick Burial Catechism Order of the ministry Discipline
of exiles who had left Frankfurt following the controversy over the Book of Common Prayer.73 The magistrates granted Calvin’s request in early November and ordered the foreigners to share Marie la Nove Chapel with the Italian congregation. The English community quickly organized themselves: before the end of the month it had elected Christopher Goodman and Anthony Gilby as preachers, William Williams and Wittingham as elders, and John Staunton and Christopher Seburne as deacons – all of whom had come from Frankfurt.74 The church’s most famous member, John Knox, arrived the following year in September 1556, and was appointed preacher to these refugees following his arrival.75 The Frankfurt exiles played a key role in shaping the congregation’s practices. A new ordinance for the refugees was published in 1556, The form of prayers and ministration of the Sacraments, which was a revised version of Wittingham’s controversial Frankfurt order.76 The actual author introduction to the church’s establishment, see Leaver, ‘Ghoostly Psalmes’, p. 226 and Dan Danner, Pilgrimage to Puritanism: history and theology of the Marian Exiles at Geneva, 1555–1560 (New York, 1999), pp. 23–4. 73 Wittingham, Knox, et al., ‘Livre des Anglois’, p. 6. 74 Ibid. 75 Knox was elected as preacher in November 1556. Ibid., pp. 8–11. 76 The forme of prayers and ministration of the Sacraments, &c. used in the Englishe Congregation at Geneva: and approved, by the famous and godly learned man, Iohn Calvyn. (Geneva, 1556). The preface of the ordinance is dated 10 February 1556. Although the author is unknown, Wittingham is the most probable source since he was already in Geneva
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
of this work, however, is unknown. This new ordinance continued to attack the perceived errors of the Book of Common Prayer and prescribed rites and ceremonies that were similar to Lasco’s Strangers’ Church. The ordinance instructed the Genevan refugees about the rites and practices to be observed, as well as joined the ongoing debate about the nature and scope of reform, with the author writing that it was also for ‘our brethren in England and elsewhere’.77 Underscoring this purpose, the Form of prayers included passages defending the rites and it was translated into Latin for a larger, European audience.78 There was considerable interest in this work. Two editions appeared in Geneva in 1556 and 1557, containing only the psalter and catechisms for the refugees’ use, while two more complete editions were published in the city in 1558 and 1561. The Latin edition mentioned above appeared in 1556, followed by additional English copies over the next four years in Paris, London and Edinburgh. The important relationship to Lasco’s Strangers’ Church is addressed in the preface to the Form of prayers. Here, the author explains about the model provided by the foreigners in England, their departure after Edward VI’s death in 1553, and the new congregations they established in places like Emden, Frankfurt and Geneva. He includes the English exiles in his account and criticizes those who fought to uphold the Book of Common Prayer in the recent controversy, writing that although God had granted them liberty to develop their rites and practices according to the Holy Scriptures, they instead defend those elements in the prayer book that are contrary to God’s Word.79 He presents the Form of prayers as a model for others to follow, explaining we ‘do present unto you which desire the increase of God’s glory, and the pure simplicity of his Word, a form and order of a reformed church, limited within the compass of God’s Word, which our saviour has left unto us as only sufﬁcient to govern all our actions by’.80 Finally, the author ends with a call for unity among English refugees and Christ’s universal Church, explaining that it is necessary for
and the text closely resembles his earlier Frankfurt order which he had co-written with Knox. In addition, Leaver has argued that the preface to the order was written most likely by Wittingham. Leaver, ‘Ghoostly Psalmes’, p. 226. 77 Form of prayers, sig. A2r. 78 Ratio et forma publice orandi Deum, atque administrandi Sacramenta, et caet. in anglorum Ecclesiam, quae Genevae colligitur, recepta: cum iudicio & comprobatione d. Iohannis Caluini (Geneva, 1556). This work also was published by the press of Jean Crespin and was an exact translation of the English edition. The only difference was the date of the preface: 13 February 1556, which is found on sig. B1v. 79 Form of prayers, sigs A4v–A5r. 80 Ibid., sigs A5r–v.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
all to agree on a common doctrine and confession, and that this ordinance is the purest form of Christ’s model for all to follow.81 A comparison of the order’s contents with Lasco’s Forma ac ratio and Poullain’s Liturgia sacra demonstrates the similar subject matter found in the three works (see Table 7.4). The only difference is the addition of the psalter and the omission of a detailed order for worship services. A closer examination of the contents reveals a mixture of inﬂuences on the English practices. On the one hand, the ordinance establishes four ofﬁces in the church’s administration similar to Calvin’s Genevan church: preachers, doctors, elders and deacons.82 The Form of prayers also institutes the assembly of ministers found in both the Geneva and refugee churches.83 The ordinance emphasizes the collegial nature of this committee, explaining that the preachers were to have no special authority over the other ministers and ‘in consultations, judgments, elections and other political affairs, [their] counsel, rather than authority, take place’.84 The ordinance also reveals an election protocol similar to Lasco’s Strangers’ Church, where lay members nominate and approve new ministers.85 This form for elections differed from their Genevan hosts who used cooption to elect preachers, doctors, elder and deacons, restricting the laity’s role to approving their ﬁnal decision. This dual inﬂuence of Calvin and Lasco can be seen in other parts of the ordinance as well. They adopted many French psalms and the Geneva reformer’s catechism.86 Defending this latter decision, the author writes that they are using the catechism because it provides the best explanation
Ibid., sig. B4v. Calvin had instituted the ofﬁce of doctors in Geneva, but this clerical position was absent from Lasco’s Strangers’ Church. Form of prayers, sig. C7r. Although the ordinance instituted the ofﬁce of doctors for the English congregation, the author explains that it would have to remain vacant for some time. He wrote that the English Protestants’ dispersal throughout Europe made it difﬁcult to maintain doctors in their churches and the position would have to wait until they could be reunited. Ibid., sigs C8r–v. 83 The ordinance instructed the ministers to meet each week to discuss doctrine, judge disciplinary cases and to ensure conformity among the church’s members. Ibid., sig. D1r. 84 Form of prayers, sig. C6r. 85 Ibid., sig. C6v–C7v. 86 Robin Leaver explores the impact of the French-Genevan Psalter on the Form of prayers in his study of Dutch and English metrical psalms. He focuses on the 51 psalms included in the English text, the majority having been written by Thomas Sterneholde. The original 1556 order contains only one psalm modelled on the French author Clèment Marot’s work. Leaver argues, however, that the growing inﬂuence of Geneva can be seen in subsequent editions of the Form of prayers: seven new psalms were added to the 1558 edition, and 29 in 1560, that had their foundations in the French-Genevan psalter. Leaver, ‘Ghoostly psalmes’, p. 231. 82
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Table 7.4 Comparison of the Liturgia sacra (1554), Forma ac ratio (1555) and Form of prayers (1556)
Form of prayers
Forma ac ratio
Preface Confession of Faith Order of the Ministry Prophecy Daily and Other Prayers Lord’s Supper Baptism Marriage Visitation of the Sick Burial Directions Discipline Catechism Psalmes -
Preface Order of the Ministry Prophecy Daily and Other Prayers Lord’s Supper Baptism Marriage Visitation of the Sick Burial Directions Discipline Catechism Order of Service
Preface Confession of Faith Order of the Ministry Daily and Other Prayers Lord’s Supper Baptism Marriage Visitation of the Sick Burial Directions Discipline Order of Service
of doctrine, is agreeable with the Holy Scriptures, and it is the most read, having been translated already into Hebrew, Greek, Latin, French, Italian, Spanish, Dutch and English.87 In contrast to Calvin, the English author identiﬁes Lasco’s same three marks of Christ’s true Church: preaching the Word, observing the sacraments and ecclesiastical discipline.88 The Form of prayers adopts the London refugee’s ritual for public prayers and fasting, based on Daniel, Chapter 9.89 They also instituted the same weekly prophecy found in the Forma ac ratio, where both the clergy and the laity participate in discussions about the week’s sermons. The author explains that ‘every week once, the congregation assemble[s] to hear some place of the scriptures orderly expounded. At which time, it is lawful for every man to speak or enquire as God shall move his heart … so it be without pertinacity or disdain, as one that rather seeks to proﬁt than to contend.’90
Form of prayers, sigs B4v–B5r. Calvin, in contrast, did not view this third element as a mark of the Church. Ibid., sigs C3v–C4r. 89 Ibid., sigs D2v–D4r. 90 Cf. Form of prayers, sigs D1v–D2r and Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs K6r–K7v. 88
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
This inﬂuence of Lasco’s Strangers’ Church can be seen in other parts of the ordinance too. As discussed in the previous chapter, the Form of prayers articulated Lasco’s same claim that the congregation holds authority over reconciliation and excommunication, explaining that ministers were not vested with this authority on behalf of the church, but rather if the congregation agreed to excommunicate an offender, then the preachers must follow their will.91 Regarding the Eucharist, the English ordinance omits the prayer book’s public confession of sins and responses to be spoken by the congregation, replacing them with a rite similar to the one practiced by other refugee communities.92 The author of the Form of prayers writes that the minister should explain Christ’s institution as well as the meaning of the ritual and its elements to the congregation. Like Lasco, the author emphasizes the rite’s symbolic nature and criticizes the ‘error of the papists’, who believe in the physical presence of Christ in the bread and wine, writing: We restore unto the sacraments their own substance, and to Christ his proper place. And as for the words of the Lord’s Supper we rehearse them not because they should change the substance … but they are read and pronounced to teach us how to behave ourselves in this action that Christ might witness unto our faith as it were with his own mouth, that he has ordained these signs for our spiritual use and comfort.93
This English congregation also rejected the traditional practice of kneeling and adopted instead the refugees’ distinctive seated communion.94 The inﬂuence of Lasco and the Strangers’ Church on the English exiles in Geneva is not surprising. Diarmaid MacCulloch alludes to the close connection between Knox and Lasco in London, asserting that the Polish reformer most likely helped Knox write his 1553 response to the privy council condemning kneeling during the Lord’s Supper.95 In addition, Wittingham’s Frankfurt ordinance and the Genevan Form of prayers drew heavily on Poullain’s Liturgia sacra.96 What is surprising is that the most recent scholarly study of this community fails to address this important
Ibid, sig. C6r. For the English ceremony, see The boke of common praier, sigs M6r–N5v. Cf. Form of prayers, sigs E4r–E8v. 93 Form of prayers, sigs E8r–v. 94 Ibid., sig. E6r. See also Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. M8r. 95 Diarmaid MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski in the English Reformation’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen, 2000), pp. 337–8. 96 Robin Leaver traces the inﬂuence of the Liturgia sacra on the English psalter in ‘Ghostly psalmes’, p. 277. He also makes some general comments about its inﬂuence on the English prosaic creed, prophecy, clerical elections, the Eucharist, and discipline. 92
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
relationship. In Pilgrimage to Puritanism: history and theology of the Marian Exiles at Geneva, 1555-1560, Dan Danner examines the refugees’ theology and rites.97 Although he acknowledges the inﬂuence of Calvin and Bucer on the Form of prayers, Lasco and Poullain are conspicuously absent. Danner notes, for example, that Calvin claimed preaching the Word and the observance of the sacraments as marks of the true Church, and that the English refugees added discipline to this list. He attributes this modiﬁcation not to the foreigners’ inﬂuence, or indeed Poullain’s Liturgia sacra which served as a model for Wittingham’s order, but rather to an unexplained anomaly of their English ecclesiology.98 This conclusion, however, fails to explain why conﬂict erupted among English exiles over the changes suggested by more radical reformers. Danner’s study also ignores the important connection between the French refugees in Frankfurt and this congregation in Geneva. The Form of prayers was based on Poullain’s ordinance, which had its roots in the Strangers’ Church. Lasco’s London congregations, and his recording of their rites in the Forma ac ratio, provided a key model for new exile churches that were established after 1553. Many of the practices continued to be used by the French and Dutch Protestants, and by some English refugees, during the 1550s and 1560s, the most active period for the refugee congregations. Most notable was their continued use of the Polish reformer’s distinctive form of elections, the Lord’s Supper rite, and discipline. By the end of the century, however, his inﬂuence was on the wane. The English refugees had returned home following the coronation of Elizabeth in 1558, and the Frankfurt magistrates closed their exile churches two years later, although a second Dutch congregation was active in the city in the 1570s and 1580s. The refugees in Emden remained active throughout the remainder of the century, but some of the more distinctive practices like the superintendent’s ofﬁce and lay authority in elections were gradually replaced to bring them in line with other Calvinist congregations. The remainder of this chapter will look beyond these communities to judge what impact Lasco had, if any, on other reform movements in Europe. Beyond the Exile Churches The London refugees found themselves at the centre of controversy over the Lord’s Supper following their return to the continent. Andrew Pettegree discusses the important role Lasco and the exile congregations played during the second Sacramentarian controversy, a period of renewed 97 Danner, Pilgrimage to Puritanism: history and theology of the Marian exiles at Geneva, 1555–1560 (New York, 1999). 98 Ibid., pp. 117–19 and p. 124.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
intensity in the debate between Lutherans and Reformed theologians over the Lord’s Supper in the 1550s.99 As mentioned above, the refugees encountered vocal opposition among Lutheran preachers in Denmark and the German lands following their return to the continent. This opposition was not new. The Hamburg preacher Joachim Westphal had published the Farrago confusanearum et inter se dissidentium opinionum de Coena Domini in 1552, defending the doctrine of Christ’s real presence, and attacking non-Lutheran views of the sacrament, by pointing out the perceived contradictions among Reformed theologians.100 He composed a second polemical tract the following year, the Recta ﬁdes de Coena Domini, that contained criticisms of the men Westphal claimed to be the leading sacramentarians: Karlstadt, Zwingli, Oecolampadius, Peter Martyr, Bucer, Bullinger, Calvin and Lasco.101 The refugees, in fact, found themselves at the heart of this controversy. In March 1554, the Polish reformer sent copies of Westphal’s Recta ﬁdes to Calvin and Bullinger, urging them to publish a response to the Lutheran preacher.102 This same month Marten Micron represented the refugees in a disputation with Westphal over the Lord’s Supper in Hamburg. Neither the preacher nor the town’s council were convinced by the exiles’ defence, and the refugees were ordered to leave the town following the meeting.103 In 1555, Calvin published his response in the Defensio sanae et orthodoxae doctrinae de Sacramentis, which was followed by Westphal’s rebuttal in Adversus cuiusdam sacramentarii falsam criminationem.104 Later that same year, the Bremen minister Johannes Timann joined the controversy, publishing his own Farrago sententiarum consentientium that singled out
99 Andrew Pettegree, ‘The London Exile Community and the Second Sacramentarian Controversy, 1553–1560’, in Archive for Reformation History, 78 (1987): 223–51. 100 Joachim Westphal, Farrago confusanearum et inter se dissidentium opinionum de Coena Domini: ex sacramentarioru[m] libris congesta / per M. Joachimum Westphalum, past. Hamb. (Magdeburg, 1552). For an overview of Joachim Westhpal and the Sacramentarian controversy see Pettegree, Marian Protestantism, pp. 60–63. 101 Joachim Westphal, Recta ﬁdes de Coena Domini: ex verbis Apostoli Pauli [et] Evangelistarum demonstrata ac communita/ per Magistrum Ioachimu[m] Westpahlum Ecclesiae Hamburgensis pastorem (Magdeburg, 1553). 102 Pettegree, ‘London Exile Community’, p. 230. Lasco’s letter to Bullinger, dated 3 March 1554, is printed in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 698. 103 Lasco reported the disputation in a letter to Bullinger, 3 March 1554, in Opera, vol. 2, p. 697. 104 John Calvin, Defensio sanae et orthodoxae de sacramentis, eorumque natura, vi, ﬁne, usu, et fructu: quam pastores et ministry Tigurinae Ecclesiae et Genevensis antehac brevi consensionis mutae formula complexi sunt (Zurich, 1555), and Joachim Westphal, Adversus cuiusdam sacramentarii falsam criminationem, justa defensio (Frankfurt, 1555).
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Lasco and the exiles for attack.105 Lasco responded to Timann and Westphal in his introduction to the Forma ac ratio, printed later that same year, in which he defended the foreigners’ sacramental rite. Although the Polish reformer does not mention these preachers by name, he does recount the struggles encountered with Lutheran critics since the refugees had returned to the continent.106 The following year, Lasco participated in a disputation with Johannes Brenz in Württemberg over the Lord’s Supper, but again no resolution was reached. It appears Lasco was no match for Brenz. Calvin reported to Bullinger that the meeting had not gone well for the Polish reformer, ‘even though Brenz had defended the presence of Christ’s body in a tasteless and trivial way’.107 The confessional parties had made no progress in reaching a common ground and, by 1557, theologians were losing interest in continuing the attacks. Westphal published a rebuttal to Lasco’s Forma ac ratio in his Justa defensio adversus insignia mendicia Joannis a Lasco in 1557. Lasco responded in the Responsio ad virulentem Joachim Westphal, a work that marks the end of this public exchange with Lutherans over the Eucharist.108 The Polish reformer and the refugees failed to reach agreement with their Lutheran adversaries over the doctrine of the Eucharist during this sacramentarian controversy. Lasco himself had little time or interest in keeping the debate going. His attention, it seems, was drawn further to the east, to the growing number of Reformed churches in his native Poland. Over the past decade, support for Calvin and Bullinger had grown among the clergy and nobility in the duchy of Little Poland, but the congregations were spread across a large area and lacked a common confession or ecclesiastical administration to bind them together. These Reformed nobles and ministers came together in the summer of 1556, hoping to form a territorial church.109 Following this synod, they sent letters to 105 Johann Timann, Farrago Sententiarum consentientium in vera et catholica doctrina, de Coena Domini, quam … iuxta divinorum vocem, Ecclesiae Augustanae confessionis amplexae sunt (Frankfurt, 1555). See also Pettegree, ‘London Exile Community’, p. 239. 106 Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs γ7r–ε1v. 107 Calvin to Bullinger, 1 July 1556, Johannes Calvins Lebenswerk in seinen Briefen, ed. Rudolf Schwarz (2 vols, Tübingen, 1909), vol. 2, p. 151. 108 Joachim Westphal, Ioachimi Westphali Justa defensio, adversus insignia mendacia Ioannis a Lasco qu[a]e Epistola ad sereniss. Poloni[a]e Regem, &c. contra Saxonicas Ecclesias sparsit, cuius exemplar, ut [a]equus lector rei veritatem facilius quasi ex antithesi collegere poßit, Westpahli scripto sub ﬁnem adiedimus (Strassburg, Fabricius Blasius, 1557), and Opera, Kuyper, vol. 1, pp. 271–344. Pettegree, ‘London Exile Community’, pp. 245–7. This work was published posthumously, as Lasco died in January 1560. 109 For a brief account of the Reformed church’s origins in Little Poland, see Janusz Tazbir’s essay ‘Reformation and Toleration in Poland in the 16th Century’, trans. Bogusław Kizman, in Poland: the land of Copernicus, ed. Bogdan Suchodolski (Warsaw, 1973), pp. 82–3. See also Gottfried Schramm, Der polnische Adel und die Reformation 1548–1607 (Wiesbaden, 1965), pp. 27–59. Schramm argues here that the territorial nobles’ support for
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
Calvin and Lasco, inviting them to come and organize their church. The Genevan reformer declined, but Lasco, who was pleased at the thought of returning home, accepted their summons. He wrote to his friend Albert Hardenberg, ‘I resolved that my work, which has been devoted to others abroad, should not be withheld from my homeland by me (so I have been invited [home])’.110 Lasco arrived in the duchy in December 1556 and set about the task of organizing the territory’s congregations into a single, cohesive church. The reformer’s own correspondence and the surviving synod records shed light on his activities in Poland. Lasco focused on two areas: establishing a common doctrine and instituting an administrative hierarchy to govern the churches. As in London, Lasco set up a collegial assembly of ministers to maintain confessional unity and run the territorial church. He wrote to his friend John Cerny, explaining how these meetings would work in Little Poland: ‘each [minister] is required to attend, so that the unanimous consent of all can be obtained from everyone about the business.’111 In June 1557, Lasco held his ﬁrst territorial synod in Wlodzislaw.112 This assembly declared their desire for a vernacular Bible and agreed to establish a new printing press. The ministers also made modest steps towards implementing a form of clerical administration similar to Lasco’s London model by instituting lay elders to aid preachers in the territory. A second synod the following month approved the Genevan catechism and
religious reform was closely tied to the desire to increase their own political power in the country. 110 Lasco to Hardenberg, Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 739. Calvin’s letter of invitation is printed in Ioannis Calvini Opera quae supersunt omni. Ad ﬁdem editionem principum et authenticarum ex parte etiam codicum manu Scriptorum, additis prolegomenis literrariis, annotationibus criticis, annalibus Calvinianis indieibusque novis et copiosissmis, eds G. Baum and A.E. Cunitz (59 vols, Berlin, 1863–1900), vol. 16, no. 2445. Calvin explained that he could not leave Geneva and that his presence was not needed as long as Lasco was coming. Ibid., no. 2602. For additional accounts of Lasco’s return to Poland, see Walerjan Skorbohaty Krasinski, Geschichte des Ursprungs, Fortschritts und Verfalls der Reformation in Polen, (trans.) Wilhelm Adolf Lindau (Leipzig, 1841), pp. 96 and 107–10, Adolf Henschel, Johannes Laski, der Reformator der Polen (Halle, 1890), p. 40, and Eduard Kneifel, Geschichte der Evangelisch-Augsburgischen Kirche in Polen (Niedermarschacht, 1962), pp. 29–30. 111 Lasco to John Cerny, 25 July 1557, which is printed in Miscellaneen zur Geschichte der evangelischen Kirche in Russland, nebst Lasciana, ed. Hermann Dalton (Berlin, 1905), p. 356. 112 Bartel, Jan Łaski, pp. 246–7. The conclusions from this synod are printed in Hermann Dalton, Lasciana: nebst den altesten evangelischen Synodalprotokollen Polens 1555–1561 (Nieuwkoop, 1973), pp. 432–6.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
excommunication protocol for their churches.113 There were some distinct differences between the ministerial positions among the refugee and Polish congregations, which reﬂect the different circumstances of the territorial church and the nobility’s traditional role in ecclesiastical affairs. The ofﬁce of elders was established by the synod in 1557, but these ministers were to be selected from among the nobles rather than from the whole congregation. Lasco’s distinct form of elections, with the laity nominating and approving new ministers, was also replaced with cooption, where the clerical assembly would appoint qualiﬁed candidates to the post.114 These changes reﬂect the close relationship between the nobles and the territorial church, and allowed them to exercise signiﬁcant control over religious affairs in the duchy. Lasco also hoped to unite Protestants in Little Poland under a common confession which, he explained in a letter to Philip Melanchthon, he hoped would lead the way to a national reformed church.115 With this goal in mind, he again took up the debate with other Protestant groups about the meaning and nature of the Eucharist. In April 1558, for example, he sent a letter to the Lutheran ministers in Prutenica, in which he criticized the doctrine of transubstantiation and defended the notion of a commemorative rite which, he says, was in agreement with the Holy Scriptures.116 The reformer argued that Christ’s real presence in the bread and wine contradicted our understanding of his ascension, because he could not be in two places at once, and that it undermined the power and dignity of Christ’s sacred body.117 Lasco offered, instead, the Reformed notion of a spiritual presence as a common ground on which he hoped all could agree. As he had done in the Forma ac ratio, he explained that the Lord’s Supper was an external action signalling the internal communion with Christ.118 He reiterated that this understanding of the rite had been conﬁrmed by the apostle Paul and had its roots in the Ancient and Apostolic churches.119 Like his earlier dispute in Germany over the Lord’s Supper, Lasco failed to convince the Lutheran ministers in Poland and was unable to achieve his goal of a common Polish confession. As for his attempts to enforce doctrinal unity on a smaller scale in Little Poland, Lasco had to address the problem of religious radicals, especially
113 Dalton, Lascania, pp. 436–7. See also George Hutston Williams, The Radical Reformation (3rd edn, Kirksville, MO, 1992), pp. 1019–20. 114 Ibid. 115 Lasco to Melanchthon, 23 March 1558, in Dalton, Miscellaneen, p. 361. 116 Lasco to the Lutheran ministers in Prutenica, 15 April 1558, in Opera, Kuyper, vol. 2, p. 755. 117 Ibid. 118 Ibid., p. 756. 119 Ibid.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
anti-Trinitarians, who were preaching in the territory. His ﬁrst signiﬁcant adversary was Peter Gonesius, a Hussite preacher who was active in the duchy. Gonesius challenged the territorial church’s doctrine of the holy trinity, arguing that there was only one God who was not triune. He added that Christ was not equal to God because of his human nature and because of his role as a mediator between the worldly and divine.120 Lasco convened a synod in Wlodzislaw in September 1558 to address this attack on the church’s doctrine. During the course of this meeting, the ministers reafﬁrmed the Apostles’, Nicean and Athanasius creeds, which supported the holy trinity, and condemned the followers of Gonesius.121 The territorial church’s doctrine came under attack again the following year. The Italian minister Francis Stancaro, who was preaching in the duchy, published the Collatio doctrinae Arii in 1559, in which he charged that Lasco’s congregations had erred in their confession, and that the Nicene Creed mistakenly had created three Gods: the father, son, and holy spirit.122 Like Gonesius, he argued instead that Christ is subordinate to God because of his human nature and because of his role as a mediator between the temporal and spiritual realms. Lasco convened a synod in Pinczow on 7 August 1559 to respond to these new attacks, during which the anti-Trinitarian author was allowed to defend his claims. At the end of the assembly, the ministers excommunicated Stancaro and, three days later, they published the Confessio de Mediator generis humani Jesu Christo Deo et homine, reafﬁrming their view of the trinity and of Christ’s dual role.123 In response to anti-Trinitarian claims, the ministers argued in this new work that Christ’s role of mediator did not make him inferior. They explained that such a role does not equate with being subordinate, writing that ‘God [had] installed prophets, priests, and kings in order that we
120 For a good introduction to Gonesius and his activities in Poland, see Lorenz Hein, Italienische Protestanten und ihr Einﬂuss auf die Reformation in Polen während der beiden Jahrzehnte vor dem Sandomirer Konsens 1570 (Leiden, 1974), pp. 135–40, and Bibliotheca Dissidentium: Répertoire des non–conformistes religieux des seizième et dix–septième siècles, ed. André Séguenny (10 vols, Baden-Baden, 1987), vol. 8, pp. 79–81. Lasco’s conﬂict with Gonesius is also discussed in Williams, Radical Reformation, p. 1009–10. 121 The assembly also condemned other anti-Trinitarians including Servetus and the ancient Cerinthus. Ibid., p. 1023. 122 Francis Stancaro, Collatio doctrinae Arii (Cracow, 1559). For an excellent discussion of Stancaro’s theology and his career in Poland, see Hein, Italienische Protestanten, pp. 66– 78. 123 Confessio de Mediator generis humani Jesu Christo Deo et homine (Pinczow 1559). The Latin edition has been reprinted in Hein, Italienische Protestanten, pp. 259–62. Some parts have been translated into English, and are printed in Williams, Radical Reformation, pp. 1030–31. See also the discussion of this synod in Hein, Italienische Protestanten, pp. 99–100, and Williams, Radical Reformation, pp. 1028–29.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
understand what pertains to the title of Christ, this is the Word incarnate, and how all this pertains to the ofﬁce of mediator.’124 Lasco was plagued by poor health during the ﬁnal years of his life, and he died in January 1560 before completing his work in Little Poland. There are a few indications that his plans for establishing a common confession and administrative structure were continued after his death. During the synod held in Xions in September 1560, the ministers reafﬁrmed the ecclesiastical administration established by Lasco. At the head of the church was the superintendent, or ‘overseer’, who was responsible for maintaining doctrinal unity. The ministers noted that this ofﬁcer should not attach himself to any single parish, but rather be available to all congregations, and that he should visit each church in the territory at least once a year to examine ministers and to ensure compliance with the confession.125 The ministers also reafﬁrmed the ofﬁce of elders, noting that their duties were to maintain the church’s doctrine, aid other ministers in their work, make sure preachers followed God’s Word, and to lead an honest, exemplary life.126 Finally, the assembly concluded that the superintendent should convene regular meetings of the clergy to discuss administrative and doctrinal matters.127 Although the frequency of these meetings was not stipulated, it is likely that they occurred monthly or biannually, rather than weekly, given the size of the duchy. This same synod in Xions also adopted a form of ecclesiastical discipline similar to the London refugee and Geneva churches. The report from this assembly describes the familiar steps of private and public censure, explaining that if a member of the church has committed a sin, the offended person must admonish him privately. If the accused member refuses to repent, two or three other members should rebuke him. If these warnings again fail, the matter should be conveyed to the ministry for public admonitions. Finally, if these exhortations do not produce reconciliation, then the case should be related to the entire congregation for their prayers and judgement. If the offender continues to reject the warnings, then he is to be cut off from participating in the Eucharist.128 There was one key difference between the disciplinary practices in the refugee and Polish churches. Although Lasco had placed authority over excommunication and reconciliation in the hands of the congregation, this assembly reafﬁrmed the 1557 synod’s decision to follow the Genevan model for excommunication, which granted the right to the ministers and 124
This translation comes from Williams, Radical Reformation, pp. 1030–31. The synod took place from 14–19 September 1560, and the concluding report is reprinted in KO, Sehling, vol. 4, pp. 270–71. 126 Ibid., p. 271. 127 Ibid. 128 Ibid., p. 271. 125
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
magistrates on behalf of the congregation. After a local consistory had made the decision to ban an offender, they were to relate the matter to the territorial assembly for their advice and approval.129 This trend away from congregational authority reﬂects the important inﬂuence of Calvin on the territorial church. The ﬁnal traces of Lasco and his Forma ac ratio can be seen in the report from the Pinczow synod held one year after his death, in January 1561. This assembly of ministers added a second type of elder to those instituted in 1557, who were to be chosen from among the laity in the towns and villages. Like their noble counterparts, these elders were charged with assisting the other ministers in running the church, enforcing compliance with the ecclesiastical discipline, and setting an example for parishioners through their lives and work.130 The assembly also instituted the lay ofﬁce of deacons to collect alms and care for the poor, and they adopted Lasco’s procedure for conﬁrming newly elected ministers. In the synod’s conclusions, the authors explained that ‘the form of ordination, together with the whole ordinance, shall be carried out according to the form prescribed by John a Lasco.’131 This ordination rite included the other ministers laying their hands on the new ofﬁcer in view of the entire congregation, visibly demonstrating his induction into the ministry.132 The Pinczow synod did not, however, adopt Lasco’s instructions for elections. The report from the assembly explained that both lay and noble elders should be re-elected annually, and that the current ofﬁce holders should nominate candidates for their replacement, who should then be examined by the superintendent. If they are approved, the candidate would return home to be ordained publicly before the entire congregation. The members of the church only had the right to elect new deacons. The ministers explained that the entire church should come together to choose honest and God-fearing men for this post, who would then be given ﬁnal approval by the general synod before being installed.133 Although it appears Lasco had some success in shaping the territorial church’s administration following his London model, he had signiﬁcantly less success when it came to doctrinal unity. As mentioned above, he had been unable to reach agreement with Lutheran preachers over the Eucharist, and the Polish reformer died before the anti-Trinitarian conﬂict 129 Ibid., p. 272. For a discussion of Lasco’s discipline and the distinctive role granted to the laity, see pp. 101–103. 130 The conclusions from the 27 January 1561 synod in Pinczow are printed in KO, Sehling, vol. 4, p. 272. 131 Ibid., p. 272. Since there is no evidence that Lasco wrote any additional ordinances regarding ordination, it is likely that they are referring to his prescriptions in the Forma ac ratio. 132 Ibid., p. 272. Cf. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sigs E3v–E4v. 133 KO, Sehling, vol. 4, p. 273.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
could be resolved. In May 1560, the ministers came together in Pinczow to deal with the radical preacher Gregory Orsatius, who had been vocal about his agreement with Stancaro on the trinity.134 The ministers chose to expel Orsatius from the duchy. The conﬂict intensiﬁed the following year when the territory’s superintendent, Felix Cruciger, split the duchy’s congregations into ﬁve regional synods as part of his administrative reforms. The weakened central control over doctrine allowed for divisions to emerge between the assemblies and made unity and orthodoxy among the congregations increasingly difﬁcult. George Huntston Williams notes that by 1563, it had become clear that the divisions were too great for these groups to unite. The radical ministers broke away from the territorial church and formed their own synod in 1565, dashing any hopes for a duchy united under a single Reformed confession.135 Lasco’s supporters experienced a similar disappointment in France, where they tried to import some of the refugee practices in the late 1550s and early 1560s. The Polish reformer’s impact can be seen in the discourse that followed the formation of the national Calvinist Church at the ﬁrst synod held in 1559. Prior to this, the Reformation in France had been, primarily, a territorial phenomenon. The princes and theologians who had participated in this assembly sought to change this by uniting the disparate congregations into a single ecclesiastical body, and they approved a common confession and discipline as part of their plan.136 Geneva served as the principal model: they adopted many of the city’s ecclesiastical institutions and practices for use in their communities. Among them was Calvin’s procedures for elections and discipline, both of which granted a high level of authority to magistrates and ministers. Not everyone agreed, however, with the synod’s proposals. One of the most notable critics was the nobleman Jean Morély, who argued that the church’s members ought to hold greater powers in governing their congregations. The conclusions of this ﬁrst assembly ignited a conﬂict among French Calvinists over the best form of ecclesiastical polity. It is within the context of this debate, that the inﬂuence of Lasco and the London Strangers’ Church can be seen. In his study of the relationship between the Genevan and French movements, Robert Kingdon asserts that this controversy focused on two
134 Williams, ‘The Polish-Lithuanian Calvin during the Superintendency of John Laski, 1556–60’, in Reformatio Perennis: Essays on Calvin and the Reformation in honor of Ford Lewis Battles, ed. B.A. Gerrish (Pittsburgh, PA, 1981), p. 146. 135 Williams, Radical Reformation, p. 1050. 136 A modern edition of the discipline is published in F. Méjan (ed.), Discipline de l’Eglise réformée de France (Paris, 1947). For the ﬁrst national synod see: Benedict, Christ’s Churches, p. 135; Philippe Denis and Jean Rott, Jean Morély (ca 1524–ca 1594) et l’Utopie d’une Démocratie dans l’Église (Geneva, 1993), pp. 154–5; and Mark Greengrass, ‘France’, in Reformation in national context, p. 56.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
key elements of the new order: the procedure for selecting ministers and discipline.137 In Calvin’s churches, the Company of Pastors nominated candidates for ecclesiastical ofﬁce and the magistrates conﬁrmed their selection, before presenting him to the congregation for their ﬁnal approval.138 The French synod instituted a modiﬁed form of this procedure. Reformed churches were either illegal or lacked the lay magistrates’ support, so the preachers and elders assumed the duty of conﬁrming new candidates.139 Thus, they used cooption, with the current ministers appointing their replacements. Changes were also made to the discipline, reﬂecting the different geographical reach between the civic and national churches. Local assemblies were formed to oversee the practice in towns and rural areas, and functioned like the Geneva consistory. Above these came a hierarchical framework of provincial and national synods. Although participation in this latter assembly was open to all churches at ﬁrst, Kingdon notes that the territorial bodies assumed the power to appoint delegates to attend the national meeting.140 These Geneva institutions, and the changes introduced in France, limited the lay members’ involvement in governing their congregations. The synod’s proposal ignited a vociferous debate over ecclesiastical administration and authority. At the heart of this controversy was the question of how much input the lay congregants should have in running the church. Jean Morély was among the foremost opponents to the synod’s plan. The French theologian, who had once served as tutor to the Queen of Navarre, Jean d’Albret, had spent time in London among the Strangers’ Church during Edward VI’s reign. From there he went to Geneva before returning home to France.141 In 1562, Morély published the Traicté de la discipline & police Chrestienne, in which he attacked the 1559 synod and their restricted role for the laity in ecclesiastical administration.142 His book provided the clearest statement of the congregationalist’s position and became the centre of the debate. Morély’s views were rooted in Lasco’s Strangers’ Church. In the Traicté, he criticizes the French churches’ current practice that limits lay
137 Robert M. Kingdon, Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement 1564–1572: A Contribution to the History of Congregationalism, Presbyterianism, and Calvinist Resistance Theory (Madison, WI, 1967), pp. 38–9. 138 Calvin, ‘Ordonnances Ecclésiastiques’, p. 2 139 Benedict, Christ’s Churches, p. 136; and Kingdon, Geneva, pp. 40–41. 140 Kingdon, Geneva, pp. 41–2. 141 Denis and Rott, Jean Morély, pp. 32–3. 142 Jean Morély, Traicté de la discipline & police Chrestienne (Lyon, 1562). Morély wrote a draft of the work in Geneva in 1560, but the completed version was not published until two years later. The complete text has been republished by Slatkine Reprints, Geneva, in 1968. Subsequent references are drawn from this most recent edition.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
participation, charging that they have deviated from God’s doctrine. He points to two signs of this perceived corruption: he complains that some ministers had placed themselves above the ecclesiastical laws, believing that they are exempt from the discipline, and that in most churches a small group choose new ministers, rather than the entire congregation.143 He denounces both Papists and those Protestants who have moved away from communal elections, describing them as ‘aristocratic’. He condemns them for allowing ministers and consistories to govern churches, in place of the congregation, and asserts that this form of administration was contrary to Christ’s institution.144 Recognizing the inﬂuence of Lasco, Morély writes that the refugee churches’ discipline was closest to the ancient and apostolic traditions.145 Like the Polish reformer, he argues authority belongs to the entire congregation.146 Morély prescribes a disciplinary system similar to the London Strangers’ Church, with its emphasis on admonitions and repentance, and with the congregation holding power over excommunication and reconciliation.147 He agrees that the local and territorial consistories are needed to oversee the national church, but argues that true authority in discipline rests with the congregation and not these larger assemblies. Morély also proposes a form of elections similar to Lasco’s Strangers’ Church, rejecting the French practice of cooption for choosing new ministers. He argues instead that this right also belongs to the entire congregation. He describes the current system in the Traicté, where preachers and elders choose their replacements and, in some cases, the magistrates conﬁrm them in their new post.148 Using the same argument as Lasco in the Forma ac ratio, he recounts Matthew’s election as pastor in the Apostolic Church ‘by a voice and vote’ of the people.149 Morély proposes an alternative form for choosing ministers with more lay participation. He explains that on the day of elections, both the current ofﬁce-holders and the congregation should nominate candidates. The preachers and elders then examine them, before presenting the most suitable one to the members for their ﬁnal approval.150 He asserts that each church should be granted the ‘liberty’ to carry out such elections.151 A ﬁnal indicator of the refugee’s inﬂuence can be seen in Morély’s recommendations for instituting the prophecy in the Traicté. Like Lasco 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151
Ibid., sigs b4v and d4v. Ibid., sigs e1v–e2r and sig. h3v. Ibid., sig. e1v. Ibid., sig. h4r. He also discusses the congregation’s authority on sig. krv. Ibid., sig. q2v. Ibid., sig. z4v. Ibid., sig. A2v. He is quoting here from Acts 1:1–26. Morély, Traicté, sigs B4v–C1r. Ibid., sig. C1r.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
in the Forma ac ratio, he describes a ceremony where the preacher gives a sermon, followed by a forum where the assembled audience of clergy and laity could raise any questions or concerns about what they had heard.152 This wasn’t a new practice for the French churches; they had used a similar ritual to maintain unity among ministers, but participation had been limited to the clergy. Morély, like Lasco, advocates the prophecy as a way to maintain unity among the entire church and criticizes the ‘private’ practice. He explains that there were two additional beneﬁts of the service, beyond the agreement of the ministry: the ediﬁcation of the whole church and the elimination of false doctrines.153 As with the elections and discipline, he promotes a greater role for the congregation in doctrinal discussions through their full and complete participation. Ofﬁcial response to Morély’s Traicté was swift and thorough. He had published the work shortly before the 1562 Orleans synod, hoping it would become the focus of discussions at the meeting. It failed to generate the desired debate and the assembled ministers, instead, denounced his book.154 The Genevan church went further with their response, excommunicating Morély on account of his text.155 The Traicté again was condemned by four more synods in 1564 and 1565.156 The following year Antoine de la Roche Chandieu, the author of the 1559 French confession, published the church’s ofﬁcial response in La conﬁrmation de la discipline ecclesiastique, obseruee eglises reformees du royaume de France.157 Chandieu defended the Genevan model and rejected Morély’s proposals. He explained that the laity participated in ecclesiastical government through the ofﬁce of elders and deacons, but maintained that the clergy must retain authority over doctrinal matters.158 The ﬁnal rejection of Morély came in 1571, when the La Rochelle synod accepted a version of the Genevan confession for the national French church.159 Although the ofﬁcial reaction condemned the Traicté, Philip Conner’s recent study of the Reformed church in Le Mans suggests that some communities actively followed Lasco and Morély’s congregationalist
Denis and Rott, Jean Morély, pp. 159–60. Morély, Traicté, sigs l2r–v. Lasco uses these same reasons to support the prophecy in the Forma ac ratio. See pp. 81–2. 154 Kingdon, Geneva, p. 63. 155 Ibid., p. 64. 156 Ibid., pp. 69–70. 157 La conﬁrmation de la discipline ecclesiastique, obseruee eglises reformees du royaume de France. Auec la response aux obiectio[n]s proposees alencontre (Geneva, 1566). 158 Kingdon, Geneva, p. 81. 159 Philip Conner, ‘Huguenot Identities During the Wars of Religion: the churches of Le Mans and Montauban compared’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 54/1 (January, 2003): 35. 153
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
model.160 The author notes that the French refugees had brought the London practices to this town. He argues that the Polish reformer’s coetus, elections procedure and deaconate, with their emphasis on the congregation’s uncommon role in governing the church, found renewed life in this community.161 Le Mans, like other towns however, was eventually forced to conform to the national church, but one element from the London order seemed to remain: the deacons continued to serve on the local consistory after 1571, which was a departure from the Genevan church.162 Perhaps Lasco’s most lasting impact beyond the refugees was in Scotland, where men such as John Willock and John Knox became active after departing Geneva in 1558.163 These two men joined John Winram, John Spottiswoode, John Douglas and John Row in writing a Protestant confession, which was approved by parliament on 17 August 1560.164 This doctrinal statement was a revised version of the one written for the English refugees in Geneva and repeated, for example, their distinctive claim of three marks distinguishing Christ’s true Church: preaching of the Word, correct administration of the sacraments, and ecclesiastical discipline.165 The following December, a general council of ministers approved the First Book of Discipline – a grand ordinance covering administration and practice for the Scottish churches.166 This too was based on the Genevan Form of prayers and contained many elements from the Strangers’ Church
Ibid., pp. 23–39. Ibid., pp. 28–30. 162 Ibid., pp. 31–2. 163 Garrett, Marian Exiles, pp. 336–7 and Philip Benedict, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: a social history of Calvinism (New Haven, CT, 2002), p. 157. For a good introduction to the Scottish Reformation, see Jane E.A. Dawson, The Politics of Religion in the Age of Mary, Queen of Scots: the Earl of Argyll and the struggle for Britain and Ireland (Cambridge, 2002), pp. 87–104, Julian Goodare, ‘Scotland’ in eds Bob Scribner, Roy Porter and Mikuláš Teich, The Reformation in national context (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 95–110, and Benedict, Christ’s Churches, pp. 152–72. 164 John Knox’s History of the Reformation in Scotland, ed. William Croft Dickinson (2 vols, London, 1949), vol. 2, p. 343. The confession is printed on pp. 257–72. See also Benedict, Christ’s Churches, p. 161. 165 Knox’s History, Dickinson, vol. 2, p. 266. Cf. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. P2v and Form of prayers, sigs C3v–C4r. 166 The six men who composed the confession also wrote The First Book of Discipline, which they say had been requested of them by the nobles’ assembly. Knox’s History, Dickinson, vol. 2, p. 289. It was signed by a majority of nobles from the Lord’s of the Congregation on 27 January 1561. Ibid., pp. 324–5. Although no original manuscript copy of the ordinance has survived, modern editions are printed in Knox’s History, Dickinson, vol. 2, 280–324, Works of John Knox, ed. David Laing (6 vols, Edinburgh, 1895), vol. 2, pp. 183–260, and in The First Book of Discipline, ed. James K. Cameron (Edinburgh, 1972). I have used the Dickinson and Cameron editions for this study. 161
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
and other exile groups. The Scottish ordinance instructs, for example, that congregations should follow the sacramental rites prescribed in the Genevan order, noting that many are already doing this.167 The authors included Lasco’s distinctive practice of the seated communion and defended it based on a literal understanding of the apostolic model, writing that ‘the table of the Lord is then most rightly ministered when it approacheth most nigh to Christ’s own action. But plain it is, that at the Supper Christ Jesus sat with his disciples, and therefore do we judge that sitting at a table is most convenient to that holy action’.168 The order dissolved the current bishoprics and replaced them with ten territories, each with a superintendent to oversee them.169 They instituted a similar format for elections, which emphasized a high level of lay involvement in choosing new preachers. The same cannot be said for other ofﬁces, however. The elders and deacons were to be nominated, examined and elected by the ministers before being presented to the congregation for their conﬁrmation.170 The authors also established other refugee practices including the weekly prophecy, to educate the congregation about doctrinal matters, and the distinctive lay authority over excommunication and reconciliation, writing that such action should be taken ‘by the mouth of the Minister, consent of the Ministry, and commandment of the Church’.171
Knox’s History, Dickenson, vol. 2, p. 282. Ibid. 169 Knox’s History, vol. 2, pp. 291–3. The ten territories were: Orkney (including the isles of Orkney, Shetland, Caithness and Strathnaver), Ross (Ross, Sutherland, Moray, and the North Isles of Skye and Lewis), Argyll (Argyll, Kintyre, Lorne, the South Isles, Arran and Bute, and Lochaber), Aberdeen (the land between the rivers Dee and Spey, including the sheriffdom of Aberdeen and Banff), Brechin (the sheriffdoms of Mearns and Angus, and the Brae of Mar to Dee), St Andrews (Fife and Fotheringham to Stirling, and the whole sheriffdom of Perth), Edinburgh (the sheriffdoms of Lothian and Stirling, on the south side of the Water of Forth, Merse, Lauderdale and Wedale), Jedburgh (Teviotdale, Tweeddale, Liddesdale, with the Forest of Ettirck), Glasgow (Galloway, Carrick, Nithsdale, Annandale, with the rest of the dales to the west). 170 Ibid., vol. 2, pp. 277–9, 284 and 310. The authors were concerned, however, that congregations could use this authority to reject reform-minded candidates. The ordinance included special instructions for these cases: if a congregation refused to accept a candidate who had been examined and approved by the superintendent and his council, the general assembly could force them to ordain the minister under penalty of censure. If the congregation still disagreed, they could nominate a new candidate, but the ordinance explains that the synod’s recommendation would supersede the church’s nominee. The authors defended this addition, writing that the vote of the church must be honoured in elections, but the council’s intervention was not a ‘violent intrusion’ and was necessary in cases where the congregations rejected qualiﬁed candidates. Ibid., p. 284. 171 Knox’s History, Dickinson, vol. 2, pp. 307 and 315. Cf. Lasco, Forma ac ratio, sig. Aa7v. 168
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
The First Book of Discipline encountered much opposition because of its radical changes it introduced. As the historian James Kirk argues, at the heart of the controversy lay the reformer’s plan to dissolve traditional beneﬁces and transfer their incomes to the church. Parliament undermined these proposals in 1561, conﬁrming that current ofﬁce holders would continue to receive two-thirds of their beneﬁces for life, while the remainder would go to pay ministers’ salaries. Five years later, the privy council and parliament agreed to grant the smaller beneﬁces (those under 300 marks a year) to the Protestant clergy.172 The opposition made it difﬁcult to implement the ordinance in the Scottish churches. The general assembly eventually commissioned 30 ministers to write a new order, the Second Book of Discipline, which was published in 1578. Any inﬂuence Lasco and the refugee congregations had on the Scottish Church began to weaken with this new ordinance. Although the seated Eucharist and weekly prophecy were retained, other similarities with the London and Genevan orders disappeared. The new work re-established the ofﬁce of bishops and the traditional dioceses, including their role as parliamentary representatives, and reafﬁrmed the larger beneﬁces.173 Congregants lost the right to nominate candidates, although they still could voice their objections before ordination. The authors explained that it was still important for preachers, elder and deacons to be elected according to the will of the congregation, but that in this case ministers could act on the laity’s behalf.174 This brought them closer in line with other Calvinist churches. Likewise, the congregants lost their power over excommunication and reconciliation, with this right passing to the consistory.175 The last remaining traces of the refugee practices disappeared by the middle part of the seventeenth century. As Margo Todd notes, the seated communion was replaced by a kneeling ceremony by the 1630s. In addition, any other liturgical practices were superseded by the new Westminster Confession adopted in 1646.176
172 The ‘Acts of the Privy Council Relating to the Thirds of the Beneﬁces’ is printed in Knox’s History, Dickinson, vol. 2, pp. 326–32. See also The Second Book of Discipline, ed. James Kirk (Edinburgh, 1980), pp. 15–23. 173 Second Book of Discipline, Kirk, pp. 119–21 and 222–6. 174 Ibid., pp. 179–80. 175 Ibid., p. 200. 176 Margo Todd, The Culture of Protestantism in Early Modern Scotland (New Haven, CT, 2002), pp. 88–9 and The Book of Common Order of the Church of Scotland, commonly known as John Knox’s Liturgy, and the Directory for the Public Worship of God, agreed upon by the Assembly of Divines at Westminter, eds George W. Sprott and Thomas Leishman (Edinburgh, 1868), pp. xvii–xxi and 125.
THE FORMA AC RATIO IN EUROPE
The interest in Lasco’s London church, and his Forma ac ratio, suggests the potency of this reformer’s ecclesiastical organization and rites when it appeared in the 1550s. His civic model established in the Strangers’ Church provided an important foundation for the new exile congregations in Emden, Frankfurt and Geneva, which is reﬂected in their continued use of the practices after the dissolution of the London church. The order’s appeal is grounded in their common experience: Lasco provided a model that allowed refugee congregations to remain autonomous from local magistrates, who often disagreed with their Reformed rites. In contrast, he had less success outside of the refugee communities. The Forma ac ratio certainly caught the attention of his contemporaries, including his Lutheran critics like Westphal, or supporters like Morély, but it failed to unite the disparate Protestant groups or ﬁnd widespread support. His greatest success outside the refugee congregations was Scotland, where his distinctive form for elections, seated communion, prophecy and discipline were instituted during the early stages of the Reformation. These too, however, lacked longevity and had disappeared by the early seventeenth century. Despite these setbacks, Lasco’s ordinance played a signiﬁcant role in establishing Protestant practices during the 1550s and 1560s, providing a model for Reformed communities and shaping discourse over religious reform among Europe’s Protestants.
This page intentionally left blank
Conclusion: Lasco’s Legacy Lasco’s Forma ac ratio recorded the rites and ceremonies of his London Strangers’ Church and provided one of the most complete and comprehensive blueprints for Reformed congregations when it appeared in 1555. This work, and his ideas about ecclesiastical organization and practice, was a potent model for the exile congregations in Europe. His legacy beyond the refugees is less precise. He played a key role in debates with Lutheran theologians over the Eucharist, for example, and had some success in shaping rites in Scotland. However, signs of his inﬂuence had largely disappeared by the middle part of the seventeenth century. How then should one judge Lasco’s Forma ac ratio and its impact on European Protestantism? The ordinance contains the author’s own vision for ecclesiastical reform and reveals much about his understanding of Christ’s universal Church through the rites and ceremonies he prescribes. It also conveys much about key inﬂuences that shaped his ideas such as Erasmus, Bucer, Zwingli and Calvin. Lasco was deeply concerned by the divisions in the Church and, like Erasmus, stressed the importance of education as a means for restoring doctrinal unity. His ecclesiastical discipline, in contrast, was rooted in Bucer’s practice in Cologne and Calvin’s Geneva.1 However, Lasco also had unique, or distinctive, elements that reﬂected his own interpretation of the Ancient and Apostolic churches on which, he claimed, the Forma ac ratio was based. He combined the superintendent, commonly found in Lutheran episcopacies, with the Genevan collegial assembly to form an uncommon ecclesiastical administration. In addition, he assigned an unusually high level of authority to the laity in governing their own church, which was exercised through the lay elders and deacons, as well as participation in elections, the prophecy, and excommunication. Lasco is, in a sense, a proto-Congregationalist, advocating a pronounced role for the congregation in running the church. Perhaps one of the greatest ironies concerning the Strangers’ Church and this ordinance is that they had remarkably little impact in England, where it was anticipated they would do the most good. Archbishop Thomas Cranmer had hoped that the refugees, and their continental-style rites and ceremonies, would lead the way to more radical reforms in his
See pp. 96–101.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
own church.2 The foreigners encountered considerable opposition among London’s clergy and the closure of their congregations in 1553 ended any hopes that they would achieve this goal. In spite of this setback, there are indications that Lasco’s French and Dutch congregations had some inﬂuence among English Protestants. As the previous chapter discussed, the refugees were divided over the 1552 Book of Common Prayer and other exiles’ more radical reforms. The Genevan community, for example, broke away from the traditional prayer book and adopted the Form of prayers, which had its roots in the London Strangers’ Church.3 An example of the foreigners’ inﬂuence also can be seen in England. Brett Usher notes that the underground Protestant church in London during Mary I’s reign employed Lasco’s ordination ceremony during Thomas Simpson’s conﬁrmation as preacher in 1557.4 This case is atypical, however, and Lasco’s reform model failed to gain widespread support among Protestants in England under Edward or Mary. The foreigners’ ceremonies also had little impact in England following the refugees’ return under the Protestant Queen Elizabeth in 1558. The religious settlement, which came the following year, re-established a Protestant church and reafﬁrmed the prayer book’s more moderate ceremonies. In the 1560s, there was a brief resurgence of interest in the exiles among early Puritans, who pushed for more continental-style reforms. Patrick Collinson and Patrick McGrath argue that the English radicals borrowed much from the refugees and that their interest in the exiles led to the Genevan Bible’s printing in London in 1560 and the Form of prayer’s publication the following year.5 The foreigners’ inﬂuence also can be seen in the Puritan proposals submitted to the 1563 convocation, which eliminated signing the cross during baptism, made kneeling during the Lord’s Supper voluntary, and argued that the wearing of surplices should not be mandatory. However, the assembly narrowly defeated these measures and church leaders responded by reafﬁrming the traditional prayer book and enforcing conformity with the 1559 religious settlement.6
2 Diarmaid MacCulloch, ‘The importance of Jan Laski in the English Reformation’, in Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator, ed. Christoph Strohm (Tübingen, 2000), pp. 325–6. 3 See pp. 127–132. 4 Brett Usher, ‘“In a Time of Persecution”: new light on the secret Protestant congregation in Marian London’, in David Loades (ed.), John Foxe and the English Reformation (Aldershot, 1997), pp. 238–242. 5 Patrick Collinson, ‘The Elizabethan Puritans and the Foreign Reformed Churches in London’, Proceedings of the Huguenot Society of London 20 (1964), pp. 528–55. This has been reprinted in Collinson, Godly People: essays on English Protestantism and Puritanism (London, 1983), pp. 245–72. See also Patrick McGrath, Papists and Puritans Under Elizabeth I (New York, 1967), pp. 73–99. 6 McGrath, Papists and Puritans, pp. 84–7.
CONCLUSION: LASCO’S LEGACY
Lasco had even less success with his own ambitions for the Forma ac ratio. He explained in the dedicatory letter his concern for the current confessional divisions that gripped the Church and hoped that his ordinance could provide a way to reunite the faithful.7 He was promoting a via media, which was not a new experience for the Polish reformer. Diarmaid MacCulloch notes that Lasco’s reform programme in East Frisia provided a ‘third way’, which allowed the territory’s countess to ‘avoid alignment with either Lutherans or Catholics’ in the territory’.8 Lasco continues this with his Forma ac ratio, providing an alternative model to overcome the current divisions. This is not to imply that he was ecumenical, in the sense that he was looking for a compromise to which all sides could agree. Instead, he was proposing an alternative, or a third way, based on his interpretation of the Ancient and Apostolic churches that would overcome, he hoped, the current confessional controversies. This approach can be seen in the refugees’ Lord’s Supper rite, which was one of the most divisive issues of his day. Lasco did not advocate compromise, but instead rejected Lutheran and Catholic doctrines entirely. He proposed an alternative that is best described as a mixture between Zwingli and Calvin. He argued, like the Zurich reformer, that the ceremony was a symbolic representation of Christ’s last supper with his apostles. At the same time, he also emphasized Calvin’s spiritual presence – the communion with Christ through participation.9 The key, for Lasco, was educating his critics about the Scriptures, which would lead to doctrinal unity and a shared understanding of the sacrament. As his public debates with Westphal and Brenz show, he had little success in convincing his opponents to accept this ‘third way’. In contrast, Lasco found a receptive audience for his reforms among the refugee congregations, who re-established exile churches on the continent after 1553 following his London model. The Emden, Frankfurt and Geneva congregations continued many of his practices, and in some cases adopted the ordinance in toto. Most notable among the measures that were retained were his coetus, seated communion, prophecy and the pronounced lay authority in elections and discipline. The appeal of these practices lay in the common exile experience. Lasco’s order provided a model for churches that emphasized autonomy from local magistrates and clergy. The exile churches in London, and those that followed on the continent, often found themselves at odds with local ofﬁcials. Institutions like the coetus and discipline allowed the churches to govern themselves. 7 John a Lasco, Forma ac ratio tota Ecclesiastici Ministerii, in peregrinorum, potißimum vero Germanorum Ecclesia (Frankfurt, 1555), sigs α2r–v. 8 Diarmaid MacCulloch, Reformation: Europe’s House Divided 1490–1700 (London, 2003), pp. 253–4. 9 See pp. 85–9.
RESTORING CHRIST’S CHURCH
Likewise the authority granted to the laity in elections and excommunication replaced the magistrates’ traditional role in these matters and allowed them to operate independent from secular authority. The potency of this model is underscored by the experience of Emden, where his institutions made possible the town’s emancipation from territorial authorities in the 1590s.10 The signiﬁcance of Lasco and the Forma ac ratio is obscured when measured strictly by his stated goal, to restore Christ’s Church, or his long-term legacy for Protestantism. The Polish reformer failed to unite the confessional parties and he does not come close to Luther or Calvin’s enduring inﬂuence, which continues to be felt to the present day. However, his ordinance should not be discounted because of this. Its true importance can be seen, instead, when viewed in the context of the 1550s and 1560s. This was a dynamic time for Protestants in Europe. The period witnessed the demise of England’s church under Mary, and its subsequent resurrection by Elizabeth. In the German lands, the uncertainty caused by Charles V’s defeat of the Schmalkaldic League was erased by the 1555 Peace of Augsburg, which legalized the religious divisions. It was also a watershed period for Reformed communities, with the establishment of exile churches in the German lands as well as efforts to establish national and territorial ones in Little Poland, Scotland and France. Lasco’s ecclesiastical order, and his Forma ac ratio, played a signiﬁcant role in this period. It provided an important foundation for the exile churches and was the focus of the second Sacramentarian controversy between Lutheran and Reformed theologians in the 1550s. Less directly, the work inﬂuenced discussions about ecclesiastical reform in places such as France, Scotland and Little Poland. There is no denying that Lasco’s ambitious goal for the Forma ac ratio was problematic. Overcoming the deep confessional differences, and restoring unity to the universal Church, was a monumental task, if not an impossible one. The Polish reformer was ill-equipped to carry it out. In spite of this, he never gave up on the notion that a common doctrine was possible, which can be seen in his Forma ac ratio and his activities on the continent during the ﬁnal years of his life. For Lasco, unity could be achieved through a return to the Scriptures and through education, continually instructing and reinforcing the principal tenets of faith. Lasco was an active church organizer who left his mark on congregations from Poland to England during his 20-year career as a Protestant reformer. His contributions to ecclesiastical organization and rites during the watershed decades of the 1550s and 1560s should secure the Forma ac ratio’s place as Lasco’s most important work and, likewise, the Polish reformer’s position
See pp. 116–17.
CONCLUSION: LASCO’S LEGACY
as one of the most dynamic church organizers from the Reformation period.
This page intentionally left blank
Bibliography Manuscript Sources Bodleian Library Zentralbibliothek Zürich
MS Barlow 19 MS F 80 Bl. 250-254
Printed Sources Aland, Kurt, Black, Matthew, et al., Greek-English New Testament (5th edn, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1990). Allen, Percy et al. (eds), Opus epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterdami (12 vols, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1926). Baum, G. and Cunitz, A.E. (eds), Ioannis Calvini Opera quae supersunt omni. Ad ﬁdem editionem principum et authenticarum ex parte etiam codicum manu Scriptorum, additis prolegomenis literrariis, annotationibus criticis, annalibus Calvinianis indieibusque novis et copiosissmis (59 vols, Berlin: C.A. Schwetschke et ﬁlium, 1863–1900). Bergier, Jean-François and Kingdon, Robert (eds), Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Genève au Temps de Calvin (9 vols, Geneva: Droz, 1964). Bodenstein von Karlstadt, Andreas, Von beyden gestalten der heylige Messze. Von zeichen in gemeyn was sie wircken und deüten. Sie seind ut Behemen od ketzer, die beyde gestalt nemen, sond Evangelische Christen (Wittenberg: Johann Rhau-Grunenberg, 1522). The boke of common praier, and the [ad]ministracion of the sacramentes, and other rites and ceremonies in the Churche of Englande (The fourme and maner of makynge …bisshoppes, &c.) (London, 1552), STC 16284.5. The booke of the common prayer and administracion of the sacraments, and other rites and ceremonies of the Churche: after the use of the Churche of England (London, 1549), STC 16267. Bretschneider, Carolus Gottlieb and Bindseil, Henricus Ernestus (eds), Philippi Melanthonis Opera quae supersunt omnia (28 vols, Halle a.d. S./Braunschweig: C.A. Schwetschke et Filium, 1835–60). Bucer, Martin and Capito, Wolfgang, Confessio religionis christianae, sacratissimo Imperatori Carolo V. Caesari Augusto in comitijs Augustae anno MDXXX. per legatos civitatum Argentorati, Constantiae, Memmingae, et Lindaviae exhibita (Strassburg: Georg Ulricher, 1531).
Bucer, Martin and Melanchthon, Philip, Von Gottes gnaden unser Hermans Ertzbischoffs zu Coln unnd Churfürsten &c. einfaltigs bedencken/ warauff ein Christliche…Reformation/ an Lehr/ brauch der Heyligen Sacramenten und Ceremonien/ Seelsorge/ vnd anderem Kirchendienst … verbesserung … anzurichen seye. (Bonn: Laurentius Mullen, 1543). Calderwood, David (ed.), The ﬁrst and second books of discipline. Together with some Acts of the Generall Assemblies, clearing and conﬁrming the same: and an Act of Parliament (Amsterdam, 1621). Calvin, John, Defensio sanae et orthodoxae de sacramentis, eorumque natura, vi, ﬁne, usu, et fructui quam pastores et ministry Tigurinae Ecclesiae et Genevensis antehac brevi consensionis mutae formula complexi sunt (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer, 1555). Calvin, John, Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles (2 vols, Philadelphia, PA: Westminster Press, 1960). Calvin, John, ‘Ordonnances Ecclésiastiques’, in Jean-François Bergier and Robert M. Kingdon (eds), Registres de la Compagnie des Pasteurs de Genève au Temps de Calvin (Geneva: Droz, 1964). Cameron, James K. (ed.), The First Book of Discipline (Edinburgh: St Andrew’s Press, 1972). Concordia. Pia et unanimi consensus repetita Confessio Fidei & doctrinae electorum, principum, et ordinum imperii, atque eorundem Theologorum, qui Augustanam Confessionem amplectuntur, & nomina sua huic libro subscripserunt. Cui ex sacra scriptura, unica illa veritatis norma et regula, quorundam Articulorum, qui post Doctoris Martini Lutheri felicem ex hac vita exitum, in controversiam venerunt, solida accessit Declaratio (Leipzig: Hans Steinmann, 1580). Cottisford, Thomas, The accompt rekeynynge and confession of the faith of Huldrik Zwinglius byshop of Zuryk the chief towne of Helvetia, sent vnto Charles the fyfte nowe Emperoure of Rome, holdynge a counsel wyth the moost noble Princes, Estates and learned men of Germany assembled together at Ausburgh. 1530. in the moneth of July (Geneva, 1555). Cox, John Edmund (ed.), Miscellaneious Writings and Letters of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, Martyr, 1556 (Cambridge, 1846). Cramer, S. and Pijper, F. (eds), Bibliotheca Reformatoria Neerlandica. Geschriften uit den Tijd der Hervorming in de Nederlanden (10 vols, ‘s-Gravenhage: M. Nijhoff, 1903–14). D. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesamtausgabe (71 vols, Weimar: H. Böhlau, 1883). Dalton, Hermann, Johannes a Lasco. Beitrag zur Reformationsgeschichte Polens, Deutschlands und Englands (Gotha, 1881).
Dalton, Hermann (ed.), Lasciana: Nebst den ältesten evangelischen Synodalprotokollen Polens 1555–1561 (2nd edn, Nieuwkoop: B. De Graaf, 1973). Dalton, Hermann (ed.), Miscellaneen zur Geschichte der evangelischen Kirche in Russland, nebst Lasciana (Berlin: Reuther & Reichard, 1905). Dickinson, William Croft (ed.), John Knox’s History of the Reformation in Scotland (2 vols, London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1949). Eck, Johannes, Repulsio articulorum Zvvingli C[a]es. Majestati oblatorum (Augsburg: A. Weissenhorn, 1530). Eck, Johannes, Sub domini Ihesu et Mariae patrocinio. Articulos 404. Partim ad disputations Lipsicam, Badensem, & Bernensem attinentes, partim vero ex scriptis pacem ecclesiae perturbantium extractos, coram divo Caesare Carolo V (Ingolstadt: Peter Apian & Georg Apian, 1530). Egli, Emil and Finsler, Georg (eds), Huldreich Zwinglis sämtliche Werke (6 vols, Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1982–91). Emmius, Ubbo, Menso Altings Leben, trans. Erich von Reeken (Emden, 1982). Emmius, Ubbo, Rerum Frisicarum historia autore Vbbone Emmio, Frisio ‘distincta in decades sex quarum postrema nunc primùm prodit, prioribus ita recognitis & locupletatis, ut novae prorsus videri possint … ’ accedunt praeterea De Frisia et Republ. Frisiorum, inter Fleuum et Viurgim Flumina, libri aliquot, ab eodem autore conscripti (1616). Estes, James M. (ed. and trans.), Godly Magistrates and Church Order: Johannes Brenz and the Establishment of the Lutheran Territorial Church in Germany 1524–1559 (Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2001). The forme of prayers and ministration of the Sacraments, &c. used in the Englishe Congregation at Geneva: and approved, by the famous and godly learned man, John Calvyn (Geneva, 1556), STC 16561. Gorham, George C., Gleanings of a Few Scattered Ears during the Period of the Reformation in England (London: Bell and Daldy, 1857). Held, Wieland and Hoyer, Siegried (eds), Quellen zu Thomas Müntzer (Leipzig: Verlag der sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2004). Honders, A.C. (ed.), Valerandus Pollanus Liturgia Sacra (1551–1555): Opnieuw uitgegeven en van een Inleiding Voorzien (Leiden: Brill, 1970). Kirk, James (ed.), The Second Book of Discipline (Edinburgh: St Andrew’s Press, 1980). Knighton, C.S. (ed.), Calendar of State Papers Domestic Series of the reign of Edward VI 1547–1553 (London: HMSO, 1992).
Knox, John, A Faythfull admonition made by John[n] Knox, unto the professours of Gods truthe in England, wherby thou mayest learne howe God wyll have his Churche exercised with troubles, and how he defendeth it in the same (Emden, 1554), STC 15069. Kuyper, Abraham. (ed.), Joannis a Lasco Opera tam edita quam inedita duobus voluminibus comprehensa (2 vols, Amsterdam, 1866). Laing, David (ed.), Works of John Knox (6 vols, Edinburgh: James Thin, 1895). Lasco, John, Brevis et Dilucida de Sacramentis Ecclesiae Christi tractatio, in qua et fons ipse et ratio, totius Sacramentariae nostri temporis controversiae paucis exponitur: naturaque ac vis Sacramentorum compendio et perspicue explicatur, per Ioannem à Lasco, Baronem Poloniae superintendentem Ecclesiae peregrinorum Londini (London, 1552). Lasco, John, Compendium doctrinae de vera unique dei et Christi Ecclesia, eiusq[ue] ﬁde & confeßione pura: in qua Peregrinorum Ecclesia Londini instituta est, auto[ri]tate atq[ue] assensu Sacrae Majestatis Regiae. Quem Deus Opt. Max. ad singulare Ecclesiae suae decus ornamentum ac defensionem (per gratiam suam ) servet, guvernet [et] fortunet (London, 1551), STC 15263. Lasco, John, Forma ac ratio tota Ecclessiastici Ministerij, in peregrinorum, potißimum vero Germanorum Ecclesia: instituta Londini in Anglia, per Pientißimum Principem Angliae &c. Regem Eduardum, eius nominis Sextu[m]: Anno post Christum natum 1550. Addito ad calcem libelli Privilegio suae majestatis. Autore Joanne a Lasco Polinae Barone (Frankfurt, 1555), STC 16571. Lasco, John, Toute la forme & maniere du Ministere Ecclesiastique, en l’Eglise des estra[n]gers, dressee a Londres en Angleterre, par le Prince tres ﬁdele dudit pays, le Roy Edouard. VI. De ce nom: L’an apres l’incarnation de Christ. 1550. avec le privilege de sa Majeste a la ﬁn du liure. Par M. Iean a Lasco. Baron de Polonie. Traduit de Latin en Francois, & imprimé par Giles Ctematius (Emden: Ctematius, 1556), STC 16574. Lavater, Ludwig, Die Gebräuche und Einrichtungen der Züricher Kirche, ed. Johann Baptist Ott and trans. Gottfried Albert Keller (Zürich, 1987). Leaver, Robin, The Liturgy of the Frankfurt Exiles 1555 (Bramcote: Grove, 1984). May, Gerhard (ed.), Das Marburger Religionsgespräch 1529 (Gütersloh: Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn, 1970). Meinert, Hermann and Dahmer, Wolfram (eds), Das Protokollbuch der Niederländernschen Reformierten Gemeinde zu Frankfurt am Main 1570-1581 (Frankfurt: Kramer, 1977).
Méjan, F. (ed.), Discipline de l’Eglise réformée de France (Paris, 1947). Micron, Martin, De Christlicke Ordinancien der nederlantscher Ghemeinten te Londen (1554), ed. Willem Frederik Dankbaar (‘sGravenhage, 1956). Mitchell, A.F. (ed.), 21 Pamphlets Ecclesiastical and Controversial (no colophon or date). Morély, Jean, Traicté de la discipline & police Chrestienne (Geneva: Slatkine, 1968). Müller, Nikolaus, Die Wittenberg Bewegung, 1521–1522: die Vorgänge in und um Wittenberg während Luthers Wartburgaufenthalt (2nd edn, Leipzig: M.H. Nachfolger, 1911). Müntzer, Thomas, Protestation odder empietung Tome Münters von Stolberg am Hartzs seelwarters zu Alstedt seine lere betreffende, unnd tzum anfang von dem rechten Christen glawben, unnd der tawffe (Alstedt, 1524). Pallas, Karl ed., Die Registraturen der Kirchenvisitationen im ehemals sächsischen Kurkreise (Halle: Otto Hendel Verlag, 1906). Pelikan, Jaroslav and Lehmann, Helmut T. (eds), Luther’s Works (55 vols, St Louis, MO and Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1958–86). Pipkin, H. Wayne (ed.), Huldrych Zwingli Writings: the Defense of the Reformed Faith, trans Henry Preble and Edward J. Furcha (2 vols, Allison Park, PA: Pickwick Publications, 1984). Poullain, Valerand, Doctrine de la Penitence Publique, Et La Forme d’icelle ainsi comme elle se practique en l’Eglise des estrangiers a Londres, deuant qu’on vienne a l’excommunication, Ensenble aussi la forme d’administrer la saincte Cene (London, 1552). Poullain, Valerand, Liturgia sacra, seu ritus Ministrii in Ecclesia peregrinorum Francofordiae ad Moenum. Addita est summa doctrinae seu ﬁdei professio eiusdem Ecclesiae. Psalm. CXLIX. Laudem Deo canite in Ecclesia Sancorum. Ioan.I. Veni & vide (Frankfurt, 1554). Poullain, Valerand, L’Ordre des priers et ministre ecclesiastique, auec La forme de penitence pub. & certaines Prieres de l’Eglise de Londres, Et La confession de Foy de l’Eglise de Glastonbury en Somerset (London, 1552), STC 16573. Ratio et forma publice orandi Deum, atque administrandi Sacramenta, et Caet. in Anglorum Ecclesiam, quae Genevae colligitur, recepta: cum judicio & comprobatione D. Iohannis Calvini (Geneva, 1556), STC 16561. Richter, Aemilius Ludwig (ed.), Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des sechszehnten Jahrhunderts (2 vols, Nieuwkoop: B. De Graaf, 1967). Richter, Aemilius and Friedberg, Emil (eds), Corpus juris canonici (Leipzig, 1879–81).
Robinson, Hastings (ed.), Original Letters Relative to the English Reformation, Written during the Reigns of King Henry VIII., King Edward VI., and Queen Mary: Chieﬂy from the Archives of Zurich (2 vols, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1846). Scheible, Heinz (ed.), Melanchthons Briefwechsel: kritische und kommentierte Gesamtausgabe (10 vols, Stuttgart: Frommann-Holzboog, 1977). Schilling, Heinz (ed.), Die Kirchenratsprotokolle der Reformierten Gemeinde Emden 1557-1620 (2 vols, Cologne: Böhlau, 1989). Schwarz, Rudolf (ed.), Johannes Calvins Lebenswerk in seinen Briefen (2 vols, Tübingen, 1909). Sehling, Emil (ed.), Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts (vols 1-6, Leipzig: O.R. Reisland, 1902–13; vols 7–15, Tübingen: Mohr, 1957–77). Smith, Preserved (ed.), The Life and Letters of Martin Luther (Cambridge: Riverside Press, 1911). Spaeth, Adolph, Reed, L.D., et al. (eds & trans), Works of Martin Luther (6 vols, Philadelphia, PA: A.J. Holman Company, 1915–32). Sprott, George W. and Leishman, Thomas (eds), The Book of Common Order of the Church of Scotland, commonly known as John Knox’s Liturgy, and the Directory for the Public Worship of God, agreed upon by the Assembly of Divines at Westminster (Edinburgh: Blackwood, 1868). Stupperich, Robert (ed.), Martin Bucers deutsche Schriften (17 vols, Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1960–81). Timann, Johannes, Farrago sententiarum consentientium in vera et catholica doctrina, de Coena Domini, quam … iuxta divinorum vocem, Ecclesiae Augustanae confessionis amplexae sunt (Frankfurt: Peter Brubachius, 1555). Utenhove, Jan, Een kort begrijp der leeringhe van de warachtige ende eenighe Ghemeynte Gods ende Christi / ende van haer gheloone ende oprechtighe belijdinghe (London, 1551). Utenhove, Jan, Simplex et ﬁdelis narratio de instituta ac demum dissipata Belgarum, aliorumque peregrinorum in Anglia, Ecclesia: et potissimum de suspectis posteà illius nomine itineribus, per Ioannem Utenhovium (Basel, 1560). Vermigli, Peter Martyr, Loci communes D. Petri Martyris Vermilii, Florentini, sacrarum literarum in schola Tigurina Professoris: ex varis ipsius authoris scriptis, in unum librum collecti [et] in quatuor Classes distribute (London: Thomas Vautrollerius, 1583), STC 24668. Wes sich D. Martin Luther &c. mit Huldrichen Zwinglin &c. der Strittigen Articulhalb vereint vnd verglichen auff der Convocatz zu Marpurt/ den dritten tag Octob. M.D.xxix (Marburg: Frany Rhode, 1529).
Westphal, Joachim, Adversus cuiusdam sacramentarii falsam criminationem, justa defensio (Frankfurt: Peter Brubachius, 1555). Westphal, Joachim, Farrago confusanearum et inter se dissidentium opinionum de Coena Domini: ex sacramentarioru[m] libris congesta / per M. Joachimum Westphalum, past. Hamb. (Magdeburg, 1552). Westphal, Joachim, Joachimi Westphali Justa Defensio, adversus insignia mendacia Joannis a Lasco quae in epistola ad Sereniss. Poloni[a]e Regem, &c. contra Saxonicas Ecclesias sparsit, cuius exemplar, ut [a]equus lector rei veritatem facilius quasi ex antithesi collegere poßit, Westphali scripto sub ﬁnem adiecimus (Strassburg: Fabricius Blasius, 1557). Westphal, Joachim, Recta ﬁdes de Coena Domini: ex uerbis Apostoli Pauli & Evangelistarum demonstrata ac communita/ per Magistrum Joachimu[m] Westphalum Ecclesiae Hamburgensis pastorem (Magdeburg, 1553). Wood, Thomas, A brieff discours of the troubles begonne at Franckford in Germany Anno Domini 1554 (Heidelberg, 1575). Zwingli, Huldrych, Ad Carolum Rom. Imperatorem, Fidei Huldrychi Zuinglii ratio: Eiusdem quoq[ue] ad illustrißimos Germaniae Principes Augustae congregatos Epistola (Zurich: Christoph Froschauer, 1530). Secondary Studies Abray, Lorna Jane, The People’s Reformation: magistrates, clergy, and commons in Strasbourg, 1500–1598 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1985). Arnold, Benjamin, Count and Bishop in Medieval Germany: a study of regional power, 1100–1350 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991). Arnold, Benjamin, Princes and territories in medieval Germany (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). Asch, R.G. and Birke, A.M. (eds), Princes, Patronage, and the Nobility: the court at the beginning of the Modern Age, c.1450–1650 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991). Baker, J. Wayne, ‘Christian Discipline and the Early Reformed Tradition: Calvin and Bullinger’ in Calviniana: ideas and inﬂuence of Jean Calvin, ed. Robert V. Schnucker (Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Essays and Studies, 1988), pp. 107–19. Bartel, Oscar, Jan Łaski: Leben und Werk des polnischen Reformators, trans. Arnold Starke (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1981). Bast, Robert James, Honor your fathers: catechisms and the emergence of a patriarchal ideology in Germany 1400–1600 (Leiden: Koninklijke Brill, 1997).
Bauer, D. Karl, Valèrand Poullain: din kirchengeschichtliches Zeitbild aus der Mitte des sechzehnten Jahrhunderts (Elberfeld: Buchhandlung des Erziehungsvereins, 1927). Benedict, Philip, Christ’s Churches Purely Reformed: a social history of calvinism (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002). Blickle, Peter, Communal Reformation: the quest for salvation in sixteenthcentury Germany, trans. Thomas Dunlap (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, 1992). Blickle, Peter, Die Revolution von 1525 (Munich: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1975). Blickle, Peter, The Revolution of 1525: the German Peasants’ War from a new perspective, (trans.) Thomas A. Brady Jr and H.C. Erik Midelfort (Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins Press, 1981), Boersma, O. and Jelsma A.J. (eds), Unity in Multiformity: the minutes of the coetus of London, 1575, and the consistory minutes of the Italian church of London, 1570–1591 (London: Huguenot Society of Great Britain and Ireland, 1997). Bonney, Richard, The European Dynastic States 1494–1660 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991). Bossy, John, ‘The Social History of Confession in the Age of the Reformation’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, series 5, vol. 25 (1975): 21–38. Brady, Thomas A. Jr., Communities, Politics and Reformation in Early Modern Europe (Leiden: Brill, 1998). Burnett, Amy Nelson, The Yoke of Christ: Martin Bucer and Christian Discipline (Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 1994). Büsser, Fritz, Die Prophezei: Humanismus und Reformation in Zürich (Bern: Verlag Peter Lang, 1994). Cameron, James K., ‘The Cologne Reformation and the Church of Scotland’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 30, no. 1 (January, 1979): 39–64. Collinson, Patrick, ‘The Authorship of A Brieff Discours off the Troubles Begonne at Franckfork’, The Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 9 (April, 1958): 188–208. Collinson, Patrick, ‘The Elizabethan Puritans and the Foreign Reformed Churches in London’, Proceedings of the Huguenot Society of London, 20 (1964): 528–55. Collinson, Patrick, Godly People: essays on English Protestantism and Puritanism (London: Hambledon Press, 1983). Conner, Philip, ‘Huguenot Identities During the Wars of Religion: the churches of Le Mans and Montauban compared’, Journal of Ecclesiastical History, 54/1 (January, 2003): 23–39.
Cottret, Bernard, Terre d’exil: L’Angleterre et ses réfugiés 16 17 siècles (Paris: Aubier, 1985). Cunningham, W., Alien Immigrants to England (2nd edn, London: Cass, 1969). Dalton, Hermann, Johannes a Lasco: His Earlier Life and Labours, trans. Maurice J. Evans (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1886). Danner, Dan, Pilgrimage to Puritanism: history and theology of the Marian Exiles at Geneva, 1555–1560 (New York: Peter Lang, 1999). Dawson, Jane E.A., The Politics of Religion in the Age of Mary, Queen of Scots: the Earl of Argyll and the struggle for Britain and Ireland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002). Decot, Rolf, ‘Confessio Augustana und Reichsverfassung: die Religionsfrage in den Reichstagsverhandlungen des 16. Jahrhunderts’, in Herbert Immenkötter and Gunther Wenz (eds), Im Schatten der Confessio Augustana: die Religionsverhandlungen des Augsburger Reichstages 1530 im historischen Kontext (Münster: Aschendorff, 1997). Denis, Philippe, Les Églises d’Étrangers en Pays Rhénans 1538–1564 (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1984). Denis, Philippe and Rott, Jean, Jean Morély (ca 1524–ca 1594) et l’Utopie d’une Démocratie dans l’Eglise (Geneva: Droz, 1993). Dickens, A.G., The English Reformation (2nd edn, London: B.T. Batsford, 1989). Drews, P., ‘Der Bericht des Myconius über die Visitation des Amtes Tenneberg in März 1526’, Archive for Reformation History, 3 (1905/1906): 1–17. Dykema, Peter A. and Oberman, Heiko A. (eds), Anticlericalism in Late Medieval and Early Modern Europe (Leiden: Brill, 1993). Engammare, Max, ‘Jan Laski’s annotated copy of Erasmus’ New Testament’, in Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator, ed. Christoph Strohm (Tübingen, 2000), pp. 21–34. Estes, James M., Christian Magistrate and State Church: the reforming career of Johannes Brenz (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982). Evans, R.J.W. and Thomas, T.V. (eds), Crown, church and Estates: Central European Politics in the Sixteenth Century (New York: St Martin’s Press, 1991). Fedorowicz, J. K, Bogucka, Maria and Samsonowicz, Henryk (eds), A Republic of Nobles: studies in Polish history to 1864, trans. J.K. Fedorowicz (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982). Fehler, Timothy, ‘Diakonenamt und Armenfürsorge bei a Lasco: Theologischer Impuls und praktische Wirklichkeit’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und
europäischer Reformator (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), pp. 173– 85. Forster, Marc R., The Counter-Reformation in the Villages: religion and reform in the Bishopric of Speyer, 1560–1720 (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992). Fox, Paul, The Reformation in Poland: some social and economic aspects (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press, 1924). Franzen, August, Bischof und Reformation: erzbischof Hermann von Wied in Köln vor der Entscheidung zwischen Reform und Reformation (Münster: Aschendorff, 1971). Frick, David A., Polish Sacred Philology in the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation: chapters in the history of the controversies (1551–1632) (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1989). Fries, Heinrich (ed.), Confessio Augustana: Hindernis oder Hilfe? (Regensburg: Pustet, 1979). Friesen, Abraham, Thomas Muentzer, a Destroyer of the Godless: the making of a sixteenth-century religious revolutionary (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990). Gäbler, Ulrich, Huldrych Zwingli: his life and work, trans. Ruth C.L. Gritsch (Philadelphia, PA: Fortress Press, 1986). Gallagher, Clarence, Church Law and Church Order in Rome and Byzantium: a comparative study (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2002). Ganoczy, Alexandre, Ecclesia Ministrans: dienende Kirche und kirchlicher Dienst bei Calvin (Freiburg am Breisgau: Verlag Herder KG, 1968). Gilchrist, John, ‘Simoniaca Haeresis and the problem of orders from Leo IX to Gratian’, in Canon Law in the Age of Reform 11th–12th Centuries (Aldershot: Ashgate, 1993). Goertz, Hans-Jürgen, Pfaffenhaß und groß Geschrei: die reformatorischen Bewegungen in Deutschland 1517–1529 (Munich: C.H. Beck, 1987). Goodare, Julian, ‘Scotland’, in eds Bob Scribner, Roy Porter and Mikuláš Teich, The Reformation in national context (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp. 95–110. Gordon, Bruce, Clerical Discipline and the Rural Reformation: the synod in Zürich, 1532–1580 (New York: Peter Lang, 1992) Gordon, Bruce (ed.), Protestant History and Identity in Sixteenth-Century Europe, (2 vols, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1996). Grane, Leif, The Augsburg Confession: a commentary, trans. John H. Rasmussen (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1987). Green, Ian, ‘Teaching the Reformation: the clergy as preachers, catechists, authors and teachers’, in C. Scott Dixon and Luise Schorn-Schütte (eds), The Protestant Clergy of Early Modern Europe (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003), pp. 156–75.
Greschat, Martin, ‘Martin Bucer und die Erneuerung der Kirche Europa’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Martin Bucer und das Recht: Beiträge zum internationalen Symposium vom 1. bis 3. März 2001 in der Johannes a Lasco Bibliothek Emden (Geneva: Droz, 2002), pp. 271–83 Hahn, Peter-Michael, Struktur und Funktion des brandenburgischen Adels im 16. Jahrhundert (Berlin: Colloquium Verlag, 1979). Hall, Basil, John à Lasco 1499–1560: a Pole in Reformation England (London: Dr Williams’s Trust, 1971). Hallowell Garrett, Christina, The Marian Exiles: a study in the origins of Elizabethan Puritanism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938). Harrington, Joel F. and Smith, Helmut Walser, ‘Confessionalization, Community, and State Building in Germany, 1555–1870’, The Journal of Modern History, 69 (March 1997): 77–101. Hein, Lorenz, Italienische Protestanten und ihr Einﬂuss auf die Reformation in Polen während der beiden Jahrzehnte vor dem Sandomirer Konsens 1570 (Leiden: Brill, 1974). Helmholz, R.H., Roman Canon Law in Reformation England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990). Hendrix, Scott H., ‘In quest of the vera ecclesia: the crises of late medieval ecclesiology’, Viator, 7 (1976): 347–78. Hendrix, Scott H., ‘We are all Hussites’, Archive for Reformation History, 65 (1974): 134–61. Henschel, Adolf, Johannes Laski, der Reformator der Polen, (Halle: Verein für Reformationsgeschichte, 1890). Higman, Francis M., Piety and the People: religious printing in French 1511–1551 (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1996). Hsia, R. Po-Chia, Social Discipline in the Reformation: Central Europe 1550–1750 (London: Routledge, 1989). Hughes, Andrew, Medieval Manuscripts for Mass and Ofﬁce: a guide to their organization and terminology (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982). Isaac, F. ‘Egidius van der Erve and his English Printed Books’, The Library, 4, no. 12 (1932): 336–52. Janse, Wim, Albert Hardenberg als Theologe: Proﬁl eines Bucer-Schülers, d.1574 (Leiden: Brill, 1994). Jürgens, Henning P., Johannes a Lasco in Ostfriesland: der Werdegang eines europäischen Reformators (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2002). Kaltwasser, Franz Georg and Raabe, Paul (eds), Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des XVI. Jahrhunderts (22 vols, Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1983). Karant-Nunn, Susan, The reformation of ritual: An interpretation of early modern Germany (London: Routledge, 1997).
Kingdon, Robert M., ‘Calvin and “Presbytery”: The Geneva Company of Pastors’, Paciﬁc Theological Review, 18 (1985): 43–55. Kingdon, Robert M., Geneva and the Consolidation of the French Protestant Movement 1564–1572: a contribution to the history of Congregationalism, Presbyterianism, and Calvinist Resistance Theory (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1967). Kingdon, Robert M., ‘Peter Martyr Vermigli and the marks of the true church’, in F.F. Church and T. George (eds), Continuity and Discontinuity in Church History: essays presented to George Huntston Williams (Leiden: Brill, 1979). Knappen, M.M., Tudor Puritanism (Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 1939). Kneifel, Eduard, Geschichte der Evangelisch-Augsburgischen Kirche in Polen (Niedermarschacht, 1962). Koch, H.W., A History of Prussia (New York: Longman, 1978). Kohler, Alfred, Antihabsburgische Politik in der Epoche Karls V: die reichsständische Opposition gegen die Wahl Ferdinands I. zum römischen König und gegen die Anerkenung seines Königstums 1524– 1534, (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982). Kohler, Alfred, Karl V. 1500–1558: eine Biographie (Munich: Beck, 1999). Krasinski, Walerjan Skorbohaty, Geschichte des Ursprungs, Fortschritts und Verfalls der Reformation in Polen, trans. Wilhelm Adolf Lindau (Leipzig: J.C. Hinrich, 1841). Kretschmar, Georg, ‘Die Bedeutung der Confessio Augustana als verbindliche Bekenntnisschrift der Evangelisch-Lutherischen Kirche’, in Heinrich Fries (ed.), Confessio Augustana: Hindernis oder Hilfe? (Regensburg: Pustet, 1979). Leaver, Robin, ‘Goostly psalmes and spirituall songes’: English and Dutch metrical psalms from Coverdale to Utenhove 1535–1566 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991). Leaver, Robin,‘A Penitential Hymn from the English Exile Congregation in Emden, 1555’, The Hymn, 41, no. 1 (1990): 15–18. Van Lieburg, F.A., De reformatorische profetie in de Nederlandse traditie (Apeldorn: Willem de Zwijgerstichting, 2001). Lienhard, Marc, Un temps, une ville, une Réforme. La Reformation à Strasbourg (Geneva: Labor et ﬁdes, 1983). Lindeboom, J, Austin Friars: History of the Dutch Reformed Church in London 1550–1950, trans. D. de Iongh (The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 1950). Loades, David (ed.), John Foxe and the English Reformation (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1997).
Lohff, Wenzel, ‘Die Bedeutung der Augsburgischen Konfession für die Lutherische Kirche und ihr Verhältnis zur römisch-katholischen Kirche’, in Harding Meyer and Heinz Schütte (eds), Confessio Augustana Bekenntnis des einen Glaubens: gemeinsame Untersuchung lutherischer und katholischer Theologen (Paderborn: Verlag Bonifacius-Druckerei, 1980). MacCulloch, Diarmaid, ‘The importance of Jan Laski’, in Strohm, Christoph (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000). MacCulloch, Diarmaid, Reformation: Europe’s House Divided 1490– 1700 (London: Allen Lane, 2003). MacCulloch, Diarmaid, Thomas Cranmer: a life (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996). MacCulloch, Diarmaid, Tudor Church Militant: Edward VI and the Protestant Reformation (London: Allen Lane, 1999). Mason, Rodger A. (ed.), John Knox and the British Reformations (Aldershot: Ashgate 1998). McDonnell, Killian, John Calvin, the Church, and the Eucharist (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1967). McGrath, Patrick, Papists and Puritans Under Elizabeth I (New York: Walker, 1967). McKee, Elsie Ann, John Calvin on the Diaconate and Liturgical Almsgiving (Geneva: Droz, 1984). McLaughlin, R. Emmet, ‘The Making of the Protestant Pastor: the theological foundations of a clerical estate’, in C. Scott Dixon and Luise Schorn-Schütte (eds), The Protestant Clergy of Early Modern Europe (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003). McNeill, John T., ‘The Church in Sixteenth-Century Reformed Theology’, in Richard C. Gamble (ed.), Calvin’s Ecclesiology: Sacraments and Deacons (New York and London: Garland Publishing Inc., 1992). Monter, E. William, ‘The consistory of Geneva, 1559–1569’, Humanisme et Renaissance, 38 (1976): 467–84. Mout, Nicolette, ‘Erasmianischer Humanismus und reformierter Protestantismus zur Zeit a Lascos’, in Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator, ed. Christoph Strohm (Tübingen, 2000), pp. 283–98. Naphy, William G., Calvin and the consolidation of the Genevan Reformation (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1994). Nischan, Bodo, Lutherans and Calvinists in the Age of Confessionalism (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1999). Nischan, Bodo, Prince, People, and Confession: The Second Reformation in Brandenburg (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1994).
Norwood, Frederick A., ‘The London Dutch Refugees in Search of a Home, 1553–1554’, The American Historical Review, 58, no. 1 (October, 1952): 64–72. Oberman, Heiko A., Luther: man between God and the devil, trans. Eileen Walliser-Schwarzbart (2nd edn, New York, 1992), Oberman, Heiko A., Werden und Wertung der Reformation: vom Wegestreit zum Glaubenskampf (Tübingen, Mohr, 1979). Ortmann, Volkmar, Reformation und Einheit der Kirche: Martin Bucers Einigungsbemühungen bei den Religionsgesprächen in Leipzig, Hagenau, Worms und Regensburg 1539–1541 (Mainz: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 2001). Owen, Dorothy M., The Medieval Canon Law: Teaching, literature and transmission (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990). Ozment, Steven, The Reformation in the Cities (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1975). Pettegree, Andrew, Emden and the Dutch Revolt: exile and the development of Reformed Protestantism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992). Pettegree, Andrew, Foreign Protestant Communities in Sixteenth-Century London (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986). Pettegree, Andrew, ‘The London exile community and the second sacramentarian controversy, 1553–1560’, Archive for Reformation History, 78 (1987): 223–51. Pettegree, Andrew, Marian Protestantism: six studies (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1996). Pettegree, Andrew, Reformation and the Culture of Persuasion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005). Pixton, Paul B, The German Episcopacy and the Implementation of the Decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council 1216–1245: watchmen on the tower (Leiden: Brill, 1995). Potter, George Richard, Zwingli (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1976). Preuss, James S., Carlstadt’s Ordinaciones and Luther’s Liberty: a study of the Wittenberg Movement 1521–1522 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1974). Reinhard, Wolfgang, ‘Gegenreformation als Modernisierung? Prolegomena zu einer Theorie des konfessionellen Zeitalters’, Archive for Reformation History, 68 (1977): 226–51. Ritchie, Pamela E., Mary of Guise in Scotland, 1548–1560: a political career (East Linton: Tuckwell Press, 2002). Rodgers, Dirk W., John à Lasco in England (New York: Peter Lang, 1996). Rose, William J., The Protestant Churches in Poland (London: Polish Research Center, 1944).
Rublack, Hans-Christoph, Eine bürgerliche Reformation: Nördlingen (Gütersloh: G. Mohn, 1982). Schilling, Heinz, Civic Calvinism in Northwestern Germany and the Netherlands: sixteenth to nineteenth centuries (Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1991). Schilling, Heinz, Religion, Political Culture and the Emergence of Early Modern Society: essays in German and Dutch history (Leiden: Brill, 1992). Schindling, Anton and Ziegler, Walter (eds), Die Territorien des Reichs im Zeitalter der Reformation und Konfessionalisierung: Land und Konfession 1500–1650 (Münster: Aschendorff, 1990). Schmidt, Herman and Power, David, Concilium, Theology in the Age of Renewal: the expression and experience of faith in worship (London: Concilium, 1973). Schmidt, Heinrich, Politische Geschichte Ostfrieslands (Leer: Deichacht Krummhoern, 1975). Schmidt, Roderich, ‘Pommern, Cammin’, in Die Territorien des Reichs im Zeitalter der Reformation und Konfessionalisierung: Land und Konfession 1500–1650, eds Anton Schindling and Walter Ziegler (Münster: Aschendorff, 1990), vol. 2. Schramm, Gottfried, Der polnische Adel und die Reformation 1548–1607 (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1965). Scribner, Bob, Porter, Roy and Teich, Mikuláš (eds), The Reformation in national context (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994). Scribner, R.W., Popular Culture and Popular Movements in Reformation Germany (London: Hambledon Press, 1987). Séguenny, André ed., Bibliotheca Dissidentum: Répertoire des nonconformistes religieux des seizième et dix-septième siècles (10 vols, Baden-Baden: Editions Valentin Koerner, 1987). Sider, Ronald, Andreas Bodenstein von Karlstadt: the development of his thought 1517–1525 (Leiden: Brill, 1974). Sprengler-Ruppenthal, Annaliese, Mysterium und Riten nach der Londoner Kirchenordnung der Niederländer (Cologne: Böhlau, 1967). Springer, Michael, ‘Church building and the Forma ac ratio: the inﬂuence of John a Lasco’s ordinance in sixteenth-century Europe’ (unpublished PhD diss., St Andrews, 2004). Steinmetz, David, Calvin in Context (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995). Stephens, Peter, Zwingli: Einführung in sein Denken (Zurich: Theologischer Verlag, 1992). Stephens, William Peter, The Theology of Huldrych Zwingli (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986).
Strauss, Gerald, Law, Resistance, and the State: the opposition to Roman Law in Reformation Germany (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1986). Strauss, Gerald, Nuremberg in the Sixteenth Century: city politics and life between Middle Ages and Modern Times (2nd edn, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1976). Strauss, Gerald, Pre-Reformation Germany (London: Macmillan, 1972). Strohm, Christoph (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000). Strohm, Christoph (ed.), Martin Bucer und das Recht: Beiträge zum internationalen Symposium vom 1. bis 3. März 2001 in der Johannes a Lasco Bibliothek Emden (Geneva: Droz, 2002). Sunshine, Glenn S., Reforming French Protestantism: the development of Huguenot ecclesiastical institutions, 1557–1572 (Kirksville, MO: Truman State University Press, 2003). Swanson, R.N., ‘Before the Protestant Clergy: the construction and deconstruction of Medieval Priesthood’, in C. Scott Dixon and Luise Schorn-Schütte (eds), The Protestant Clergy of Early Modern Europe (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003). Swanson, Robert, Religion and Devotion in Europe c. 1215–c. 1515 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995). Tazbir, Janusz, ‘Poland’, in The Reformation in national context, eds. Bob Scribner et al. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994). Tazbir, Janusz, “Reformation and Toleration in Poland in the 16th Century”, trans. Bogusław Suchodolski, in Poland: the land of Copernicus, ed. Bogdan Suchodolski (Warsaw: The Polish Academy of Sciences Press, 1973), pp. 75–95. Tierney, Brian, Church Law and Constitutional Thought in the Middle Ages (London: Variorum, 1979). Todd, Margo, The Culture of Protestantism in Early Modern Scotland (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002). Usher, Brett, ‘“In a Time of Persecution”: new light on the secret Protestant congregation in Marian London’, in David Loades (ed.), John Foxe and the English Reformation (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 1997), pp. 233–51. Van Engen, John, ‘The Church in the Fifteenth Century’, in Handbook of European History 1400–1600: Late Middle Ages, Renaissance and Reformation, eds. Thomas A. Brady Jr., Heiko Oberman and James D. Tracy (Leiden: Brill, 1994). van’t Spijker, Willem, ‘Die Bedeutung des Kölner Reformationsversuchs’, in Christoph Strohm (ed.), Johannes a Lasco (1499–1560): Polnischer
Baron, Humanist und europäischer Reformator (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000). Volk, Ernst, Johannes Bugenhagen: der Reformator im Norden (Gross Oesingen: Verlag der Lutherischen Buchhandlung Harms, 1999). Vree, Jaspar, ‘The editions of John a Lasco’s works, especially the Opera Omnia edition by Abraham Kuyper, in their historical context’, Dutch Review of Church History, 80, no. 3 (2000): 309–26. Weerda, Jan Remmers, Der Emder Kirchenrat und seine Gemeinde: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte reformierter Kirchenordnung in Deutschland, ihrer Grundsätze und ihrer Gestaltung (2nd edn, Wuppertal: Foedus Verlag, 2000). Williams, George Huntston, ‘The Polish-Lithuanian Calvin during the Superintendency of John Laski, 1556–60’, in B.A. Gerrish (ed.), Reformatio Perennis: essays on Calvin and the Reformation in honor of Ford Lewis Battles (Pittsburgh, PA: Pickwick Press, 1981). Williams, George Huntston, The Radical Reformation (3rd edn, Kirksville, MO: Sixteenth Century Journal Publishers, 1992). Winroth, Anders, The Making of Gratian’s Decretum (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). Witte, John Jr., Law and Protestantism: the legal teachings of the Lutheran Reformation (Cambridge: Cambridge Universtiy Press, 2002). Wriedt, Markus, ‘Luthers Gebrauch der Bischofstitulatur in seinen Briefen’, in Martin Brecht (ed.), Martin Luther und das Bischofsamt (Stuttgart: Calwer, 1990). Zeeden, Ernst Walter, Konfessionsbildung: Studien zur Reformation, Gegenreformation und katholischen Reform (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1985). Zeeden, Ernst Walter and Lang, Peter Thaddäus (eds), Kirche und Visitation: Beiträge zur Erforschung des frühneuzeitlichen Visitationswesens in Europa (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1984). Zoepﬂ, Friedrich, Das Bistum Augsburg und seine Bischöfe im Mittelalter (Munich: Schnell und Steiner, 1955). Zophy, Jonathan, Patriarchal Politics and Christoph Kress (1484–1535) of Nuremberg (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press, 1992).
This page intentionally left blank
Index admonitions 95–101, 104, 107–8, 109–10, 138, 142 Aepinus, John 34–5, 44 Agendas 28 Agricola, Stephan 18–19 Albrecht of Prussia (duke) 17, 25–6, 44 alms 24–5, 35, 68–70, 77–9, 89–90, 93, 95, 126, 139 Alting, Menso 115–16 Anabaptists 38–9, 45, 48–9, 82, 84, 93, 96–7, 103, 119 anti-Trinitarians 137–8 Augsburg Confession (1530) 16, 19–23, 36–7, 56, 60, 63, 66 Augsburg Interim 5, 44 Austin Friars 44, 46, 50 Bale, John 124 Banc, Arnaud 106 bann 17, 60, 101–2, 105, 139 baptism 8, 18–19, 25–6, 31, 35–6, 46, 48, 53, 78, 80, 82, 83–5, 91, 150 Bartel, Oscar 7 Benedict, Philip 7 Berge, Nicholas van der, see Hill, Nicholas Berne 69 Beyer, Hartmann 118 Black Rubric 89 Blesdijk, Nicolas 38–9 Bodenstein, Andreas von Karlstadt 13–14 Book of Common Prayer (1549, 1552) 124–5, 127–8, 150 Book of Concord (1580) 37 Brandenburg-Nuremberg 31, 36 Bremen 44, 51, 112, 133 Brenz, Johannes 1, 18, 33, 134, 151 Broucker, Antonius de 109–10 Bucer, Martin 1, 4, 8, 13, 16, 18-19, 20–21, 32, 38, 42, 60, 64, 69–70, 95–7, 101, 133, 149, see also Einfältiges Bedencken
Bugenhagen, Johannes 1, 33 Bullinger, Heinrich 11, 38, 42, 45–7, 49, 50–52, 88, 133–4 burial 26–7, 39, 89, 92–3 Calvin, John 8, 11, 17, 60, 63–7, 71–3, 85–6, 89, 95, 97, 101–2, 115, 121, 126, 129–30, 133, 134–5, 139, 149, 151 Ecclesiastical Ordinances (1541) 65–6, 69, 71 Institutes 8, 63, 89 canon law 30–31 Canterbury 42 Capito, Wolfgang 13, 20–21 catechism 1, 4, 49, 80–81, 113, 129, 135 Cerny, John 135 Charles V (emperor) 19–20, 44 Christian III (king of Denmark) 112 Church, deﬁnition of 15–17, 37, 59–61 marks of 17, 47–8, 59–61, 130, 132, 144 membership in 82–3, 87 Clerc, Francis de 72 clerical authority 64–5, 67, 72, 141–3 coetus, see ministers, assemblies Cologne 4, 28, 36, 38, 96, 149 community chest 14, 25–6, 34–5, 37 Company of Pastors 64, 66-7, 115, 141 consistory 72, 90, 96, 98–9, 102, 104–7, 109, 116, 139, 141, 144, 146 cooption 71, 116, 123, 129, 136, 141–2 Cox, Richard 124–6 ‘Order of common prayer’ (1555) 125–6, 127–8 Cranmer, Thomas 43, 45, 46, 88–9, 149 Ctematius, Gellius 52, 54, 117 Dalton, Hermann 6–7
Dathenus, Peter 108–9 deacons, see ministers, deacons Delenus, Gualter 45 diets, imperial 19-21, 39, 63 discipline 4, 5, 27, 34–5, 38–9, 41, 45, 49–50, 52, 54, 57–62, 65, 68, 74, 77–8, 84, 87, 89, 93, 95–110, 113–14, 116, 118, 120–21, 123, 126, 130, 132, 138–44, 146–7, 149, 151 Douglas, John 144 Dowley, John 106–7 East Frisia 1, 3–5, 9, 27, 38–9, 44, 51–2, 64, 67, 96, 112–16, 151 Eberhard II (archbishop of Salzburg) 29 ecclesiastical discipline, see discipline Eck, Johannes 20–21 Edward I (king of England) 5, 8, 41, 44, 46, 48, 51-2, 56–8, 75, 111, 128, 141, 150 Einfältiges Bedencken (1543) 38, 96 Einsiedel, Hugo von 24 Eisenach 14, 63 elders, see ministers, elders Elizabeth I (queen of England) 107, 132, 150, 152 Emden 1, 4, 8, 44, 51–4, 103, 106–107, 111–19, 123, 128, 132, 151–2 civic ordinance (1594) 114–15 Polizeiordnung (1545) 27 territorial ordinance (1564) 114 Emmius, Ubbo 115 Erasmus, Desiderius 2–3, 149 Erfurt 28 Erve, Gellius van der, see Ctematius, Gellius Eucharist 8, 13, 19, 20, 22, 25–9, 31, 46–8, 50, 54, 56–7, 69, 78, 81–2, 85–90, 103–6, 109, 111–13, 117–18, 120-21, 126, 131–4, 136, 138–9, 145-6, 149–51 seated rite 86, 88–9, 120, 131, 145–7, 151 Eusumanus, Christopher 112 excommunication 27, 30, 97, 99, 100–105, 108–10, 114, 120, 126, 131, 136, 138, 142, 145–6, 149, 152
Fagius, Paul 43 fasting 14, 39, 89–90, 93, 123, 130 Ferdinand of Denmark (king) 17, 21 First Book of Discipline (1561) 44, 145–6 Form of prayers (1556) 107, 127, 128–32, 144, 150 Frankenthal 108–9, 121 Frankfurt 1, 3, 5, 28, 51–4, 71–2, 90–91, 105–11, 118–28, 131–2, 147, 151 Frederick the Wise (elector of Saxony) 13, 24 Geneva 52, 64, 66–7, 71, 75, 90–91, 107, 111, 125–6, 128–9, 131–2, 140–41, 144, 147 Gilby, Anthony 127 Glaubourg, Jean de 106, 125 Gonesius, Peter 137 Goodman, Christopher 127 Gotha 18, 29, 63 Grand, Augustin le 72, 106 Gravesend 51, 111 Grebel, Conrad 13 Groningen 8, 115 Hadden, James 124 Hadeln 26–7 Hamburg 33, 44, 63, 112, 133 Hardenberg, Albert 3, 4, 38, 42, 44, 51, 112, 135 Herman, Jasper 105 Hesse 17, 32, 37, 63, 67 Heyden, Gaspar van der 109, 121 Hill, Nicholas 52–3, 117 Holagen, Anne 104–5 Hooper, John 88 Horne, Robert 72 Hugo of Hohenlandenburg (bishop of Constance) 29 Humbracht, Conrad 106 Huysmannus, Bartholomeaus 113 images, removal of 4, 13–14, 36 Jonas, Justus 18–19 Joris, David 38–9 Jungen, Daniel zum 106 Kant, Caspar 25, 28 Ketelhut, Christian 33
Kirchenrat, see consistory Knox, John 88–9, 124-5, 127, 131, 144 Königsberg 44 Kureke, Johannes 33 Kuyper, Abraham 6 laity 5, 13, 37, 70–73, 80–83, 90, 92, 95, 101, 103–5, 110, 116, 120, 122–3, 129–30, 136, 139, 141, 143, 146, 149, 152 Lasco, John a early career 4–5 conversion 3–4 in Cologne 4–5, 96–7 on discipline 100 disputation with Johannes Brenz 134 in Emden 1, 4, 44, 51–4, 112–13, 115, 117 in England 1, 5, 43, 44–51 in Frankfurt 1, 3, 5, 52, 54 marriage 4 in Poland 64, 108, 135–8, printing the Forma ac ratio 5–6, 52–4 purchases Erasmus’s library 2 Writings Brevis et dilucida (1552) 47, 49 Compendium doctrinae (1551) 1, 47–9, 59-60 Toute la forme & maniere du Ministere Ecclesiastique (1556) 54, 117 Leipzig 21, 36 Leisnig 25 Lever, Thomas 124-5 Le Mans 143 Little Poland, see Poland Lord’s Supper, see Eucharist Lübeck 63, 112 Luther, Martin 3-4, 13–16, 18–19, 28, 30–31, 34, 36–7, 56, 62-3, 152 magistrates, spiritual authority 24–5, 74 Mainz 3, 28–9 Marbach, John 43, Marburg Colloquy 18–19, 22, 56 Marburg Articles 18–19 Marburg University 37 Marian exiles 8, 131–2, 107–8, 110,
123–6, 128 Marie la Nove Chapel 127 marriage 26-7, 39, 63, 78, 89, 91 Mary I 5, 9, 51, 107, 150, 152 mass, abolition of 13–14, 22, 26, 36, 54 Mecklenburg 29–30, 36 Melanchthon, Philip 3, 16, 18–22, 29, 34, 38, 63, 136 Michaelis, Jacob 113 Micron, Marten 5, 45–6, 49, 58, 111–12, 133 Christlicke Ordinancien (1554) 5–6, 8, 49–50, 113 ministers 47, 59, 64–5 assemblies 4, 66, 68, 73–4 deacons 4, 33, 58, 62, 64, 68–73, 75, 78, 82, 86–9, 109, 113–14, 116, 120–23, 126–7, 129, 139, 143–6, 149 laity’s duties towards 68-9 elders 58, 62, 64–73, 75, 82, 86–7, 90–92, 98, 100–109, 114, 116, 120, 122–3, 126–7, 129, 135–6, 138–9, 141–3, 145, 149 election of 45, 70–75 preachers of the Word 29–30, 32–5, 37–8, 45, 59, 64–8, 77 superintendents 37–9, 62–4, 66–7, 75 Morély, Jean 140–44 and synods 143 Traicté de la discipline & police Chrestienne (1562) 141–3 Münster 28–9 Müntzer, Thomas 13–15, 28 Articuli per fraters minores (1519) 14–15 Protestation oder Erbietung (1524) 15 Musculus, Wolfgang 42 Myconius, Friedrich 18, 29 Nordlingen 25, 27–8 Normandie, Laurent de 72 Nuremberg 24-5, 27–8 Ochino, Bernardino 42 Oecolampadius, Johannes 13, 18–19, 133 Oldenburg, Anna von (countess of East Frisia) 4, 27, 39, 44, 112
ordinances (ecclesiastical ordinances) 14, 23–38, 41, 149, 151 Osiander, Andreas 18–19 Passau 28 Peasant’s War 14–15, 32–3 Pérez, Jan de Pineda 72 Perussel, Francis 42, 45, 72, 105, 120 Peters, Jacob 104 Philip of Hesse (landgrave) 15, 17, 37 Pinczow 137, 139 Poix, Jean de (seigneur de Séchelles) 72 Poland 1, 7, 64, 108, 134–40 Polizeiordnungen (police orders) 23, 27, 96 Pommerania 28, 30, 32–3, 36 Ponet, John 124 poor relief, see community chest Poullain, Valerand 50, 71–3, 105, 118–21, 124, 129–32 Doctrine de la penitence publique (1552) 50 Liturgia sacra (1554) 71, 105, 118-20 L’ordre des priers et ministere ecclesiastique (1552) 50 preachers of the Word, see ministers, preachers of the Word preaching, see sermons presbytery 64, 67 Prophezei (prophecy) 69, 78, 81–2, 93, 130, 142–3, 145–7, 149, 151
Schwäbisch Hall 33 Scory, John 107, 123–4 Scotland 8, 11, 111, 144–6, 149, 152 seated communion, see Eucharist, seated rite Seburne, Christopher 127 Second Book of Discipline (1578) 146 seniors, see ministers, elders sermons 25, 33, 77, 80, 90–91, 93 Sigismund I (king of Poland) 2 Sigismund August (king of Poland) 54, 56 Simons, Menno 38–9 sola scriptura 14, 59, 80 Spottiswoode, John 144 Stancaro, Francis 137, 140 Staunton, John 127 Stralsund 33–5 Strangers’ Church (London) 1, 5, 41–50, 56–8, 149–50 Strassburg 20, 32, 50, 66–7, 75, 111, 124 Sturm, Jakob 18 Suawe, Peter 33 superintendent, see ministers, superintendent Sutton, Edmond 123 Tenneburg 29 Tetrapolitan Confession 20 Timann, Johannes 133–4 transubstantiation 20, 85, 136 Trier 29
Quesnoy, Eustache du 72 Ridley, Nicholas (bishop of London) 46 Riverius, John 113 Rostock 112 Row, John 144 Sacramentarian controversy 132–4, 152 sacraments 16–17, 20, 22, 25–7, 60–61, 63, 65–6, 77-8, 82–9, 93, 130–32, 144 St Augustine 15 St Cyprian 73 St Matthew 91, 95, 98–9 St Paul 16, 65, 67, 81, 99, 102, 136 Schmalkaldic League 21, 26, 43, 152 Schroer, Leutke 104
Ulm 28 universal Church 3, 13, 15–17, 37 Lasco on 39, 42, 56–8, 83, 128, 149, 152 see also marks of the Church) Utenhove, Jan 49, 88, 117 Val, Peter du 117 Vauville, Richard 45 Vermigli, Peter Martyr 60–61, 102 Common Places (1583) 60–61, 102 visitations, parish 23, 27, 29, 95 visitations, the sick 39, 89, 91–2, 93 Walet, Nicholas 72 Wesel 52, 111, 117 Westminster Confession 146 Westphal, Joachim 133–4, 147, 151
White Ladies Chapel 118, 124 Wied, Hermann von (archbishop of Cologne) 4, 38, 96 Williams, William 123, 127 Winram, John 144 Wismar 112 Wittenberg 3, 36, 71 unrest in 13–15 Karlstadt’s articles (1521) 14, 23–5, 27, 31, 36 Wittingham, William 123–5, 127, 132 Wlodzislaw 137 Wood, Thomas 123 Worms 4, 21, 28, 36, 38
Wormser Buch (1540) 16 worship services 14, 25–6, 42, 45, 57, 77–81 Xions 138 Young, Thomas 107, 123 Zurich 17, 20, 38, 49, 52, 69, 81, 102, 111, 124 Zwingli, Huldrych 4, 8, 13, 16, 18–21, 60, 81, 85-6, 88, 95, 102, 121, 133, 149, 151
This page intentionally left blank
St Andrews Studies in Reformation History Editorial Board: Bruce Gordon, Andrew Pettegree and Roger Mason, St Andrews Reformation Studies Institute, Amy Nelson Burnett, University of Nebraska at Lincoln, Euan Cameron, University of Newcastle upon Tyne and Kaspar von Greyerz, University of Basel The Shaping of a Community: The Rise and Reformation of the English Parish c. 1400–1560 Beat Kümin Seminary or University? The Genevan Academy and Reformed Higher Education, 1560–1620 Karin Maag Marian Protestantism: Six Studies Andrew Pettegree Protestant History and Identity in Sixteenth-Century Europe (2 volumes) edited by Bruce Gordon Antifraternalism and Anticlericalism in the German Reformation: Johann Eberlin von Günzburg and the Campaign against the Friars Geoffrey Dipple Reformations Old and New: Essays on the Socio-Economic Impact of Religious Change c. 1470–1630 edited by Beat Kümin Piety and the People: Religious Printing in French, 1511–1551 Francis M. Higman The Reformation in Eastern and Central Europe edited by Karin Maag John Foxe and the English Reformation edited by David Loades The Reformation and the Book Jean-François Gilmont, edited and translated by Karin Maag The Magniﬁcent Ride: The First Reformation in Hussite Bohemia Thomas A. Fudge
Kepler’s Tübingen: Stimulus to a Theological Mathematics Charlotte Methuen ‘Practical Divinity’: The Works and Life of Revd Richard Greenham Kenneth L. Parker and Eric J. Carlson Belief and Practice in Reformation England: A Tribute to Patrick Collinson by his Students edited by Susan Wabuda and Caroline Litzenberger Frontiers of the Reformation: Dissidence and Orthodoxy in Sixteenth-Century Europe Auke Jelsma The Jacobean Kirk, 1567–1625: Sovereignty, Polity and Liturgy Alan R. MacDonald John Knox and the British Reformations edited by Roger A. Mason The Education of a Christian Society: Humanism and the Reformation in Britain and the Netherlands edited by N. Scott Amos, Andrew Pettegree and Henk van Nierop Tudor Histories of the English Reformations, 1530–83 Thomas Betteridge Poor Relief and Protestantism: The Evolution of Social Welfare in Sixteenth-Century Emden Timothy G. Fehler Radical Reformation Studies: Essays presented to James M. Stayer edited by Werner O. Packull and Geoffrey L. Dipple Clerical Marriage and the English Reformation: Precedent Policy and Practice Helen L. Parish Penitence in the Age of Reformations edited by Katharine Jackson Lualdi and Anne T. Thayer The Faith and Fortunes of France’s Huguenots, 1600–85 Philip Benedict
Christianity and Community in the West:Essays for John Bossy edited by Simon Ditchﬁeld Reformation, Politics and Polemics: The Growth of Protestantism in East Anglian Market Towns, 1500–1610 John Craig The Sixteenth-Century French Religious Book edited by Andrew Pettegree, Paul Nelles and Philip Conner Music as Propaganda in the German Reformation Rebecca Wagner Oettinger John Foxe and his World edited by Christopher Highley and John N. King Confessional Identity in East-Central Europe edited by Maria Crăciun, Ovidiu Ghitta and Graeme Murdock The Bible in the Renaissance: Essays on Biblical Commentary and Translation in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries edited by Richard Grifﬁths Obedient Heretics: Mennonite Identities in Lutheran Hamburg and Altona during the Confessional Age Michael D. Driedger The Construction of Martyrdom in the English Catholic Community, 1535–1603 Anne Dillon Baptism and Spiritual Kinship in Early Modern England Will Coster Usury, Interest and the Reformation Eric Kerridge The Correspondence of Reginald Pole: 1. A Calendar, 1518–1546: Beginnings to Legate of Viterbo Thomas F. Mayer Self-Defence and Religious Strife in Early Modern Europe: England and Germany, 1530–1680 Robert von Friedeburg
Hatred in Print: Catholic Propaganda and Protestant Identity during the French Wars of Religion Luc Racaut Penitence, Preaching and the Coming of the Reformation Anne T. Thayer Huguenot Heartland: Montauban and Southern French Calvinism during the French Wars of Religion Philip Conner Charity and Lay Piety in Reformation London, 1500–1620 Claire S. Schen The British Union: A Critical Edition and Translation of David Hume of Godscroft’s De Unione Insulae Britannicae edited by Paul J. McGinnis and Arthur H. Williamson Reforming the Scottish Church: John Winram (c. 1492–1582) and the Example of Fife Linda J. Dunbar Cultures of Communication from Reformation to Enlightenment: Constructing Publics in the Early Modern German Lands James Van Horn Melton Sebastian Castellio, 1515-1563: Humanist and Defender of Religious Toleration in a Confessional Age Hans R. Guggisberg translated and edited by Bruce Gordon The Front-Runner of the Catholic Reformation: The Life and Works of Johann von Staupitz Franz Posset The Correspondence of Reginald Pole: Volume 2. A Calendar, 1547–1554: A Power in Rome Thomas F. Mayer William of Orange and the Revolt of the Netherlands, 1572–1584 K.W. Swart, translated J.C. Grayson The Italian Reformers and the Zurich Church, c.1540–1620 Mark Taplin
William Cecil and Episcopacy, 1559–1577 Brett Usher A Dialogue on the Law of Kingship among the Scots A Critical Edition and Translation of George Buchanan’s De Jure Regni Apud Scotos Dialogus Roger A. Mason and Martin S. Smith Music and Religious Identity in CounterReformation Augsburg, 1580–1630 Alexander J. Fisher The Correspondence of Reginald Pole Volume 3. A Calendar, 1555–1558: Restoring the English Church Thomas F. Mayer Women, Sex and Marriage in Early Modern Venice Daniela Hacke Infant Baptism in Reformation Geneva The Shaping of a Community, 1536–1564 Karen E. Spierling Moderate Voices in the European Reformation Edited by Luc Racaut and Alec Ryrie Piety and Family in Early Modern Europe Essays in Honour of Steven Ozment Edited by Marc R. Forster and Benjamin J. Kaplan Religious Identities in Henry VIII’s England Peter Marshall Adaptations of Calvinism in Reformation Europe Essays in Honour of Brian G. Armstrong Edited by Mack P. Holt John Jewel and the English National Church The Dilemmas of an Erastian Reformer Gary W. Jenkins Catholic Activism in South-West France, 1540–1570 Kevin Gould
Idols in the Age of Art Objects, Devotions and the Early Modern World Edited by Michael W. Cole and Rebecca E. Zorach Local Politics in the French Wars of Religion The Towns of Champagne, the Duc de Guise, and the Catholic League, 1560–95 Mark W. Konnert Enforcing Reformation in Ireland and Scotland, 1550–1700 edited by Elizabethanne Boran and Crawford Gribben Philip Melanchthon and the English Reformation John Schoﬁeld Reforming the Art of Dying The ars moriendi in the German Reformation (1519–1528) Austra Reinis Catholic Belief and Survival in Late Sixteenth-Century Vienna The Case of Georg Eder (1523–87) Elaine Fulton