Diarmaid MacCulloch's The Reformation

It is striking to me, the relation between Church and State. From the 4th century until the Reformation in the 16th century, there had been but one relationship in the West, that between the Catholic Church and the various empires. The two were intimately intertwined with each other; at times they were hard to distinguish. Particular families would dominate a bishopric or monastery. Even the Chair of Peter proved not to be immune from such socio-poltical invasion and corruption. At other times it seemed that the Church dominated the secular: Popes would crown kings, divide territory (e.g., the Americas), ride into battle even! The ancient earthly kingdom of Israel seemed to be alive and well in the Medieval Ages.

It is interesting that the Reformation movements, largely, did not seek to overthrow this relationship, that is, to do away with it. In fact, among the magisterial Reformers, it appears (thus far) that Martin Luther was the only one to emphasize the seperation of Church and State, even if later Lutheranism did not. Aside from Luther, it appears that the Anabaptists and other radicals such as the Mennonites were the ones to stress this seperation, although this cannot even be said of all the radicals!

The Reformation movements gave the secular rulers Christian alternatives to Rome. Once a ruler decided in favor of a particular Reform movement, there was simply nothing that Rome could do about it; she was forced, in other words, to embrace a co-existing version of Christianity. The explosion of ecclesial options, however, had tremendous theological implications. To proclaim Rome to be wrong was one thing, but to be given the opportunity by a ruler to actually establish a Reformed Church, which entailed producing a reformed theological system of beliefs, was quite another. In some cases, some Reform movements flat-out rejected the triune nature of God and the divinity of Jesus! Even Scripture was not immune to the Reform, for one one occassion Calvin had to fight for the canonicity of the Song of Songs! Issues such as Predestination and Infant Baptism could prove to be a deadly battle, literally. Magisterial Reformers were developing important aspects of their theology as time went and the ramifications of the Reformation unfolded. For instance, MacCulloch says that Luther continued to believe in Purgatory until the 1530's. In the case of Calvin, MacCulloch states that Predestination only gradually became an important aspect of his theology. MacCulloch notes that Zwingli somewhat changed his position on the Eucharist toward the end of his life.

The Reformation movements won their opportunities, but establishing the socio-political reality of their cause was quite an adventure, to say the least.

It is fascinating to compare and contrast the Reformation movements of the Protestants with the reformation movements within the existing Catholic Church. The pre-Reformation lay movements became much more important and useful in light of the Reformation. Saints were raised up in this time of chaos, such as Ignatius of Loyola, Teresa of Avila and John of the Cross. Even more fascinating for me is to compare the "conversion experiences" of both Luther and Ignatius, and Luther and Erasmus. They both saw what Luther saw, but they reacted very differently. Why? On a somewhat different note, having read Teresa of Avila's Interior Castle, how is it that she could have such an amazing view of grace and the Christian life, and Luther such a wretched and hopeless works-righteousness view?

Lest the odds seem against Luther, it should be said that in comparing and contrasting these things, one vital thing that is revealed is that theology and doctrine were of immense importance for Luther, and that this, seemingly, could not be said about Ignatius, Teresa or John. Indeed, the halmark of their lives even to this day is their spirituality. They are considered masters of the spiritual life. Rebellion was simply wrong for them. Obedience and seeking God in what was already established was their outlook and response to the corruption within the Church.

What do we say in 2008? One obvious thing is: Protestants are still here (notice I didn't say "The Reformation movements are still here."), and Rome is still here. Both have gotten substantially larger, although I'm not sure that is a good thing for Protestants. Rome seems to be experiencing a revival; Protestants seem to be confused, divded, seeking help from Rome, and even converting to Rome. What the Hell?