Church History Final 2013 Flashcards
Bishop’s Bible:
This Bible was produced under the authority of the official English Church. It was created because of the Anglican’s distaste for the Protestant notes in the Geneva Bible. This translation was used as the basis of the King James Bible.
Coverdale Bible:
This was the first complete translation of the Bible in English. It was based primarily on other already existing translations. However, it did not receive the official endorsement of the government.
Douai-Rheims NT
a translation made by Catholic scholars; based on the Vulgate.
Geneva Bible
the main Bible of English-speaking Protestants in the 16th century, translated in Geneva. It contained notes that encouraged protestant theology. To James I its notes seemed to strip the king of his “divine right” to rule as God’s representative on earth.
Great Bible
The first officially authorized version of the english Bible. A revised translation of the Matthew’s Bible with its notes removed. Its ordering of the biblical books set the standard for translations to follow.
Hampton Court Conference
the KJV ultimately came out of this.
John Reynolds
President of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. He called for the changing of certain words in the Book of Common Prayer (“with my body, I thee worship”) because they implied the worshipping of the wife by the husband. God alone should be worshiped, he said. On the second day of the Hampton Court Conference (1604) he made four demands on behalf of the Puritans concerning 1. the doctrine of the church, 2. pastors, 3. church government, and 4. the Book of Common Prayer. Finally, he proposed a new Bible translation [(which would be the KJV) (McGrath, 159-160)
King James I:
his background with Scottish Presbyterianism and his reasons for supporting a new Bible translation
King James was born prince of Scotland–his mother was imprisoned by protestant rebels, and the young prince entrusted to one George Buchanan–who rigorously taught him academics and a instilled in him a love for learning. James became a sharp theologian and a brilliant mind under Buchanan’s tutelage. In England, where he succeeded his distant relative Elizabeth, James assigned the rival catholic, presbyterian, and puritan factions to translate the bible under his supervision. This was an effort at religious unity and gave James significant theological clout.
He also supported a new Bible translation because the notes of the translation popular with the Puritans, the Geneva Bible, rid the king of “divine authority” (the king is given authority by God to rule over the land). The KJV, as a result, would have none of these notes. And that was good.
Lewis’s categories of textual influence and his reasons for why the literary influence of the AV (Authorized Version = King James Bible) is less than we might expect
(1) A source,
(2) Flagrant quotation -quotation isolated and proclaimed by typographical devices,
(3) Embedded quotation -sentences or phrases from the KJV that have been artfully worked into an author’s own language so that an ignorant reader might not recognize them,
(4) Vocabulary,
(5) Language architectonics (think structure)-in rhythm, the imagery, or the style. (Lewis, 12-15)
Two reasons for why the KJV’s literary influence is less than what we might expect
1) The Bible as literary pleasure was not treated as such until the 18th-19th century Romantic movement, with its tastes for the primitive and the passionate (think princes tending flocks, drawn spring water, monarchs without guards). In short, until the Romantic taste existed, the AV was not so attractive as a literary achievement, limiting its influence.
2) Its familiarity puts off a deep influence: “an influence which cannot evade our consciousness will not go very deep.”
Matthew’s Bible:
A translation written by one of Tyndale’s friends. It was based largely on Tyndale’s translation. It was not authorized by the English government. Written by John Rogers
Millenary Petitiona
a document signed by more than 1,000 Church of England ministers pledging faithfulness to the king and calling for reform (i. e. the removal of certain rights and ceremonies in the church).
Richard Bancroft
bishop of London (later Archbishop of Canterbury); he was hostile toward both Catholics and Protestants. He was the chief overseer of the translation of the KJB.
Febronianism:
named after Justin Febronius, the pseudonymous author of a book published in 1763 under the title of The State of the Church and the Legitimate Power of the Roman Pontiff. This argued that the church is the community of the faithful, and that the bishops, as their representatives, are to rule the church. Therefore, final authority resides in a council of the bishops, and not in the pope. Pope Clement XIII condemned Febronius’ work as heretical.
Formula of Concord:
In 1557, the Formula of Concord was an attempt to intermediate the positions between the Lutherans and Calvinists. For instance, it declared that while it is true that there are some elements that are not essential to the gospel, in time of persecution one should not abandon even these peripheral matters. But on the matter of communion, the Formula of Concord upheld the strict Lutherans, denying any significant difference between Zwingli’s position, clearly rejected by Luther at Marburg, and Calvin’s. As a result, from that point on one of the characteristics of Lutheranism was its understanding of communion, expressed in terms of contrast with Calvinism.
Francis Gomarus:
“was a firm believer in predestination in the strictest sense” (Gonzalez) and, as a collegue of Jacobus Arminus, clashed with him on predestination and the true nature of Calvinism. The issue between Gomarus and Arminius was not whether there is such a thing as predestination. On that point they agreed, for both found abundant biblical references to predestination. They debated the basis on which predestination takes place. According to Arminius, predestination was based on God’s foreknowledge of those who would later have faith in Jesus Christ. Gomarus, on the other hand, claimed that faith itself is the result of predestination, so that before the foundation of the world the sovereign will of God decreed who would have faith and who would not.
Gallicanism:
an attitude shared primarily by kings and nationalists that opposed the notion of a centralized church under papal authority (Gonzalez, ch. 18).
Georg Callixtus:
a German Lutheran theologian who looked to reconcile all Christendom by removing all unimportant differences
Jacobus Arminius:
a distinguished Dutch pastor and professor whose theological training had been thoroughly Calvinistic, and had taken place partly in Geneva, under the direction of Calvin’s successor Theodore Beza. Having returned to Holland, he gained wide recognition through his preaching from an important pulpit in Amsterdam. It was due to his good name, and to his fame as a student of the Bible and theology, that the leadership of the church in Amsterdam asked him to refute the opinions of Dirck Koornhert, a theologian who rejected some aspects of Calvin’s doctrine, particularly in the matter of predestination. With a view to refuting Koornhert, Arminius studied his writings and compared them with Scripture, with early Christian theology, and with the teachings of several of the major reformers. Finally, after a struggle of conscience, he reached the conclusion that Koornhert was right. Arminius became a professor at the University of Leiden in 1603, and his opinions became a matter of public debate. One of his colleagues, Francis Gomarus, was a firm believer in predestination in the strictest sense, and soon the two clashed. It was thus that Jacobus Arminius, who considered himself a true follower of Calvin, gave his name to Arminianism, the doctrine that many since then have considered the very antithesis of Calvinism.… Arminius held that the great decree of predestination was the one by which God determined that Jesus Christ would be the mediator and redeemer of humankind. That was indeed a sovereign decree, in no way dependent on human response. But the divine decree having to do with the final destiny of each individual was based, not on the sovereign will of God, but rather on divine foreknowledge, by which God knew what each person’s response would be to the offer of salvation in Jesus Christ. In almost every other matter, Arminius remained a strict Calvinist.
Jansenism:
a Christian theological movement, primarily in France, that emphasized original sin, human depravity, the necessity ofdivine grace, and predestination. The movement originated from the posthumously published work of the Dutch theologian Cornelius Jansen, who died in 1638. It was first popularized by Jansen’s friend Jean du Vergier, Abbé de Saint-Cyran, and after Saint-Cyran’s death in 1643 was led by Antoine Arnauld. Through the 17th and into the 18th centuries, Jansenism was a distinct movement within the Catholic Church (Wikipedia). Now, however, Jansenism was less a doctrine regarding grace and predestination, and more a movement of zealous religious reform. The Jesuits had proposed the theory of “probabilism,” which meant that a probability, no matter how slight, that an action was correct made it morally acceptable. To the French Jansenists this was moral indifferentism, and instead they proposed a life of such discipline and rigor that it was said that the nuns of Port-Royal were “as pure as angels and as proud as demons.”
John Smyth:
an early Baptist minister of England and a defender of the principle of religious liberty. Historians consider John Smyth as a founder of the Baptist denomination (wikipedia). After he was convinced that infant baptism was invalid, he baptized himself
with a bucket and ladle; “critics dubbed him ‘the self-baptizer’” (Gonz. 195).
“Philippists” vs. Strict Lutherans
The Philippists (represented by Philip Melanchthon) were willing to compromise with Catholics on ‘peripheral’ points of their faith, which they did, headed by Melanchthon, in the Liepzig Interim. The strict Lutherans, who had firmly refused to sign the Interim in spite of the displeasure of the emperor, accused the Wittenberg “Philippists,” of having forsaken several elements of Luther’s teachings. Melanchthon responded by establishing a distinction between the central elements of the gospel and those that are peripheral to it. The latter he called by the Greek name of “adiaphora.” The essential must not be abandoned at any cost. The adiaphora, although important, must not be confused with the essential. Therefore, in a situation such as the church was facing at the time, one could be justified in leaving aside some of the secondary elements in order to have the freedom to continue preaching and teaching the essential. The strict Lutherans, under the leadership of Matthias Flacius, responded that, although it may well be true that there are some elements essential to the gospel, and others that are peripheral, there are circumstances that require a clear confession of faith. At such times, some elements that could otherwise be considered peripheral become symbols of the faith itself. To forsake them is to deny the faith. Furthermore, the strict Lutherans accused the Philippists of giving too much credit to human participation in salvation. These controversies led to the Formula of Concord.
Quietism:
advocated total passivity before God. A believer is simply to disappear, to die and be lost in God. Any activism, be it of the body or of the soul, must be set aside. Contemplation must be purely spiritual, having nothing to do with any physical or visible means—including the humanity of Christ. The same is true of ascetic discipline, which is another form of activism. When the soul is lost in contemplation of the divine, it must consider nothing else—not even the neighbor.
Remonstrants (know the content of their Remonstrance):
In 1610, the Arminian party issued a document or “Remonstrance,” and thereafter were commonly known as “Remonstrants.” The document itself contains five articles dealing with the issues under debate. [Gonzalez, Justo L. (2010-07-25). Story of Christianity: Volume 2: The Reformation to the Present Day (Kindle Locations 3472-3473). HarperOne. Kindle Edition.]
Content:
Article 1 - Ambiguous teaching on Predestination
Article 2 - affirms that Jesus died for all human beings, although only believers actually receive the benefits of his passion
Article 3 - tries to deal with the accusation of Pelagianism, by declaring that humans can do nothing good on their own account, and that the grace of God is necessary in order to do good
Article 4 - Rejection of irresistible grace
Article 5 - though their teaching suggests that Christians can lose their salvation, the Remonstrants responded that biblical teaching on this point is not clear, and that they would need clearer scriptural proof before committing themselves in one direction or the other (Largely drawn from Gonzalez).
Synod of Dort (know the content of the Canons of Dort):
The canons of the Synod of Dort affirmed five doctrines the Remonstrants could not accept, and from that point on those five doctrines have become the hallmark of orthodox Calvinism. [Gonzalez, Justo L. (2010-07-25). Story of Christianity: Volume 2: The Reformation to the Present Day (Kindle Locations 3501-3502). HarperOne. Kindle Edition.]
Content
1) The doctrine of unconditional election. This means that the election of the predestined is not based on God’s foreknowledge of each one’s response to the offer of salvation, but only on the inscrutable will of God.
2) Limited atonement - the Remonstrants claimed that Christ had died for all humankind. Against them, the Synod of Dort declared that he died only for the elect.
3) Total depravity & its extent - the synod affirmed that, although there is still in fallen humans a vestige of natural light, human nature has been so corrupted that that light cannot be properly used. And this is true, not only in that which refers to the knowledge of God and to conversion, but also in things “civil and natural.”
4) Irresistible grace.
5) Perseverance of the saints, that is, that the elect will persevere in grace, and cannot fall from it. Although such perseverance is not the work of the believer, but of God, it should serve to give us trust in our own salvation, and steadfastness in doing good, even though we see the power of sin still active in us.
