In 1580, when the Lutherans and the Reformed met at Montbeilard, when the topic turned to predestination, Theodore Beza (1519–1605) rose, lifted his copy of Luther’s Concerning Bound Choice (De servo arbitrio), and said, “We stand with Luther.”1 The Lutheran representatives suggested . . . Continue reading →
We also rebuke and reject all Anabaptists, who repeat their baptism and do not allow little children among God’s people to be baptized. James T. Dennison Jr. ed., Reformed Confessions of the 16th and 17th Centuries in English Translation: 1523–1693, vol. 3 . . . Continue reading →
We have decided, in accordance with the Word of God, that despite the howls of Servetus and the new Anabaptists, infants must be baptized together with adults, for the following reasons: 1. The matter of the sacrament, the covenant itself, righteousness, life, . . . Continue reading →
I believe that baptism is the sign of the covenant of God with the seed of Abraham, ought to be given to those who belong to the covenant of grace, and, as a consequence, to the infants of believers. Thus I reject . . . Continue reading →
We teach that baptism should not be ministered in the church by women or midwives. For Paul excludes women from ecclesiastical callings: but baptism belongs to ecclesiastical offices. We condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that young infants, born of faithful parents, are . . . Continue reading →
I will not consider what concerns the administration of holy baptism, for I believe that none of us, sirs, wants to position ourselves among the Anabaptists, who have no stronger enemies than we. And concerning several other specific questions on this matter, . . . Continue reading →
We confess and acknowledge that baptism appertains as well to the infants of the faithful as unto those that be of age and discretion. And so we damn the error of Anabaptists who deny baptism to appertain to children before they have . . . Continue reading →
Moreover, although the sacraments are (given) to us for a pledge (arrabon), through which we are reassured of the promises of God, nevertheless I acknowledge that they will be useless to us unless the Holy Spirit should render them efficacious in us, . . . Continue reading →
Hence I believe that there is one Church of those who have the same Spirit, through whom they are made certain that they are the true children of the family of God; and this is the first fruits of the Church. I . . . Continue reading →
We clearly protest those strange and erroneous doctrines, which turbulent spirits have invented [so as] to reject and condemn, among other damnable and depraved opinions, as when they say infants are too small to be baptized (whom we baptize according to the . . . Continue reading →
Covenant theology seems to be all the rage these days. According to E. P. Sanders, the “pattern of religion” known as Second Temple Judaism can be described as “covenantal nomism.” Continue reading →
Now, what need is there to go through all of Latomus, point by point, since what has been said thoroughly refutes his entire position and confirms mine? I have sufficiently shown that his whole work consists of begging the question, for he . . . Continue reading →
After all these centuries the Reformation’s doctrine of justification is still disputed in some circles, particularly among a relatively small but vocal group associated with the so-called new perspective on Paul. Continue reading →
In the controversy between Protestants and Roman Catholics there has been no question whether Jesus obeyed God’s law, but only to what effect. Did Jesus obey the law so as to make it possible for us to cooperate with grace toward future justification, or did he obey God’s law for us (pro nobis) to accomplish our justification once for all? The Protestants affirmed the latter and denied the former. Nevertheless, despite the unity among confessional Protestants on justification, questions have persistently arisen among them concerning the nature, intent, and effect of Jesus’s law keeping and its relation to the justification of sinners. Continue reading →
Who counts as a Puritan and what does that adjective mean? These are important questions that need to be investigated. Like the adjective evangelical it is widely used both in academic and popular literature but there is no consensus as to what it means or who belongs to that category. Continue reading →
In the controversy between Protestants and Roman Catholics there has been no question whether Jesus obeyed God’s law, but only to what effect. Did Jesus obey the law so as to make it possible for us to cooperate with grace toward future justification, or did he obey God’s law for us (pro nobis) to accomplish our justification once for all? The Protestants affirmed the latter and denied the former. Nevertheless, despite the unity among confessional Protestants on justification, questions have persistently arisen among them concerning the nature, intent, and effect of Jesus’s law keeping and its relation to the justification of sinners. Continue reading →
The term scholasticism has a narrower reference than the term orthodoxy: it well describes the technical and academic side of this process of the institutionalization and professionalization of Protestant doctrine in the universities of the late sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. If the . . . Continue reading →
By the death of Calvin, all of these founders of the Reformed tradition had produced their major writings and had prepared their churches for the next generation—having argued the basic doctrinal positions of the Reformed faith, whether in their larger more systematic . . . Continue reading →
In my own usage, throughout the study, I have attempted to work with terms that have substantive use in the historical documents and I have tried to confine my meanings to the meanings of the era. Thus, ‘scholastic’ indicates an academic style . . . Continue reading →
When this orthodox or scholastic Protestantism is examined in some depth and viewed as a form of Protestant theology in its own right rather than as merely a duplication or reflection of the theology of the Reformation, it is clearly a theology . . . Continue reading →