This page is for ministers to share EM3 projects, reports and experiences - as an encouragement for one another. If you have had a sabbatical, or done a concentrated piece of EM3 work, or attended a worthwhile conference, please send in a report!
Reformation -
Alnwick minister Joan Grindroad-Helmn shares her discoveries as she tackles a weighty bit of history
In a desire to learn or remember more about the reformation I read Diarmaid MacCulloch’s book, “Reformation: Europe’s House Divided”. Part of the reason being that my own knowledge of the reformation was from an American angle and part was sparked by my investigation into my current church’s history.
The book was not difficult to read, though there were a great deal of facts crammed into it. I must say, however, that after reading the book I realise that I really want to read more about the interregnum and restoration in England, as this was given little space in this book. What I particularly enjoyed was not so much in the facts, but in the reasons behind it. I remembered the facts of the reformation from 25 odd years ago, though in a limited way, but I don’t recall hearing about the social causes.
New Technology
I appreciated MacCulloch’s starting prior to the reformation to “set the scene” so to speak. His assertion that the “technology” of the day was mostly to be found in the church was interesting. Still the most complicated of instruments, the organ was widely in use by the 4th century. It was the invention of rag paper and then the printing press and became a huge factor in the reformation. The assumption that the common people were illiterate wasn’t exactly sound, especially church folks, as they were reading the many tracts that were published cheaply and en masse. It had not occurred to me that the society of that time, similar to ours 8 years ago, was thinking about the “end times” with the millennium and then half millennium. 1500 was an important time when many people were trying to get their house in order, so perhaps those ideas were also a factor in the reception of new ideas.
Luther’s words at Wittenberg came at just the right moment. I had forgotten that, very loosely like Jesus, Luther had no intention of starting a church, he was an academic who wanted to provoke debate. If they were in the end times and the house needed to get into order, then discussion was needed so action could be taken. I remember being taught that Luther started this all over the selling of indulgences. His problem with indulgences was more specific, to the indulgence that would build St. Peter’s on the backs of people’s fear. Whether Luther would have approved of where the Lutheran church went in subsequent years is highly doubtful.
I also appreciated the connection with the Catholic church at the time, and the division between north and south in Europe. I had a greater understanding of the primacy of Rome, well I should say the pope, as he was not always in Rome. The power of the church and its influence across so much of Europe, via prince bishops and other means was a tremendous “lock” on how countries progressed and interacted with each other. Granted there was not the same sense of nationalism as today, it was much more of an empire of loosely joined lands. I had also not put together the reasons that most of this heavy reformation was going on in the north of Europe, the many factors that brought them to a different place from the areas in the south who were united in fighting in many ways.
It seemed as though Calvin became the prime reformer, if you could put it that way. Others would look to him for ideas, judgement and acceptability. In some ways, it must have been frustrating that Calvin, sitting in relative comfort in Geneva, was setting out how things should work – did work in Geneva – when most other places were torn with strife and bloodshed.
PowerPoint Preachers
I have to admit that I was most intrigued by the picture of the early reformed church, where 4 types of ministries were accepted. The priests, doctors, elders and deacons, each having a specific function. I wonder if today’s church could go back a bit to where elders were for discipline, deacons for pastoral care, doctors for education and preaching and priests for the sacraments. Perhaps it is embodying Paul’s “spiritual gifts”, but one can see that by the end of the reformation it looked like the jobs were being condensed. I loved the image of churches bringing in people whose ministry was to preach – and do it in great style with the equivalent of Powerpoint – while the priest was there for the sacraments. Will this happen to the URC?
I also recognised something we perhaps have lost in the church today, that of expectation. When people went to church it was expected that they brought their Bibles and after the preacher did the service it was expected that they would discuss it, wrestle with what had been said. The many tracts that were around were to be discussed, because there was an importance about the message. It seems that we just don’t do that these days, maybe we should.
Granted, the church of the reformation was not perfect. Many of the original ideals were lost. The call for discussion and debate opened up the way for endless change and sadly, those who disagreed were often conquered, thrown out or executed. Much blood was shed in reformation and counter reformation, so much stemming from grabs for territory and political gain. And much of this worked because the common people were still in fear of God. They were afraid for their souls and so the power of the church was immense. By the 1700’s, due to many other influences, people lost the fear of God and the power of the church changed.
American Puritans - and others
It was also sad to read about the English church and Elizabeth’s refusal to reform, her desire to preserve undid so much work, though worse was yet to come. I also did not know that many centuries before the Jews had been expelled from England, only to be reintroduced in the 1600’s as the belief of the end times reappears – conversion of the Jews as a part of the great build-up to the second coming.
I would like to disagree, slightly with MacCulloch on the American bits. He seems to say that America was settled by Puritans whose religion was spread due to the fact that the training college was Harvard in Boston Massachusetts. Therefore New England Puritanism was spread throughout the colonies and was the dominant church. This was true in New England, but he omits completely the College of William and Mary in Virginia, founded only a few years after Harvard, that supplied ministers to the southern colonies and was a much more Episcopal training than the New England puritans. Not all the colonies were settled by puritans.There was a great deal in this book, so many details I had either forgotten or just never known. I knew nothing about Latvia and the eastern European churches. I wanted to know more about how it was that the church of Scotland was a success in its reformation. I had a better understanding of the Catholic church and its power. Above all, I seemed to get much more of a grasp on the why than the what. This story of the reformation again showed that everything has a time. The reformation didn’t become the big movement it did because someone was desperately trying to save a dying institution and was searching around for a lifeline. It came at a time when people were asking questions. When someone dared to ask there was a groundswell of feeling and the Spirit moved. And then it had its time and other things in both church and society moved. God isn’t finished with us yet, who knows where the church will go?