Roger Williams: His Life, Work, and Effect

By: Dwayne Spearman

Thesis Statement

                The life and work of Roger Williams had a tremendous effect on not only ending religious intolerance and persecution in America, but also led to the founding of Rhode Island which served as a model for the future government of the new American Republic. 

Introduction

                Many fail to comprehend how the life of this one man so impacted not only the spiritual formation of the New World, but also the political formation of the same. The life and work of Roger Williams was a constant battle against religious intolerance that usually resulted in some form of persecution, and also a struggle for a separation of those powers that perpetrated the intolerance. Those powers were namely the church and the state that were essentially one and the same as that the church was over all things both spiritual and political. Roger Williams had the fortitude to speak against these realities and alienated himself from both.

                His proposition was a simple one: civil authorities should have no power or jurisdiction over the church in matters of conscience, and the church should have no power or jurisdiction over the state in civil matters.[1]  These convictions led not only to the founding of the first colony in the New World to enjoy true religious freedom, but also served as a model for the future government of the new American Republic. 
  

Early Life

While the exact date is not certain, Roger Williams was born in Wales around the beginning of the seventeenth century to James Williams and Alice Pemberton.[2] His date of birth has been said to have been as early as 1599 and as late as 1606.[3]  By all accounts, they were a middle class family as that his father owned an established tailor shop in London. However, very little is known about either of them since all of the records are feared to have been destroyed in only what is referred to as the “burning of the Registers of St. Sepulcher’s parish.”[4]

William’s family home was near what was called the Newgate Prison which is where many Puritans who had been declared to be heretics were held until they were escorted to the public square to be burned at the stake. There is little doubt that Williams witnessed these executions as a child and they most likely had some impact upon his opposition to religious persecution later in life.[5]  

As Williams grew, he came into favor with one Sir Edward Coke who was at one time the chief justice of England. Coke served as his patron and mentor while he attended both Charterhouse and Pembroke Hall where he graduated in 1627.[6] The two became very close as the years passed. It reached the point in which Coke actually referred to Williams as his son.[7] Some have suggested that Coke is the one who taught Williams by example how to be blunt, forthright, eloquent, and indomitable.[8] All of which Williams himself was known for throughout his life.

After graduating from Pembroke, Williams matriculated at Cambridge and began two years of graduate studies in preparation for ministry.[9] After which, he assumed his first ministerial position. It was shortly thereafter that he met and fell in love with Mary Barnard to which he was married December 15, 1629.[10] Their marriage would produce six children and last for what most believe to be at least forty-seven years. It is suggested that Mary died sometime in 1676, while Williams died in either January of 1682 or 1683.[11]    

While he began his education as an Anglican, he finished it having been won over to the Puritan cause which eventually led to his Separatists views.[12] It was not something that happened over night, but it did materialize as he became more familiar with men such as John Winthrop, Thomas Hooker, and John Cotton.[13] It was also his relationship with these three men that led him to consider for the first time immigrating to the New World.[14] 

The New World

John Winthrop left for Massachusetts in 1630 in what is referred to as the main migration.[15] Williams, now a strict Separatist, took a pastorate at a church in Salem just outside of Boston as that there were not many options for him in England any longer. He set sail late that same year with Mary and were followed by John Cotton three years later.[16]

However, it did not take long after the arrival for Williams to find that he was slightly to the right of both Winthrop and Cotton. This began to dawn on him when he advocated that the colony separate from the Church of England. However, the colony refused to do so for what was to be primarily economic reasons.[17] The colony depended on funds from England, and to make a show of being a bastion of Separatism was felt to be a poor decision that might lead to those funds being cut. However, Williams, using his new pulpit in Salem, openly condemned the Church of England and accused it of being in “league with the anti-Christ.”[18] Thus, almost immediately, there were dividing issues between the men that only grew wider as the days passed.

There were several other issues that came up in rapid succession that quickly strained the relationship between the men. First, shortly after taking the pulpit at Salem, Williams wrote and circulated a pamphlet advocating that the royal Patent that had been issued by the king was null and void because the land upon which the colony sat had not been properly purchased from the native Indians.[19] He further contended that “the king cannot give away what he does not own.”[20]

Second, he argued that the Cross of St. George should be removed from the flag that flew over the colony. His argument was that the state was not part of Christendom, and that to have the cross there was idolatrous and a violation of the second commandment.[21] He furthermore, strongly objected to the term ‘Christendom” as a means of describing Western Europe and believed that the term should not be used for nations, but rather, reserved for God’s elect only.[22] The governor of Salem actually had the cross removed and effectively created another controversy.

Third, Williams was a strong advocate that women should be veiled in church “on account of the angels” that Paul spoke of in 1 Corinthians 11:10 as his proof text.[23] This was seen by many to be just a little too much even for Williams. It was shortly thereafter that he was called to stand the first time before the magistrates in Boston to give a defense of himself and his views. It was the prelude to the larger breach that would come.[24] 
  

Banishment

In October of 1635, Williams was called before the magistrates again to renounce his teachings or face possible exile from the colony. The specific teachings that he was asked to renounce included: his teachings that the land rightly belonged to the Indians and that the colonist had no right to it until fair payment was made; that it was not lawful to ask that a wicked person to swear or pray as that those are actions that should be done by “God worshipers” only; that it is not lawful to listen to the ministers of the Parish Assemblies in England, and that separation should occur from those who do; and finally, that the Civil Magistrate’s power should only extend to “bodies, goods, and the outward state of men” and not to spiritual affairs.[25]

It was the fourth teaching of Williams that would later come to be known as the separation of church and state.[26] The teaching came from his view of the Ten Commandments. He referred to the first four of the commandments as the first table which contained man’s duty to God, and he referred to the last six commandments as the second table which outlined man’s duty to his fellow man. He had absolutely no problem at all with Civil Magistrates attempting to regulate the second table, but felt that they should have no jurisdiction when it came to the first table, for that was between the man and God alone.

Williams believed that there was a fundamental difference that existed between the church and the state. He insisted that the magistrate had civil power, but in the church, he was just another layman.[27] On the other hand, the minister had churchly leadership, but in regards to the state, he was simply another citizen.[28]

In the end, Williams refused to recant in regards to any of his teachings, and this led to the decision to banish him from the colony, and the command that he be placed on the next available ship back to England.[29]  However, Williams was notified by friends and fled the colony where he survived the winter with the help of the Narragansett Indians.[30]

A Little Background

It must be remembered that the early settlers who came to America were not Americans.[31] They were Europeans, and as such, the idea of religious freedom was not even on their radar. The Europe that they had come from demanded uniformity in regards to worship. Their mindset was that there was no liberty in that area. Both persecutor and persecuted alike believed this because it had been the model from whence they had come. There merely wanted to reconstruct life in the New World using the Old World as a pattern.[32]

 In their mindset, there was only room for one truth and not a plurality of truths. To that end, there was only one form of worship to be tolerated and all others were to be put down through force if necessary. Dissent was viewed as false and dangerous.[33] It was during the medieval period that the Roman Catholic Church had firmly established itself as the sole source of all spiritual truth. Therefore, they were the custodians of that truth, and that fact precluded the possibility of toleration.[34]

It was Jerome who once said, “A spark should be extinguished, fermentation removed, a putrid limb amputated, an infected animal segregated.”[35] In was also Augustine who advocated a “righteous persecution, which the Church of Christ was to inflict upon the impious.”[36] Augustine believed that religious persecution was in actuality an act of love in that it was an effort to save men from the “brink of damnation.”[37] In fact, even men like Martin Luther and John Calvin were staunchly against religious freedom. This is the backdrop of the environment in which Roger Williams found himself. It is no wonder that his views were slightly controversial.

Founding of Rhode Island

After his banishment, and maybe even before, Williams came to realize that he was not going to be able to reform existing colonies in New England, and that if his dream was going to become a reality, something entirely new was going to have to be established.[38] Williams not only dreamed of a place where people in the New World could go for religious freedoms, but also a place where those from the Old World could come.[39]

Fortunately, William’s had a great relationship with the Narragansett Bay Indian tribes as a result of his missions work among them while he was at Salem, and once again when they helped him during his initial forced exodus from the Massachusetts Bay Colony. It was from them that he was able to receive the land to start his own settlement just south of the Bay Colony which he aptly named “Providence” indicating how the Lord had provided for him.[40]

Under his leadership, the new settlement prospered. Of course, his family joined him, but so did friends and other “social delinquents” who had been asked to the leave the Massachusetts Bay Colony.[41] As a matter of fact, initially, dissenters from the Bay Colony were banished to Rhode Island to be with Williams as a form of punishment.[42]

In the end, the settlement grew and prospered so quickly that the Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony came to fear that Williams might actually use his new found power to retaliate against them for the way that they had treated him.[43] This eventually led the governor of the colony to send messengers to Williams inviting him to come back and to be a part of the Bay Colony again. William’s response was to send them a message that simply stated, “I feel safer among the religious savages along the Narragansett than I would among the savage Christians of the Massachusetts Bay Colony!”[44]  

            To Williams, Providence was more than just a new home. It was an experiment to demonstrate to the world that civil government can work with a complete separation of church and state. Therefore, granting complete freedom of conscience in religious matters, and to prove that a popular democratic form of government would be the “surest basis for the security of human rights.”[45]  

In May of 1644, Williams returned to England and was able to obtain a charter for the new colony from the Long Parliament.[46] Eventually, with the help of Anne Hutchinson, the towns of Portsmouth, Newport, and Warwick were established. [47] These combined would eventually come to be known as Rhode Island. In the meantime, the four settlements formed a confederation (or republic) with Williams as the president.[48]

It was then in May of 1647 that the General Assembly of Rhode Island adopted a code of laws that guaranteed the complete separation of church and state that closed with a statement that said, “All men may walk as their conscience persuades them, without molestation – everyone in the name of his God.”[49] It would later be amended in 1663 to also say that

“no person within said colony, at any time hereafter shall be in any wise molested, punished, disquieted, or called in question for any differences in opinion in matters of religion, and do not actually disturb the civil peace of said colony; but that all and any persons may, from time to time, and at all times hereafter freely and fully have and enjoy his and their own judgments and consciences in matters of religious concernment.”[50]

Thus, Rhode Island was to become the first colony in America to claim full and complete religious freedom. No man was barred from holding civil office in regards to their religious persuasion. This act of the General Assembly of Rhode Island was nothing like the “Act of Toleration” that had been passed in Maryland which only guaranteed religious freedom to those who “professed to believe in Jesus Christ” and to those who “believed in God’s holy and true Christian religion”.[51]   

Therefore, Rhode Island has been referred to by many as the “cradle of liberty” in which democratic principles were first successfully applied.  It was the model republic and served as the forerunner to the Declaration of Independence that was to be signed in 1776 at Independence Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.[52] 

First Baptist Church

            While to say that Williams was the first Baptist in the New World would be a stretch, it could certainly be said that he started the first Baptist church in the New World when he declared that his church in Providence was to be Baptist in 1639.[53] However, to do this officially, Williams himself had to become a Baptist first by being properly baptized. While not able to find an officially ordained Baptist minister to do so, he asked one of his church members to baptize him first, and then he would in turn baptize the rest of them.[54]   

However, being a Baptist did not last very long for Williams as that his ideas were becoming increasingly more radical as his views evolved. Two views in particular led to his break with the Baptists. First, he had arrived at the conviction that his baptism was illegitimate because it had not been administered under apostolic authority.[55] He believed that in order for a baptism to be authoritative, it must be administered by someone who was in direct succession from the apostles. However, since there had apparently been a break in apostolic succession, his baptism, and everyone else’s for that matter, were not authoritative. This view would also eventually be carried over into the sacrament of communion as well.[56]

These new convictions would lead him to believe that there will never be a true church again until Christ returns and initiates a new apostolic age.[57] In regards to the lack of true churches, he said, “If my soul could find rest in joining unto any of the churches professing Christ Jesus not extant, I would readily and gladly do it.”[58]

His second controversial view that he had arrived at by this time as a result of his tremendous respect for the American Indians, was that was that the religion of the Indians was just as acceptable in the eyes of God as was Christianity.[59] As such, he came to the conclusion that the Indians did not need to be converted because God had already accepted them just as they were. Of course, this belief created a tremendous stir not only among the Baptists of Rhode Island, but also among the Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony. 

Conclusion

In the end, Roger Williams lived a life that had tremendous impact upon not only the spiritual life of the New World, but also the political. He remained steadfast in his battle against what he perceived to be religious intolerance that was the result of a state that was controlled by the church. While not able to reform the Massachusetts Bay Colony in this regard, he was able to start his own colony which would serve for many years to come just how successful a society can be when the church and the states powers are held separate.

These battles cost Williams in that he had to give up so much for the convictions which he held. In the process, he was alienated from friends, family, and even country. However, his convictions and sacrifice have stood the test of time, and he will always be remembered as one of the most important early political and spiritual thinkers in American history. [60]
 

Bibliography

Covey, Cyclone. The Gentle Radical: A Biography of Roger Williams. New York, NY: The MacMillan Company, 1966.

Davis, James Calvin. On Religious Liberty: Selections from the Works of Roger Williams. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2008.

Ernst, James E. The Political Thought of Roger Williams. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press, Inc, 1926.

Garrett, John. Roger Williams: Witness Beyond Christendom. New York, NY: The Macmillan Company, 1970.

Gaustad, Edwin  S. and Leigh E. Schmidt. The Religious History of America: The Heart of the American Story from Colonial Time to Today. New York: New York: HarperCollins Publishers, 2002).

Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity, Volume II, The Reformation to Present Day. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2010.

Longacre, Charles Smull. Roger Williams, His Life, Work, and Ideals. Takoma Park, Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1939.

McBeth, H. Leon. The Baptist Heritage. Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1987.

Miller, Perry. Roger Williams: His Contribution to the American Tradition. Atheneum, NY: The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1953.

Polishook, Irwin H. Roger Williams, John Cotton and Religious Freedom: A Controversy in New and Old England. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1967.

Winslow, Ola Elizabeth. Master Roger Williams,: a Biography. New York, NY: Macmillan, 1957.

The Rochester Family

I am always blessed by this family's music ministry.

Martin Luther: Life, Calling, Ministry, and Effect

By: Dwayne Spearman

Introduction

Many people within the church today refer to themselves as Protestants in ignorance. They, like many who have come before them, have forgotten those who prepared the way. They have neglected the influence of those who made the hard decisions so that they will most likely never have to. The purpose for this study is to take a closer look at one man who dared to stand alone in the face of an institution that had declared him a heretic and sought his life in exchange. The life, calling, and ministry of Martin Luther had far-reaching effect on all those who would come after him, and fundamentally changed the face of Christianity forever.

Luther’s Life

Martin Luther was born in Eisleben, Germany to Hans and Margarette Luder on November 10th in the year 1483.[1] It was also in this small town that he died sixty-three years later on February 18th, 1546.[2] There is no doubt that his sixty-three years upon this earth was destined to change the face of Christianity permanently.

His parents were peasants. Yet, his father was a copper miner who apparently had a head for business and eventually rose through the ranks to found several foundries.[3] Even with the business success of his family, by all accounts, Luther’s childhood was less than ideal as a result of his father’s severe treatment of him. Unfortunately, this abusive treatment translated over into other areas of his life such as school, and bouts with depression, anxiety, and fear that constantly plagued him throughout his adulthood.[4]

To make matters worse, his mother had a preoccupation with witches that also had an interesting effect on Luther.[5] While he spoke rarely of her, she obviously influenced his superstitious and enhanced views of the unseen world. He even once said that witches were responsible for spoiling milk, eggs, and butter.[6] He even believed that the maladies that he himself suffered where not natural but devil’s spells.[7]

Luther’s Calling
Storterheim

His father’s desire was that his son would become a lawyer. As such, he enrolled young Luther in the University of Erfurt in 1501 to pursue a degree in law.[8] However, something was to happen in young Luther’s life that would change everything. The story goes that on one particular day in the year 1505, Luther was caught in a thunderstorm that scared him so badly, that he made a vow to St. Anne that he would drop out of law school and dedicate his life to serving the Lord by becoming a monk if she would spare his life.[9] True to his word, on July 17, 1505, he left law school and joined a monastery of the Augustinian Order as a friar.[10]

Upon entering the monastery, Luther was almost immediately recognized for his academic abilities. As one author put it, his induction into monastic life did not nothing to “terminate his study, it merely redirected it into the pursuit to theology” instead of law.[11] Another author noted that he was “clearly academically competent” and had even placed second in his class of seventeen students.[12] As a result of the insistent encouragement of his order’s leadership, he entered the priesthood and was ordained on April 4, 1507 at the age of twenty-three.[13]

However, this is where Luther’s childhood that was filled with abuse and a dominating father came into play. He struggled with feelings of unworthiness of God’s love and lived in constant fear of judgment.[14] It reached the point in his life that good works and the sacrament of penance was just not enough because he felt that he was just too unworthy to be justified before a holy and a righteous God.[15] He even went on to punish his body through self-flagellation until he finally reached the conclusion that God was not a God of love, but one of hatred.[16] This went on until finally one of his superiors, decided that the best thing that Luther could do was to begin an academic career so that he would take his mind off of his “obsessive preoccupation with his inner life and he was immediately ordered to the University of Wittenberg to begin his studies.[17]

Wittenberg

It was a Wittenberg that many of Luther’s questions were answered through the careful study of the Scriptures. This came about largely as a result of him being forced to study them for not only himself; but to teach them to others as well. It was during this time in his life that he came to so trust in the Scriptures that he once said of them “The Scriptures have never erred. The Scriptures cannot err. It is certain that Scripture would not contradict itself; it only appears so to the senseless and obdurate hypocrites.[18]

It was at this point in his life that his eyes were finally opened to the truth and he was able to see things that he had never seen before in regards to the Christ of Scripture. For example, in his lecture of the Psalms to his students, he found that if they were to be interpreted correctly, they must be done so Christologically.[19] It was this series of lectures that gave him for the first time the ability to see that Christ himself underwent similar trials to his own. It was a source of great comfort for him to know that Christ also suffered just as he had suffered in so many ways. Also, it was during this time that he came to understand that even though God the Father does indeed expect total perfection from His creation, it is God the Son who stands as the intermediary for his creation’s forgiveness.[20] This did much to remove the sense of guilt and unworthiness that Luther had carried with him practically his entire life.

This led to another series of lectures on the Epistle to the Romans in 1515 in which Luther exclaimed that he had finally found the solution to all of his difficulties.[21] Of course, it was not something that happened over night, but it was something that happened ever so slowly as he began to understand the truth of Romans 1:17 which simply says “For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, the just shall live by faith.”[22]

It was not a simple matter as it is approached today. For him, the first part of the verse that says that the “righteousness of God is revealed” was extremely condemning in that he understood that the righteousness of God could only be satisfied first through the justice of God. At issue was the “juxtaposition of the righteousness of God and the righteousness of man.”[23] To Luther, that meant that the “just” mentioned in the verse had to have some sort of righteousness within them that was akin to the righteousness of God. [24] Of course, therein lay the problem, Luther knew that he was not able to obtain this necessary righteousness through penance and the sacraments of the church as he had tried to do for so many years.[25]

Great Discovery

The revelation, or what Luther referred to as the “great discovery of the gospel”, came when he realized that the righteousness spoken of in the verse does not refer to any standard that the Christian must obtain in order to be saved, but instead, is referring to the fact that God Himself had already provided the righteousness that is required for the believer that resulted in salvation as a free gift.[26]

This is the point in which Luther’s theology was developed in regards to the issue of justification or divine acceptance.[27] Simply stated, he had come to the conclusion in what he believed to be the guidance of the Holy Spirit that “personal transformation and renewal are the consequence and not the precondition of God’s love.”[28] This changed everything for him. His years of self-condemnation and loathing were finally over. He finally understood for the first time that “justification by faith” does not mean that what God demands of us is faith which he then dutifully rewards. Instead, it means that faith and the resultant justification that it brings are a free gift from God.[29] He was now firmly grounded in his famous doctrine of justification by faith which would serve as his banner from that point forward in his ministry.

Luther’s Ministry
Hero

From all appearances, Luther did not take his newfound understanding of the doctrine of “justification by faith” and attempt to overtly convert everyone around him to his way of thinking. Instead, he continued to give himself to his pastoral and teaching responsibilities at the university.[30] Some historians even speculate that he initially did not totally grasp the “radical contradiction” in what he had come to understand and the accepted penitential system that was widely taught and accepted by the church of his day. However, this passivity dissipated quickly once he was able to bring his colleagues at Wittenberg into his way of thinking through careful exposition of Scripture and quite persuasion.[31] This eventually led to the conviction by Luther that the traditional view must be challenged and corrected through debate.

His initial attempt to get the word out via an academic debate was a total failure. His preparation had been to merely write out ninety-seven thesis that he thought would generate an interest, but nothing happened. It fell upon deaf ears. Most have speculated that it was because he had written the theses in “the language of the academy” which was Latin and was more of an attempt to “attack the main tenants of scholastic theology.”[32] Of course, that did not appeal to the common man.

His second attempt is the one that he is famous for. In this attempt, he wrote another set of theses that he entitled Ninety-Five Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences. That was all it took, but with a little push from someone who took them and translated them from Latin into the language of the people, German. Little did Luther know that he had just done a frontal assault on the Church of Rome and their attempt to raise the funds necessary for the completion of the Basilica of Saint Peter.[33] This placed Luther squarely in the sights of Pope Leo X who is credited with being one of the worst popes during a time filled with “corrupt, avaricious, and indolent popes.”[34] Needless to say, he had aroused a very powerful enemy.

Heretic

The end result was the exact opposite of what Luther had wanted in that his initial desire was to “establish the church once more upon the foundation of the gospel” and not to divide it.[35] He merely wanted to rid the church of their reliance upon human merit and good works. His discovery of the true gospel that did not include the need for penance and sacraments proved to be simply too much to hold the two together. He had sown the seeds that would rip the church as he knew it apart.

Even still, he chose to stay in the church that he had known and loved his entire life. The protests that he voiced were out of a heart felt responsibility that he had as a priest and theological professor.[36] His attempts were as one member to another. His desire was never to leave the church, but to right the church through proclamation and not separation.[37]

In truth, and as history contests, the papacy could not stand for such clarity. Therefore, after several warnings that went unheeded, Martin Luther was excommunicated from the very church that he had given his life to by Pope Leo X in 1520 in the Bull Exsurge Domine.[38] The Bull condemned forty-one of his beliefs as heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious ears, seductive of simple minds, repugnant to Catholic truth.[39] This was when Luther finally repudiated the pope and burned the Bull publicly.

Later the following year, he was given the opportunity to recant at the Diet of Worms. To the offer of recantation, his final words after laying out his defense was simply, “I stand convicted by the Scriptures, to which I have appealed, and my conscience is taken captive by God’s word, I cannot and will not recant anything, for to act against our conscience is neither safe for us, nor open to us. On this I take my stand. I can do no other. God help me. Amen.”[40] The break with Rome was complete.

Luther’s Effect

After the Diet of Worms and amid the chaos that ensued, Luther simply disappeared. Some thought for sure that he had already been killed for his actions. However, that was not the case, as that he had actually been granted safe passage by Frederick the Wise who had already taken steps to ensure his safety.[41] He did this by having him basically abducted and whisked away to Wartburg Castle where he was to stay for his own protection from May of 1521 to February of 1522.[42] While there, Luther did not waste his time in idleness. Instead, he used the time to begin his translation of the New Testament into German which he completed two years later, followed by the Old Testament that he completed ten years later.[43] Luther’s Bible, as it came to be called, proved to be instrumental in the reformation.

According to legend, it was also at Wartburg Castle that Luther had his famous confrontation with the Devil when he threw his inkwell at him. Of course, the legend was born when he said that he had “driven the devil away with ink.”[44] No one really knows for sure if Luther actually had a physical encounter with the Prince of Darkness, or if it was just a reference to the consequences of his new translation of the New Testament.

Meanwhile, others had taken up the cause while Luther was in exile. These included men like Andreas Karlstadt and Philipp Melanchthon who had been heavily influenced by the truth of Luther’s teachings while at Wittenberg. These men pushed for changes quickly in regards to encouraging monks and nuns to leave their monasteries and to be allowed to marry. Worship was simplified, German replaced Latin, masses for the dead were abolished, and the cup was given to the laity in communion.[45] Many of these things happened much quicker than Luther himself would have ever pushed for or even imagined. He actually voiced concerns, but the flood gates had already been opened and change, radical change in many respects, was already well on its way.

Conclusion

What came to be known as the Protestant Reformation changed the face of Christianity forever. Long after the deaths of Luther and the other great reformers, Protestantism has continued to evolve much farther than Luther himself would have ever imagined, or most likely even would have approved of. Of course, most Protestants would agree that God was behind the Reformation and that He was the one that gave Luther the wherewithal to stand in the face of tremendous opposition up to an institution that he had loved and devoted his life to, and yet declared him a heretic.

This present generation would do well to be mindful of the great sacrifices that were made by those like Luther who have gone before at cost to mind, body, and spirit. Protestants, and to a great degree, even Roman Catholics today owe a huge debt of gratitude to them. They made the difficult decisions that paved the way for future generations of Christians to walk. All would do well to be mindful of them.

Bibliography

Bettenson, Henry and Chris Maunder, eds. Documents of the Christian Church. 4th ed. London: Oxford University Press, 2011.

Erickson, Millard. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker House Books, 1998.

Evans, G.R. The Roots of the Reformation: Tradition, Emergence, and Rupture. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2012.

Gonzalez, Justo L. The Story of Christianity, Volume II, The Reformation to Present Day. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2010.

Luther, Martin. The Table-Talk, trans. William Hazlitt. Philadelphia, PA: United Lutheran Publishing House, 1846.

Marius, Richard. Martin Luther: The Christian Between God and Death. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999.

McGrath, Alister E. Christianities Dangerous Idea: The Protestant Reformation – A History from the Sixteenth Century to the Twenty-First. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2008.

McGrath, Alister E & Darren C. Marks, eds. The Blackwell Companion to Protestantism. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2004 Pelikan, Jaroslav. Obedient Rebels: Catholic Substance and Protestant Principle in Luther’s Reformation. New York, NY: Harper & Row Publishers, 1964.

Shelley, Bruce L., Church History in Plain Language. 4th ed. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 2008.

My Critique of "Christianity's Dangerous Idea"

Introduction

Christianity’s Dangerous Idea was written by Alister McGrath. He currently holds the chair in theology, ministry, and education at the University of London. [1] Prior to that, he was a longtime professor at Oxford University. He has authored several books on the issues of theology and history and lectures all over the world and currently resides in Oxford, England.
His intent was to take a survey style look at the seeds that started what came to be known as the Protestant Reformation. To that end, he attempts to chronicle the events that led up to the actual break with the Church of Rome, the reformers themselves who played major roles in these events, the eventual global ramifications that followed, and attempts to take a brief look at the possible future of Protestantism.

Brief Summary

The book is divided into three main sections which he refers to as Origination, Manifestation, and Transformation. In the Origination section, he lays the background for what he calls the gathering storm. [2] He starts this section by addressing the corruption that had already permeated the medieval church. The papacy is viewed as being out of control by many and there were those who sought to rein it back who were part of the Conciliarist movement. [3] However, the movement, while bringing the issue to the forefront, ultimately failed.
However, the issue of corruption did not go away. If anything, it got worse. Appointments of senior clergy were no longer based on the will of God, but the influences of family, fortune, and power. [4] Even the lower clergy were viewed with contempt by the laity because of the illiteracy that was rife within their ranks. According to the author, this gradual deteriorating view was not the result of a dwindling spirituality within medieval Christianity, but to the contrary, it was the result of an increasing “popular interest in religion” at the time. [5]
The final issue dealt with in this section of import is the advent of humanism. The humanists as they were called were primarily engaged in bringing about renewal and reform to the church with a call to return to the original sources of the faith. [6] In short, it was a renewed interest to return the church to the “vitality and simplicity of the apostolic age”. [7]
In the Manifestation section of the book, he takes a look at the impact that the Bible has had on the Protestant movement. This includes a discussion on distinctive protestant beliefs, how they are organized in their various denominational structures, how they go about worship, and the ministry of preaching.
His intent is to show how the various groups that make up the whole of Protestantism have interpreted and applied the Scriptures in these areas. [8] Of course, he shows that each have arrived at similar, yet different conclusions. However, it’s the similarities that make up a body of beliefs that are distinctively Protestant. [9] These include justification by faith, the nature of the church, the sacraments, and the issue of predestination. He even takes a look at how Protestantism has impacted the arts and natural sciences.
In the Transformation section of the book, he looks at the rise of western powers, particularly that of the United States, and its consequences. He asserts that the rise brought “inspirational” as well as “deeply disturbing” changes that were “incalculable” to Protestantism. [10] This was the result of what he refers to as the globalization of Protestant ideas that originated in the United States, but were then re-appropriated, repackaged, and disseminated to the rest of the world. He also goes on to assert the intellectual lead that was for many years in Germany had now been passed to the United States. He concludes that the most significant event to happen during this time was the rise of Pentecostalism. [11]

Critical Interaction

The stated purpose of the author was to gather into one work a single, organized narrative for the origins and development of Protestantism. [12] His attempt was not so much to look at the small details of each and every person and event, but to find the “bigger picture” underlying them in an effort to find their significance for “understanding the past, present, and future trends” of Protestantism. [13]
The prevailing conviction of the author seems to have been that for his readers to understand and appreciate where the Protestant movement is today, they must first be able to understand and appreciate where it has been in the past. [14] Of course, the author realized that this was no small task, and in so doing, much historical information would have to be left out or handled with a “broad-brush”, which inevitably left much to the interpretation of the author. [15] Of course, this is where any author opens themselves up to criticism. History is history with facts, spaces, and places, but when one tries to interpret that history to make application to the present; it becomes subjective; let alone to attempt to forecast the future based on that interpretation.
There have been several book reviews that have critiqued how well the author did in this effort. One such positive review was written by Bryce Christiansen of The Booklist who refers to the work as “capricious” and “highly provocative”. [16] He interestingly notes McGrath did an excellent job of showing how quickly the reformers such as Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli took the doctrine of sola Scriptura and developed their own forms of church authority. He also concludes that anyone who cares about Christianity’s past and future should read the book.
There is no doubt that the Reformation had no sooner displaced the Roman Catholic Church and it’s suppressive policies when the reformers inadvertently set about to establish their own based on their individual interpretations of the Scriptures. They each appealed to the “same source as authoritative, and yet arrived at different conclusions (e.g., the Communion). [17] With the removal of what had been the only recognized authority for hundreds of years invested in the hierarchy of the Roman Church, that authority had now been invested in each and every believer as per the teachings of Luther and the “radical doctrine of the priesthood of all believers”. [18] The author did an excellent job of showing the conflict that quickly arose with seemingly no resolution except disagreement and division.
Another such reviewer is James Overbeck. In his opinion, the only real contribution of the book is that it does help to “describe the shift currently taking place in the Protestant world with the decline of churches in Europe and North America”, and the shift that is currently in place toward Africa and Asia. [19] He also takes shots at McGrath for equating Christianity with Protestantism to the exclusion of the Roman Catholics.
There is no doubt that the author wrote the book from the Protestant viewpoint. It’s obvious that he is a Protestant just based on the biographical data given on the cover of the book. As such, he wrote the majority of the time from the viewpoint of a Protestant observer to history. We all tend to write one sided on every issue and it can be very hard to not do so because it’s the side that we are on. For example, when describing any war of the past, each side has a different take on why it started, how it played out, and how it ended. We all have perspective. McGrath’s perspective was most definitely Protestant, and thus it is through that lens that he wrote. Ultimately, the he made a very straight forward historical presentation of how the Reformation took seed and how it spread throughout Europe and to the rest of the world.

Conclusion

In the end, the issue at hand for this reader is to understand how the information contained in Christianity’s Dangerous Idea impacts my own life, ministry, and church. In regards to my life, as a lover of history, I believe that if we don’t know it, and at least attempt to understand it, we are inevitably going to make the same mistakes. Just a cursory look at men such as Luther, Calvin, and Zwingli should prove to anyone that they were not perfect. They had their’ share of faults, but each of them can be learned from. For example, Luther constantly felt that he needed to “get in with God” and that he “had to make himself into a good person”, but he eventually learned that “God’s love is not conditional” and that personal transformation follows with an understanding of “divine acceptance”. [20]
In regards to my ministry, it was obvious that men and ministries go through hard times. All of the great reformers had their friends, and yet also had their enemies. Standing on the front lines of any fight will draw fire from both sides. To do great things for God requires taking a stand that will sometimes cost more than we ever thought that we were going to pay. Just the very thought should make the words of our Lord ever clearer when he said, “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple”. [21]
Finally, in regards to the church, there is much to be gleaned. The one great take away for me personally is that the church belongs to Jesus Christ and not to man. It was his creation from the very beginning, and the men that he has graciously allowed to be a part of it are indeed sinful creatures. It doesn’t matter if they call themselves Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, or by any other name, because of their sinful natures, everything that they touch tends to come crumbling down around them and gone forever, except the church. With the church in view, Jesus said to Peter after he had questioned his disciples as to who men said that he was, “And I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” [22] The church certainly has been through a lot of things and yet it has survived. It is not going anywhere until the Lord himself comes and gets it.

Bibliography

Christensen, Bryce. "Christianity's Dangerous Idea: The Protestant Revolution-A History from the Sixteenth Century to the Twenty-First." The Booklist 104, no. 3 (2007): 22. Accessed June 16, 2014. http://search.proquest.com/docview/235593694?accountid=12085 (accessed June 16, 2014).

HarperCollins. “Discover Author Alister McGrath.” HarperCollins.com.
http://www.harpercollins.com/cr-105130/alister-mcgrath (accessed June 13, 2014).

McGrath, Alister E. Christianity’s Dangerous Idea: The Protestant Reformation – A History from the Sixteenth Century to the Twenty-First. New York, NY: HarperCollins, 2008.

Overbeck, James A. “Christianity’s Dangerous Idea: The Protestant Revolution; A History from the Sixteenth Century to the Twenty-First.” Library Journal 132, no. 13 (2007): 93. Accessed June 16, 2014. http://search.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.liberty.edu:2048/login.aspx?direct=true&
db=bah&AN=26206263&site=ehost-live&scope=site.