Speaking of Reformed “dead guys”, there are some who are not only dead but forgotten. And that is our loss. Some who come to mind are Martin Bucer, David Pareus and Matthius Flaccius.
Bucer, the other “Martin” of the German Reformation, was right there with Luther, Zwingli and Melanchthon through most of those frenzied early decades of the continental Reformation. He was at times befriended, at other times distrusted, by the more famous Martin. His problem was that he wanted the various factions of the Reformers to be unified in the face of threefold opposition: Secular State, fellow Reformers, and Rome.
Here is a quote from Britannica on this event:
“In the various colloquies between Protestants and Catholics or between German Lutheran and Swiss Reform churchmen, Bucer often advocated the use of obscure language and ambiguous formulas when explicit agreement between the opposing parties was impossible to attain. His justification for the use of ambiguity was that he believed that the essential goal was the reform of the people and the doctrinal issues could be worked out later.”
Another demonstration of Bucer’s pragmatism was when he (along with Melanchthon and Luther!) assured their local leader, Philip the Confessor, that he could have a second wife! And citing the Old Testament as precedent! But he later repented of this.
Where Bucer really shines is in his carrying over his work into England, having been banished from Strasburg (along with his partner, Paul Fagius) for not going along with the compromise of 1548 with Roman Catholics (It was officially called the “Augsburg Interim”, but the name is not the thing).
It was in England that Edward VI, young heir of Henry VIII, eager to put God’s truth into action, asked him for help in carrying along true Reformed principles in the kingdom newly entrusted to him. The last, best labor that Bucer brought out for this young king was his “De Regno Christi” (“The Kingdom of Christ”). Shortly afterward he died. Bucer’s fellow-fugitive, Fagius, also died about this same time (of the plague, I believe). Unfortunately Edward died also, very soon afterwards. He died young, being replaced (after a tragic interim) with “Bloody Mary”, who promptly disinterred the bones of both Bucer and Fagius.
God’s purposes and working are truly beyond our understanding. Here was the opportunity for the German Reformation to bear wonderful fruit in England. But instead – after just a couple years – all of these, the advisors and the regal advisee – died. And along comes Mary!
As far as Bucer’s writings is concerned, Britannica Encyclopaedia tells us “The definitive edition of the collected works of Bucer is now in progress”.
Martin Bucer, like all of the Reformers, was certainly a product of his times. His life is at both exemplary and cautionary. The latter especially in his willingness to, as Britannica wrote, put “the reform of the people” over “doctrinal issues“. But those doctrinal issues are the very foundation of the people of God. Martin Bucer seemed quite willing to place people over doctrine. Doing this very often leads to a people with no doctrine, because once one is determined to sacrifice lesser doctrines it becomes harder to justify or even discern the line that safeguards the essentials.
Bucer, the other “Martin” of the German Reformation, was right there with Luther, Zwingli and Melanchthon through most of those frenzied early decades of the continental Reformation. He was at times befriended, at other times distrusted, by the more famous Martin. His problem was that he wanted the various factions of the Reformers to be unified in the face of threefold opposition: Secular State, fellow Reformers, and Rome.
Here is a quote from Britannica on this event:
“In the various colloquies between Protestants and Catholics or between German Lutheran and Swiss Reform churchmen, Bucer often advocated the use of obscure language and ambiguous formulas when explicit agreement between the opposing parties was impossible to attain. His justification for the use of ambiguity was that he believed that the essential goal was the reform of the people and the doctrinal issues could be worked out later.”
Another demonstration of Bucer’s pragmatism was when he (along with Melanchthon and Luther!) assured their local leader, Philip the Confessor, that he could have a second wife! And citing the Old Testament as precedent! But he later repented of this.
Where Bucer really shines is in his carrying over his work into England, having been banished from Strasburg (along with his partner, Paul Fagius) for not going along with the compromise of 1548 with Roman Catholics (It was officially called the “Augsburg Interim”, but the name is not the thing).
It was in England that Edward VI, young heir of Henry VIII, eager to put God’s truth into action, asked him for help in carrying along true Reformed principles in the kingdom newly entrusted to him. The last, best labor that Bucer brought out for this young king was his “De Regno Christi” (“The Kingdom of Christ”). Shortly afterward he died. Bucer’s fellow-fugitive, Fagius, also died about this same time (of the plague, I believe). Unfortunately Edward died also, very soon afterwards. He died young, being replaced (after a tragic interim) with “Bloody Mary”, who promptly disinterred the bones of both Bucer and Fagius.
God’s purposes and working are truly beyond our understanding. Here was the opportunity for the German Reformation to bear wonderful fruit in England. But instead – after just a couple years – all of these, the advisors and the regal advisee – died. And along comes Mary!
As far as Bucer’s writings is concerned, Britannica Encyclopaedia tells us “The definitive edition of the collected works of Bucer is now in progress”.
Martin Bucer, like all of the Reformers, was certainly a product of his times. His life is at both exemplary and cautionary. The latter especially in his willingness to, as Britannica wrote, put “the reform of the people” over “doctrinal issues“. But those doctrinal issues are the very foundation of the people of God. Martin Bucer seemed quite willing to place people over doctrine. Doing this very often leads to a people with no doctrine, because once one is determined to sacrifice lesser doctrines it becomes harder to justify or even discern the line that safeguards the essentials.
. OK, I will look these characters up in my massive religious books.