# Heinrich Bullinger - Question



## AdamM (Sep 12, 2006)

Friends (Dr. Clark & others), 

I have a couple questions concerning Heinrich Bullinger that I would appreciate your thoughts on. I have read in several sources that Bullinger´s work was very influential during the time of the Westminster Assembly, possibly more so even than Calvin´s (especially as it relates to the development of the covenant as an organizing principle). Do you believe that to be true? If so, why did Bullinger´s influence (and work) not carry forward with at least the same prominence as Calvin´s? Other than the Second Helvetic, any recommendations on his works? 

Thank you for your help!


----------



## crhoades (Sep 12, 2006)

Schaff-Herzog Entry on him from ccel

Start with getting The Decades - which if I'm not mistaken beat Calvin's Institutes in sales back in the day. Lot's of helpful biographical material there.

Best overall look at his theology: Architect of the Reformation

Venema's look at his views on predestination

A look at his covenantal thought as relates to politics as well.Fountainhead of Federalism: Heinrich Bullinger and the Covenantal Tradition

There are a few scholarly works on the guy that run $125+ but the above should keep you busy for a while. If you want to buy the books for me, I'll read them and let you know what they say!

[Edited on 9-12-2006 by crhoades]


----------



## crhoades (Sep 12, 2006)

Dr. Clark also has a nifty toc of the Decades here.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Sep 12, 2006)

to Chris. 

Also there are some portions of the _Decades_ online here and here.

There is another good biographical sketch here. He was, among other things, a mentor and protector of the English Puritans as discussed by A.H. Drysdale, _History of the Presbyterians in England_, p. 54 and as seen in Bullinger's Letters.


----------



## crhoades (Sep 12, 2006)

According to the Oxford Encylopedia of the Reformation, Bullinger differed with Calvin in three areas:

1. Lord's Supper - viewed it as a testimony of God's grace but did not follow Calvin that it was an instrument of God's grace. They came together at the Consensus Tigurinus which omitted the intrumentality.

2. Predestination - did not follow Calvin on double-predestination. Said to not have developed reprobation. Later, Dutch Arminians appealed to him.

3. Magistracy - Bullinger was Erastian. Single sphere where the magistrate was more in sacris vs. Calvin's view of 2 spheres and the magistrate circa sacra.


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Sep 12, 2006)

On the subject of whether Bullinger was Erastian the following extract from Jean-Marc Berthoud's 2004 Lecture on Bullinger may be helpful:



> *Let us here remove some unnecessary misunderstandings as to Bullinger´s position on the relation of the Church to the State. As a defender of Chalcedon he refused any confusion between the spiritual and the temporal orders. The Magistrate was not to usurp the proper spiritual function of the Church: the preaching of the Word and the celebration of the sacraments. The Church, on the other hand, was not to pretend to any kind of rule over the Magistrate, as was the case with the Roman theocratic system.* But one must add that the absence, for political and theological reasons, in the Zurich arrangement of 1531-1532 of that clear institutional distinction between Church and State, for which Calvin was later to fight so strenuously in Geneva, made the balance between the spiritual and temporal powers in Zurich unduly (and dangerously) dependent on the stature both of the Magistrates and of the Pastors. Once Bullinger was gone, and with him his great spiritual and political authority, the State would increasingly be tempted to dominate the Church. Nothing on the institutional level would then hinder this growing appetite for the usurped authority of the State in the spiritual sphere. This historical fact "“ that of the ulterior Erastian subordination of the Church to the State "“ may in part explain why Bullinger, the historical representative of the faithful Zurich Church, has today become so utterly unknown, even in his native canton. *The institutionalisation by Calvin of a clear distinction between Church and State was certainly more biblical (and less dangerous) than Bullinger´s political accommodation and, in the long run, certainly more productive both spiritually and politically.*
> 
> But it is best here to let Bullinger speak for himself. An important part of his Decades is given to a detailed exposition of the Ten Commandments. The sixth commandment "“ Thou shalt commit no murder "“ is separated into its two aspects: the interdiction of homicide and the description of the function of the Magistrate. In passing, it is interesting to point out that the duties of the Magistrate are usually dealt with under the fifth commandment, that ordering children to honour their parents. On this question of the biblical teaching on homicide and on civil authority, Bullinger devotes no less than four sermons in the first volume of the Parker Society edition of the Decades, some 95 pages in all. The titles of each of these sermons in the Second Decade merit attention.
> 
> ...



Source: The Evangelical Library Annual Lecture 2004: Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575) and the Reformation - A Comprehensive Faith by Jean-Marc Berthoud, Lausanne, Switzerland


----------



## crhoades (Sep 12, 2006)

Andrew, as always... thanks!

Here is the excerpt that I was using. Vol. 1, p. 229



> The third area in which Bullinger disagreed with Calvin was the nature of the Christian community. Bullinger taught that the Christian community was rightfully nder the rule of the Christian magistracy. This doctrine of the single sphere, which he had used against the Anabaptists since the early 1530's, contrasted sharply with Calvin's view of the two spheres, the civil and the ecclesiastical, with the church having control over Christian discipline. The two men never agreed on the issues of discipline and the relationship between the civil and ecclesiastical authorities.



I did find this tidbit in the biographical sketch found in the RHB copy of his Decades regarding Servetus.


> Bullinger wrote to Theodore Beza privately on August 30, 1553, saying, "But what is your most honourable senate of Geneva going to do with that blasphemous wretch Servetus? If they are wise, and do their duty, they will put him to death, that all the world may perceive that Geneva desires the glory of Christ to be maintained inviolate."


George Ella's interpretation is that Bullinger played a greater role in Servetus' death than did Calvin.

I'm on the hunt for the Berthoud piece in full now. Thanks! [ Wikipedia strikes again! Other good resources linked to as well...doh!]

[Edited on 9-13-2006 by crhoades]


----------



## AdamM (Sep 12, 2006)

Chris & Andrew, thank you!! 

Those are the type of links I was hoping to find. 

As my original post noted, I find it fascinating how a man like Bullinger who was a giant in his age can be for the most part forgotten by most Reformed folks today. If Bullinger was a more used resource in England and Scotland than Calvin at the time of Westminster, I can't see how we can correctly understand the roots of our tradition if we look at our confessions and catechisms almost solely through a Calvinian lens?


----------



## crhoades (Sep 12, 2006)

For a really good, eye-opening/expanding book, check out _Christ's Church Purely Reformed: A Social History of Calvinism_ by Benedict. Great look at others all around Calvin. We also have lost touch of Bucer, Viret, Vermigli (although experiencing a renaissance of sorts) etc.


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Sep 13, 2006)

Venema's work is much to be preferred over Fountainhead of Federalism. The best thing about the latter is the translation of Bullinger's little treatise on covenant theology -- but Lillback (I think) did a translation about '85 in his PhD diss.

Yes, Bullinger was very influential among the English in the 16th and 17th centuries. It does suggest that the modern obsession with Calvin is a little out of balance. Judging from their comments, their reading was more ecclectic than we might expect.

I've sometimes wondered whether the English found Bullinger more congenial because he was a little less mystical on the Supper, among other things? He was more reluctant to speak about predestination (though he certainly believed it!). He was perhaps perceived to be a little less controversial and more attractive to the more orthodox Anglicans? Just an hypothesis.

rsc


----------



## crhoades (Sep 13, 2006)

They always have the coolest coats, hats, and beards...


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot (Sep 13, 2006)

I also think that Thomas Cartwright, William Perkins and William Ames fall into the category of immensely influential on the Puritans but too-much neglected today by most Calvinists.


----------



## crhoades (Dec 20, 2006)

The Fifth Set of Decades can be read online for free here .


----------

