Scripture alone paved way to Reason alone
When Martin Luther, an Augustinian friar, began his rebellion against the Catholic Church 500 years ago he had no idea just how much destruction he would cause.
Within a year or so he adopted the slogan, "sola Scriptura", Scripture alone.
Radically individualistic, this fundamental slogan of the whole rebellion led to the eventual wipe out of Christianity in large parts of Europe.
Luther argued that Scripture was the Word of God, so everything God wanted to say was in it. People only had to read it to know God's plan.
They had no need, then, of any other teacher. They did not need a pope and bishops, nor the views of saints or theologians, nor the credal statements of the great councils, nor the witness of the martyrs.
“No faithful Christian can be forced beyond the sacred Scripture, which is nothing less than divine law, unless new, approved revelation is added," said Luther in 1519.
Other reformers, popping up in many German and Swiss cities, agreed with him. Like Zwingli in Zurich.
He declared in 1522 that “no such trust should be given to any word like that given to God's word. For it is certain and may not fail. It is clear and will not leave us to err in darkness."
Few seemed to notice at the time that this teaching itself was not found in Scripture. Nor did the Bible say which books belonged to it, so how were Christians to know where to go for God's word?
What quickly did become clear, however, was that Scripture, cut off from the Church's teaching authority, seemed to be saying conflicting things to different reformers.
Luther, for example, still believed that the bread and wine became the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist. But in a space of 5 years, at least nine other reformers wrote vehemently against him.
Meanwhile infant baptism came under fire from different quarters, with Zwingli defending it and Conrad Grebel, his former colleague, calling it "a senseless, blasphemous abomination, against all Scripture.”
Nor could the various reformers agree on care of the poor, the power of the sacraments, military service, prayers for the dead, devotion to Mary, the role of the Holy Spirit and the divinity of Christ.
Not even sacred images were safe, and countless paintings, statues and other religious treasures were burnt or broken.
Hundreds of new Christian groups were springing up. Some argued that God's word could be understood only with the Holy Spirit's guidance. But again the Spirit seemed to be guiding each reformer along his own path. More division.
The crucial thing for a reformer was to get the local ruler or political authority on his side. This would give some standing to his reading of Scripture.
An ever-growing number of conflicting groups had to manage without this support, but their influence was very limited as a result.
On the other hand, rulers were happy to back a reformer who would support their various military campaigns for increased power and territory, and who would help discipline the populace.
In this way wars which were primarily waged for political reasons ended up being called "religious wars".
After centuries of growing divisions, Protestantism, says Brad Gregory, cannot be compared with Catholicism in any meaningful way (The Unintended Reformation).
Rather, Protestantism is now "an umbrella designation of groups, churches, movements, and individuals whose only common feature is a rejection of the authority of the Roman Catholic Church."
So there is no point in asking what Protestants believe. It depends on the group or individual.
Seeing the growing divisions in society, various groups returned to the Catholic faith. Others decided that faith should be treated as a private opinion and excluded from the public square, where "Reason alone" would rule.
But Reason alone, as a path to truth and unity, turned out to be as divisive as Scriptura sola.
Within a year or so he adopted the slogan, "sola Scriptura", Scripture alone.
Radically individualistic, this fundamental slogan of the whole rebellion led to the eventual wipe out of Christianity in large parts of Europe.
Luther argued that Scripture was the Word of God, so everything God wanted to say was in it. People only had to read it to know God's plan.
They had no need, then, of any other teacher. They did not need a pope and bishops, nor the views of saints or theologians, nor the credal statements of the great councils, nor the witness of the martyrs.
“No faithful Christian can be forced beyond the sacred Scripture, which is nothing less than divine law, unless new, approved revelation is added," said Luther in 1519.
Other reformers, popping up in many German and Swiss cities, agreed with him. Like Zwingli in Zurich.
He declared in 1522 that “no such trust should be given to any word like that given to God's word. For it is certain and may not fail. It is clear and will not leave us to err in darkness."
Few seemed to notice at the time that this teaching itself was not found in Scripture. Nor did the Bible say which books belonged to it, so how were Christians to know where to go for God's word?
What quickly did become clear, however, was that Scripture, cut off from the Church's teaching authority, seemed to be saying conflicting things to different reformers.
Luther, for example, still believed that the bread and wine became the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist. But in a space of 5 years, at least nine other reformers wrote vehemently against him.
Meanwhile infant baptism came under fire from different quarters, with Zwingli defending it and Conrad Grebel, his former colleague, calling it "a senseless, blasphemous abomination, against all Scripture.”
Nor could the various reformers agree on care of the poor, the power of the sacraments, military service, prayers for the dead, devotion to Mary, the role of the Holy Spirit and the divinity of Christ.
Not even sacred images were safe, and countless paintings, statues and other religious treasures were burnt or broken.
Hundreds of new Christian groups were springing up. Some argued that God's word could be understood only with the Holy Spirit's guidance. But again the Spirit seemed to be guiding each reformer along his own path. More division.
The crucial thing for a reformer was to get the local ruler or political authority on his side. This would give some standing to his reading of Scripture.
An ever-growing number of conflicting groups had to manage without this support, but their influence was very limited as a result.
On the other hand, rulers were happy to back a reformer who would support their various military campaigns for increased power and territory, and who would help discipline the populace.
In this way wars which were primarily waged for political reasons ended up being called "religious wars".
After centuries of growing divisions, Protestantism, says Brad Gregory, cannot be compared with Catholicism in any meaningful way (The Unintended Reformation).
Rather, Protestantism is now "an umbrella designation of groups, churches, movements, and individuals whose only common feature is a rejection of the authority of the Roman Catholic Church."
So there is no point in asking what Protestants believe. It depends on the group or individual.
Seeing the growing divisions in society, various groups returned to the Catholic faith. Others decided that faith should be treated as a private opinion and excluded from the public square, where "Reason alone" would rule.
But Reason alone, as a path to truth and unity, turned out to be as divisive as Scriptura sola.
