A BRISK TOUR OF THE REFORMATION
Part 3 (Developments in the ReformedChurch till 1900)

We are on a brisk tour of the Reformation. In the last two articles, we saw theevents that led up to the Reformation at breakneck speed and only stop to takea few snapshots from a distance. We paused ever so briefly in the 16th century,during the time when the magisterial Reformers, Calvin, Luther and Zwingli,lived. There we managed to take a few quick shorts of the landscape and anoccasional flower. In this third leg of our journey we are speeding on again.

Having seen the beauty and significance of the Reformation, we marvel at theconfusing landscape of modern Christianity. But things did not become what theyare today suddenly. There have been almost 500 years of Church history sincethe Reformation. Things began to change rapidly in the last 100 years or sobecause of the communication explosion and other reasons, and so we expect toslow down a little in our tour as we approach the present century. But for now,400 years lie ahead of us. An immense number of paths would lead to the 20thcentury so that however much we try to cover, we will still grosslyover-simplify our description of what may be seen along the way. Indeed, we canonly afford glimpses of all we see, and we shall have miss many importantscenes. What can we do in such a tourist brochure as this? But this survey isdesigned to give some very, very basic knowledge of what had gone ahead of us,so that we may have some idea of what has happened to the Reformation.

Now, since the Protestant Reformation,—even as the Roman Catholic Church movedgenerally along the line of the counter Reformation pronouncements of theCouncil of Trent (1545–1563),—the various branches of the Christian Church havemoved along one of four lines: First, some hold to the creeds and confessionsof the historic Reformed churches or wrote updated confessions which areconsistent with the earlier confessions. We may call these the Reformedchurches. Reformed Christianity developed on in England,Scotland and Netherlands, as well as France, Germanyand Switzerland.Secondly, some have continued on in some form of quasi-catholic traditions,which appear to occupy the middle ground between Roman Catholicism and theReformed Faith. Among these would be Lutheranism and Anglicanism. Thirdly, somehave departed more or less from either the quasi-catholic traditions or theReformed tradition. Among these would be the Arminians, Quakers, Pietists,Moravians, Baptists, and Methodists. And fourthly, some have entirely given upthe Bible as the infallible and authoritative Word of God. These were theSocinians, Unitarians and Modernists.

In the interest of relevancy and space, we shall, in this survey, only look atsome of the developments in the Reformed Tradition in Holland,England, Scotland and America. The influences of theother traditions, however, will become quite clear, especially in the nextarticle.

The Dutch Reformation

The Dutch Reformation may be roughly divided into four periods. The first maybe known as the Lutheran period (1517–1530), during whichtime, the church was mainly Lutheran in doctrine and character. The second maybe known as theAnabaptist period (1531–1545), during whichAnabaptistism was the dominant religious movement. It was only in 1545 and 1560that Calvinism began to infiltrate the Southern and Northern Netherlandsrespectively. Nevertheless, as Dr. Beeke notes, “the buds of Dutch Calvinismdid not flower profusely until the seventeenth century, initiated by the Synodof Dort in particular (1618–19), and intensified by the Dutch SecondReformation (Nadere Reformatie), a primarily seventeenth- and earlyeighteenth-century movement…” (Joel Beeke, “The Dutch Second Reformation,”in The Christian’s Reasonable Service by Wilhelmus á Brakel,[SDG, 1992], 1.lxxxv). It is interesting to note that, today, conservativeDutch Reformed churches are generally found not in Hollandbut in America!Among these, there are those who trace their history to the Dutch Second Reformation,and others who would denounce the key developments in the Second Reformation asbeing mystical and pietistic, and so tend to dissociate themselves from themovement while claiming continuity with the Calvinism of the earlier periods.It is also interesting to note the tendency towards legalism in the former andantinomianism in the latter.

Nevertheless, it is without dispute that the greatest contribution from Netherlands tothe Reformed Church comes by way of the Three Forms of Unity, whichcomprises the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism and the Canons ofDort.

The Belgic Confession was composed in 1561 and revised by the Synod of Dort.Its chief author was the Guido de Bres, who was one of several itinerantpreachers during those days when Roman Catholic King Philip II of Spain was persecuting Reformed believers in Belgium asbeing revolutionaries. De Bres had written the Confession mainly to testify tothe king that Reformed believers were not rebels. When the copy of theConfession was sent to the king, it went with a petition for relief ofpersecution, in which petitioners promised obedience to the king in all lawfulmatters, though they would “offer their backs to stripes, their tongues toknives, their mouths to gags, and their whole bodies to fire, rather than denythe truth of God’s Word.” The king was unmoved, and eventually De Bres died amartyr’s death. Nevertheless, the Confession became a source of greatencouragement to the persecuted saints to endure suffering for Christ’s sakeduring those troublous days, when more than 18,000 Protestants fell to theRoman Inquisition in the Netherlands.

The Heidelberg Catechism (HC) was penned by Zacharias Ursinus,professor at Heidelberg University, Germany, with possibly some contributions byCaspar Olevianus, the court preacher in Heidelberg.It was written under the behest of Elector Frederick III (i.e., Frederick the Pious), whowas converted from Lutheranism to Calvinism in 1559. It was first published in1563, and became part of the Three Forms of Unity under thedirection of the Synod of Dort. Today, this document, which was of Germanorigin, is generally known to Reformed believers not as a German statement buta Dutch statement because of its promulgation through the Three Forms ofUnity.

The Canons of Dort was the product of the Synod of Dort, which was convened bythe Dutch Parliament to examine the teachings of the disciples of JacobusArminius, known as the Remonstrants. In all, 81 theologians (56 Dutch and 25foreign) met for 154 sessions, and at the end of it condemned the five pointsasserted by the Remonstrants as being contrary to Scripture and heretical. Thearticles of the Canons are essentially a systematic apology of the doctrine ofsalvation as taught by John Calvin. This document was held in great esteem byCalvinistic churches throughout the world; and the essence of it, as summarisedin the Five Points of Calvinism or TULIP, is regarded as the yardstick ofCalvinistic orthodoxy in most English speaking churches in the world, eventoday.

In addition to the creeds, the Dutch Reformed tradition also gave rise to solidtheologians and pastors, such as William Ames, Wilhelmus á Brakel, Hendricks deCock, Abraham Kuyper, Herman Bavinck, etc.

The English Reformation

Unlike in most of Europe, the Reformation in England started much later, and hadpolitical, rather than theological, beginnings. Although William Tyndale’sEnglish New Testament had already reached England in 1526, it was not until1536 that there was some rumbling in the Church of England, which marked thebeginning of a rather tumultuous and volatile Reformation history.

King Henry VIII was granted permission by Pope Leo X to marry Catherine ofAragon after the death of his brother Arthur, her previous husband. But hislove for her waned, especially since she did not give birth to any sons whosurvived infancy. So he wanted a divorce. He asked the next pope, Clement VII, to declare that the papal permissiongiven him to marry Catherine was against the law of God, and so he was notlegally married at all. But the Pope refused to commit himself becauseCatherine was the aunt of Emperor Charles V, the most powerful monarch at thattime. Well, Henry VIII, eventually found a theologian, Thomas Cranmer, who wasready to back him up theologically and also to marry him with Anne Boleyn whomhe had already begun courting. To cut the long story short, in 1536, Henrybroke with the Pope, made Cranmer the Archbishop of Canterbury, and appointedhimself the head of the Church of England.

But Cranmer was not yet a Protestant, and so the doctrine and practices of theChurch of England remained largely Romish. But in 1538, on the advice ofCranmer, Henry decreed that an English Bible be placed in every church, andrequired that it be available for reading by the parishioners. Cranmer himselfwas, moreover, reforming, so that by 1547 when Edwards VI became king, theReformation in Englandbegan to make much progress under his guidance and the preaching of NicholasRidley and Hugh Latimer.

However, Edwards VI did not live long, and Mary Tudor, a spiteful and hardenedRoman Catholic became queen in 1553. In her reign, 300 English Protestants weremartyred (including Latimer, Ridley, Cranmer), and 800 fled to the Continent,where they imbibed the doctrinal tenets of the continental Reformers,especially Calvin. Among these was John Knox, who considered the Genevanacademy under Calvin was “the most perfect school of Christthat ever was in the earth since the days of the apostles.”

We may say that it was the Marian persecution that produced the seed bed fortrue Reformation in Englandand Scotland,for when Queen Elizabeth I ascended the throne, many of the English andScottish ministers returned to be pastors, well equipped with proper knowledgeof Reformed doctrine and practices. When Knox returned in 1559, for example, heand others were able to write the Scottish Confession, and established thefirst truly Presbyterian church based on the teachings he had received at Geneva.

But in England,especially, the state-sanctioned church remained quasi-catholic. In fact,Elizabeth I herself had some inclination to Romanism and she imposed somepractices which many conscientious Protestants could not accept. These becameknown as Puritans or Precisionists for their stance. Many remained in theAnglican Church, hopeful of further reforms, though they were inclined toPresbyterianism. Other separated themselves and form non-conformist churches.

More providential turn of events came in 1603 when James I of England becameking. Although he authorised a new translation of the English Bible (KJV) in1611, he was no friend of the Protestants. In 1604, 300 Puritan ministers weredeprived of their livings. Again, large numbers emigrated. Many went to Holland, from where they would later sail the Mayflower toMassachusetts, America, and so brought theReformation, or rather the Church, there.

In 1625, another king unsympathetic to the Reformed believers or Puritans,Charles I, became king, and three years later William Laud, a hater ofCalvinism and lover of Rome like Charles I himself, became the Bishop of London(and Archbishop of Canterbury in 1633). He undertook stringent measures tostamp nonconformity out of the Anglican Church. Laudian oppression was aleading contributor to Puritan migrations to America, such as the large groupled by John Winthrop in 1630.

But the hand of God was about to intervene so that both Charles I and Laudwould become indirect instruments for the advancement of the Reformed Faith in England and Scotland. “Surely the wrath of manshall praise thee: the remainder of wrath shalt thou restrain” (Ps 76:10).

It happened in this wise. One day, some members of Parliament, irked by Laudianpersecutions, began to speak openly against Arminianism. The king heard aboutit and in anger decided to rule without Parliament, and so for 11 years he didnot convene the Parliament.

But in 1637, William Laud decided to extend his influence, and decreed that theAnglican Prayer Book should be used also in Scottish churches. There was greatopposition, and soon the people rose in revolt. They would not be ruled bybishops. The people flocked to sign the National Covenant (1638)upholding Presbyterianism. The result was that civil war broke out.

The king quickly found out that it was not so easy to force the Scots intosubmission. He soon ran out of money and also found it difficult to raisetroops. Soon he was compelled to recall the Parliament.

The Parliament met twice in 1640. In the second sitting, known as the LongParliament, the Parliament decided to curtail the power of the king! The riftbetween Parliament and king widened. In 1642, a second civil war broke out,this time between Parliament’s New Model Army led by Oliver Cromwell and theking’s army. Immediately, John Pym, the parliamentary leader and a Puritan,decided to appeal to Scotlandto help. Scotland agreed, but on condition that the English Parliamentundertook positive steps for the reformation of religion in doctrine, worship,discipline and government of the church, according to the Word of God! Theagreement was ratified in 1643, in what is known as theSolemn League andCovenant, a religious covenant and a civil league between the Scots and theEnglish. Among other things, the signatories swore to preserve “the ReformedReligion in the Church of Scotland” and the Reformation of religion in England. TheEnglish Parliament, moreover, convened an assembly of divines to bring aboutthe necessary changes in the English churches.

This assembly met at the Westminster Abbey and is thus called the WestminsterAssembly. From 1 July, 1643, to 22 February, 1649, in 1,163 sessions, 121English divines and 6 invited Scottish commissioners met. The result was theWestminster Confession, the Larger Catechism, the Shorter Catechism, theDirectory of Worship, as well as metrical Psalter and other documents, such asthe Presbyterian Form of Church Government.

By 1646, Oliver Cromwell’s army defeated the king’s army and made Scottish helpunnecessary. In the same year, the episcopalian form of church government wasabolished in the Church of England, and three years later in 1649, King CharlesI was executed. Cromwell became the Lord Protector of England. Butbecause his army comprised many Independents, Cromwell refused to enforce or toencourage the spread of Presbyterianism.

Nevertheless, Presbyterianism has left a lasting contribution to thedevelopment of the Reformed Church through the Westminster Standards.Presbyterian churches, which remain faithful to the Confession, may be foundnot only in Scotland (whichgenerally adopted the Confession), but also in England,America, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore,and elsewhere. Many independent churches have also adopted much of what has beentaught in the Westminster Confession, including the manner of worship.

Moreover, like in the case with Holland, the Lord also raised up manyillustrious ministers of the Gospel during this period, who though dead yetspeaketh through their books, such as: William Perkins, Richard Sibbes, ThomasWatson, Thomas Manton, Joseph Caryl, John Owen, John Bunyan, Richard Baxter,Matthew Henry, etc., etc.

The Scottish Reformation

The early history of the Scottish Church may be said to becharacterised by covenants, Covenanters and confessions. Covenanters aregenerally those who affirmed the two national covenants already mentioned, andwere prepared to lay down their lives according to their vows to maintain thesole headship of Christ in the church, and therefore the spiritual independenceof the church. Many indeed laid down their lives, especially after King CharlesII was restored to the throne in 1660, following Cromwell’s death. Charles II,who had deceptively signed the two covenants in 1649, sought almost immediatelyto be recognised as the head of the church and was determined to root outanyone who opposed him. Many Covenanters were martyred as a result, during his25-year reign. But persecution only made the church stronger.

The Church of Scotland was founded in 1560 as the national Scottish Church.At that time the Scottish Confession, as well as the Genevan Confession and theSecond Helvetic Confession, were the adopted standards of the Church. In 1647,however, the Church adopted the recently completed Westminster Standards as thesubordinate standard of the church.

At first, only verbal compliance was expected of ministers of the Gospel, butby 1690, all probationers, elders and ministers were required to vowsubscription to the Confession of Faith as the true doctrine which wasconstantly to be adhered to. In 1711, the formula of subscription was tightenedso that at their ordination, ministers had to sign the following formula:

I do hereby declare, that I dosincerely own and believe the whole doctrine contained in the Confession ofFaith… to be the truth of God; and I do own the same as the confession of myfaith.

This requirement was relaxed somewhat in 1796 not without consequence; for in1843, further relaxation of the need for subscription became one of the reasonsfor the formation of the Free Church of Scotland, though the ostentatiousreason was the patronage system in which godless patrons had the legal rightsto nominate whom they wish to appoint as pastors in the churches. It is not difficultto see how the two reasons are tied. More than 400 ministers, led by ThomasChalmers, constituted the Free Church in what is historically known as theDisruption of 1843. The Free Church of Scotland claimed to be the truesuccessor of the national church reformed in 1560, because the continuance ofthe patronage system meant the setting aside of Christ as the head of theChurch in the remnant body.

The Free Church was further strengthened by unions with the Original Secession Church in 1852 and the ReformedPresbyterian Church in 1876. However, trouble loomed in 1892 when the largemajority at the General Assembly passed what is known as the Declaratory Acts,which have been criticised as being accommodative to Arminian and Amyraldianviews in the church, even though such views were contrary to the Calvinisticposition of the Confession. In reaction, the Free Presbyterian Church ofScotland was formed the next year in 1893 by two ministers, Donald Macfarlaneand Donald Macdonald. In 1900, the Free Church eventually united with theUnited Presbyterian Church (despite earlier protests by James Begg), and becameknown as the United Free Church.

The present Free Church of Scotland and Free Church of Scotland (Continuing)trace their roots to the 27 Free Church ministers who refused to be part of the1900 merger, believing that many important doctrine and church principles whichare founded upon the Westminster Confession of Faith were compromised in themerger.

The Scottish Presbyterian churches may not have great impact on Reformedchurches outside of Scotland, but the fact that the Free Church and the FreePresbyterian Church continue to maintain the polity and manner of worshipdescribed in the Westminster Confession of Faith, based on biblical convictionsrather than mere tradition, is a great encouragement to Presbyterian churchesseeking to return to the old paths and desiring to be honest to theirconfession of faith.

Those who find the courage to do so, would find a great cloud of witnesses tocheer them on, whom the Lord had raised on Scottish soils, such as: John Knox,Samuel Rutherford, George Gillespie, Thomas Boston, John Kennedy, James Begg,John Brown of Haddington, David Dickson, Rabbi Duncan, William Cunningham,James Bannerman, George Smeaton, etc., etc.

The American Reformation

We have noted that it was the persecution during the reign of James I (1603 on)and Charles I (1630 on) that led to the large number of Puritan emigrations toNew England (America).Most of these Puritans were Calvinistic, though most of the earlier settlers inNew England were Congregationalists ratherthan Presbyterians.

Nevertheless, in the early eighteenth century, many Scots emigrated, so that by1706 the first presbytery in America (PCUSA) was formed with Rev FrancisMakemie (1658–1708) as moderator. Although the first synod met in 1716 it didnot officially adopt a doctrinal standard until 1729. When it finally adoptedthe Westminster Confession, under the urging of the Scottish and Irishimmigrants, however, a clause was inserted into the Adopting Act that statesthat every member of the synod must subscribe to “the essential and necessaryarticles” of the Westminster Confession.

Although this qualifying clause was essentially to cater for the controversialtwenty-third chapter with regards to the authority of civil magistrates overthe synod, it in fact opened the way for ministers to disagree with theWestminster Confession. The fact that not everyone agreed with what are“essential and necessary” began to bear upon the church as the next generationof leaders began to rise up the rungs.

By 1810, the first permanent split in the denomination occurred over a disputeover the educational qualification of ministers and the issue ofpredestination: the Cumberland Presbyterian was founded (her ministers did notbelieve in predestination and insisted that the ordination standards forministers be more relaxed).

By 1836, the difference between those who adhered fully to the Confession andthose that did not in the PCUSA was so sharp that the denomination divided intoOld School and New School branches.

Among the numerous differences, the New School did not believe inOriginal Sin and even redefined sin merely as self-love. Interestingly a groupwhich broke away from the Old School in 1861 would combine with a group thatbroke away from the New School in 1858, and together constituted thePresbyterian Church in the US (PCUS) in 1864; while the remnant in both the OldSchool and New School would came back together in 1869 and continue to be knownas the Presbyterian Church of USA (PCUSA).

All these splits and consolidations, plus others which resulted from thoseassociated with the Associate Presbyterians and Reformed Presbyterians whichbegun independently in 1755 and 1774 respectively, would result in ninePresbyterian Denominations by the end of the 19th century, namely: (1) PCUSA;(2) PCUS; (3) Cumberland Presbyterian; (4) Second Cumberland Presbyterian; (5)Reformed Presbyterian Church of North America (Old Light); (6) ReformedPresbyterian Church of North America (New Light); (7) Associate ReformedPresbyterian of the South; (8) United Presbyterian Church of North America; and(9) Associate Synod of North America.

Without going into details, it is instructive to note that the confusingsituation in Presbyterianism in the United States at the turn of the 19thcentury was largely due to the failures by most of the groups to giveconscientious subscription to the Westminster Confession of Faith which allheld to, which was so wonderfully brought about by God’s providential guidance.This neglect would lead to further splits and departures from the Confession aswell as downright apostasy in the 20th century.

But again, despite all the struggles, many luminaries ofthe Reformed Faith,—some Presbyterian, some congregational and some Dutch,—havebeen raised on these soils during these 400 years. We can think for examples ofJonathan Edwards, William Tennent, Achibald Alexander, Robert Lewis Dabney andCharles Hodge.

Conclusion

As we indicated earlier, this survey can in no way be exhaustive even though weare extremely selective in our coverage of what happened in the Church from theReformation till 1900. But it is hoped that these articles will provide somekey information, which will give us some idea of where the Reformed Faith,particularly of the Presbyterian strain, has been heading in the last 400years.

Most of us would marvel at the wisdom and sovereignty of God by which Heprovidentially led the Church to produce the major creeds of the Reformed andPresbyterian churches. However, when we look down the history ofPresbyterianism and see how splits and mergers have occurred largely on accountof different understanding with regards to the Confession, we may tend towonder if the use of a Confession in the church is wise at all. Such a tendencyin our mind, however, occurs only because we fail to see that in fact thenumber of denominations and varied ecclesiastical expressions that have arisenfrom confessional churches is in fact extremely small when compared to theproliferation that have resulted from churches that have abandoned the use ofthe Confession altogether, while claiming to believe in the authority of theHoly Scripture.

Beside, it remains a fact that there is in general much more similarities amongdifferent believing denominations, which hold to the same Confession thanbetween any two churches which do not use any confession. And, furthermore, thefact remains that there are still churches, which seek to hold to theConfessions in all honesty, which still defend and maintain biblical worship inmuch the same way as the churches which adopted the Confession when they werefirst penned. This is amazing unity when we consider that almost 500 years havegone by, and the fact that the worship of non-confessional churches havechanged many times over.

—J.J. Lim