Spiritual Reformers in the 16th & 17th CenturiesJones, Rufus M. (Rufus Matthew)
Religion
Spiritual Reformers in the 16th & 17th Centuries
Jones, Rufus M. (Rufus Matthew)
Mysticism; Reformers
Coornhert criticizes the great Reformers for having put far too weighty
emphasis on externals, and he especially criticizes Calvin for having
given undue prominence to "pure doctrine" and to the right use of
sacraments. It is impossible, he insists, to establish authoritatively
from Scripture this so-called "pure doctrine." In fact, many parts of
Scripture are against the doctrine of predestination, and Scripture is
always against the doctrine of perseverance in sin. All speculations
about the Trinity, or about the dual nature of Christ, transcend our
knowledge and should be rejected. Furthermore {112} there is no
authoritative Scripture or revelation for the new forms of the sacrament
that have been introduced by the Reformers and are being made essential
to salvation. The true Reformation, he thinks, should be devoted to the
construction of the invisible Church, which has existed in all ages of
the world, but which is kept from realizing its full scope and power
because the attention of men is too greatly absorbed with signs and
symbols and outward things.[11]
For similar reasons he disapproved of the Anabaptists, even in their
purified form as worked out under the guidance of Menno Simons. They
still held, as did the reformed churches, that the true Church is a
visible church which every one to be a Christian must join, though this
true Church, as they conceive it, consists only of "saints." They claim
the authoritative right to ban all persons who, according to their
opinion, are not "saints." This right Coornhert denies. He further
disapproves of their literal interpretations of the Sermon on the Mount,
and of the obstacles which they put in the way of the free exercise of
prophecy on the part of the members of the community. He insists that a
person may be a Christian and yet belong to no visible church, if
meantime he is a true member of the invisible Communion. He himself
refrained from taking the communion supper, either with Papists,
Lutherans, or Calvinists, because he said they all set the sacrament
above the real characteristic mark of Christian membership, which is
love, and because there is no divine command, with distinct and
unambiguous authority, for the efficacious celebration of the sacrament,
which in any case could not be rightly kept so long as sectarian
hostility and lack of love prevail in the contending visible
churches.[12] Under these circumstances, Coornhert, who was intensely
concerned for the sincere, simple-minded souls, perplexed by the maze of
varying sects and parties, refused to found a new sect or to head a new
schismatic movement. On behalf of those who could not {113} conform, he
pleaded for freedom of conscience and for the right to live in the world
undisturbed as members of the invisible Church, using or omitting outward
ceremonies as conscience might direct, waiting meantime and seeking in
quiet faith for the coming of new and divinely commissioned apostles who
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account