CALVIN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY ALL SUBJECTS OF THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST: JOHN OWEN’S CONCEPTIONS OF CHRISTIAN UNITY AND SCHISM A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF CALVIN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY SUNGHO LEE GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN MAY 2007 Copyright © 2007 by Sungho Lee All rights reserved To Sunghyun, My Beloved Dove CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS viii ABSTRACT ix CHAPTER 1. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF OWEN’S ECCLESIOLOGICAL WORKS 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Brief Statement of Thesis 1 1.2 Statement of the Problem 2 1.3 Present Status of the Problem: A Historiographical Survey 3 1.4 The Scope of the Study 10 2. Owen’s Ecclesiastical Life and Works 12 2.1 From a Moderate Presbyterian to a Leading Congregationalist 12 2.2 The Interregnum and Schism Controversies 18 2.3 The Relationship between Presbyterians and Congregationalists after the Restoration 22 2.4 Owen against Catholicism and Conformism 25 3. Survey of Unity and Schism in Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century 28 3.1 The Reformers 28 3.1.1 Martin Luther 30 3.1.2 John Calvin 33 3.1.3 Peter Martyr Vermigli 36 3.2 Great Britain 38 3.2.1 The Elizabethan Puritan Movement 38 3.2.2 Separatists 41 3.2.3 Congregationalists 45 3.2.4 Roman Catholics and Anglicans 49 iv CHAPTER 2. OWEN’S CONGREGATIONAL VIEW OF THE CHURCH Introduction 54 1. Significant Shifts of Emphasis in Ecclesiology 55 1.1 From the True Church to the Nature of the Church 55 1.2 From Visible/Invisible Catholic to Visible Catholic/Particular 58 1.3 Owen’s Threefold Distinction of the Church 62 2. The Role of Scripture in Ecclesiology 66 2.1 The Authority of Scripture 67 2.2 The Divine Origin of the Church 70 2.3 The Relationship between the Old and New Testament 73 3. The Nature of the Church 79 3.1 Christ’s Presence in the Church by the Holy Spirit 79 3.2 Christ as the Immediate Head of the Church 82 3.3 Matter and From of the Church 87 3.3.1 Matter of the Church: Visible Saints 89 3.3.2 Visible Saints as the Regenerate 96 3.3.3 The Formal Cause of the Church: Church Covenant 98 3.4 Summary 106 CHAPTER 3. OWEN’S QUEST FOR THE TRUE AND BIBLICAL CONCEPTIONS OF SCHISM AND UNITY 1. Of Schism in Context 108 2. The Quest for the True Conception of Schism 112 2.1 The Biblical Definition of Schism 112 2.2 Schism and Separation in Distinction 119 3. The Quest for the True Conception of Unity 122 3.1 The Invisible Catholic Church and Unity 122 3.2 The Visible Catholic Church and Unity 127 3.2.1 Unity in the Truth Alone 127 v 3.2.2 The False Views of Unity 130 3.2.3 Summary: Congregationalism Defended 136 3.3 The Particular Church and Unity 137 3.3.1 The Particular Church as a Congregation 137 3.3.2 No True Unity without Voluntarism 140 3.3.3 Communion among Particular Congregations 148 3.3.4 Unity in Toleration 152 CHAPTER 4. OWEN’S VINDICATION OF SCRIPTURE AS THE FINAL JUDGE 1. Historical Context for John Canes’ Fiat Lux 161 2. Four Competing Supreme Judges: Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Inner Light 165 3. The Church of Rome Is Not the Final Judge 170 3.1 Protestantism Is Not Responsible for Schism 170 3.2 The Origin of the Gospel 173 3.3 The Church of Rome Is a Fallen Church 178 3.4 The Pope Is Not the Head of the Church 183 4. Scripture as the Protestant Principle of Unity 189 4.1 The Material Sufficiency of Scripture 190 4.2 Autopistos of Scripture: Problem of Authority 194 4.3 Perspicuity of Scripture 201 CHAPTER 5. OWEN’S DEFENSE OF NONCONFORMITY 1. The Problem of Uniformity at the Restoration 209 2. Unity without Civil Impositions 211 2.1 Samuel Parker (1640-1688) 211 2.2 The Church and State 213 2.3 The Magistrate and Conscience 220 2.4 The Use of Force 227 vi 2.5 Grace versus Virtue 230 3. Nonconformity Is Not Schism 234 3.1 Edward Stillingfleet (1635-1699) 234 3.2 “Walk by the Same Rule,” Philippians 3:16 237 3.3 Nonconformity Defended 243 3.3 Grounds for Nonconformity 248 CONCLUSION 257 THESES 263 BIBLIOGRPAHY 265 vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The happiest day of my entire life was when I received the admission to the Ph.D program at Calvin Theological Seminary. It has been a great blessing for me to study the Reformed theology at the seminary over the past years. With a grateful heart, I give thanks to Calvin Theological Seminary. The dissertation could not have completed without the help of many people and institutions. First of all, I express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Richard A. Muller. It is my great honor to write the dissertation under his supervision. His insight, suggestions, comments, corrections, and criticism of my dissertation made a great contribution to the dissertation. I also give special thanks to the readers for my dissertation: Dr. John Bolt, Dr. Lyle D. Bierma, and Dr. Carl R. Trueman. I would like to acknowledge all the professors who taught me at the seminary: Dr. Ronald J. Feenstra, Dr. James De Jong, Dr. John Cooper, Dr. John Bolt, Dr. Calvin van Reken, and Dr. Henry Zwaanstra. I am thankful for my parents who have supported my study for a decade with prayer. I was able to devote myself to studying due to their financial support. Finally, I owe an enormous debt of gratitude to Sunghyun and my little precious three children for their love, sacrifice, and encouragement. Their presence with me as such has been a great comfort and strength throughout the course of this work. Soli Deo Gloria! viii ABSTRACT Throughout the seventeenth century the Church of England experienced disintegration and schism. Each Protestant party charged the other with breaking the unity of the church. For this reason, schism and unity were one of the most controversial issues that leading theologians wrestled with. However, scholars have not paid due attention to this issue. The object of this dissertation is to explore how John Owen, a great leader of the second-generation Congregationalists, defended Congregationalism, Protestantism, and Nonconformity from the charge of schism. Aware that the ecclesiological terms, such as “schism,” “unity,” and “separation,” were seriously abused by his opponents, Owen carefully redefined those terms based upon his own biblical interpretation. Accordingly, the dissertation surveys Owen’s ecclesiastical life and works against the historical background of ecclesiology in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, recognizing that ecclesiology was one of Owen’s main theological concerns throughout his life, and that ecclesiology in general and schism and unity in particular were significantly developed by him in debate. The general tenets of Owen’s ecclesiology are examined in his two definitive ecclesiological works: An Inquiry into the Original, Nature, Institution, Power, Order, and Communion of Evangelical Churches and The True Nature of a Gospel Church. Examination of Owen’s Of Schism and his controversy with Daniel Cawdrey, a prominent English Presbyterian, shows more precisely what the real issues were between ix Congregationalists and Presbyterians with regard to the unity of the church. Owen’s criticism of Fiat Lux, a Roman Catholic work written by John Vincent Canes, reveals that the problem of authority is fundamental to the understanding of unity and schism: for Owen, Scripture is the final judge in all religious matters not only in itself but also in relation to us. In Owen’s apologies against two eminent Conformists, Samuel Park and Edward Stillingfleet, the question of “unity how?” is as important as that of “unity in what?” Owen argues that Nonconformity is not schism but the true way to Christian unity whereas imposition of conformity is a false way. x CHAPTER 1 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF OWEN’S ECCLESIOLOGICAL WORKS 1. Introduction 1.1 Brief Statement of Thesis This essay will explore the controversies surrounding schism during the latter half of the seventeenth century in England with special reference to John Owen, who devoted a great amount of his energy to defending Congregationalism from the charge of schism. The changes of the religious situation in England pressed Owen throughout his life to write on the Christian unity and schism. His opponents and partners in debate included not only Presbyterians and Conformists but also Roman Catholics. It is little surprise to find that ecclesiology in general and unity and schism in particular were one of Owen’s major theological concerns. Owen believed not only that the church fell into schism but that the concepts of unity and schism themselves were seriously corrupted. He noticed that each religious party of his time used the terms “unity” and “schism” ambiguously and incorrectly. Typically, unity was defined as a complete communion with the catholic church, and schism as a causeless separation from her. According to the traditional concepts of unity and schism, Congregationalism can hardly escape from the charge of schism. In order to overcome this predicament, Owen felt the need for a biblically grounded criterion determining the meaning of unity and schism. By careful expositions of the Scriptures, Owen set up ‘new’ notions of unity and schism and then used them in defense of Congregationalism. Accordingly, the importance of exegesis and, in particular, pre- 1 2 critical models of interpretation were significant to Owen’s resolution of ecclesiological issues. 1.2 Statement of the Problem Twenty years after Owen’s death, Cotton Mather, one of the most eminent Puritans in New England, lamented, “The church of God was wronged, in that the life of the great John Owen was not written.”1 I would argue, further, that given the importance of issues concerning the church, its nature, its unity and schism to Owen, the study of Owen’s thought would be incomplete until a satisfactory study on Owen’s ecclesiology is written.