10390794.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
https://theses.gla.ac.uk/ Theses Digitisation: https://www.gla.ac.uk/myglasgow/research/enlighten/theses/digitisation/ This is a digitised version of the original print thesis. Copyright and moral rights for this work are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge This work cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given Enlighten: Theses https://theses.gla.ac.uk/ [email protected] EUCHARISTIC SACRIFICE AND THE PATRISTIC TRADITION IN THE Th e o l o g y o f m a r t in b u c e r I534-I546. by Nicholas James Thompson Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of Glasgow Appli^Qoo, © Nicholas Thompson 2ooo ProQuest Number: 10390794 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest ProQuest 10390794 Published by ProQuest LLO (2017). C o pyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code Microform Edition © ProQuest LLO. ProQuest LLO. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.Q. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346 w IJITY I 11 A b s t r a c t The Reformation debate over eucharistie sacrifice threw the relationship between Scripture and Tradition into sharp relief. While apologists for the status quo appealed to Scripture, they usually admitted that it could not be defended without an appeal to Tradition as well. For the Reformers, on the other hand, the “sacrifice of the Masses” epitomised the triumph of the human words and institutions over the Word of God. The Mass was replaced with new liturgies consistent with what the Reformers held to be a scriptural doctrine of the sacrament. Martin Bucer is widely recognised as the “ecumenist” among the Reformers. His irenic activity was directed not only at securing unity within the Evangelical movement, but also at mending the divisions which the Reformation had opened in the wider European church. From 1534, Bucer sought to reassure adherents of the traditional church that Evangelical doctrine was consistent not only with Scripture but with the decrees of the councils and popes, the writing of the church fathers and even the scholastics. He sought as well to engage them in a joint reformation of the church based on the historical consensus ecclesiae. This study assesses Martin Bucer’s theology of eucharistie sacrifice in terms of this broader project. Its development is traced from his earliest published attack on the Mass in 1523, but the focus of the study is Bucer’s writing between 1534 and 1546. This period covers his involvement in the Second Colloquy of Leipzig (1539) and the secret colloquy of Worms (1540). It also covers his involvement with Hermann von Wied’s attempt to introduce the Reformation to the Archdiocese of Cologne in the wake of the First Colloquy of Regensburg (1541). Two works are considered here. The first is Constans defensio (1543): Bucer’s response to the Antididagma (1543) in which the Cologne cathedral chapter attacked the archbishop’s reform proposals. The second is Bucer’s De vera et falsa caenae dominicae administratione (1546). In both Bucer appealed to the fathers. This time, however, he did so to distinguish his understanding of eucharistie sacrifice from that of Johannes Cropper, the Catholic theologian who had collaborated with him on the Worms-Regensburg Book. Their debate clarifies ambiguities in the articles on the Mass which emerged from the Colloquies. It also sheds light on Bucer’s own understanding of these articles. During the era of the colloquies, Bucer seems to have been ready to countenance the continued use of th,eM^&s 2of the Roman rite in the Catholic territories of Germany, but subject provisos. Firstly, the private Mass would be abolished. Secondly, congregational communion would be encouraged at Ill public Masses. Thirdly, the Roman Canon would be subject to a “suitable interpretation,” and the priests and people would be instructed in it. The suitable interpretation would involve the following components. Firstly, the people would be warned against superstitious faith in the opus operatum. The opus operatum would be interpreted in terms of Bucer’s later theology of sacramental efficacy; i.e. as the exhihitio of the body and blood of Christ and its faithful consumption. The “application” of Christ’s sacrifice to non-communicants, living and dead would be understood as thanksgiving and intercession offered by Christ’s members through, with and in Christ their head. The “merits” of the saints would be understood as their intercession for the church militant. “Offering” for the dead would be understood as the church’s recognition of its communion with those who had died in Christ, and its hope to share with them in the resurrection. While Bucer and Cropper failed to agree on the nature of Christ’s presence in the eucharist, both agreed that, considered as a whole, the Last Supper fulfilled the types of the Old Testament sacrifices. It did so as realised memorial. In both Cod’s past deeds were recalled with thanksgiving. Material goods were presented which “represented” both the people’s thanksgiving and the fruits of Cod’s action in the past. A portion of this offering was eaten in Cod’s presence. A portion was set aside for the use of the poor. In both rituals, priest and people anticipated the completion of Cod’s promises. For Israel, this fulfilment was Christ. For the church it was the perfect unity of Christ and his body. IV Ta ble o f C o n t e n t s 1. INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................1 2. THE PLACE OF TRADITION IN THE DEBATE ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.............................................................................. 10 2.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................10 2.2 The Authority of Tradition on the Eve of the Reformation............................ 13 2.2.1 Humanism as a complicating factor...............................................................17 3. THE EARLY DEBATE ON THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS...................... 23 3.1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 23 3.2 The Protestant Critique..........................................................................................23 3.2.1 Testamentum etPromissio................................................................................ 23 3.2.2 The Opus Operatum and its Application to Others.....................................24 3.3 The Catholic Response........................................................................................... 29 3.3.1 Sacrificium...................................................... 32 3.3.2 Sacramentum Sacrificii......................................................................................37 3.3.3 The Opus Operatum and its Application to Others.....................................42 3.3.4 The Historical Development of the Mass................................................. 48 3.3.5 The Memorial of the Faithful Departed and the Saints.............................. 51 4. THE USE OF TRADITION AMONC THE REFORMERS.............................55 4.1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 55 4.2 The Reformers’ Use of the Fathers in the Debate on the Sacrifice of the Mass...................................................................................................................... 56 4.2.1 Questioning the Authenticity of the Authorities........................................ 56 4.2.2 Sacrificium..........................................................................................................57 4.2.3 Sacramentum Sacrificii......................................................................................61 4.2.4 The Application of the Mass......................... 64 4.2.5 The Private Mass............................................... 66 4.2.6 The C anon.........................................................................................................67 4.3 Summary: Eucharistie Sacrifice and Tradition in the Early Reformation................................................................................................................68 5. BUCER’S EARLY WRITINC ON THE MASS: 1523-1531.................................71 5.1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 71 5.1.1 The Abolition of the Mass in Strasbourg......................................................71 5.1.2 From the Abolition of the Mass to the Early 1530s....................................78 5.2 Bucer’s Early Critique of the M ass........................................................................80