This afternoon we're going to focus on another lesser-known reformer who has largely been overlooked in modern discussions of the Reformation, but who made a significant contribution in his own day as a reformer and as a promoter of Protestant unity. This man is Martin Bucer, who lived from 1491 to 1551. And let's begin by considering his early years. Martin Bucer, or Bucer, was born in 1491 in Selestat, South Germany. His father, Claus Busser, was a cobbler or a shoemaker by trade and made a very meager living. However, despite his meager means, Busser's father made it possible for Martin to have a good primary education at the Latin school in Selestat. where Martin gained proficiency in Latin and in Aristotelian logic and philosophy. Martin was an excellent student and he would have done very well had he immediately gone to a university. However, his family did not have the means to send him, so at the urging of his grandfather, Martin joined the Dominican religious order. Because by joining that religious order, Martin would at least have some chance for intellectual development, and the Dominicans were known in that day for their intellectual activity. And within that order, Martin did advance. He first served as an acolyte, then he took his vows to become a Dominican monk, and then he was consecrated as a deacon in the year 1510. The Order also recognized Martin's intelligence and promise and sent him to the Dominican Monastery in Heidelberg to study theology. A year later, Luther was ordained a priest, so he had basically a year or so of theological training, and then he enrolled at the University of Heidelberg to further his formal education. While at the university, Busser read all the works of Thomas Aquinas, who was especially revered by the Dominicans, and he became increasingly fond of and influenced by the works of Erasmus, the Roman Catholic humanist who, as we know, influenced several reformers. But more importantly, Busser was also exposed to Martin Luther's 95 theses. And when Busser heard that Luther had actually been invited to Heidelberg to present his theology at what would become known as the Heidelberg Disputation, Busser attended the event. And while there, Busser not only met Luther in person, but he also became convinced that Luther's theology was correct. After this, Busser returned to his studies at the university and received his degree in early 1519. But Busser could no longer conceal his new theological convictions. Busser began to speak out against Aquinas and the medieval scholastics. He began to proclaim the clear Augustinianism that he had learned from Martin Luther. And in time, Luther found himself at odds with his own religious order. For the Dominicans were not about to follow Luther, they were strict adherents and followers of Thomas Aquinas. nor do they want one who is sympathetic to Luther within their order, because Luther is still very much a renegade at this particular time in history. And so sensing that his religious order was contemplating disciplinary action against him, Luther requested that he be released from his monastic vows, and on April 29th, in the year 1521, Busser left the Dominican Order. Following his release, Busser served for a short time as the court chaplain to Frederick II, Count Palatine of the Rhine, which afforded Busser the opportunity to live in Nuremberg, which was the most powerful city in the empire at that time. And there he met many people who shared the same theological sympathies as he did, and through the associations he made in that city, he was offered the position of pastor of the town of Lundstuhl. Shortly after that, Büsser became one of the first priests of the Reformation to break his vow of celibacy by marrying a former nun by the name of Elizabeth Pallas, who would eventually bear him 13 children. In fact, it was Booser's marriage that prompted Erasmus to remark that the Reformation was not so much a tragedy as a comedy, because it always ended, it seemed, with a marriage. And if you think about that, that's true, because after priests would reform, in time they would realize that marriage was ordained of God and they would marry. After a short period in Lundstuhl, Busser traveled to Wittenberg for further studies. However, en route to that city, he stopped in the town of Wissenberg, where the leading reformer of that city, a man named Heinrich Motherer, asked him to become his chaplain instead. Booster, seeing an opportunity to work with an established reformer, stayed and worked with Motherer, but sadly, their labors together were short-lived. Some of the changes that Motherer and Booster tried to implement stirred up the people of the city. Shocking, right? The people of the city are not open-minded to reform. And although the city council wanted them to stay, Motherer and Busser had to leave the city out of concerns for their safety. And from there, in the year 1523, Busser fled to Strausburg in France. In fact, Strausburg is located right on the border of Germany and France, where he would soon find his place as a reformer among reformers, and have the opportunity in due time to promote unity among reformers. Before I go any further, let me stop there and ask if there are any questions or comments on this introductory portion of this slide. Any questions or comments? This brings us to the second phase of Booster's life that I'd like for us to consider, and that is Booster's labors as a reformer and as a promoter of Protestant unity. For once Busser arrived in Strausburg, he met up with an established reformer in that city named Matthew Zell. And under Zell's tutorage, Busser was given opportunities to preach and to teach, and was eventually called to be the preaching pastor of a Protestant parish in that town known as St. Aurelian. Busser also met and joined with other Reformers in that area, and in time, Busser began to emerge more and more as the leader of the Reformation efforts in that city. For example, Busser participated in public disputations with Roman Catholic theologians. the most notable being his debate with Franciscan Thomas Moerner over the nature of the Roman Catholic Mass. In that debate, Busser repudiated the idea that the Roman Catholic Mass was a true sacrifice, and he argued that it should be abolished, the Mass should be abolished, since it was not a true observance of the Lord's Supper. Furthermore, as support for the Reformation in Stroudsburg widened, the city leaders asked for an official summary of the Reformed faith. And in response, Booser published his Twelve Articles of Faith. In these articles, Booser listed the following as key Reformed doctrines. the doctrine of justification by faith, the belief in the absolute authority of scripture, and the complete rejection of the mass, the doctrine of purgatory, and the traditional Roman Catholic liturgy. In addition to his twelve articles of faith, Busser also created a new liturgy for the Reformed churches. And he even sent it to Zurich. Now, who's in Zurich? Do you remember? It's Wien. And he sent it to Wittenberg. Who's in Wittenberg? Well, the Lutherans are. In hopes of uniting all the Protestant churches around one common order of worship. But that was not to be. For already by this time, the differences between the reformers in Zurich, the Swiss reformers, and Wittenberg, where the Lutherans were, were so great, especially regarding the Lord's Supper, that adopting a common order of worship was impossible. However, Busser did not give up on the possibility of unity, for in the year 1529, Busser attended the Marburg Colloquy, or the Marburg Conference, which we talked about last Sunday, where Booster tried to mediate between Zwingli and Luther and help them to come to an agreement over the nature of the Lord's Supper. But that conference, as you know from last week, was not a success. Booster left that conference genuinely sorrowful that a compromise for unity could not be reached. But the real lack of unity between Luther and Zwingli did not hinder Busser from continuing God's work of reform in Strausburg. And as time went on, Busser's own ministry as a reformer expanded. For in 1530, Busser became president of a newly founded church council, which was given full ecclesiastical authority in Strausburg. which was now an evangelical city. And once in that position of authority, Busser implemented more reforms. And over the next 19 years, Busser labored tirelessly to make Strasbourg a Protestant stronghold by strengthening the churches, establishing Christian schools, including a seminary, by writing extensively, by lodging persecuted refugees, because there are refugees spread out all over Europe and they need a place to go, and nurturing relationships with other churches throughout Germany, France, and Switzerland. And of course, one of the refugees that Busser would receive and mentor was a young man by the name of John Calvin. who had been forced to flee from Geneva and who ended up staying in Strausburg by Busser's invitation. During the time that Calvin stayed in Strausburg, which was the years 1538 to 1541, Busser ensured that Calvin had a place to minister and a place to write, and he, Busser, taught Calvin a great deal in the areas of church discipline, Christian ministry, and the public worship of God. In fact, it's interesting to note how much Calvin actually learned from Lusser in those particular areas. In fact, one thing that Lusser clearly taught Calvin was the importance and use of catechism where Busser had written three catechisms for use in Straussburg. And Calvin used them extensively while there. In fact, there's good reason to believe that Calvin actually used them in the church and possibly even preached on portions of them while he was in Straussburg. And later, after Calvin returned to Geneva, one of the first things that Calvin did was to write a new catechism which he attached to new articles of organization for reforming the church in Geneva. Thus, Booster's influence on Calvin was considerable and noticeable. But while Booster trained others for the cause of reformation, his real burden was for unity among the Protestant churches. This was seen in the year 1536, when Busser traveled to Wittenberg and again tried to secure an agreement with Martin Luther and the Lutheran churches over the Lord's Supper. During their meeting together, which became known as the Wittenberg Concord, Busser presented a much more traditional doctrine of the Lord's Supper than Zwingli had earlier. And as a result, Bucer reached an agreement with Luther that Christ's body and blood are given with the bread and the wine. However, a lasting agreement between them was not possible because Bucer would not accept the idea That even unbelievers receive the body and blood of Christ when they partake. And Luther was adamant about that. That the Lord's Supper was so efficacious and that the presence of Christ's body and blood were so much in the elements. that even unbelievers were partaking of the body and blood of Christ when they participated in the Lord's Supper. And Busser could not agree with that. Busser held that Christ's body and blood are only received by faith, and thus only received by the faithful. And thus, despite his repeated efforts at securing unity between Protestants over the supper, Busser was never able to do so. nor was he able to hold back the political forces that would eventually stop his labors in Strasbourg. For in 1549, Emperor Charles V imposed harsh restrictions on Protestants in Germany and, of course, in France. Busser, refusing to accept them, was forced to leave the city and go into exile. So here we find Busser going into exile for the next phase of his life in ministry. Before we go any further, let me stop here and ask if there are any questions or comments that anyone would like to make. Yes, Frank? How did Busser feel about an unbeliever celebrating a horse sacrifice? What effect did he see that as having? Well, Luther would say that a person who was an unbeliever would be eating and drinking damnation unto themselves, but his real argument was that the presence of Christ was so in the supper, and it was not contingent upon whether there was the presence of faith or not. Some of the Reformers argued that Christ was spiritually present in the supper, and that there was a spiritual transaction, if I can use that word, between Christ and those who had faith. Luther, on the other hand, said that faith was not necessary for the presence of Christ to be there. The Christ's presence was there whether the person was a believer or not. And that was essentially his argument. No, he doesn't encourage them. To Luther's credit, he never says that unbelievers should partake. of the Lord's Supper. I mean, he understands the scriptural admonitions against taking the Lord's Supper as an unbelief. But Luther does not want to make the presence of Christ contingent on whether or not a person is a believer or not. Yes, Rob? I think one of the subjects you're keeping in mind is that virtually everybody in that day and age is a Catholic. And because they were baptized, and because Luther sees the gospel in baptism as well as in communion, you have people in the churches. And so it's more of a reformed anxiety to ensure that everybody taking the The bread of the Lord. The form of the bread is wine. It's the liquor of the body and blood. The immortal forms the anxiety to ensure that that individual is a Christian believer. There is a promise. It's testamental. It's not evidence. It's a promise that's given at baptism. It's a promise that's given at communion. And so, actually, Brewster, in the Heisenberg, in the Marquardt book, attempts to try to put the spirit of Christ into the body of blood. And he sees ecumenism as a big one. He's branded as really violent political oppressor. Of course, Calvin eventually picks up on that later. But what Utser tries to do is he tries to compromise. And when he says so, he will. I'm not going to agree that the body and blood are actually there. What I'm going to say is they're spiritually there. So we have no presence. Yeah, that's an excellent explanation, Rob, really. But Busser's attempts to reach a compromise with Luther are not looked upon favorably by Zwingling and others. They are seen as a compromise. I think Busser is not guilty of a compromise, however. I think he's strategic. I think he's wanting to find at least the minimum common ground. And Busser cannot agree with in, with, and under, but he can agree with with. And so if that's all that we can agree on, just the with, and of course then we have to define that and think about the implications of it, but if that's all we can agree on, we'll agree on that point. And Zwingli and others say no, that's a compromise completely. Luther senses that he has somewhat of a victory, But then when Luther presses his point, no, we have to go as far as to say that even the believers will take to the body and blood of Jesus Christ. Then that's when Busser really realizes where Luther's going and Busser says, no, I can't go that far. So those who would accuse Busser of compromise, I think are a little harsh in that Busser does draw the line in the sand, but he is willing to go further than others. He is willing to find that minimal common ground that they can agree upon. The reason for that is because Bucer, or Bucer as a man with great love for the Church of Jesus Christ, is still greatly burdened about the differences that exist between the Swiss believers and the German believers. And he understands the potential hazard of that continued disunity. So he's really, really concerned and burdened about that. Any other comments or questions? Yes, right here. But some people go so far as to say that he's so swayed by the political situation of the day, he actually makes a statement to Hoover, and he says, hey look, England wouldn't have a doctrinal issue like this if it hadn't been for the United. which to us might even sound a little horrific, to them, in the nature of classical professionalism, where the divisions are being more firmly separated, an ecumenical person is just like a borderline parasitic. Right. In that day, yes. In that day. Yeah, in that day. Right. He is severely disappointed. I was really disappointed that he couldn't reach an agreement with Luther. But Luther is devastated really. because he has a passion for the church and a passion for unity. It kind of strikes me funny when I think about this in the modern day context. I mean certainly modern evangelicals wouldn't see Busser as a compromiser. They would wonder what the issue even is and why there was even a debate between Zwingli and Luther and Busser to begin with. But as you said, in that day of rising confessionalism, everybody's striking out on their own, so to speak, and writing their own confessions. And differences are really brought to the surface more than common principles and common beliefs. But it is a problem. Any other comments or questions? OK. Well, this brings us to the last two aspects of Lusser's life that I want us to consider this afternoon. In those being, Busser's remaining labors in England and his real legacy as a reformer. As you recall just a few moments ago, I said that because of political pressure, Busser goes into exile, leaves France. And shortly after fleeing from Strasbourg, Busser receives an invitation from Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury, to come to England and to assist with the work of Reformation there. And Bucer accepted his invitation. In fact, it appears that Bucer also had an invitation from Calvin to come and to assist him and Geneva at the same time. But Bucer sensed that he would be of greater use in England given that the Reformation was still in the early stages there. Because I want you to try to recall, I don't know if you wrote these dates down, Usser actually flees from Strasbourg in 1549. And in England, King Henry VIII only died two years prior, in 1547. So that gives you an idea of how early the Reformation is going on in England. So Booster senses he can be of greater value going to England and helping out there than he could to go to Geneva and help Calvin, where the work of the Reformation is more established. And once Booster arrived in England, he was put to work. For immediately he was appointed Regius Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, and he began teaching theology to large classes of enthusiastic students committed to reform. Some of these students would graduate and exercise considerable influence in the Anglican Church in England, which greatly benefited from Busser's labors. Furthermore, Busser's counsel was continually sought by Cranmer and by England's king, Edward VI. You may remember in your studies of the English monarchy, I know you're very familiar with them and you could list all the English monarchs by memory, but England's King Edward VI was the boy king and he ended up dying at age 15 and he was followed by Mary I. I think you remember who Mary was, Queen Mary. So that gives you an idea of the time frame that's going on. And again, Busser's counsel would be sought by Cranmer and by England's king, Edward VI, on issues of church polity and on matters of ongoing church reform. One such issue was a significant revision to the Book of Common Prayer, which Busser oversaw and which led to a major theological disputation where Booster spoke and won over some of the English bishops to the cause of evangelical reform. So what I'm stating here is that Booster not only influenced students, but God put him in situations where he was also able to speak and influence English bishops at that time for the cause of reformation. Also at the request of the king, Busser wrote his greatest and last theological work entitled The Reign of Christ. This book, which Busser wrote in less than three months' time, was written to answer the king's questions as to the true nature of Christ's kingdom. What is the kingdom like, and how is that kingdom manifested in the world? And in this work, Busser argued that the only way to further the reign of Christ was to establish an evangelical Christian nation which followed the model of the Mosaic law of the Old Testament. But of course, this idea was not original to the circle, and this idea continues to circulate even in our own day, as there are a few who would argue that we need to implement the Mosaic law again, in certain contexts. After writing The Reign of Christ, however, Bucer took seriously ill, and before the king could express his full appreciation for the book, Bucer died on February 28, 1551. Bucer was 60 years old, which is a good ripe old age in that particular day. And in recognition of his service to Christ and to the monarchy, Looser's body was laid to rest in Cambridge, inside the University Church, which is called Great St. Mary's. Although it's interesting to note that during the reign of Queen Mary, the Queen's commissioners destroyed Looser's tomb, dug up his final remains, and had them publicly burnt. However, later, during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, his tomb was restored. And today, there is a gold plaque on the ground, in fact, I had the privilege of seeing this when I was in Cambridge a year or so ago, which is on the ground slightly behind the altar in Great St. Mary's Church, which serves as a memorial to Booster and his faithful laborers. As for his written remains, Booser left behind him a sizable corpus or body of written works, ranging from catechisms to theological correspondence to commentaries on whole books of the Bible. However, his theological and biblical writings were never as popular as those of other Reformers, and even today, the large majority of Busser's works remain untranslated from the Latin in which Busser wrote them. This is largely because Busser was, well, quite frankly, very long-winded. In fact, Luther, who knew Busser personally, called Busser a chatterbox. Sadly, this tendency to be overly verbose carried over into Busser's writing style as well. In fact, John Calvin, who's a very close friend of Busser, wrote the following. He says, Busser is too verbose to be read quickly by those who have other matters to deal with. He goes on to say, Busser does not know when to stop writing. Therefore, it's not hard to see why most of Busser's works are simply unknown today, except to serious students of the Reformation period. However, Busser's real legacy was not to be found in his biblical and theological writings, for Luther and Calvin were to far excel him in this area. But rather, Busser's real legacy was to be found instead in his ability to influence other men for the cause of reformation. For that was the genius that Busser demonstrated for many years while at Strausburg. And that was the giftedness that Busser took with him to Cambridge, where he not only influenced young men to look and to labor for reformation, but helped to establish a program of theological education that would eventually produce such great Reformed leaders as William Perkins, the father of English Puritanism, and William Ames, the great Separatist leader. So Luther was not a raging bull like Luther. In fact, Luther no doubt wished on many occasions that Luther would rage less and accommodate more. Nor did Busser possess the theological and literary skills of John Calvin. Nor did Busser possess the originality and the tenacity of Zwingli, who sought to blaze new paths of reform. But rather, Busser was a man who loved truth and he loved unity. And throughout his adult years as a reformer, he labored tirelessly and fearlessly for both. Brethren, may we learn from his godly example. Any questions or comments at this point? Yes? When you say Cambridge, I mean, I'm sure they're proud of the legacy. They are. In fact, I didn't mention this in the lecture, There is actually the remains of a building that Hoosier actually taught out of. And of course the building at large has been refurbished, but they left a wall or two where you can see the original outside of the building. And it was said that in Booser's day that building was filled to the brim and even outside the windows would be open and people would be standing outside as students taking notes from his lecture. He had a very profound impact and as a result of that when he did die They afforded him a great place of honor by burying him inside Great St. Mary's Church. Which, if you know anything about the history of England, they like to bury people of renown inside churches. If you've ever been to Westminster Abbey, when you walk around in there, it's like a tomb. I mean, there's just grave markers and everything all over the place where they mark the remains of great people in England's past. And it was the same thing in many churches. We saw that when we went to South Carolina. You remember when we looked up on the walls of the church, there was all these plaques and stuff in memory of different people. Some people buried right there on the premises. The same honor was afforded to Bootsy. It was thrilling to see the outside of the building and to know that he actually labored and taught there and to see the plaque commemorating his life and his labors there. It was a joy. Any other comments or questions? Okay, well I wanted to share with you, before we end this lesson, a short selection from one of his treatises on the authority of Scripture. You'll remember earlier in my lecture that I said that Busser wrote his twelve articles, and in those twelve articles he listed, really, what was a summary of the Reformed faith. One of the great doctrines, remember, that I mentioned first was justification by faith. And another great doctrine of the Reformation was the authority of Scripture. And this is just a selection on one of his treatises on the authority of Scripture, which as you know was a subject of great debate in Booster's day. I wanted to share this selection because I think it shows some of his abilities as a theologian. It certainly shows his awareness of some of the issues and the debates of that particular day. And I think in the middle section here you'll kind of see where his wordiness comes in a little bit in his writings. He makes a point, but then he really has to press the point and press the point. And he doesn't necessarily have the brevity, the directness that Calvin and Luther had in their writings. But let's look at this, a booster on the authority of Scripture. He writes here, and you should have a copy of this on the last page of your handout. It says, our opponents put the authority of the Church above Scripture. Now who are the opponents that he's talking about? Yes, the Roman Catholic Church. Our opponents put the authority of the Church above Scripture. Why? Because the Church gave us the books of Scripture, therefore they argue the Church gave authority to these books. Now have you heard this argument yourself from any Roman Catholics before? Some of you, I'm sure you have, if you've had any interaction with knowledgeable Roman Catholics. The argument is simply, our church determined what books should be in the Bible. So therefore, our church gave Christians the scriptures. And they place, of course, the authority of the church above that of the scriptures. He goes on here. The church rejected the Gospels of Nicodemus and Thomas, but accepted the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. They, meaning the Roman Catholics, glory in this argument, but actually it is merely a stupid and barefaced fallacy. Discriminating the spirits and discriminating between them does not give their spirits authority. Likewise, testing metals does not make the metals either good or bad. Or again, when citizens make a judgment about the king's decree, that it is authentic, and that it means this or that. That judgment does not bestow authority on the decree, but rather it seeks to accept without a mistake the actual authority that is in the king's majesty by being subject to his acknowledged decree. Someone hands you a crown, you test it for the correct weight to see if it is pure gold or contains any gloss, but you do not thereby create the value of the crown. A royal decree is issued to a university, and this is a telling illustration here because it's most likely, I'm not 100% sure, but it's most likely that he's writing this as he's continuing his labors at Cambridge. The chancellor or rector examines it to see if it is genuine or a forgery, and only then is it publicly set forth by the whole body of the university. The devil has mixed his own sacraments into the sacraments of Christ and even his own books. into the divine books, and the Church has sorted out the divine from the diabolical. In so doing, the Church has not given authority to these books, but has withdrawn authority from the others, showing that they are not divine. May God forbid that men should confer authority on the eternal Word of God. Christ taught the ultimate authority of divine Scripture when he said, Search the Scriptures. The Word is eternal, and thus its authority is eternal. We cannot point to any council that gathered in order to establish the canon of Scripture. Rather, the Spirit has moved the hearts of believers in every generation, persuading them to assign his authority to the canonical writings and to reject the rest. All the Church can do, so here is his understanding of what authority the Church has, All the Church can do is warn, instruct, plant, and water. If the human authority in the Church is so great as they claim, why can't they convince the Turks? Why don't they convert the Muslims by the exercise of this authority? Why doesn't the same authority govern over all people, not even over all Christians? No, indeed. And then this last statement or two will give you an idea of his theology. The need is for regeneration and the illumination of the mind by the Holy Spirit in order that we may esteem the Scriptures as the pure and undefiled and eternal Word of God from which all religious authority must derive. This is from a collection of Luther's works entitled Common Places. So here we get a sense of Lusser's convictions with respect to the Word of God. And remember the time frame that we're speaking here and what a revolutionary concept that would have been for him to be writing a treatise of this nature in that day.