In the first part of our conversation, Dr. Timothy George shared how the original edition of Theology of the Reformers came to be, why he included an Anabaptist and the reason behind William Tyndale’s inclusion in the most recent edition.
Today, Dr. George explains why he situates the theology of individuals within their historical context, if there is a such thing as Reformation “theology,” as opposed to “theologies,” and what makes the Reformers so important even today.
Trevin: One of the things I find so helpful in this book is that you do not separate theology from history but instead show how each theologian was affected by and then impacted their historical context. Why is it important to consider the context when studying the theology of these men?
Dr. George: During my teaching assignment at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, I was a member of both the church history and theology departments. I was trained in this approach by my great mentor at Harvard, George Huntston Williams. He taught us to seek connections and discern patterns—theological and historical—in every event or person or period we studied.
Several years ago at Beeson Divinity School we undertook a major revision of our curriculum, bringing together church history and systematic theology into an organic whole, a new integrated discipline that we call History and Doctrine. This approach has shaped everything I have written, including Theology of the Reformers. There is no such thing as a disembodied theology divorced from the mess and muck of real life. This is clearly stated in the central affirmation of the Christian faith: “The Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14).
Trevin: Recent Reformation scholars have questioned whether it’s appropriate to speak of Reformation “theology,” choosing instead to focus on “theologies” of the Reformers. The title of your book indicates that you see enough commonality in the reformers to maintain the singular “theology.” Why?
Dr. George: That is a great question. Indeed, it is quite popular these days to speak not only of Reformation “theologies” but also of “Reformations.” I understand the emphasis behind such pluralizing trends. No one can read my book, I think, without being confronted with the great diversity within the Reformation itself. Luther and Zwingli agreed on so much, and yet their failure to reach accord on the Eucharist resulted in the splitting apart of the nascent Protestant movement, an event reflected in the fact that we still have separate Lutheran and Presbyterian churches today!
A good historian will allow the sources to speak in all of their stubborn particularity. Homogenized history is falsified history. And yet it is true, as your question suggests, that, while acknowledging the rich diversity within the many heterogeneous movements of reform (including Catholic) in the early modern period, I nonetheless recognize an essential cohesiveness in the period itself and in the underlying theological questions its protagonists pursued.
Thus I stand with other scholars, such as Hans J. Hildebrand, Patrick Collinson, and David Steinmetz in continuing to speak of the Reformation and Reformation theology. As an episode within the history of doctrine, the Reformation represented an acute Augustinianization of Christianity. Augustine’s concerns were also those of the reformers: the character and reality of the triune God of holiness and love, the bestowal of salvation as a free unmerited gift, divine predestination and human responsibility in the economy of grace, and the journey of the church through time toward that eternal city with foundations. These were all major concerns for the five figures treated in first edition as well as the revised edition of Theology of the Reformers.
Trevin: Some Christians might look askance at a book about theologians from a period of history so different from our own. What is it about Reformation personalities and their theology that you believe is still vital for Christians today?
Dr. George: Through what is called “The New Perspective on Paul” and other revisionist theologies today, the entire Reformation paradigm has been described as essentially misdirected and wrongheaded. It needs to be said that none of the reformers, including the five I deal with here, are perfect specimens of pristine Christianity. None of them is above criticism. I am certainly not interested in a kind of repristination that would only be of antiquarian interest and would not serve the reformers’ own overriding concern that the living voice of the gospel—viva vox evangelii—be heard afresh in each generation.
Still, when the writings of the reformers are compared with the attenuated, transcendence-starved theologies which dominate the current scene, they yet speak with surprising vitality and spiritual depth. Karl Barth once said of Martin Luther that we can hardly celebrate this legacy in any better way than to listen to what he has to say. The same is true for the other reformers I have written about in this book as well.
My hope for this new edition is that it will introduce to a new generation this remarkable (now) quintet of Reformation pioneers whose unswerving commitment to Jesus Christ and his church should inform our own. As I say in the new preface I have written for this volume, “No minister of the gospel and no theological student should be without a good working knowledge of Martin, Huldrych, John, Menno, and William.”
