Katharina Schutz Zell: A Glorious Legacy of Reformation Femininity

On October 31, 1517, the twenty-one-year-old Katharina Schutz went about the rhythms of her Strasbourg life unaware that more than three hundred miles away a monk named Martin Luther was about to forever alter her life’s trajectory. That morning, Luther posted his 95 theses or convictions to the door of the Wittenberg Chapel hoping to provoke a friendly discussion that would guide the Catholic Church back to its “true treasure…the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.”

From Luther to Katharina

Two years earlier in 1515 while meditating on Romans 1:17, Luther had encountered and embraced the gospel. Luther later said of that moment: “There I began to understand that the righteousness of God is that by which the righteous lives by a gift of God, namely by faith. And this is the meaning: the righteousness of God is revealed by the gospel, namely, the passive righteousness with which the merciful God justifies us by faith.” Longing to reintroduce the Catholic Church to the gospel of grace which had liberated his soul, Luther posted his 95 Theses, believing the Catholic Church would welcome his push for gospel reform.

Unfortunately, the opposite happened. Pope Leo X and the Catholic Church condemned Luther as a heretic, ordered that his books be burned and that he should be executed. Though the threats against Luther’s life forced the monk now turned reformer into hiding for a time, the spread of his teachings proved unstoppable.

By March 1521, Luther’s teachings reached the city Strasbourg and Katharina. That month the city’s new and increasingly popular pastor of its cathedral, Matthew Zell, began to promote Luther’s theology of salvation through faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone. Katharina would later note, ‘He [Zell]…learned from him [Luther] how to teach rightly, and as soon as he [Zell] knew it, he preached and taught the truth of God eminently and happily.”  Convinced that neither the prayers of the saints nor people’s good works were sufficient for salvation, Matthew began to encourage his congregants to appeal to Christ because he “has the power to save us from sins, death, and hell and to give us eternal life.” Matthew declared, “We firmly put our faith and trust in Him.” Katharina Schutz, who had developed a strong interest in spiritual matters as a young girl was intrigued by Matthew’s sermons and Luther’s writings.

Katharina had been born in 1497 to devout parents who had edged their way into Strasbourg’s nobility through her father’s election to the city government. Katharina shared her parents’ passion for the Catholic Church. To quote Katharina, “Since I was ten years old I have been a church mother…I have loved all the clergy…and have conversations with them – not about dances, worldly pleasures, riches or carnival but the kingdom of God.” When she entered her teenage years, Zell took a vow of chastity and celibacy becoming a kind of stay-at-home nun. Like Luther before her, Katharina faithfully attended mass, studied theology, and did all that she could to earn God’s favor. Despite her efforts, Katharina lamented that she and her friends “could never find any peace in all our many works, practices, and sacraments of that [Roman] church.” In other words, she longed for something more…for something that could free her soul from the guilt of sin and damnation. She longed for the gospel – the very message of Luther, Zell, and the Protestant Reformation.

This longing for and eventual devotion to God’s Word makes Katharina Schutz (who would soon become more widely known as Katharina Schutz Zell) a worthy object of modern Christian study and reflection. Katharina’s legacy reveals that the theology of the Reformation redeems sinful women, guides them to fulfilling marriages, and sustains them through great suffering.

A Reformation Woman

As Katharina sat under Matthew’s teaching, conversed with him about theology, and read the writings of Luther, God opened Katharina’s “understanding to comprehend the Holy Scriptures.” She described her conversion as follows:  “He awakened and sent out by tongue and writings the dear…Martin Luther, who described the Lord Jesus Christ for me and others in such a lovely way that I thought I had been drawn out of the depths of…grim bitter hell into the sweet and lovely kingdom of heaven.” She now understood and believed that salvation was found in the Scriptures alone through faith alone in Christ alone by grace alone. To quote Katharina, “I…confess with…all believers the forgiveness of our sins only through the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ the spotless lamb, who was with the Father from eternity and was killed in the flesh for us. Likewise, I confess the only righteousness that counts before God: our inheritance of enteral life through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus from the dead.” As evidenced by her confession, Katharina had found eternal life through her study of Reformation theology. She remained forever thankful for the gospel that came to her through “Luther, my dear husband [Matthew Zell], and many other dear men.”

The Godly Wife

With her eternal destiny secured, Katharina turned her attention to the implications of her new beliefs on her daily life. Shortly after her conversion on December 3, 1523, Katharina “greatly amazed” “many people” when she repudiated her monastic vows and married her pastor and close friend, Matthew Zell, securing her final name: Katharina Schutz Zell.

Katharina later explained that the driving force behind her and Matthew’s decision was not primarily romantic. She described herself as lacking “overwhelming beauty, or riches, or other virtue that might move one to seek me in marriage. Rather, they married to advance the gospel. To quote the pastor Martin Bucer who married Matthew and Katharina, “Marriage…has many advantages in enabling the minister not only to live a more disciplined and blameless life, but also to be more free of temporal cares…to serve the Lord more faithfully, zealously, and without hinderance.”

Marriage also promised to increase Katharina’s spiritual effectiveness. The reformers believed a women best advanced the kingdom of God through her domestic duties. Luther proclaimed that no comparison could be made between the spiritual effectiveness of the “married woman who lives in faith…and a cloistered nun who lives in unbelief”(Luther 1522, 13). Katharina concurred with this conviction and wrote that women who “ faithfully (in the faith) keep house, obey, cook, wash dishes, wipe up and tend children…and…turn toward God with the voice of song…please God much better than any priest, monk, or nun.”

The reformation theology that compelled Katharina towards marriage also provided her and Matthew with the necessary framework for a loving and fulfilling marriage. Katharina embraced the teaching of Genesis 1 and 2 which revealed that God had designed the wife to be in Luther’s words the “helpmeet of the husband.”  Katharina wrote, “I have been his [Mathew’s] helper according to my means in his house and in his office and service.” In other words, Katharina found joy and purpose because she devoted the twenty-four years of her marriage to the management of Matthew’s home and to the enrichment his pastoral ministry.

Katharina managed their home with remarkable efficiency. When the neighboring city of Kentzingen forced a 150 reformed-minded men in exile in 1524, Katharina and Matthew welcomed eighty of them into their home and fed them for four weeks. Maintaining “a free table for all refugees…the poor and good friends in the faith” Matthew and Katharina would go on to host Martin Bucer, John Calvin, the Anabaptists Sir Casper Schwenckfeld, and countless others. The couple that become famous for their hospitality also cared for Katharina’s father, siblings, and extended family throughout their marriage.”

Katharina also exported her hospitality to those that could not visit her, caring for the inmates of the Strasbourg jail, tending to countless plague victims, and visiting many widows. She offered the following reflection on her social involvement, “My devout husband…often allowed there to be something lacking in his own physical and household needs and gladly sent me as a gift to the community.”

Even after Matthew died, she continued to care for her fellow Christians, hosting a sickly nephew in her home even as her own health declined. When Bucer sent Katharina two coins to help her manage her household, Katharina gave one of the coins to two pastors and their exiled families and returned the other coin to Bucer so that he could be “generous another time.” She delighted in being the hands and feet of Christ both inside and outside her home.

The only aspect of Katharina’s Christian life that outpaced her care for Matthew’s household was her love for Matthew’s ministry. As she noted at Matthew’s funeral, Matthew “was from the beginning to his death…teaching…that the eternal word of God become flesh, and…took away the curse of our father Adam…[and]…I was with him from the beginning.” Because Matthew  “actively furthered” and helped Katharina grow her faith, she was able to help him think through and respond to the theological challenges that engulfed the city of Strasbourg. Katharina said of Matthew, “He granted and allowed me space and will to read, hear, pray, study, and be active in all good things, early and late, day and night. Indeed, he took great joy in that – even when it meant less attention to or neglect in looking after his physical needs.” Katharina and Matthew spent their marriage, listening to sermons, reading theological tracts, and corresponding with theologians such as Luther,  Zwingli, and Calvin (Zell and McKee 2006h, 193, 2006a, 227).”

At times, she took her theological correspondence public. She printed a pamphlet seeking to encourage the women of Kentzingen, edited a hymn book for mothers, published expositions on the Lord’s prayer and Psalm 51, and distributed multiple pamphlets in defense of her marriage and Matthew’s theology and character. She proved such a prolific writer and apologist for the reformed faith that her opponents nicknamed her “doctor Kathrina.”

Though many of Katharina’s writings encouraged the reformers and enabled historians to discover of her story, they also created a tension between her understanding and practice of biblical submission. When Katharina printed her first essay in defense of Matthew, she went against Matthew’s wishes. Katharina admitted that if Matthew “were to learn of it [the publication of her book] he would not allow me to do such a thing.” On another occasion, Katharina’s strong opposition to the practice of naming godparents at a child’s baptism so upset her church that Bucer labeled Katharina “a trifle imperious” and told Matthew to restrain his wife.” Later in life, Katharina would preach three funeral sermons: one for her husband and two on behalf of deceased anabaptist friends. These actions seemingly undermined her claim that a woman “must appropriately be submissive to the man’s office according to the teaching of Saint Paul.” Though Katharina generally submitted to her husband and her pastors and saw her theological work falling under their authority, she still believed that she had biblical warrant to speak in the defense of the truth if no one else would. She opined, “I would be unwilling to be left in error and lies…why should I not also in turn correct the error and lies that my neighbor believes(Zell and McKee 2006c, 66)?” Because of this conviction, Katharina at times exercised spiritual authority beyond her station as a wife and Christian sister. 

Despite this foible, Matthew unquestionably loved Katharina and she him. Katharina said of her husband, “I have never had a…time at all when we have not been one. Nor has there been any time when he has done me hurt, great or small with words or deed.” And when Katharina failed to “rightly” serve or help Matthew, she reported that he “gladly forgave me everything before I asked.”  As she noted more succinctly elsewhere, “He loved me much and held me in great honor.” Together, Matthew and Katharina modeled the glories of a marriage built upon the gospel of the Reformation.

The Biblical Encourager

On January 8, 1548, Katharina’s dear husband –  “the highest and best treasure that I have on earth” – died in her arms. She lamented, “what great pain of heart…God…has exacted of me…I will mourn it to my grave.”

Though the death of Katharina’s husband proved to be her greatest sorrow, Katharina had experienced great suffering throughout her marriage. She had endured the “great pain” of burying both of her children at a young age, of having her character and theology slandered, and of walking with numerous friends through persecution, sickness, and death. In all these situations, she found the strength to endure and overcome through the gospel that she first encountered in Luther’s writings and Matthew’s preaching.

Katharina did not fear persecution and sickness because she knew that suffering was a means of grace, that God loved her, and that one day she and all true followers of Jesus would be resurrected. She told the women of Kentzington “that such things [as persecution] are…signs of His fatherly love…God wants to discipline us and tear us away from the desires of this world so that we may learn to desire him only.” Reflecting upon a time of great suffering in her life, Katharina proclaimed, “ I thank my God that in these and other crosses He teaches me many things…to acknowledge my sins, to confess and pray for them.” Moreover, she understood the slanderous attacks on her life to be an opportunity to seek the salvation and redemption of her attackers. She concluded the defense of her marriage to Matthew we these words, “I seek nothing other than we may be saved together with each other…O Lord do not leave them to persists and perish in their blindness, and do not reckon their lies to them as sin.” 

She also encouraged the hurting to trust God’s character because she knew that Jesus who saved sinners would not “lay on you more to bear than is good and necessary for you.” She understood her heavenly father who freely loved all of his people to be the source of his people’s comfort and help. She wrote of him, “You care for us and save us from temporal and eternal evil.”  She also believed that her savior who gave good gifts  would never forsake his children As she told a friend struggling with leprosy, “Pray with confidence and faith as a child calls on his father…He cannot and will not turn his countenance away from you.” She expressed a similar sentiment at Matthew’s funeral proclaiming, “O God and Father, You will forgive me all…and You will comfort me for I have no doubt of your grace.”

Lastly, she could endure great sorrow because she believed in the hope of the resurrection. She reminded the women of Kentzington, “When your husbands are killed, do you not know that Christ said, ‘I am the resurrection and the life, whoever believe in me though he is already dead, yet he will live [Jn 11:25].” She revisited this theme as she grieved Matthew’s death. At his funeral, she proclaimed, “With my husband and all believers, I hope to obtain that costly resurrection of Jesus, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ…that hour will come when the dead who are in the grace will hear the voice of the lamb of God and go forth.” Katharina’s reformed theology provided her with the courage and hope needed to survive the darkest of days.

An Unfortunate End

After Matthew’s death, Katharina continued to suffer in part because the Catholic Church reestablished a foothold in Strasbourg but mostly because two of Matthew’s friends dragged her into a theological debate that would tarnish her legacy of faithfulness.

In the early 1550s, Sir Casper Schwenckfeld who had first come to Strasbourg in 1528 as an Anabaptist refugee, began asserting that Matthew was Anabaptist, a member of a protestant sect that advocated for believer’s baptism, political pacifism, and a spiritual view of the sacraments. Admittedly, Matthew and Katharina did hold to a form of mere Christianity or mere-Reformation that allowed them to welcome reformers of all persuasions including Anabaptists into their home as long as they confessed “the Lord Christ as the true Son of God and only savior of all people.” But neither Matthew nor Katharina held to the Anabaptist faith. The couple was most closely aligned with Zwingli and Calvin’s theology.

Unfortunately, Matthew’s pastoral successor, a former intern and house guest named Ludwig Rabus, believed the rumors. He began to reframe Katharina’s life and ministry as being ones that has cause the church “such trouble.” Though Katharina pushed back against Ludwig’s mischaracterization of her life and asserted that her final allegiance was not to any “devout minister” because “I do not want to be theirs…but with them I want to be Christ’s,” she failed to regain her reputation. She would die on the isolated fringes of the Strasbourg church community that she had served with such zeal  (Zell and McKee 2006h, 494). At the end of her life, she lamented at the end of her: “I am…little valued by our clergy…I am left without any love and comfort in my crosses.

As her reputation and health gave way, Katharina continued to cling to her savior. She told a friend in the years leading up to her death, “I see coming soon the time of my release from this life. I rejoice and welcome it and know that to die here will be my gain… I have walked before God in fear of Him despising of the world for fifty years so that I could say with Saint Ambrose, “I have lived so that I am not ashamed to continue to live among the faithful, but I also am not afraid to die, for I am certain that in Christ I will live again and that in Him I have a gracious God forever.” She saw her Lord and Savior face-to-face Jesus and was reunited with her dear husband on September 5, 1562.

Final Thoughts

Because of Ludwig’s attacks, Katharina’s legacy mostly vanished from the historical record. She only resurfaced on the church history timeline at the end of the twentieth century because the historian Elsie McKee translated her works into English and wrote the first English biography of this Reformation-era saint. In so doing, McKee unearthed a woman of exemplary theological character and conviction. To quote McKee, “The Bible suppli[ed] both the authority and logic of most of her thinking.” Katharina demonstrated that gospel was powerful enough to redeem, direct, and sustain the life of every woman who eyes to see and ears to hear.

May those churches that owe their existence to the Protestant Reformation that Katharina loved continue to celebrate her faith, marriage, and courage. May her place on the Reformation timeline never be forgotten.

From Sermon to Life: The Powerful Story of Lloyd-Jones and Stott’s Reconciliaiton

Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, who led Westminster Chapel through World War II and a large part of the Cold War, was the epitome of biblical faithfulness in the pulpit. When a V-2 rocket exploded next to his church and anointed him and his congregation with a fine coat of ceiling dust, he brushed off the dust, took a quick break, and then continued with his sermon. Nothing could deter Lloyd-Jones from preaching the gospel of his Lord and Savior. As the Welsh pastor noted during a Cold War era sermon, “The greatest trouble in the world is not the nuclear bomb but humanity’s rejection of the Gospel.” As he said in another sermon, the gospel is “the one and only remedy that can cure the disease which is the cause of all our local and particular problems.” And so, he preached that truth in both the best and worst of times.

A Man of Integrity

What was true of the Doctor in his famous pulpit was also true of him in the quiet recesses of his home. As his reconciliation with the Anglican pastor John Stott would make clear, Lloyd-Jones lived out gospel convictions just as faithfully in private as he did in public.

81A 6ZelT+L

In a sermon preached during his rise to fame in 1949, Lloyd-Jones warned his audience against the bitterness of unforgiveness. To illustrate his point, Lloyd-Jones recounted a story about two men who sought to be reconciled with one of their former pastors who was on his deathbed. Lloyd-Jones recalled:

So they took the journey, and they arrived at his house. His wife went up into the bedroom and told him they were there, but he refused to see them. I could not do that! How could I go out and face God in eternity and my whole eternal destiny and refuse to forgive a man who came to me with an outstretched hand?

In contrast to the man in the story, Lloyd-Jones understood that those who had been forgiven had to forgive.

When Lloyd-Jones preached this on 1 John 4, he was still more than thirty years away from his death and was enjoying a budding relationship with Stott, a minister who shared the Doctor’s passion for expository preaching, evangelism, and discipling the next generation. Lloyd-Jones so valued Stott’s friendship and insights into the Scriptures that the Doctor asked Stott to take over Westminster Chapel upon his retirement.

A Conflict

But then on October 18, 1966, their relationship unexpectedly soured. That night at the Second National Assembly of Evangelicals (NAE), Lloyd-Jones delivered a powerful address, calling for British evangelicals to exit liberal denominations that allowed for the denial of essential doctrines, such as justification by faith alone. As Lloyd-Jones noted, “To leave a church which has become apostate is not schism. That’s one’s Christian duty and nothing else.” Lloyd-Jones hoped his call for gospel unity built upon gospel purity would spark an evangelical revival. The Welsh pastor said, “If those of us who believe it [the Word of God] only come together … I believe we would then have the right to expect the Spirit of God to come upon us in mighty revival and re-awakening.”

Stott who shared the stage with Lloyd-Jones held the opposite view. The Anglican pastor believed that evangelicals should stay in their liberalizing denominations for the purpose of winning them back to truth.

When the Doctor’s address concluded, Stott rose to speak. But before turning to his official duties as chairman of the NAE, Stott broke professional protocol. He criticized the Doctor’s appeal, fearing that those pastors attending the NAE would, in Stott’s words, “go home and write their letter of resignation that very night.”

Stott offered the following critique of his friend:

I believe history is against what Dr. Lloyd-Jones has said…Scripture is against him, the remnant was within the church not outside it. I hope no one will act precipitately…We are all concerned with the same ultimate issues and with the glory of God.

With his words, Stott prevented the resignations he so feared, muted his friend’s influence in the British Evangelical movement, and shattered his close ties with Lloyd-Jones.

Image

A few weeks later, Stott apologized to Lloyd-Jones for his lack of decorum. Though Stott claimed that he and the doctor maintained “a warm personal relationship,” in the years after 1966, the events of October 18 continued to nag at Stott. According to Lloyd-Jones’ wife, Bethan, Stott arrived at Lloyd-Jones’ hospital room two years later in tears. The Anglican pastor feared that his rebuke had contributed to Lloyd-Jones’ cancer diagnosis. Bethan quickly brushed off Stott’s fears as silly and guided Stott into the Doctor’s hospital room. Still, the events of that night and their subsequent fallout had in the words of one historian resulted in the marginalization of Lloyd-Jones’ voice within the evangelical movement. And they continued to occupy space in Stott’s mind.

From Illustration to Life

In 1978, Stott sensed that the window to restore his friendship with the Doctor was closing and once again sought out his old friend. In the words of Stott’s biographer, the Anglican pastor traveled to Lloyd-Jones’ home hoping to “build bridges and to repair a friendship.”

In so doing, he transformed Lloyd-Jones’ illustration into the Doctor’s reality.  Would he forgive?

Lloyd Jones (1)

When Stott arrived at Lloyd-Jones’ house, Bethan in concert with Lloyd-Jones’ wishes, escorted Stott into the Doctor’s study.

There, Stott encountered not coldness and anger but kindness and forgiveness. Stott said of his friend’s reception of him, “[Lloyd-Jones] could not have been more affable and welcoming.” After talking about their shared passion for the book of Ephesians (both preached through the book and would publish volumes on it), the two men waded into the old wounds of 1966. As they did so, Lloyd-Jones extended love and reconciliation to Stott. Lloyd-Jones told his old friend, “If God spares me, and we could be together, I’d say like Simeon, ‘Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace.’” By God’s mercy, Lloyd-Jones proved himself to be the same man in his study at the end of his life as he was in the pulpit as he rose to popularity. As the Doctor said back in 1949: “This truth is given to me that I may live by it and that I may experience in my life in all the power and grace and glory.” And so by God’s grace, Lloyd-Jones lived what he preached in some of his most public of moments in some of his most intimate ones.

A Genuine Act

Though I have been able to pull out this thread of gospel faithfulness from Lloyd-Jones’ life, I doubt that the Welsh pastor was ever so self-aware. Lloyd-Jones preached thousands of sermons. Admittedly, he edited many of them for publication in his final years. But, he never turned his attention to his sermons on 1 John. His family would compile, edit, and publish those volumes after the Doctor’s death. I have no reason to think that Lloyd-Jones was especially aware of the contents of his 1 John sermons when he met with Stott for the last time. After all, the two friends talked about the book of Ephesians and not John’s epistle. Moreover, the accounts of Lloyd-Jones’ last visit with Stott originate from Stott and others and not with Lloyd-Jones. I believe, Lloyd-Jones saw his meeting with Stott as nothing more than a meeting between old friends.

Rather, I suspect Lloyd-Jones’ actions arose not from self-awareness but from his ever-deepening experience of God’s mercy and grace. As Lloyd-Jones told his friend and first biographer, Iain Murray, during the last weeks of his life:

When you come to where I am, there is only one thing that matters, that is your relationship to Him and your knowledge of him. Nothing else matters…Our best works are tainted. We are sinners saved by grace. We are debtors to mercy alone…God is very patient with us and very kind and He suffers our evil manners like He did with the children of Israel…The Love of God!

In other words, the man who had “For I determined not to know anything among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified” written on his tombstone could not help but love others as he had been loved. In short, he was a man of the gospel.

Conclusion

May God grant us all such consistency. May we live out the gospel of forgiveness in private with the same fervency we speak of it in public. May all who pull the threads of our life find such faithfulness.


The Champion of Scripture: An Introduction to the Life and Ministry of William Tyndale

By 1532, both the British government and its church had universally panned William Tyndale’s books. King Henry VIII (of six wives fame) had sent spies into Europe to kidnap Tyndale and return him to London. The bishop of that same city, Cuthbert Tunstall, had denounced the books in a sermon and then tossed them into a massive bonfire. And, Thomas More – a priest and close advisor to Henry VIII- had published a confrontational and large (80,000 word) critique of Tyndale’s works. In that mammoth volume, More captured the mood of the nation’s leaders when he labeled Tyndale as “mad,” “devilish,” and “a heretic.” The Catholic priest then warned his readers that Tyndale’s books possessed the power to turn, “true Christian folk into false, wicked wretches.” 

Ironically, Tyndale’s books proved so distasteful because they championed the content and authority of the Scriptures. Tyndale believed that God’s Word in conjunction with the Holy Spirit was sufficient to save sinners, build the church, and sanctify the saints. To quote Tyndale, “We trust not in this friar or that monk, neither in anything, save the word of God only.” Operating on this believe, Tyndale sacrificed his comfort, career, and even his life to “cause every boy that drives the plough to know more of the Scriptures than the pope does!”

Salvation, Education, & Exile

Like Martin Luther who started the Reformation in 1517 with the posting of his 95 Theses, Tyndale did not begin his career with revolution in mind. Tyndale’s sharpest critic conceded the reformer had begun his career as “a man of right good living… studious and well learned in Scripture… and in divers places in England [he] was very well liked and did great good with preaching.”

Tyndale was born around 1495 into a Cotswold family on the border of Wales that had made its fortune in textiles. After leaving home, Tyndale earned a bachelor’s degree from Oxford in 1512 and then a master’s degree in 1514. During this season, he was also ordained as a Catholic priest. He then transferred to Cambridge in 1516 before retiring from academia to serve as the tutor to Sir John Walsh’s two young sons. Seemingly, he left Cambridge in 1522 to have more time to translate books such as Erasmus’s Enchiridion which offered a critic of disorderly priests and noblemen.

Not long after transitioning to the Walsh’s home in Sodbury, Tyndale was accused of preaching heresy and found himself before of a tribunal of bishops. Tyndale wrote of that experience: “The chancellor…threatened me grievously, and reviled me, and rated me as though I had been a dog.” But nothing more would come of the charges because the priests that had accused Tyndale would testify against the reformer.

Though the contents of Tyndale’s sermons have been lost, the incident points to a change in Tyndale’s faith. By 1522, Tyndale had become well acquainted with the Scriptures, had repented of his sins, and had embraced the doctrines of grace as taught by Luther. Tyndale believed that God used the law to show men and women their “sin and unrighteousness” so that with the help of the Holy Spirit they would embrace the gospel through faith.  Echoing Luther’s view of Romans, Tyndale wrote: “A man is justified by faith only… And when I say that faith justifies, understand thereby, that faith and trust in the truth of God and in the mercy promised us for Christ’s sake, and for his…works only, quiets the conscience and certifies…that our sins are forgiven, and [that] we have part in the favor of God.” Or as Tyndale said more succinctly elsewhere, “except a man have knowledge of his sins, and repent of them, he can have no part in Christ.”

Scholars debate Tyndale’s path into the reformation, pointing to the influence of men such as Erasmus, Luther, and John Wycliffe who had translated the Bible into English from Latin about a hundred years before Tyndale was born. Though Tyndale interacted with Erasmus, was steeped in Luther’s writings, and was well acquainted with Wycliffe’s life, ministry and his translation of the Bible, neither Tyndale nor any of his contemporaries documented the author’s transition into the protestant faith. But the realities of his faith were unmistakable.

Convinced that, “the Scripture is the light and life of God’s elect, and that mighty power by which God creates them,” Tyndale decided to spend his life translating the Scriptures into English. In his notes to his translation of the Pentateuch, Tyndale said that he had been moved to Translate the New Testament because he believed that lay people would only understand the truth of the gospel if “the Scripture were plainly laid before their eyes in their mother-tongue, that they might see the process, order, and meaning of the text.” As Tyndale explained elsewhere, “That precious thing which must be in the heart…is the word of God which…through the preaching of gospel, proffers, and brings unto that all that repent and believe, the favor of God in Christ.”

Such ideas proved revolutionary because the English church possessed little gospel preaching and even fewer copies of the Bible. What little preaching and gospel translations that did exist were mostly in Latin which few English people understood. Tyndale lamented, “Is it not a shame that we Christians come so often to church in vain, when he who is fourscore years old knows no more than he that was born yesterday?”

Understanding that he needed more protection than the Walsh’s could provide if he were to translate the New Testament into English, Tyndale sought the support of the Bishop of London. But Tunstall had little interest in Tyndale’s work and refused to add the reformer to his staff. Understanding now that “not only was there no room in my Lord London’s palace to translate the New Testament but also that there was no place to do it in all of England,” Tyndale sailed to Hamburg, Germany in May 1524. He would never return to England.

The Church, the Scriptures, & Persecution

But he did print his first translation of the New Testament into English in 1525. Almost as soon as the Bible were printed, England put pressure on the German states to arrest their rogue theologian, forcing Tyndale to flee to the city of Worms for protection. Here in 1526, Tyndale embarked upon his most productive era that began with his publication of his second edition of his New Testament. It would not end until his arrest in 1535. Over the next eight years as he traveled about Europe, Tyndale produced multiple editions of the New Testament, translated several Old Testament books, and wrote several theological works such as the Parable of the Wicked Mammon and Against Prelates.

With each successive publication, the opposition to Tyndale grew. Almost as soon as his New Testaments arrived in England, Bishop Tunstall and others began burning the books. About this time, Tunstall purchased several thousand of Tyndale’s New Testaments intending to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people. But the purchase produced the opposite effect. Tunstall’s funds enabled Tyndale to pay his debts and to secure the printing his second edition of his New Testament. This edition meet with even greater success and became the first widely read English translation of the Scriptures because it contained, “clear, everyday, spoken English.”

Tyndale had anticipated such persecution knowing that “preaching that is a salting…stirs up persecution,” and had managed to stay a step ahead of Tunstall, Cardinal Wolsey, and others. But between 1531-1534, the Catholic Church managed to locate and execute at least seven of Tyndale’s supporters and sympathizers.

In 1529, More also began launching print attacks against Tyndale that placed the reformer on the defensive. Though More complained that Tyndale’s books contained “the worst heresies picked out of Luther’s works,” (things such as Luther’s criticism of purgatory, celibacy, and the pope) More’s most damaging attack which still circulates concerned the quality of Tyndale’s translation. More proclaimed that “the translation of Tyndale was too bad to be mended.” Thus, into the fire it went.

Thomas More
Thomas More

But what More objected to was not sloppy work or a changing of the Greek manuscripts as More had done to support the Catholic view of verbal tradition. Rather, More objected to Tyndale’s work in the Greek and Hebrew manuscripts which led the reformer to place the authority of the Greek and Hebrew text above the authority of popes and councils. To quote Tyndale, “When I have read the Scripture, and find not their doctrine there…I do not give so great credence unto their doctrine as unto the Scripture.”

Following this maximum, Tyndale departed from the Catholic understanding of ekklesia as “church.” Tyndale translated the word as “congregation,” believing that all believers (and not just the priests and bishops) were to be the salt and light that Jesus spoke of in Matthew 5:14-15. Tyndale also translated the Greek word as presbyteros as elder instead of bishop.

These changes which better reflected the Greek text had profound implications for the church. Since the church was “begotten through the word,” then the Scriptures and not the pope would be the church’s final authority. Tyndale noted, “God’s truth depends not on man. It is not true, because man…admit it to be true, but man is true, because he believes it.” Since the Scriptures were the final authority, then local congregations could appoint elders and preachers “to preach God’s word purely, and neither to add or diminish it.” To quote Tyndale, “Let God’s word try every man’s doctrine, and whomsoever God’s word proves unclean let him be taken for a leper.” If someone had leprosy, Tyndale believed the local church could “rebuke” and even remove that man from the pulpit. Tyndale concluded, “No man may yet be a common preacher, save that he is called and chosen…by the common ordinance of the congregation.”

This belief was further bolstered by Tyndale’s Understanding the keys of the kingdom in Matthew 16:19. The reformer said that this text was no more the exclusive domain of the apostle Peter and of popes than the command that Jesus gave to Peter in Matthew 18:21-22 to forgive others seventy times seven. Tyndale located the power to receive people into the church and to excommunicate them from the church in the local congregation. Tyndale wrote, “every man and woman, that knows Christ and his doctrine have the keys, and the power to bind and loose.”

In other words, More took issue with Tyndale’s translations not because they contained errors but because they removed errors that had propped up the Catholic Church’s tradition of papal authority and its resulting belief that sinners could “be justified by the works of the ceremonies and sacraments, and so forth.” For Tyndale, the Scriptures alone were sufficient to save and to build the church.

Sanctification, A Royal Divorce, & Death

When seeking to guide Christians through the complexities of the secular world, Tyndale once again appealed to the authority of the Scriptures. He encouraged wives to heed the example of Sarah and the words of Paul and to submit to their husbands. Similarly, he encouraged husbands to love their wives: “God has made the men stronger than the women; not to rage upon them…but to help them…and win them unto Christ, and overcome them with kindness, that out of love they may obey the ordinance that God has made between man and wife.” Tyndale also encouraged children to obey parents. He called Christians to love their neighbors and enemies, graciously meeting the needs of others without asking for loans or forms of repayment.

In response to the German peasants revolt of 1524, which was said to have resulted from Luther’s theology, Tyndale encouraged his readers to entrust their souls and wellbeing to Jesus. He encouraged kings to submit to the Scriptures and to “oppress not your subjects with rent, fines or custom…to maintain your lusts, but be loving and kind to them, as Christ was to you.” If the king became a tyrant, Tyndale told the citizens to put their “trust in God, then God will deliver you out of their tyranny for his truth’s sake.” If God delayed in rescuing his people, the citizens had no right to revolt. If they did, “then they make way for a more cruel nation.” God alone would judge kings. Tyndale believed the Scriptures could establish and maintain a just society.

Tyndale’s ethical writings caught the attention of Henry VIII with mixed results. At first, they angered British monarch. When Henry VIII sought to divorce his first wife, Catherine of Aragon – his brother’s widow, Tyndale naively entered the conversation in 1530, hoping to bring the scriptural clarity to the dilemma that the Catholic Church lacked. After surveying several Old Testament texts that dealt with divorce, Tyndale declared in The Practice of Prelates that Henry VIII’s marriage to Catherine was “lawful.” Unfortunately for Tyndale, Henry who disregard the reformer’s arguments having already determined to end his marriage to Catherine. Later English printings of The Practice of Prelates overseen by Queen Elizabeth I, Henry VIII’s daughter, would omit the reformer’s section on marriage and divorce.   

Tyndale possessed some awareness of the king’s sentiments and rejected all of Henry VIII’s invitations to return to England. He told the kings’ messengers that “he [Tyndale] will not promise to stop writing books, or return to England, until the King will grant a vernacular Bible.” As Henry VIII sought to finalize his divorce in 1533, an unknown person in the king’s government recruited the frivolous nobleman Henry Philips to locate Tyndale.

While Philips searched for Tyndale, Henry VIII’s new wife, Anne Boleyn, introduced Tyndale’s earlier work The Obedience of the Christian Man to her husband. Though Henry VIII’s appreciation of the book remains debated, Anne who was both a supporter of Tyndale and of his translations managed to warm Henry VIII to the reformation. But by that time, Philips had already found and befriended Tyndale.

Philips’ duplicitous actions highlight Tyndale’s one notable fault: the reformer’s failure to discern between friend and foe. Though Tyndale’s patron, Thomas Pointz, distrusted Philips, Tyndale brushed Pointz’s concerns aside and welcomed Philips into his inner circle. Tyndale had made a similar error in 1525 when he sought Bishop’s Tunstall’s support. He committed the same mistake a year later when he partnered with William Roye only to discover that Roye lacked the expertise in Greek in Hebrew that Tyndale valued. The one thing Roye most excelled at was insulting his opponents of whom he had many. After a year of working together, Tyndale ended his relationship with Roye. Unfortunately, Tyndale would not get the same opportunity with Philips.

On the evening of May 21, 1535, Philips led Tyndale down a dark alley surrounded by troops who quickly arrested the reformer and transported him to Vilvorde castle. Once Tyndale’s friends learned of his arrest, they asked Henry VIII to intercede on the reformer’s behalf. Showing his change of heart, Henry VIII allowed his diplomats to work for Tyndale’s release through back channels. But when he learned of Tyndale’s coming transfer, Philips acted. He accused Henry VIII’s envoy of being complicit in Tyndale’s crimes. Consequently, the man set to safely transport Tyndale to England found himself having to escape Antwerp under the cover of darkness. Tyndale’s fate was sealed.

Execution Of Tyndale

In the early days of October 1536, Tyndale found himself tied to a stake awaiting his death. With his last breaths, Tyndale cried out, “Lord! Open the king of England’s Eyes.” The executioner then pulled the rope around Tyndale’s throat tight and brought the reformer’s life to an end. The executioner then set fire to the bundles of wood stacked around the reformer’s lifeless body, reducing it to an ashy dust.  

In August of 1536, Tyndale’s tribunal condemned the reformer to death for the crime of heresy. Unfortunately, historians know little about the tribunal’s proceedings or of Tyndale’s thoughts while in captivity. All that remains from that era is one letter in which Tyndale asks to be granted the freedom to read the Hebrew Bible and new clothes.

Conclusion

Though Tyndale fell victim to the flames of persecution, his mission to see the Bible read in the common language of his people would not end. In the very New Testament that had led to Tyndale’s death, Jesus had promised that “until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished (Matt 5:18).” In 1539, Henry VIII’s eyes did partially open. That year, the king placed a copy of the Great Bible which was based on Tyndale’s translations of the Old and New Testament in every church of England. God’s word had triumphed over the gates of hell.

Tyndale’s influence did not end with the reformation. Scholars estimate that around 84% of the King James Bible reflects the wording of Tyndale’s Bible. Tyndale also shaped the Jerusalem Bible which is the Catholic Church’s translation of the Scriptures into English. In other words, the English world has the Scriptures today in its various translations because Tyndale sacrificed everything, including his life so that we might have access to the gospel that save sinners. May we forever follow Tyndale’s example and in-turn “seek nothing but the truth and to walk in the light.”