| duke of Austria, and other popish princes, decreed that in the countries which had embraced the new religion it should be lawful to continue in it till the meeting of a council, but that no Roman Catholic should be al- lowed to turn Lutheran, and that the reformers should deliver nothing in their sermons contrary to the re- ceived doctrine of the Church. It was furthermore spe- cially decreed, (1) that it shall be forbidden nowhere in Germany to say or attend mass; (2) the preaching of the doctrine of Zwingli about the Eucharist shall be prohibited; (3) the Anabaptists shall not be tolerated; (4) libels against religious parties and about religious matters are interdicted. These articles did not meet the pretensions of Luther's followers. The Lutheran states asserted that in matters of faith a majority of votes was not decisive, and that the resolutions of 1526, unanimously voted, could only be abrogated by a unani-
, mous vote. They, in consequence, protested against the resolutions of the diet, and it was thus that the fol- lowers of the Reformation were in derision called Prot- estants. They declared their readiness to obey the em- peror and the diet in all "dutiful and possible matters." but against any order considered by them repugnant to "God and his holy Word, to their soul's salvation, and
; their good conscience," they appealed to the emperor, to
I the free council, and to all impartial Christian judges. The essential principles involved in the protest againet this decree and in the arguments on which it was grounded were (1) that the Catholic Church cannot be the judge of the Reformed churches, which are no longer in communion with her: (2) that the authority of the Bible is supreme, and above that of councils and bish-
\ ops; (3) that the Bible is not to be interpreted and used according to tradition, or use, and wont, but to be ex- plained by means of itself, its own language, and con- nection. As this doctrine — that the Bible, explained independently of all external tradition, is the sole au- thority in all matters of faith and discipline — is really the foundation-stone of the Reformation, the term Prot- estant was extended from those who signed the Spires protest to all who embraced the fundamental principle involved in it.
The protesting parties were as follows: John, the elector of Saxony, the landgrave of Hesse, the mar-
| grave of Brandenburg-Bayretith. a duke of Brunswick- Liineburg, a prince of Anhalt. a number of Frankish and Suabian imperial cities — Nuremberg, Dim, Kempten, Nordlingen, Heilbronn, Reutlingen, Isny, St. Gall, Weis- senburg. Windsheim, Strasburg, Constance, Liudau. and Memmingen. The four last named had joined the pro- test on account of the interdiction ofZwingli's doctrine, which interdiction met with the entire approval of Lu- ther and his zealous followers. The latter also accepted the article against the Anabaptists, and, while Luther approved of the protest, he exhorted at the same time the Frotestant powers to destroy the impious Anabap- tists with fire and sword, and accept the resolutions of the diet in this respect. Now, the new doctrines being in possession of a name which indicated their common hostile relation to the Roman Church, the schism be- came less curable, and reconciliation was thenceforth less practicable than ever. See Reformation.
The term Protestant, which thus came to be synony- mous with non-Romanist, was applied, first, as a conven- ient historical term designating collectively all who deny the usurped supremacy of the pope; secondly, as a term of controversy implying (1) a condemnation of al- leged Romish errors and superstitions, and sometimes (2) a yet further assertion of certain tenets supposed to be of the essence of Protestantism. This essential prin- ciple of Protestantism is the sufficiency and authority of the Scriptures as a religious rule of faith and practice. Those, on the one hand, who deny its sufficiency are not in principle Protestants. The former include not only the Roman Catholics, but all those who maintain the authority of the Church to speak for God, either in add- ing to the doctrines of the Bible or in giving them a
PROTESTANTS
G94
PROTESTANTS
binding and authoritative interpretation; and those, on the other hand, who deny its divine authority arc not properly Protestants; and the latter embrace all those wln> hold thai man's unaided reason is the all-sufficienl guide and standard in religious faith and practice, and thai the Bible i> only to be used like other hooks — as a light, bul not as an authority. In 1659 it was staled in Milton's Treatise of Civil Power in Ecclesiastical Cases: -It is the general consent of all sound Protes- tanl writers that neither traditions, councils, nor canons of any visible Church, much less edicts of any magis- trate or civil session, but the Scripture only, can he the final judge or rule in matter- oi religion, and that only in the conscience of even <'hri-tian to himself. . . . With the name of Protestant hath ever been received this doctrine, which prefers the Scripture before the Church, and acknowledges none but the Scripture sole interpreter of itself to the conscience. If by the Prot- estant doctrine we believe the Scripture not for the Church's saying, but for its own as the Word of God — then '"lulit we to believe what in our conscience we apprehend the Scripture to say. though the visible Church with all her doctors gainsay. . . . To interpret the Scripture convincingly to his own conscience none is able hut himself, guided by the Holy Spirit; and not so guided, none than he to himself can he a worse de- ceiver. . . . This is not the doctrine of the Church of England. If the Church have authority in controver- sies of faith, it is a matter of conscience to submit one's private judgment to that authority. There coexist in the Church of God two authorities mutually corrobora- tive of each other, and, so far as individual interpreta- tion of each, mutually corrective of each other — the inspired Word and the inspired Church; the inspired Word receiving its canonicity, its interpretation, from the inspired Church, and the inspired Church tested in its development by the inspired Word" < Bishop Forbes, on Thirty-nine .1 rt. p. 95). Of course, since Protestant- ism recognises the right of private judgment in the interpretation of Scripture, it allows a wide divergence of theological views, and such a divergence actually exists. At the same time, the differences in the be- lief of the various Protestant sects generally relate to minor points, as of worship, ceremonial, and form of ec- clesiastical government, nearly all the greal Protestant denomination- being substantially agreed respecting the fundamental points of doctrine as taught by the Word of God. Mr.Chillingworth. addressing himself to a writer in favor of the Church of Koine, speaks of the religion of the Protestants in the following excellent terms: