Abstract
The importance of the church fathers for theologians of later eras has long been a topic of interest for historians of Christian thought. In Inventing Authority, Esther Chung-Kim continues this tradition with an interesting window into the use of the fathers in sixteenth-century Protestant polemics. Chung-Kim’s work differs from recent scholarship in the field in that it examines the use of the fathers in the specific area of Reformed/Lutheran eucharistic debates, while providing the breadth of an integrated look at the writings of a variety of figures on this topic. The approach is comparative, seeking to trace developments in the appropriation of the fathers by Protestant thinkers across nearly six decades of the Reformation.
After an appropriate introduction, Chung-Kim commences this adaptation of her doctoral dissertation with an analysis of Martin Luther and Zurich’s Ulrich Zwingli (along with Johannes Oecolampadius) at the Colloquy of Marburg. She follows with an excursus on John Calvin, then two chapters on debates between Calvin and the Lutheran Joachim Westphal. She then turns to Calvin’s debate with Tilemann Hesshusen, and closes with the Genevan Theodore Beza and the Swabian Jacob Andreae at the Colloquy of Montebéliard. It is to be noted that, although the book is presented as an examination of both Reformed and Lutheran uses of the fathers, the accent falls heavily on the Reformed side. Chung-Kim also displays more consistent facility with the finer nuances of Reformed thought than she does with those of Lutheran thought.
This work reflects a disciplined approach that bears some useful fruit for the historian. For instance, with regard to the Calvin/Westphal debates of the mid-1550s, Chung-Kim argues that each side was resourced by a greater variety of fathers than had been the case at the Marburg Colloquy of 1529, and the argumentation of each used ancient voices in five discernible strategies. These ranged from adopting the fathers as “spokespersons” for the one side to linking the other side with an ancient heretic. Unfortunately, in some cases the differences in the uses of the fathers between one debate and another seem too negligible to warrant the distinct treatments given them in this volume. Also, a number of the treatments would benefit from the inclusion of more quotations from the reformers.
Inventing Authority is well-indexed, and the use of endnotes suits the book’s overall accessibility. The decision to summarize the Württemberg theses and Beza’s theses in appendices rather than in the text of the chapter on the Colloquy of Montebéliard seems appropriate. A noteworthy weakness, however, is that the publisher’s editing should have been more robust, for the prose is a bit rough in places. Still, Inventing Authority is well-researched and thought-provoking, and will be of interest to the scholar, the student and the informed layperson.