The Role of the Printing Press in the Reformation
74In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. John 1:1-4, 14
When one enters any Christian home or church today he will find an abundance of Bibles. However, there was a time when Bibles were only in Latin, copied by hand, and owned only by the church. A Christian layman who owned a printed bible in his own language was denounced as a heretic and publicly burned by the church. Forgotten was God’s admonition to His people to “impress these words of mine on your heart and on your soul; and you shall bind them as a sign on your hand, and they shall be as frontals on your forehead. You shall teach them to your sons, talking of them when you sit in your house and when you walk along the road and when you lie down and when you rise up. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates.”
By the end of the reformation, however, God’s word was available to both clergymen and laymen, rich nobles and poor farmers. The common people were given the holy Scriptures to read, interpret, and apply for themselves. God’s law became a part of nearly every home, and culture saw a goal shift from paganist to godly.
Several key instruments were used by God to cause this great reform of culture, but the most pivotal was in the form of written communication of the Word. First, the invention of the moveable-type printing press made it possible for Bibles to be owned by many common people, and also efficiently circulated the writings of the Reformers. Second, the diligent work of several Bible scholars produced translations of the Bible in many of the common tongues of Europe.
The Ignorance of the Church
The state of the church before the Reformation is described by John Foxe, in his famous Book of Martyrs:
“The law of God was seldom read and never understood, so Christ’s saving work and the effect on man’s faith were not examined. Because of this ignorance, errors and sects crept into the church, for there was no foundation for the truth that Christ willingly died to free us from our sins: not bargaining with us but giving to us.”
At this point in history we must admire God’s wisdom, for just as the church fell into ruin because of the ignorance of its teachers, and shortly after the burning of John Huss and Jerome, God gave his church the art of printing, which restored the truth of God’s word to the body of Christ and decried its false teachers.
The Printing Press
In Mainz, Germany, an invention developed under the hands of a man named Johann Gutenberg which would change the course of history forever. Gutenberg was a strong Christian who had a vision for all men, everywhere, to soon be able to own and read the Bible in their own homes. His own words will do best:
“God suffers because there are such multitudes of souls to whom His sacred Word cannot be given; religious truth is captive in a small number of little manuscripts, which guard the common treasures instead of expanding them. Let us break the seal which binds these holy things; let us give wings to truth that it may fly with the Word, no longer prepared at vast expense, but multiplied everlastingly by a machine which never wearies --to every soul which enters life!” (The Modern Age, p. 30)
Previous countries which had experimented with the printing press found it less economical than hand-copying. Korea, China, and Japan had all used wooden blocks for printing since the 700s, and Korea even used metal letters, but the great amount of characters which their languages used made the printing press impractical and expensive. But when Johannes Gutenberg combined moveable metal letters with an oil-based ink and a wooden hand press, he created the first practical and widely used printing press. (Humanists and Reformers, p. 39)
This man “broke the seal to the treasure house and let the truth fly with the wings of the Word,” yet he died a penniless man. However, the effects of this invention, though small at first to a largely illiterate Europe, soon grew to massive proportions. All of culture was changed and became defined by this new invention. Information could be printed in mass quantities, people could analyze and study the Bible outside of the church, and reading now became the culture’s “conversation.” Literacy rates for sixteenth century Western Europe averaged from %5 to %10 of males and grew to %50 after the invention of the printing press. (Humanists and Reformers, p. 43).
Postman, a communications theorist, readily links a culture’s intellectual and social concerns to the form of communication it uses:
“In studying the Bible as a young man, I found intimations of the idea that forms of media favor particular kinds of content and therefore are capable of taking command of a culture...It is, I believe, a wise and particularly relevant supposition that the media of communication available to a culture are a dominant influence on the formation of the culture’s intellectual and social preoccupations.” (Amusing Ourselves to Death, p. 9)
This was indeed true in the case of the printing press, as the culture undertook drastic changes economically, intellectually, socially, and religiously. I will describe a few of these religious changes below.
Priesthood of All Believers
Prior to the printing press, manuscripts were copied laboriously by hand and were only owned by nobility, princes, and scholars who could afford to pay for a scribe. People went to church to learn what the Bible said, but were given false doctrine. Many of the Reformers realized the error in the church, yet it was hardly possible to combat the error, as the common people couldn’t read the Scriptures and had no standard to measure the teachings by.
With the coming of the printing press, reading suddenly became a vital part of the culture. Bibles were distributed, theological schools opened, the Reformers’ works were published and eagerly devoured. Common people began to read and reason on their own. The result was a society that could now see the lies of the Roman Catholic Church, the foolishness of the “Divine Right” of kings, and the greatness of God’s gracious plan of salvation for His people. The Bible trained and educated the people until many could exclaim with David, “Oh, how love I Thy law!” because many now knew exactly what it said.
Historian John Foxe relates a few of the changes that took place in God's kingdom:
“Through the grace of God, men of wisdom were now able to communicate their thoughts accurately and widely so others could distinguish light from darkness, truth from error, religion from superstition. Knowledge grew in science and in languages, opening a window of light for the world and clearing the way for the Reformation of the church. (Foxe's Book of Martyrs, p. 65)
Bibliography
|
Humanists and Reformers: A History of the Renaissance and Reformation
Price: $40.95
List Price: $65.00 |
|
History of The Reformation of the Sixteenth Century (Volumes I. to V.)
Price:
|
|
Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
Price: $5.29
List Price: $15.00 |
|
In the Beginning Was Information: A Scientist Explains the Incredible Design in Nature
Price: $8.79
List Price: $13.99 |
From Image to Text
For a culture that had been primarily “image” based, the rational and analytical nature of reading was at first a shock. One cathedral received the first printed book on its shelves full of hand-written manuscripts and an observing scholar exclaimed, “This book will destroy the building!” (Victor Hugo, Notre Dame de Paris,1831)
He was correct in the sense that the people would no longer need the church’s images to understand the truth of the Bible. Gargoyles, statues of saints, candles, incense, stained glass, white and delicate cathedral walls, and rich tapestries had all been used to teach the people about eternal concepts. Gregory the Great, the first of medieval popes (590-604) referred to images as the “books of the uneducated.” (Humanists and Reformers, p. 43)
“If the printed book brought an end to the age of the cathedral, one of the ways in which it did so was by becoming the building. Printed paratexts took a wide range of textual edifices across the threshold and into even the humblest home.” (Agent of Change p. 81, eds. Baron, Lindquist, Shevlin) Now these humble homes could read and reason through these ideas in the clearer, more rational form of the printed Word. Luther called the coming of printing “God’s highest and extremest act of grace, whereby the business of the Gospel is driven forward.” (Postman, Amusing Ourselves to Death, p. 32)
The business of the gospel, in this case, was to reach with long and sensitive fingers into every fiber of Renaissance culture, to the rich, the poor, the kings and plowboys, and confront them with the pure and unadulterated truth of the Word. Now there could be no ignorance without excuse. The reality and logic of the printed Word held a force that could not be counteracted easily. The preparation of “languages and letters” for the Word of God, as Luther called it, made it so that, as both he and Erasmus had hoped:
“The farmer might sing snatches of his Scripture at his plough, that the weaver might hum phrases of Scripture to the tune of his shuttle, that the traveler might lighten with stories from Scripture the weariness of his journey.” (Erasmus, quoted in The Modern Age, p. 31)
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
I really wonder what it would be like today had not the printing press been invented and multiplied the speed at which Gods word and truth can be spread.
"Foxes Book of Martyrs" is right behind me on my bookshelf. Everybody should read it to be enlightened. And you know Jan Hus, too? Impressive level of knowledge you have. Is your position one of an iconoclast? I must say those Cathedrals were awesome monuments to God. A Priesthood of all Believers—that says it all!
Wonderfully composed Hub and the Truth is well told. Thanks!
Thank you for your comments everybody! I am honored to have you read my writing.
Iconoclast? No, not me! The original aesthetic purpose of the cathedrals was to direct the eye upward, to let it light, and to cause the mind to think on spiritual things. Our modern church buildings would do well to imitate this historical Christianity and incorporate more of the practical beauty of God into its archetecture. I agree with the reformers, however, who were concerned that the icons in the church were being worshipped. These man-made icons were given more reverence than the God-inspired Word, which is idolatry.
I'm curious, Mr. Watkins, if you have read D'Aubigne's History of the Reformation. It's a treasure of a history book and full of detail from original documents! I've used it for research, but would like to read it in its entirety sometime. Thanks again for your encouragement!
I have not read that book but I will put it in my shopping cart right now. Thank you for calling my attention to it. And for your thoughtful response. God Bless You!
Thanks for your interesting note. But as a former Protestant, I would invite you to broaden your mind and challenge your presumptions and prejudices, just a bit, as they seem to lead you to some very wrong-headed conclusions, such as, “An outgrowth of the reformation was the renaissance, which gave culture a new interest in discovering God’s glory in the sciences and arts.”
Actually, the Reformation was largely a reaction against the Renaissance, which had begun a couple hundred years before the Reformation. Among the complaints of many of the so-called “Reformers” was the charge that Catholic Churchmen were teaching in their universities the humanist works of Greek and Roman pagans—even homosexuals like Aristotle, mind you!—instead of teaching only the Bible. If, as you suggest, the Renaissance was produced by the Reformation, why was the Renaissance stillborn in Protestant Germany, Geneva, Scandinavia, etc., but thriving in Catholic cities in Italy and France that never became Protestant? Not only are you incorrect, but a simple look at the map and a few tour guides to the great works of the Renaissance will show you that you have it exactly backwards.
And regarding “God gave his church the art of printing,” and “Prior to the printing press, manuscripts were copied laboriously by hand . . .. People went to church to learn what the Bible said, but were given false doctrine.” I wonder if it is your view that God allowed this false doctrine to persist for 1500 years and then finally came to the rescue with a printing press? Would that really make any sense? Jesus promised to be with his Church until the end of time, but he neglected it until . . . when, 1550 or so? On this view, how much of the doctrine given out in the Churches prior to the printing press was false? The doctrine of the trinity? The Nicene Creed? How does one decide? And Jesus protected his Church enough to ensure that the Bibles that we have, copied as they were by these medieval Catholic monks, were handled carefully to produce true and reliable and accurate copies, but he just didn’t care if these same monks taught falsely from the pulpit on Sundays? The Holy Spirit guided their work only during the week but not on Sundays? Surely not.
You seem to be reading only from sources with a vehement anti-Catholic prejudice (certainly true of Foxe and d'Aubigne), which leads you to accept wildly erroneous statements such as, e.g. “the printed book brought an end to the age of the cathedral”—the printed book did no such thing. There have been beautiful Cathedrals aplenty built in dozens of non-Protestant cities since the Reformation—e.g., Cadiz, Savior on the Blood in St. Petersburg, the Cathedral of St. Sava in Belgrade, Mosta Cathedral in Malta, all of the Cathedrals of North and South America. Protestant doctrine that rebelled against “worldly” displays of beauty brought about the demise of Cathedrals in Protestant lands, not the printing press. (It was not the existence of printed books that led the Huguenots to attack Notre Dame Cathedral in 1548, or led John Knox to destroy cathedrals in Scotland.)
Thanks for your site, and for allowing comments.
Martin
Mr. Martin,
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration of my article, and for your comments. You have brought up several weighty charges against the Protestant Reformation which I hope to defend. You have also brought up some good points which I plan to do research on, as I see I have more to study!
First, it sounds like I should do more research on the Renaissance and the Reformation and the connection between them. If anything, your remarks have shown that my sources may have been different than yours, and I could easily be mistaken about the correlation and timing of the two events. I do know, however, that the Reformation, though upsetting in many ways to the beauty of the cathedral, did help align the culture's perspective of beauty in relation to God. Beauty is not to be the sole source of our understanding of God, nor should it ever take the place of His Word (the Bible), or distract from worshipping the true God and instead, cause worship of an image of Him. Idolatry is a grievous sin against God, and if the cathedrals encouraged and promoted idolatry, then it is better that a beautiful thing be destroyed than that it should cause anyone to stumble. See my comment on my other article, "The Beauty of Holiness" for more on the proper relation of God's people to beauty.
The second point you brought up, concerning the Catholic church and its doctrines, is a much deeper issue. The medieval monks deserve our gratitude for their small spot of light during a relatively "dark" time. They preserved doctrine which was Biblical, for the most part, and best of all cherished and multiplied the word of God, even though it took hours of painstaking handwriting. The doctrine of the Catholic church changed over the centuries, however. By the time of the 1500s, the church officials were no longer living for the glory of the cross alone, but were using their religious power to put fear into the people, thus causing the people to buy indulgences and pay money to give undue worship to relics. Much of the money went into the pockets of the papal order, and did nothing for the people's spiritual well-being. The basic doctrine of the gospel of grace had been corrupted by the lie that good works could somehow be righteous enough to get a person into heaven. You may disagree with this, Mr. Martin, as you are now a Catholic, but search the scriptures and you will see that the shed blood of Christ alone is what saves a man, and nothing he can do or pay will profit him anything in eternity. Remember what God says to those who think they will be saved by their actions in Matthew 7.
"Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."
The salvation of a man depends on the fact that Christ knows him, not that he has done many "wonderful works."
If God did let His church experience a time of spiritual "darkness", this was not the first time. The 400 years between the Old and New Testaments was a very dark time for the Jews, and we see the result of that in the flawed doctrine of the Jewish church promoted by the church leaders during Jesus' time. I have not the time or space to do it justice, but it is possible to see many correlations between the doctrine & practice of the Jews at 30 AD and the Catholics at 1550.
My source on the printed book bringing an end to the age of the cathedral was not necessarily Christian, protestant, or "prejudiced" against catholics. It was a scholarly book published by Cambridge Univ. Press and written by Elizabeth Eisenstein called, "The Printing Press as an Agent of Change," focusing mainly on the change of communication modes. Her point was that the pre-printing press communication was primarily image-based. Visual images, art, beauty, and pictures was the primary way that doctrine was communicated, and this was the specialty of the cathedral. The "age of the cathedral" ended when it no longer was the primary influence on religion, but when the printed word became the way doctrine was communicated. She quotes Victor Hugo in "The Notre Dame de Paris." There certainly were more cathedrals built after the printing press, but we must admit that books have had a great deal more influence on our current culture than post-reformation cathedrals have.
Hope this helped clarify some things! Thank you for your comments as well.
You're very gracious to respond so thoughtfully to my comments. These are big issues, but I'll try to be brief in reply. First, the notion that anyone “worshiped” Cathedrals, or images or statues in cathedrals, much less idols, as part of Catholic doctrine in medieval culture is not just incorrect, but flagrantly so. This is like saying that it is idolatry for a person to have a cross about their fireplace. Some nutty folks have said so, but then they fail to understand what idol worship means. When the Catholic Church worships, it offers sacrifice, as has been the tradition in the Old Testament, the early church, the medieval church, always. The idolatry and worship condemned in scripture is the offering of sacrifice to false gods. The medieval Church, like the large majority of Christians today (Catholics+Orthodox+Maronites+Melkites and other non-Protestant churches) offer sacrifice of self, fasting, etc. to God and God alone, and we participate in Christ's sacrifice on Calvary through the Eucharist at every mass. Many Protestant groups have gotten away from the Eucharist and have all but rid the notion of sacrifice from their services and, if it's the right word, from their culture. (You won't hear Joel Osteen talk about fasting very often, or even sacrifice, except when asking for money.) So, often Protestants understandably mistake the reverence that Catholics and Orthodox have for beauty, Mary, the communion of saints, etc., for worship—but that's because they don't understand how the Catholics and Orthodox worship. Catholics don't sacrifice to objects or images, nor do they worship any God other than the Trinitarian God also worshiped by most Protestants.
As to the behavior of the medieval popes and priests, one must distinguish between teaching and behavior. You observe, “Much of the money went into the pockets of the papal order, and did nothing for the people's spiritual well-being.” True enough, though I would argue that beautiful cathedrals do a great deal for people's spiritual well being, and I could even provide you names of quite a few former atheists who have been led to God simply because they found themselves confronted with the magnificent beauty in Chartes Cathedral. The people who paid for the construction of Chartres could hardly have done anything better with their money, as they have given many millions of people inspiration and joy and hope for 900 years. For people to give their worldly possessions to celebrate the magnificence and beauty and grandeur of the almighty, and to construct a great tribute to God . . . I have a hard time understanding what the problem is there.
But in any case, if I were to say that Protestant theology is misguided because lots of Protestant televangelists are thieves, you would surely object, and rightly so. Lots of Catholic clerics have been, and presumably are today, thieves. As was Judas. (I figure is less than one in twelve priests is a bum, great progress has been made.) You say the teaching of the church changed by 1500, but you should look into this, as it's not so. There was improper application of doctrine, and fallible humans not living up to doctrine, as there was among the early apostles, the early church, and every church that ever existed. (Indeed, one could talk at length about some of the personal foibles of the founders of Protestant sects as well, but that would not go to the truth or falsity of the doctrine they were teaching, would it?)
The Mormons have this idea of the Great Apostasy, whereby all Christians left God, and so Jesus had to return to North America. But when you ask for the dates and the doctrines, the specifics as to what the Great Apostasy was, and when it occurred, they have no answer. They only have this vague assertion that Christians strayed, and so now the Mormons have the truth. As far as I can tell, the alleged straying of the Catholic Church (and the Maronites and the Orthodox and the Coptics and the Assyrian Church and all non-Protestant Christians?) from the early church is the same. I have never been able to pin it down.
As for the passage from Matthew that you are right to quote, you would also want to note two other passages from that same Gospel that shed additional light on the matter. In Chapter 25 Jesus speaks very explicitly about the judgment that awaits us all, and He explains, “Then the King will say to those at his left hand, `Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels; for I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome me, naked and you did not clothe me, sick and in prison and you did not visit me.' Then they also will answer, `Lord, when did we see thee hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to thee?' Then he will answer them, `Truly, I say to you, as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me.' And they will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." He does not condemn them for failing to believe or failing to worship or failing to read, but for failing to act. It could not be any plainer. Personally, I would be very nervous if I lived my life according to the proposition that all one needs is faith. In Chapter 7 of that same Gospel, Jesus says point blank that 'only the one who does the will of my father' will enter heaven. It's hard to get more explicit than those two passages, it seems to me. And of course, the only place in all of scripture where the words “faith” and “alone” appear together are in the Letter of James 2:24, where we're told that it is NOT by faith alone that we're justified, as Luther had it—which is why Luther wanted to excise James from the Bible.
Having said that, there is really terribly little difference in understanding between the Catholic and Protestant doctrines on justification and salvation, because in the Catholic and Orthodox view good works are only made possible by grace and are worthless without love. Protestants hear and believe that Catholics think they can buy their way into heaven and are saved by their own will and not by Christ, but then in my experience Protestants always tended to quote each other as the source for this view. Once I actually looked at the Catechism of the Catholic Church to see what it really teaches the picture was quite different. Also, you might enjoy reading a short discussion Pope Benedict gave at a weekly audience back in November about justification and Pauline theology about the law and Luther's misunderstanding of Paul. Paul's teaching was that one didn't need to abide by the minutia of the cultural Jewish law re who was considered “unclean,” for example. Paul never said and never meant that somehow Christ freed us from adhering to the MORAL law. On the contrary, Paul even holds the pagans to account for failing to live up to the natural moral law in Romans. Anyway, here is a link to the Benedict discussion. http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/aud
Oh, one final thought re your sources—we live in a very Anglo-Protestant culture. There is very little published by Cambridge Press that is not Protestant in outlook. (Cambridge certainly isn't known for its pro-Catholic stance over the years, that's for sure.) All of which is to say that if you are reading about a matter pertaining to the history of religion, and you are not reading a Catholic or an Orthodox source, then you are most likely reading a source with a Protestant outlook. It may still be a fabulously enlightened source, but I'm only suggesting that, since you are making statements about Church history and cathedrals and doctrine it could only be enlightening to you to add some Catholic sources to your reading.
I didn't mean to hi-jack your lovely blog—you needn't post these comments.
God bless you, and may you find truth.
Martin L.
I really enjoyed this hub! Haven't read the book but definitely will now. Thanks!
wow, this is a must bookmark.
Rose West says:
6 months ago
This is an excellent article! It made me realize how much we take for granted. We should be so thankful to have the Scriptures in our own language! God truly used the printing press to further His kingdom.