Bullinger On Scripture

Heinrich, or Henry, Bullinger (1504-1575) was the principal reforming pastor-theologian of Zurich after the death of Zwingli in 1531. He is perhaps the most unsung of the magisterial reformers, and in his own day he was called “the common shepherd of all Christian churches.” In comparing a few excesses in Luther and Calvin, George Ella speaks of Bullinger as producing “clear, precise theological statements without emotional overtones and without giving the impression that he had an axe to grind.”1 His largest work was called the Decades, and were compiled from the years 1549-1551, being designed to eventually become a “loci communes.”2

As to this odd title, Beeke and Ella explain: “The Decades derives its name from being a series of fifty theological sermons, which are divided into five groups or ‘decades’ of ten sermons each. Each sermon is a helpful, detailed exposition of an important doctrine.”3 Sermons 1, 2, and 3 of his first Decade were on Scripture. This should not be surprising. Not only did this represent the first “sola” of the five—granting that these were coined much later—but in Bullinger’s own reforming work, he had sizable shoes to fill after the death of Zwingli. There was the constant pressure of Rome for people to return to their “proper mother,” just as Sadoleto had propositioned the Christians of Geneva. In the midst of such troubles, he must get the Scriptures right, and he must see to it that his hearers have a firm grasp on the incomparable worth of hearing directly from God in His word.

The Nature of Scripture

The Old Testament Scriptures came to us, as to Jesus and the Apostles, “sound and uncorrupted.”4 As the typical apologist would do, Bullinger delivers both external and internal evidences for the divine inspiration of Scripture. As to the external, Bullinger makes much of miracles and prophecy. For instance, of the five books of Moses, he says not only that these are attested “with signs and wonders,” but that they were done “not in any corner of the world, or place unknown, but in Egypt, the most flourishing and renowned kingdom of that age.”5 He also mentions Isaiah’s specific prophesies, no doubt, having Isaiah 53 in mind, as well as the foretelling of Cyrus by name, and Daniel’s specific predictions of “those things which are and have been done in all the kingdoms of the world almost, and among the people of God, from his own time until the time of Christ.”6

While the trustworthiness of a witness is evidenced in the externals—that is, things which they say are true or predict will happen, are the case and will come to pass—yet this attribute can also be considered under internal argument. The reason is because such begins with consistency. Beyond that, the majority of what the Bible addresses will remain its own self-contained subject matter. So Bullinger speaks of the apostles as “simple men, innocents, just, tellers of truth, without deceit or subtleties, and in all points holy and good.”7

The first attribute usually treated in one’s doctrine of Scripture is its necessity. Bullinger opens off the first sermon of the first decade with a practical necessity, namely, the Scriptures containing “all true and heavenly wisdom ... Therefore, whosoever is ignorant what the word of God, and the meaning of the word of God is, he seemeth to be as one blind, deaf, and without wit, in the school of Christ, and lastly, in the reading of the very sacred scriptures.”8 Clearly Bullinger aims this especially at would-be preachers and teachers in the church. The same practicality applies to Scripture’s necessity in the earliest redemptive history. As to the five books of Moses, “The cause why he wrote them was, lest peradventure by oblivion, by continuance of time, and obstinacy of a people so slow to believe, they might either perish, or else be corrupted.”9

Bullinger offers a simple definition, that “the word of God doth properly signify the speech of God, and the revealing of God’s will; first of all uttered in a lively-expressed voice by the mouth of Christ, the prophets and apostles; and after that again registered in writings, which are rightly called ‘holy and divine scriptures.’”10 Further, “The word of God is truth: but God is the only well-spring of truth: therefore God is the beginning and cause of the word of God.”11

How does he understand the inspiration of Scripture? Bullinger touches upon dual agency:

“For, although the word of God be revealed, spoken, and written by men, yet doth it not therefore cease to be that which indeed it is; neither doth it therefore begin to be the word of men, because it is preached and heard of men: no more than the king’s commandment, which is proclaimed by the crier, is said to be the commandment of the crier.”12

The unity of Scripture is a less discussed attribute, but it is important when we consider the basis for covenant theology in Reformed history. He first brings this out in Jesus’ affirmation of Moses in places like John 5, Luke 16, Matthew 5.13 The whole Bible shapes the church today: “For if we think uprightly of the matter, we shall see that the scriptures of the old and new Testaments ought therefore to be received by us, even because we are Christians.”14

As one of its perfections, Bullinger insists that the Scriptures contain what he calls an “absolute doctrine.” What does this mean? He means that it makes the one to whom it is illuminated perfect. A century and a half later, Mastricht would speak of this as well. Bullinger offers this syllogism, requiring only to be clarified in a schema:

“Furthermore, no man can deny that to be a most absolute doctrine, by which a man is so fully made perfect, that in this world he may be taken for a just man, and in the world to come be called for ever to the company of God. But he that believeth the word of God uttered to the world by the prophets and apostles, and liveth thereafter, is called a just man, an heir of life everlasting. That doctrine therefore is an absolute doctrine.”15

Let us consider two objections that were brought to his attention. First, how could the Bible’s doctrine be perfect if it recorded not all that Jesus said (Jn. 20:30) nor all that He could have (Jn. 16:12)? Second, how can the scriptures be clear when Peter said that some of Paul’s writings are difficult, and there are many “dark places,” that is, figurative speech? It is evident that these inquiries strike at the heart of our claims to biblical sufficiency and clarity if they go unanswered.

To any claims of its insufficiency on the grounds of those statements in John’s Gospel, for Bullinger, the resolution comes in the very next words Jesus says in both of those texts: “but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (Jn. 20:31), and “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you” (Jn. 16:13-15). In other words, the perfection of what Jesus did say consists in its sufficiency to save, and that the Spirit would be bringing to their mind, in authoring the New Testament, the same set of truth as “All that the Father has” and “all truth” which are treated synonymously. In short, it is all you need to know for salvation.

As to Peter’s words about Paul’s letters containing difficulties, Bullinger reconciles 2 Peter 3:16 with 2 Corinthians 4:3-4 with ease.

“I know that the apostle Peter saith, in the epistle of Paul ‘many things are hard to be understood:’ but immediately he addeth, ‘which the unlearned, and those that are imperfect, or unstable, pervert, as they do the other scriptures also, unto their own destruction.’ Whereby we gather, That the scripture is difficult or obscure to the unlearned, unskillful, unexercised, and malicious or corrupted wills, and not to the zealous and godly readers or hearers thereof. Therefore, when St. Paul saith, ‘If as yet our gospel be hid, from them it is hid which perish, and whom the prince of this world hath blinded the understanding of the unbelievers, that to them there should not shine the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.”16

Bullinger says of the Scripture that we “have a doctrine absolutely perfect in all points.”17 He considers the Roman Catholic claim to an oral apostolic tradition, and challenges his reader to simply compare any such teaching “with the manifest writings of the apostles; and if in any place you shall perceive those traditions to disagree with the scriptures, then gather by and by, that it is the forged invention of men, and not the apostle’s tradition.”18

Not everything included in this first sermon would be agreeable to the Christian apologist of our time. Although not falling under the category of doctrinal error, or even exegetical flaw, Bullinger, in extolling the word of God, unnecessarily says, “There are not extant to be seen the writings of any man, from the beginning of the world, until the time of Moses, which are come to our knowledge.”19 An unforced error only in emphasis. Of course the modern world has seen the discoveries of The Epic of Gilgamesh, Sumerian King List, Law Code of Hammurabi, the Enuma Elish, and Atrahasis. None of this touches upon the veracity of the biblical authors, but it should be noted. Shortly thereafter, he writes, “And from the beginning of the world to the birth of Moses are fully complete two thousand three hundred and sixty-eight years of the world. And whosoever shall diligently reckon the years, not in vain set down by Moses in Genesis and Exodus, he shall find this account to be true and right.”20

Interpreting and Expositing Scripture

As in every other day, there were those who complained that it is enough that the Bible is read, that it needs no teacher, and certainly not any elaborate set of rules for approach. He replies,

“For if a man do read the words of scripture only, not applying it to the states, places, times, and persons, it seemeth that he hath not greatly touched their ungodly and wicked life. Therefore, when they cry that sermons and expositions of the scriptures ought to be taken away from among men, and that scriptures ought to be read simply without any addition; they mind nothing else but to cast behind them the law of God, to tread under foot all discipline and rebuking of sin, and so to offend freely without punishment: which sort of men the righteous Lord will in his appointed time punish much the more grievously, as they do more boldly rebel against their God.”21

In his second sermon, Bullinger addresses the proper hearing of Scripture, which is set in the context of Israel having purified their garments, signifying to “lay apart worldly affairs.” The third sermon covers Scripture’s exposition, in which he cites as examples the sermon of Moses in Deuteronomy, Ezra reintroducing the law, Jesus in the synagogue, Peter at Pentecost, the Ethiopian eunuch crying out for understanding by the help of someone to explain, and of course Paul’s letters.

What then is needed for right hearing? “Over curious questions must be set aside. Let things profitable to salvation only be learned. Last of all, let especial heed be taken in hearing and learning.”22

As to right interpretation, Bullinger had a firm grasp on both the analogia fidei and regula fidei. In other words, he maintained that all proper interpretations and expositions of Scripture be consistent with the whole of Scripture and with the system of orthodox doctrine. This is important, as both of these concepts (especially in their Latin phrases) are frequently misconstrued. To the first: “Things uncertain, doubtful, and obscure, are made manifest by those things that are more certain, sure, and evident” and “the true and proper sense of God’s word must be taken out of the scriptures themselves.”23 To the second, “let it therefore be taken for a point of catholic religion, not to bring in or admit any thing in our expositions which others have alleged against the received articles of our faith, contained in the Apostles’ Creed and other confessions of the ancient fathers.”24

Bullinger gives at least three criteria for the analogy of faith: “that is, by conferring together the places which are like or unlike, and by expounding the darker by the more evident, and the fewer by the more in number.”25 The closest he comes to a definition of exegesis is where he says, “Therefore the true and proper sense of God’s word must be taken out of the scriptures themselves, and not forcibly thrust upon the scriptures, as we ourselves lust.”26

“And finally, the most effectual rule of all, whereby to expound the word of God, is an heart that loveth God and his glory, not puffed up with pride, not desirous of vainglory, not corrupted with heresies and evil affections; but which doth continually pray to God for his Holy Spirit, that, as by it the scripture was revealed and inspired, so also by the same Spirit it may be expounded to the glory of God and safeguard of the faithful.”27

Not only were the magisterial Reformers pushing back against excesses in allegory, but there were many false ethical interpretations. For instance, “The Lord saith, ‘Strive not with the wicked.’ But if we affirm that he spake this to the magistrates also, then shall charity toward our neighbors, the safety of them that are in jeopardy, and defense of the oppressed, be broken and clean taken away. For thieves and unruly persons, robbers, and naughty fellows, will oppress the widows, the fatherless, and the poor, so that all iniquity shall reign and have the upper hand.”28

Further down, he adds, “Again, when it is said to Peter, ‘Put up thy sword into thy sheath: he that taketh the sword shall perish with the sword;’ we must consider, that Peter bare the personage of an apostle, and not of a magistrate: for of the magistrate we read, that to him is given the sword to revengement.”29 The Anabaptists made arguments similar to more modern pietists, and we notice in Bullinger’s response to them, that biblicism and pietism can go hand in hand. On the one hand, we might be tempted to say that this is nothing more complicated than a verse taken out of context. But such ignorance of context tends to follow patterns.

In conclusion of his final sermon on the nature, hearing, and exposition of Scripture, Bullinger says, “The word of God is a rule for all men and ages to lead their lives by: therefore ought it by interpretation to be applied to all ages and men of all sorts.”30 It is a brief statement but it suggests that the same ought to apply not only to the scope of time and kinds of men, but spheres of society and uses of the law. In short, those biblicists he discussed who complained of the exposition of Scripture, wanting only its strict reading, are really aiming to constrain the authority of Scripture.

Bullinger’s reputation for plain preaching to the ordinary layman is evident in the way he speaks of the Bible itself. While he was very much interested in the controversy with Rome, to silence caricature’s on behalf of the sheep, he quickly returned to pastoral speech, shunning the temptation to impress important people with high and lofty rhetoric.

____________________________

1. George Ella, “Shepherd of the Churches,” in The Decades of Henry Bullinger, Volume 1 (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2004), XII.

2. Joel Beeke and Ella, “Henry Bullinger’s Decades,” LXXIII.

3. Beeke and Ella, “Henry Bullinger’s Decades,” LXXX.

4. Decades, I:55.

5. Decades, I:45.

6. Decades, I:51.

7. Decades, I:52.

8. Decades, I:36.

9. Decades, I:46.

10. Decades, I:37.

11. Decades, I:38.

12. Decades, I:48.

13. Decades, I:47-48.

14. Decades, I:58.

15. Decades, I:61.

16. Decades, I:71.

17. Decades, I:61.

18. Decades, I:64.

19. Decades, I:39.

20. Decades, I:42.

21. Decades, I:74.

22. Decades, I:65.

23. Decades, I:72, 75.

24. Decades, I:76.

25. Decades, I:78.

26. Decades, I:75.

27. Decades, I:79.

28. Decades, I:77.

29. Decades, I:78.

30. Decades, I:80.