De religione christiana fides / Confession of Christian Religion (review)

Recent concern for second-generation Reformers has broadened the scholarly field of vision to include important but oft-ignored trajectories in early Protestant thought. Baschera and Moser’s edition of Girolamo Zanchi’s confession — with parallel Latin and early modern English texts — is a welcome addition to this trend. They have selected primary-source material that church historians should find useful. Zanchi’s De religione christiana fides was originally meant to be a common Reformed symbol, yet the semi-scholastic style and occasionally controversial content led to its becoming a merely personal confession. Nonetheless, the text is important because it sets forth the thought of a key figure within the Reformed theological tradition. The editors’ superb introduction summarizes Zanchi’s biography, surveys his intellectual context, and briefs scholars on the state of Zanchi studies. As the editors note, this confession is no simple creed, but is a sophisticated expression of Zanchi’s faith. One strike against it, according to some contemporaries, is its complex style. By the late sixteenth century, however, it seems understandable that theologians like Zanchi would carefully distinguish between the several new theological options on the market. Indeed, one finds that his nuances respond to the same fragmentation that led Lutherans to adopt the Formula concordiae. Perhaps for this reason, military metaphors dominate Zanchi’s dedicatory letter. He senses that his church and theology are under siege by Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Anabaptist, and fellow Reformed opponents.

Most of the confession is standard fare, yet there are several noteworthy features. Though a medieval scholastic influence upon his style is evident, the body of the confession never cites medieval schoolmen explicitly. Moreover, his Observationes (published subsequently and included in volume 2 of this Brill edition) freely reflects scholastic language (e.g., “ut scholastici loquuntur,” [530]) and dogmatic affinities with the scholastics (e.g., “cum scholasticis . . . negamus,” [531]). Throughout, Zanchi demonstrates a commitment to a “catholic” ecclesiology, defined as adherence to apostolic doctrine rather than tactile apostolic succession. He frequently cites patristic sources. Zanchi values the role of formal reason; though he concedes reason is not able to arrive at new truth, he believes it can help theologians derive necessary consequences from biblical premises. Zanchi places predestination front and center in his work, unlike the limited place the doctrine finds in Calvin’s Institutes. His overall cosmology is markedly ancient, and he spends time distinguishing the heavenly levels, differentiating the heaven in which Christ resides from the planetary realms. Angels are described according to the medieval hierarchical model. Zanchi tends toward the moralism of Zwingli and seems relatively less influenced by Luther’s approach to law and gospel. His model for the atonement employs the language of “engrafting,” “ransom,” and “union,” but ultimately emphasizes Anselm’s theory and the language of “imputation.” Christology receives special attention, as Zanchi emphatically denies the Lutheran concept of the communicatio idiomatum. He argues that only the human nature of Christ can suffer; the divine nature is impassible. Moreover, in an effort to maintain the human nature of Christ, he contends that Jesus, because he was truly human, could not walk through walls after his resurrection. Perhaps the most interesting material is found in the second volume. There Zanchi defends several criticized elements of his confession. For instance, he shrugs off the disapproval of some who were concerned that he retains the word episcopus by noting that replacing a “good Greek” word with a “bad Latin” term like superintendents does not get around the question of ecclesiastical authority.

Overall, the editorial work is excellent. Baschera and Moser pay close attention to disciplinary standards for editing early modern texts. A few spelling errors occur, perhaps understandably, in the irregular early modern English text. Nevertheless, the editorial apparatus is consistent and understandable, with helpful footnotes for historical context. One hopes that more scholars will follow their lead and select texts as...