The first protestant

Logos is super powerful. I love the new 8 version. It was asked who was the first Protestant I do not know the answer so I went to the timeline. Typed in protestant came up with a timeline around the 1500's. Ok but what about the Hussites, or Tyndale? In Christian history class, they are considered some of the first protestants. Now whether right or wrong I am just trying to figure out what the best way to search the topic is in the new version 8?

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

MJ. Smith

It was asked who was the first Protestant

Are you asking (a) who was the term "Protestant" first applied to, (b) who was the first who wanted to apply the world-view shift that led to Protestantism to the Church, or (c) who was the first to "protest" the beliefs of the Church ... close to who was the first heretic or schismatic? If you know what you are looking for, I'd be able to help build the search.

Blair Laird

All of the above please It will help me in future searches

MJ. Smith

Let me answer one at a time:

First use of the term "protestant" ... for your purposes use the online etymological dictionary https://www.etymonline.com/word/Protestant#etymonline_v_2731 which gives you:

[block

Protestant (n., adj.)

1539, from German or French protestant, from Latin protestantem (nominative protestans), present participle of protestari (see protest (n.)). Originally used of German princes and free cities who declared their dissent from ("protested") the decision of the Diet of Speyer (1529), which reversed the liberal terms allowed Lutherans in 1526.

When forced to make their choice between obedience to God and obedience to the Emperor, they were compelled to choose the former. [Thomas M. Lindsay, "A History of the Reformation," New York, 1910]

The word was taken up by the Lutherans in Germany (Swiss and French preferred Reformed). It became the general word for "adherents of the Reformation in Germany," then "member of any Western church outside the Roman communion;" a sense first attested in English in 1553.

In the 17c., 'protestant' was primarily opposed to 'papist,' and thus accepted by English Churchmen generally; in more recent times, being generally opposed to 'Roman Catholic,' or ... to 'Catholic,' ... it is viewed with disfavour by those who lay stress on the claim of the Anglican Church to be equally Catholic with the Roman. [OED]

Often contemptuous shortened form Prot is from 1725, in Irish English. Protestant (work) ethic (1926) is taken from Max Weber's work "Die protestantische Ethik und der 'Geist' des Kapitalismus" (1904). Protestant Reformation attested by 1680s.

][/block]

Dan Francis

Some have even argued that ST. Francis of Assisi was truly the first Protestant. Luther is arguably the first in that was called so and in that it was his actions that lead to the schism it feels logical to apply it to him. It is also true that there are many people who help set the stage.

-dan

Ken McGuire

From what I understand, the "easy" answer is that the term "Protestant" comes from the protest made by the Evangelical Princes after the Diet of Speyer in 1529. In the view of the "Protestants" the Diet in 1529 where the Emperor was not present improperly set aside a ruling of the Diet of Speyer of 1526 where the Emperor was there. The ruling in question was one that in 1526 allowed them to make some limited reforms in their territories...

As for who was the first "Protestant" in any other understanding, any answer of that would first require an understanding of what exactly the Reformation was about - something that has been debated since at least the 16th century, with some of the movements separating from Rome and some staying within her. There were countless medieval reform movements. The Cluniac Reforms in the 10th century were important reforms of monastic life. Even before that, the organization of the College of Cardinals was an important reform in papal elections...

This historical-theological judgement is still debated. I would recommend the study (not just searching) of many primary sources as well as some of the better historical writings on the period.

MJ. Smith

For the first heretics, etymology again gets us part of the way:

[block]

anathema (n.)

1520s, "an accursed thing," from Latin anathema "an excommunicated person; the curse of excommunication," from Ecclesiastical Greek anathema "a thing accursed," a slight variation of classical Greek anathāma, which meant merely "a thing devoted," literally "a thing set up (to the gods)," such as a votive offering in a temple, from ana "up" (see ana-) + tithenai "to put, to place," from reduplicated form of PIE root *dhe-"to set, put."

By the time it reached Late Latin the meaning of the Greek word had progressed through "thing devoted to evil," to "thing accursed or damned." Later it was applied to persons and the Divine Curse. Meaning "act or formula of excommunicating and consigning to damnation by ecclesiastical authority" is from 1610s.

Anathema maranatha, taken as an intensified form, is held to be a misreading of I Corinthians xvi.22 where anathema is followed by Aramaic maran atha "Our Lord hath come" (see Maranatha), apparently a solemn formula of confirmation, like amen; but possibly it is a false transliteration of Hebrew mohoram atta "you are put under the ban," which would make more sense in the context. [Klein]

[/block]

So it precedes Christianity, and I'll posit that 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22 is the first reference with the heretics being unnamed.

If you wish a more narrow definition of being officially labelled anathema, I would search for anathema either in Church documents or in a more focused first seven church councils. That brings you to:

[block]

CANON XXXIX

Of the care and power which a Patriarch has over the bishops and archbishops of his patriarchate; and of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome over all.
Let the patriarch consider what things are done by the archbishops and bishops in their provinces; and if he shall find anything done by them otherwise than it should be, let him change it, and order it, as seemeth him fit: for he is the father of all, and they are his sons. And although the archbishop be among the bishops as an elder brother, who hath the care of his brethren, and to whom they owe obedience because he is over them; yet the patriarch is to all those who are under his power, just as he who holds the seat of Rome, is the head and prince of all patriarchs; in-asmuch as he is first, as was Peter, to whom power is given over all Christian princes, and over all their peoples, as he who is the Vicar of Christ our Lord over all peoples and over the whole Christian Church, and whoever shall contradict this, is excommunicated by the Synod.1
[I add Canon XXXVII. of Echellensis’s Nova Versio LXXXIV. Arabic. Canonum Conc. Nicæni, that the reader may compare it with the foregoing.]
Let there be only four patriarchs in the whole world as there are four writers of the Gospel, and four rivers, etc. And let there be a prince and chief over them, the lord of the see of the Divine Peter at Rome, according as the Apostles commanded. And after him the lord of the great Alexandria, which is the see of Mark. And the third is the lord of Ephesus, which is the see of John the Divine who speaks divine things. And the fourth and last is my lord of Antioch, which is another see of Peter. And let all the bishops be divided under the hands of these four patriarchs; and the bishops of the little towns which are under the dominion of the great cities let them be under the authority of these metropolitans. But let every metropolitan of these great cities appoint the bishops of his province, but let none of the bishops appoint him, for he is greater than they. Therefore let every man know his own rank, and let him not usurp the rank of another. And whosoever shall contradict this law which we have established the Fathers of the Synod subject him to anathema.2

Philip Schaff and Henry Wace, eds., “The Captions of the Arabic Canons Attributed to the Council of Nice,” in The Seven Ecumenical Councils, trans. Henry R. Percival, vol. 14, A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Second Series (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1900), 48.

[/block]

You will then have to read histories of the council to determine who this is targeted against i.e. why it was an issue .... I've got to leave you some of the fun.