Recently, Gavin Ortlund has claimed that Wessel Gansfort was a proto-Protestant. Intrigued by this, I purchased a 2-volume set of Gansfort’s collected works. Was Gansfort really a proto-Protestant? Nope. Consider the following:
Allusion to baptismal regeneration:
You will say to me, “How shall I partake of this sacrifice; we rarely go
to communion, not oftener than once a fortnight, or occasionally, once a week?”
It was not so much this outward participation that I urged; but rather that you
should often bathe and wash and be baptized in the blood of the Lamb, who was
born for you and given for your every necessity. (Wessel Gansfort, “Letter to a
Nameless Nun,” in Wessel Gansfort: Life and Writings, ed. Edward Waite
Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared Waterbury Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons,
1917], 1:243-44)
Explicit Affirmations
of Baptismal Regeneration:
The apostles were consecrated and anointed in the Holy Spirit. For the
Holy Spirit himself is the ointment which Christ earned for us by his death.
Therefore we have all been baptized and anointed in the death of Christ and in
the Holy Spirit. (Wessel Gansfort, “Concerning Ecclesiastical Dignity and
Power. The True and Right Obedience, and How Far Those who are Subject to
Prelates are Bound by Their Mandates and Statutes,” in Wessel Gansfort: Life
and Writings, ed. Edward Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared Waterbury
Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917], 2:196)
Baptism and penance are the two sacraments by which a son of wrath and
darkness can become a son of God and return from death to life. Hence from
their nature they do not require any external attestation; and such externals
as are added to them,--as for example in baptism—a place, a sponsor, consecrated
water, a minister; and—in confession—admittance,--the reservation of certain
cases, the salutary injunction to repentance;--all these are of the Church, not
of God, although they have been profitably devised by wise leaders of the
Church, and ought not to be omitted except in case of necessity. (Ibid., 234)
Baptism regenerates a believer from death to life and, whether he be
penitent or impenitent, washes and cleanses him from all past sins, so that
they are not imputed to him for guilty or punishment. Hence, just as in baptism,
when God cleanses a man from guilt, he does not impute it to him for
punishment; so likewise in repentance, to whatever extent God cleanses a man
from guilt, to that extent he exempts him from punishment. (Wessel Gansfort, “Dr.
Wessel Concerning Purgatory; What the Fire Purgatory is, and its Nature; Concerning
the State and Progress of Souls After This Life, etc.,” in Wessel Gansfort:
Life and Writings, ed. Edward Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared Waterbury
Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917], 2:300)
Confession, by a nun,
to their Mother superior:
Be regular in the observance of your duties in your cloister home, and
that will suffice for bodily discipline. In the matter of sleep and food and
drink and clothing, follow the common usage and be content. But in your
reflection and meditation on the Lord Jesus never be content. By so doing you
will often have him as the sweet guest of your heart, by his counsel he will
faithfully control all your thoughts. In your confessions, I advise you to do
just as your faithful Mother Superior and leader shall counsel. And you can be
content with the thought that you are ready to confess orally, when it is
expedient. For we are not bound to confess except for our good, and for our
progress in salvation. (Ibid., 245)
Angels and faithful
Christians praying for the dead and the dead praying for Christians; the
prayers of angels and departed Christians can positively affect one’s
processional sanctification, etc.:
If such experiences shall follow when I am done with this wretched life,
I shall wish that which God wills for me. He, however, will wish me to advance
out of the dawning day into the light of the rising sun. For this I ought to
pray. To this very end angels pray for the dead. And we too pray for the
angels, praying that their blessed desires for us may be fulfilled. To this
very end the whole Church prays, or ought to pray. The dead pray for us, that
we may pass into the happy fellowship of the saints. The prayer of the angels
for the dead is most blessed. The prayer of the dead for us is more blessed
than our own—whether it be for ourselves or for them. (Wessel Gansfort, “A
Letter of Master Wessel of Groningen to Brother Bernard of Meppen, Regular
Canon, Concerning the Progress and the State of Souls after this Life; What—and
How—We Should Pray for Them, etc.,” in Wessel Gansfort: Life and Writings,
ed. Edward Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared Waterbury Scudder; New York: G.
P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917], 1:247-48)
I do wish that they [the dead] would pray for my sanctification, and for
my progress into the light of the approaching day that shall shine brighter and
brighter; that the holy name of the sun that is soon to rise for me may change
into the blessed appearance of the sun that has risen (even as the name of the
Lamb has changed into his happy appearance), so that I may actually see all the
treasures of God’s house in Christ,--those vast treasures of wisdom, glory, and
love. (Ibid., 248)
Propositions
1. Praying for the dead is holy meditation.
2. Holy is the desire of those who pray for the living.
3. In so far as they are holier than we, their desire for us is holier
than ours for them.
4. It is holy meditation for us to pray that the saints may receive the
“double stole” more quickly.
5. Holy is our desire for the angels that they may receive the fruits of
their ministry, the object of their prayers.
6. If, however, anyone prays for the dead, who are like the bride
described in Canticles, altogether fair and undefiled,--though his prayer
proceed out of piety—nevertheless he errs if he asks that they be loosed form
their sins, just as he errs if he asks that an angel be freed from sorrow.
7. Our piety, when we pray for them, is pleasing to them.
8. Their most acceptable love profits us, when they make intercession
for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. This they could not do while in
this life. Their groanings there, how unutterable here!
9. So far as our praying proceeds out of piety, it is holy. But so far
as it contains error, it is not holy. It is therefore holy, and not holy: like
propositions, which being built partly upon two others,--one affirmative and
the other negative,--are termed “participants.” (Ibid., 249)
Gansfort Praying to
the Penitent Thief on the Cross:
DEATH IS THE DOOR OF
LIFE, AT WHICH CHRIST IS THE DOORKEEPER, BUT TO WHICH THE THIEF LEADS US
What then shall the Christian fear? The leader himself by his example
begets in us complete confidence. Surely the doorkeeper, who does not exclude
such a leader, will admit those whom he has redeemed with his own blood.
A PRAYER TO THE
BLESSED THIEF
I pray thee, therefore, O blessed thief, by the kind hand of God upon
thee, by the mercy which thou didst receive in that late hour of repentance, be
thou my comrade in my last hour. (Wessel Gansfort, “Concerning the Sure and Benign
Providence of God which Operates in and Graciously Orders All Things,” in Wessel
Gansfort: Life and Writings, ed. Edward Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared
Waterbury Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917], 2:101)
Praying for the Dead
being “Salutary Meditation”:
Why Prayer for the
Dead is Salutary Meditation.
Even as the Psalmist exhorts “the angels that are mighty in strength,
that fulfil his word, to hearken unto the voice of his word,” in spite of the
fact that they do this with all their might and strength, so we are permitted
to desire and pray that they should do what they are doing. And just as praying
for them, so praying for those who sleep, that they may be freed from their
sins, is holy and salutary meditation; as it is holy and salutary to wish what
God wishes and to pray that this will be done. For it is possible to direct a
pious wish beyond as well as this side of everything that is first and to
desire and pray for the will of the first in all things. (Wessel Gansfort, “Dr.
Wessel Concerning Purgatory; What the Fire Purgatory is, and its Nature; Concerning
the State and Progress of Souls After This Life, etc.,” in Wessel Gansfort:
Life and Writings, ed. Edward Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared Waterbury
Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917], 2:315)
Wessels Not Believing
that One’s Fate was Necessarily “Fixed” at Death (contra many Protestant
Interpretations of Hebrews 9:27):
Prepositions drawn from the Same Words of Peter, concerning the Gospel
and Knocking of the Son of Man, sent to Master Ludolph, Dean of St. Martin’s
Church, Utrecht.
Therefore the conclusions to be drawn from this text are:
1. That Christ preached in the spirit.
2. That Christ, being put to death in the flesh, preached.
3. That he preached to those in prison.
4. That, being put to death, he came to them in the spirit.
5. That those in prison had died in the flesh.
6. That those in prison, being dead in the flesh, were alive in the spirit.
7. That those in prison aforetime were disobedient to the truth.
8. That though they were disobedient to the truth, they believed enough for
salvation.
9. That they, who had been disobedient, experienced the patience or rather the
longsuffering of God.
10. That those in prison believed, but believed imperfectly.
11. That they, being imperfect, had need of a preacher and evangelist, that
they might continue stedfastly in the wisdom of faith.
12. That the gospel was preached to these imperfect souls, that they might be
prepared for the judgment.
13. That those, to whom the gospel was preached before Jesus preached it, were
not prepared or wholly fit for judgment.
14. That if those, to whom the gospel has been preached after Christ, came and
preached it, do not believe, they have no excuse for their sin.
15. That whoever believes the great—nay the greatest—evangelist, so that he
cleanses to him with all his heart, truly has eternal life.
16. The Son of man, the preacher, the great evangelist, will come, knocking, to
every man.
17. That to every man, that hears his voice when he knocks and preaches the
gospel, and that believes and clings faithfully to him, Christ is become an
evangelist, who will not abandon him until he shall make him perfect.
18. That the whole process of their evangelization is the paradise which
precedes the kingdom.
19. In a state of innocence, paradise would have preceded the kingdom of heaven
in time, duration, and deferment.
20. That it is reasonable and probable that Christ promised such a paradise to
the thief.
21. That only those, to whom the gospel has been preached by the great
evangelist, are properly adapted to be judged with the eternal judgment.
22. That the eternal judgment will show that the perfectly righteous are equal
to the angels.
23. That, when the Son of man shall come and the great evangelist shall knock
and at the same time flash like lightning, he that hardens his heart shall be
worthily judged with the demons.
24. That everyone that is to be judged before the last judgment must have the
gospel preached to him by the great evangelist.
25. That this gospel and the judgment are very different from each other.
26. That in the state of original righteousness paradise would, in time and duration,
have preceded the judgment.
27. That the process intervening between the preaching of the gospel to those
who are to be perfected and their entire fitness to be judged as not inappropriately
called paradise.
28. That is the probable that Christ promised such a spiritual paradise to the
thief on the cross.
29. That I do not think the thief—even in his own judgment—was better fitted
for paradise than many most excellent Fathers of the Old Testament, who were
manifestly the friends of God.
30. That if even those holy men had to be taught by the great evangelist so
that they might be judged, I cannot easily believe that the great multitude of
Christian people who go hence in this day do not need that great evangelist.
31. That no one departing from this life can be made perfect, unless he has
been perfectly admonished, perfectly taught, and perfectly influenced by the
preaching of the gospel to him by Christ.
32. That the decision of no mortal can determine how much Christ influences,
teaches and admonishes each man by the gospel of his knocking.
33. That Christ’s preaching of the gospel is the only true, principal
purgatory, although others also, but of lesser importance, may reasonably be
endured.
34. That therefore this true purgatory is paradise, but that to one who loves
God, it grows more and more acute, as he himself, becoming purer, burns more
and more with divine love.
35. I think that this burning ardor and bitterness of a glowing soul is the
true, last, and most perfectly purgatory.
36. That much imperfection lay hidden deep in original righteousness; hence
much cleansing remained to be done.
37. This preaching of the gospel is neither impossible for the preacher nor the
one to whom it was preached.
38. That it is not clearly opposed to any passage of Scripture.
39. That if such a preaching of the gospel be assumed, many passages of Sacred
Scripture will be more easily unravelled.
40. That it dishonors neither God nor Christ.
41. That if this be accepted, manifestly all the passages of Scripture will be
harmonized. (Wessel Gansfort, “Dr. Wessel Concerning Purgatory; What the Fire
Purgatory is, and its Nature; Concerning the State and Progress of Souls After
This Life, etc.,” in Wessel Gansfort: Life and Writings, ed. Edward
Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared Waterbury Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s
Sons, 1917], 2:304-7)
Followers of Wessel
Claiming He Taught Prayers for the Dead, the Efficacy of the Mass under certain
circumstances, and Posthumous Purification in Purgatory:
You ask what I think about suffrages for the dead. I wish you to know
that I unhesitatingly maintain and believe that prayer for the dead is
beneficial, not only to him who prays but to him for whom prayer is made, on
condition however that the latter departed in grace. Hence the apostles also
used to baptize for the dead. With what baptism , but that of prayer and
groanings that cannot be uttered? It is very strange if our Master Wessel told
you anting contrary to this, for this was just the way in which he explained
these matters to me. Just before his death I wrote to him at great length
concerning them. That you may know more fully what he taught us on the subject,
read the following propositions again and again; for I myself did not
understand them at the first reading.
1. A suffrage is an aid to need, want, and weakness, divinely obtained
by intercession.
2. The most powerful of all suffrages is the suffering of the Lord
Jesus.
3. A suffrage issues primarily form him who obtains it, although
principally from him who grants it; and it is effective both in him who
undertakes and him who receives it.
4. Suffrages are dependent upon the discretion of him who grants them.
5. It is within the intercessor’s discretion to intercede for anyone who
pleases.
6. It is not within the intercessor’s discretion to secure as much as he
wishes.
7. That an intercession should result in a suffrage, small or great, is
not within the discretion of the person who intercedes.
8. It does not follow automatically (in opere operato) that by
mere intercession one’s effort will secure a suffrage for another.
9. The work wrought by the effort of the agent may become a suffrage,
but only by extrinsic denomination.
10. No suffrage becomes a suffrage by intrinsic denomination apart from
the change, growth, and progress of the inner man.
11. No suffrage is useful aside form the work of the agent himself, who
obtains the suffrage through the love of the person that makes progress.
12. The works effected aside from the works of those operating, do not
serve as suffrages to anyone.
. . .
13 Without the work of the agent, a mass does not become a suffrage for
anyone.
14. A mass without all the appointed work of the celebrant may become a
suffrage to the auditor through his own work.
15. A mass may be a suffrage to the auditor through his own work.
16. A mass serves as a judgment to anyone who is not rightly disposed
toward it, whether he hears or does not hear it.
17. A mass is a suffrage for anyone, so far as he is worthily affected
by it.
18. A mass becomes a suffrage through the suffering of the Lord, but
only to those who suffer with him and in proportion to the measure of their
suffering.
19. A mass is of no avail to one who does not suffer at all.
20. For those who suffer perfectly in purgatory, the celebration of the
masses is unnecessary. This is clear because to suffer perfectly is to love
perfectly, and he that loves perfectly is worthy of the throne rather than of
purgatory.
21. Whether masses are celebrated or not, souls in purgatory will reign
with Christ to the extent that they make progress in suffering with him.
22. A mass is nothing but the suffering of Christ and the co-suffering
of him who recalls it.
23. The co-suffering of another, e.g. of the celebrant, does not avail
for suffrage to those who are in purgatory, no matter how great the sacrifice
or the co-suffering or the pious discretionary intercession may be.
24. The discretionary measure of obtaining the suffrage is solely
proportioned to the measure of the granting of it; and the measure of obtaining
it is proportioned to the measure of participation; and the measure of
participation is propertied to the measure of acceptance of the co-suffering.
25. The gradation is the measure of pious suffrages is solely in the
hand of God and of the mediator, the Lord Jesus.
From all these propositions we conclude that prayer for the living as
well as for the dead should have as its end, “Thy will be done, as in heaven,
so on earth.” IT was stated above that the mass is unnecessary for those who
share perfectly in Christ’s sufferings. This, if I understand it aright, does
not refer to every necessity, but is restricted to the need and want that may
be removed by suffrages. For if masses were not celebrated, i.e. if the Lamb’s
flesh were not eaten in heaven, the souls in heaven would not live with that
life, with which they live unto God. “I,” said ,e, “appointed unto you a table,
that ye may eat at my table.”
(“Extracts from the Letter of Master John of Amsterdam to Bernard of
Meppen, Procurator Zilae, Concerning Suffrages for the Living and the Dead, and
Concerning the Celebration of Masses, According to Master Wessel,” in Wessel
Gansfort: Life and Writings, ed. Edward Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared
Waterbury Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917], 1:261-64)
Posthumous
purification, etc.:
Concerning the state
of souls; and what it is to love Jesus.
1. Those who have died in the Lord have died by the death that is
precious in his sight.
2. Those who have died in the Lord are more precious in his sight than
were Adam and Eve in their original righteousness.
3. This more perfect love of those who have died in the Lord is worthier
of paradise than was original righteousness.
4. The love of those who have died in the Lord, when strengthened, will
no longer be affected by prosperity or adversity.
5. Those who have died in the Lord—being parts of his image—are
purified, since in the time of the apostles they baptized for the dead.
6. The love of all who have died in the Lord is not forthwith made
perfect.
7. Imperfect love cannot make a heart perfectly pure.
8. So long as the purity of their heart is not perfect, men shall not
see God.
9. “The path of the just is a shining light that shineth more and more
unto the perfect day.”
10. When the light shines when the light, I say, of wisdom, glory, and
love shines more and more, that there is purification for those who have died
in the Lord.
11. This shining light is that very teacher of wisdom, the Lord Jesus.
12. To be conformed to this light, to become like this exemplar in all
things,--this is to be purified.
Unless our love for the Lord Jesus in account of our salvation,
justification, and blessedness in very pure, it is but filthy rags and selfish
love,--such love as a famishing wolf has for a lamb. For we ought to love
without seeking anything for ourselves, or for anyone else except for God. To
approach and to be conformed to this law is to be purified. (Wessel Gansfort,
“A Letter of Master Wessel Challenging a Certain Man to a Discussion Concerning
the Fulfillment of Sacred Scripture: Concerning the Imperfection of the Holy
Apostles and Martyrs, Who even After This Life Were not Forthwith Crowned, But
Still Needed to Advance and Grow in Purgatory, i.e. in Paradise,” in Wessel
Gansfort: Life and Writings, ed. Edward Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared
Waterbury Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917], 1:256-57)
Belief in the Efficacy
of Plenary Indulgences Issued by the Roman Pontiff:
The pope has power to grant plenary remission to those who are entirely
contrite and who have made confession, just as he has the power to baptize a
faithful catechumen in the Holy Spirit,--but only in exercising his ministry,
not his authority,-nor on the ground that it is so, because he any more than
any other lawful minister wills it. But he has that power because of his
office, not because of his authority. (Wessel Gansfort, “A letter by the
Venerable Master Wessel of Groningen, Professor of Sacred Theology, to Master
Engelbert of Leyden,” in Wessel Gansfort: Life and Writings, ed. Edward
Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared Waterbury Scudder; New York: G. P. Putnam’s
Sons, 1917], 1:273)
Affirmation of the Efficacy of Sacramental Confession to a Priest and
Penance (and acceptance of the distinction between the formal vs. material
reception of the grace of a sacrament):
I fully agree that in sacramental confession an attrite person is
sometimes made contrite through penance, viz. when, by confession without
interposing an obstacle to the sacramental covenant, he receives the promised
race of life. And he would not live by grace unless he received love, in some
degree. Indeed, without love he could neither live, nor could he be at all
contrite or humble. For he who is not prepared to be ground to some extent
between those wo millstones is not yet humbled and contrite. But the stubborn
hardness of his heart will causes him to be despised in God’s sight. If,
however, he is perfectly contrite, he will not be bound to suffer punishment
through the Church.
You remember, I am sure, those widely published words from Book IV of
the Sentences, Distinct. 18, “Others indeed say that it is God alone, and no
priest, that pays the debt of everlasting death, just as he also—of and through
himself—quickens the soul within.” For, even as he—of and through himself
alone—quickens the soul, so he—of and through himself—covers the sins of the
penitent. Because, just as he retained for himself the authority of baptism, so
he retained that of penance.
But it is clearly admitted by all that in the remission of sins the
priest has no part at all except in the administration of the sacrament. So in
the sacrament of penance, the Lord operates in secret through the sacrament in
accordance with the disposition of the recipient. For he—of and through
himself—covers his sins, when in bestowing love he does not reserve him for
punishment. And it is then that he pays the debt of punishment. For “love
covereth a multitude of sins.” And according to Augustine they are covered,
when they are abolished through love. Hence he says: “For if God covereth the
sins, he did not wish to notice them. And if he did not wish to notice them, he
did not wish to consider them; and if he did not wish to consider them, he did
not wish to punish them, but rather wished to pardon them.” Again at the end of
the chapter he draws this conclusion: “Hence it is clearly shown that God
himself plainly released the penitent from the debt of punishment. And this he
does at the time when he illumines him from within by inspiring him with true
and heartfelt contrition.” Further in the Rubric he says that this is “a more
correct opinion that” mentioned in the preceding chapter, viz. that “certain
persons believe that guilt is removed by God, but that the punishment is
removed by the priest.” . . . these words of Augustine are not opposed to the
words of the Lord, “Whatsoever ye shall bind” etc., is logically shown by
Magister in the words of Augustine. (Wessel Gansfort, “A Letter Concerning
Indulgences by the Venerable Master Wessel of Groningen in Reply to Master
Jacob Hoeck, Dean of Naeldwick,” in Wessel Gansfort: Life and Writings,
ed. Edward Waite Miller, 2 vols. [trans. Jared Waterbury Scudder; New York: G.
P. Putnam’s Sons, 1917], 1:310-12)
