M' v^> Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924084658248 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 3 1924 084 658 248 In Compliance with current copyright law, Cornell University Library produced this replacement volume on paper that meets the ANSI Standard Z39.48-1992 to replace the irreparably deteriorated original. 1998 dorttell Intu^mttg ICtbrarg BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME OF TH< SAGE ENDOWMENT FUND THE GIFT OF iienrt; ^rSagc 1891 ^^^"'^^AGffFCtOES WOt^^'^-^^' CIRCULATE THE CONFESSIONAL HISTORY OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH BY JAMES W. RICHARD, D. D., LL. D. PEOFESSOE IN THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY GETTYSBUEG, PA. PUBLISHED FOB THE AUTHOR BY THE LUTHERAN PUBLICATION SOCIETY PHtLADELPHIA, PA. COPYKIGHT, 1909, BY Marie E. Richard. PREFACE The sad service, and yet a privilege, was assigned me by the author of this volume to preface his work by a few words expres- sive of the conditions of its issue. Professor Richard, after a brief yet severe illness lasting but five days, passed away, March 7th, from earthly labor in the full vigor of mental and physical life. Only one-half of the proof mat- ter of the volume received his personal examination and correction before his death. This volume is the finis as well as the ripe fruit of his studies for twenty years in this department of scholarly research. It was the intention of the author to append to his volume a bibliography of the literature pertaining to this subject, and con- sulted by him in its preparation ; but his sudden removal by death precluded the execution of the purpose. Fully two hundred vol- umes, chiefly Latin and German, were consulted, all of which are in the libraries of the Theological Seminary and of Pennsylvania College, save about twenty volumes, some not purchasable and borrowed, and several examined in the library of the University of Leipzig. It would doubtless have been a great pleasure to the author to read the reviews and criticisms of his work, and to elucidate and substantiate the claims resulting from his researchful labors. But he has now left the truth to vindicate itself on the pages of history. He labored to reach objective facts, and to relate them accord- ing to his consciousness of historic verity, a consciousness illu- mined by wide researches. The loss to the Theological Seminary of his living personality can only in part be compensated by a wide circle of readers who may be interested in this historic subject, and desire to be profited by his fruitful investigations and his gift of creedal discipline. Recognition is due Professors J. 0. Evjen and K. J. Grimm for their kind service of final proof reading and critical suggestions. M. COOVER. Gettysburg, Pa., April 26, 1909. (iii) In aeternum historiae Veritas colenda est. CONTENTS CHAPTER I. The Beginnings of the German Reformation 1 CHAPTER H. The Diet at Augsburg in the Year 1530 . . . 24 CHAPTER III. The Journey to Augsburg ... . . .... 36 CHAPTER IV. The Composition of the Augsburg Confession 46 CHAPTER V. The Materials Used in Composing the Augsburg Confession . 61 CHAPTER VI. The Delivery of the Augsburg Confession 74 CHAPTER VII. The Characteristics of the Augsburg Confession ... .92 CHAPTER VIII. Analysis of the Augsburg Confession. . . . 104 CHAPTER IX. The Catholic Confutation . 123 (V) VI CONTENTS. PAGE CHAPTER X. Efforts at Reconciliation . . 138 CHAPTER XL Efforts at Reconciliation. — Continued 157 CHAPTER XII. The Efforts at Reconciliation. — Concluded . • . 170 CHAPTER XIII. Luther's Relations to the Augsburg Confession 194 CHAPTER XIV. The Melanchthon Editions of the Augsburg Confession 209 CHAPTER XV. The Augsburg Confession FROM 1530 TO 1555. . 234 CHAPTER XVI. The Other Old Lutheran Confessions . . 255 CHAPTER XVII. The Old Lutheran Confessions as Ecclesiastical Symbols to 1555 . . . . 275 CHAPTER XVIII. The Old Lutheran Confessions as Symbols from 1555 to 1580 . 289 CHAPTER XIX. The Controversies Within the Lutheran Church: In General. 311 CHAPTER XX. The Anthropological Controversy . 333 CONTENTS Vll PAGE CHAPTER XXI. The Christological Controversy . . . 372 CHAPTER XXII. The Soteriological Controversy 386 CHAPTER XXIII. Efforts at Pacification 400 CHAPTER XXIV. The Torgau Book . 418 CHAPTER XXV. The Authors of the Torgau Book 432 CHAPTER XXVI. The Censures of the Torgau Book 452 CHAPTER XXVII. The Bergic Book . 469 _ CHAPTER XXVIII. Subscription to the Formula of Concord . 491 CHAPTER XXIX. The Book of Concord . . .... 519 CHAPTER XXX. The Symbolical Books in the Era of Pietism, of Philosophy AND OF Rationalism . . . . 546 V'iii CONTENTS. PAGE CHAPTER XXXI. The Confessions in the Nineteenth Century - . ■ . 571 CHAPTER XXXH. The Confessions in America • 601 THE CONFESSIONAL HISTORY OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH. CHAPTER I. THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. The German Refonnatiozi of the .sixteenth century was one of the greatest movements recorded in history. But it cannot be said that this great movement began on this or on that daj', or that its existence is due to this or to that event, or to one or to another man. It was a phenomenon of the times. John Wyclif was its morning star. John Huss and Jerome of Prague were its proto-martyrs. Savonarola was its prophet. The post- ing of the Ninety-five Theses on the door of the Castle Church at Wittenbei-g, October 31, 1517, was an incident, or one link in a long chain of events. The minds of multitudes of the German people were in a condition to understand and to interpret a challenge of ecclesiastical affairs as they then existed. The hierarchy had become intolerably oppressive. The priesthood was corrupt. Millions of German gold had been carried across the Alps to support the profligate extravagance of the Vatican. A third, perhaps a half, of all the real estate was in the hands of the Church. One person out of every seveilteeii belonged to One or another of the religious orders. Money ^\as demanded for baptism, for marriage, for extreme unction, for burial; and now, perhaps more shamelessly than ever before, indulgences for permission to sin were sold to raise more money to be sent to Rome. The Ninety-five Theses came at the opportune moment. Had they appeared one hundred years earlier, their author would, undoubtedly, have been led to the stake for daring to call in question the divine right of the Pope to forgive sins. The cry of ' ' heresy, ' ' potent still, is not so potent as it was at the begin- ning of the fifteenth centurJ^ The one hundred and two years (1) 2 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN HEFORMATION. that intervened between the burning of John Huss at Constance and the posting of the Ninety-five Theses at Wittenberg had witnessed a vast expansion of the intellectual horizon in Ger- many. The Renaissance, which is not only the re-birth of litera- ture and art, but is chiefly the transition from the mediseval to the modern world, had crossed the Alps, and had found a wel- come home among the sturdy sons of the North. For Germany, the fifteenth century was the century of the founding of universities. Besides Vienna, Heidelberg, Cologne and Erfurt, founded in the fourteenth century, we now have Leipzig in 1409, Rostock in 1419, Cracow in 1420, Greifswald in 1456, Freiburg and Trier in 1457, Basel in 1460, Ingolstadt in 1472, Tiibingen and Mayence in 1477, Wittenberg in 1502, Frankfort-on-the-Oder in 1507. Knowledge was running to and fro. In the German univer- sities the poetry, oratory, philosophy and science of ancient Greece and Rome were now cultivated as scarcely anywhere else in the world, and were turned to the behoof of the Christian religion. Thousands of young men were speaking the language of Cicero and were reciting the verses of Virgil, Horace and Terence, and were beginning to drink deep from Pierian and Castalian springs. Even the cities were vieing with each other in establishing free schools for the education of their future citizens. Nor were the girls to be neglected. Already in the fifteenth century a high school for girls, with learned ladies, who were not nuns, for teachers, was established in Frankfort. In the same century also came the printing-press, which at once began to serve the cause of the Gospel. In 1455 the Bible was printed in Latin. From 1462 to 1518 not less than fourteen editions of the Bible were printed in High German, and from 1480 to 1522 four editions in Low German. In 1477 the Hebrew Psalter was printed, and in 1488 the entire Hebrew Bible. In 1516 the New Testament in Greek was printed at Basel, and in 1520-22 appeared the famous Complutensian Polyglot. Thus the fountains of wisdom, both profane and sacred, were opened to the learned and to the unlearned. As a result, Ger- many had risen to a higher self-consciousness. The people were thinking for themselves and were thinking by means of the great thoughts contained in the old classics and in the Divine Word. Indeed, Germany had now laid those foundations of science and culture on which she has erected herself into the school-house of the nations. The old regime could not satisfy the new condi- THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. 6 tions. The age was sighing for deliverance from the bondage of the past, and was yearning for the freedom held out in the promise of the future. But reformations are not wrought without human instrumen- tality. They await the coming of great and heroic souls who embody in themselves the experiences, the detestations, the aspi- rations, of their contemporaries. And among the great and heroic souls there must be one who is greatest, one who can com- mand the confidence of others, one who by nature is endowed with the qualities of leadership. 1. Martin Luther. ]\Iartin Luther was the greatest and the most heroic soul of the sixteenth century, one of the greatest and most heroic of all the centuries. He was great and heroic without knowing it, or without trying to be great and heroic. He was born with a great and heroic soul. The things he saw and felt and heard, the experience of divine grace in his heart, made him great and heroic — this Thuringian peasant 's son, who had begged his bread in the streets of Eisenach, had tortured his body in the cloister at Erfurt, had observed the corruptions of the Church at Some, and withal had learned that "God's righteousness is not that by which God punishes sinners and the unrighteous, but that by which the merciful God justifies us by faith, ' ' and that justifica- tion means the pardon of sins, and that grace means misericordia Dei, and that faith is confidence in the promise of God for the sake of Christ. This was a new Gospel — rather was it the restoration of the Pauline interpretation of the Gospel — which had been preached and proclaimed by the fathers before the Christian Church had taken unto itself the rites of the Jewish and of the heathen altar, and which had not wholly died out from the Latin Church, though it had not been proclaimed in all its fullness and sweet- ness and power for a thousand years. But Luther did not state this Gospel as a dogma for the understanding. He grasped it as a living experience, as the power of God unto salvation. When now he sent it flying over the land in books and pamphlets and songs, the entire mass of the German people was put in motion. Some heard the message with joy and some with indignation, for all eyes were turned toward the monk of Wittenberg, who had declared war against the Pope, had confessed his doctrine before 4 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. an imperial diet, and had refused to recant unless he should be refuted out of the Divine "Word. A crisis had arisen in the Roman Catholic Church. The man of the triple crown was in danger of losing dominion over the fairest portion of Christendom, ilohammedanism had con- quered almost the entire field of Oriental Christianitj- and the western shores of Africa, and had held Spain for more than seven hundred years. Shall heresy now claim the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation ? The very thought is intolerable. In 1520 the Pope issued the bull of excommunication against jMartin Luther. In 1521 the Diet of Worms placed him under the bah of the Empire, and the Emperor declared that he would avenge the insult offered to the Apostolic See as though it had been done to himself. But the "heresy" spread so fast, and the arch-heretic made so many friends, that the Princes foiuid it expedient to refrain from executing the edict. At Spej'er in 1526 the hei-etic's friends were defiant, and displayed on their armorial bearings the motto: Yerhum Dei manet in externum. The Diet could only resolve that in matters appertaining to the Edict of Worms each Prince "should so live, govern, and carry himself as he hopes and trusts to answer to God and to his Im- perial Majesty":* and the right was granted to each Prince to determine the affairs of religion in his own dominion according to his own viewaJ Multitudes of the people had now espoused the ' ' heresy, ' ' and Princes had taken it under their protection. The "heretic," who at Worms had stood alone, now had more real and true friends in Germany than the man of the triple crown at Rome. That is, the reformation of religion in Germany, which began, we scarcety know when, and had been preceded and pro- moted by events and conditions, we scarcely know how mauj-, in less than nine years after the posting of the Ninety-five Theses, had advanced far in the direction of success. At least, till the close of the year 1526 foundations have been laid which have not tn this day been shaken. But in oi'der to understand this reformation movement we must return to the man who was at once its most immediate cause and its leading spirit. In the year 1501 ^Martin Luther entered the University of Erfurt. Here he devoted himself chiefly to the reading of the Latin classics and to the study of the Aristotelian philosophy. Two years later, he was proclaimed Bachelor of * Von Eanke, History of the Reformation. Bk. IV., Chap. III. St. Louis edition of Luther's Scliriften, XVI., 210! THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. O Philosophy, and iii 1505, ^Magister. July 17, 1505, he entered the Augustinian cloister at Erfurt and devoted himself to the stiidy of theology, with the Latin Bible and the tomes of William Occam and Gabriel Biel as his chief text-books. In 1507 he was consecrated priest, and ' ' received power to offer sacrifices for the living and the dead. " In 1508 he was called to the chair of Phil- osophj^ in the University of Wittenberg, and was there enrolled anno 1508 thus : Fr. ^lartinus Luder de Mansf eld, admissus mox 1509 d. 9 Mart. Baccalaureus tamquam ad Biblia.* Here he lec- tured on the Dialectics and the Physics of Aristotle, the same whom he subsequently called Daninatus, because he taught that one must do good in order to become good. But even then he pre- ferred theology, "that theology which examines the kernel of the nut, the fat of the wheat, the marrow of the bones. " f In 1511 he went to Rome where he heard such "vulgarities" in the Mass as: "Bread thou art and bread thou wilt remain; wine thou art and wine thou wilt remain." In 1512 he was promoted to be doctor of theology, and bound himself to study and to teach the Holy Scriptures.? And now it was that he entered the career that made him the prince of Reformers. We soon find him lecturing on the Psalms and on the Epistle to the Romans, and studying Augustine more diligently than ever before. In opposition to Aristotle and the scholastic theology he exclaims: "Prior to all obedience the person must be acceptable, for God looked first * Gieseler, Church History, IV., p. 17, note 4. t De Wette, Luther's Brief e, I., p. 6. t Waleh, XVI., 1631. St Loms edition of Luther's Schriften, XVI., 1700. But Luther, at his promotion to the doctorate, took also the following oath : Ego .N. iuro domino Decano et Magistris facultatis Theologice Obedientiam et Eeuerentiam debitam, Quod In quoeumque statu vtilitatem Vniuersita- tis et Maxime facultatis Theologice pro virili mea proeurabo, Sed hunc gradum non reiterabo. Quod omnes Actus Theologicos exercebo In mitra (.Nisi fuerit religiosus.), vanas peregrinas doctrinas ab ecelesia dampnatas et piamm aurium offensiuas non dogmatisabo, Sed dogmatisantem domino Decano denunctiabo infra octendium. Quod manutenebo consuetudines, libertates et priuilegia Theologice facultatis pro virilj mca, Vt me deus adiuuet et sanctorum euangeliorum conditores. Quod, si fuerit Biblicus, interserat. Quod stabo integrum annum in Biblia (Nisi fuerit Eeligiosus, cuj Semestre deputamus), Quod singulis annis semel ordinarie respondebo, Et Decano lubente sermonem faeiam ad clerum, Et quod vltra caput lectionatim non absoluam. Si fuerit Sententiarius : Quod quemlibet librum solempniter auspicabor premissa oratione commendatitia sacre pagiue, Nec- non questione eorrespondente materie libri mej. Quod Tertium non incipiam. Nisi prius pecierim pro formatura et publiee loco examinis responderim. Quod etiam duobus Annis in Sententijs perseuerabo. Si fuerit Licentiatus, Iuro etiam Eomane ecclesie obedientiam, Et proeurabo pacem inter Magis- tros et Seholasticos Seculares et Eeligiosos, Et pirhetum In nullo alio gym- nasio reeipiam. From the Statuta Collegij Theologici in Forstemann's Liber Decanorum, pp. 146r7. Luther's career from the year 1517 on is an instruc- tive comment on this oath. 6 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. upon Abel and then upon his gift." On Psalm Ixiv. 14, he wrote: "God will work justification. This operates against Aristotle, who wrote that we become righteous when we do righteous deeds. Much rather must a person be righteous before he can work righteousness." And May 18, 1516, he wrote to John Lange: "Aristotle is gradually going down, and will soon be overthrown, perhaps forever. The lectures on the Sen- tentiaries are held in complete disgust. . No one may hope for an audience who is not willing to teach this theology, that is, the Bible and Augustine, or some other doctor of authority in the Church."* And as at this time he came under the influence of Tauler and of the Theologia Germanica, he soon abandoned Scholasticism forever, and preached against indulgences in the confessional and on the pulpit. Finally, the Ninety-five Theses came, and a sermon on indulgences and grace. Here were the words that spoke a new era into being and gave a new date to the history of the Church and of the world. Here the chief thoughts are that the Pope has no power to remit penal- ties except those which he himself has imposed by his own authority, and that "the true treasure of the Church is the Holy Gospel of the glory and grace of God." Jacob Hochstratten cried Heresy. Conrad Wimpina, Sylvester Prierias, John Eck and others entered the lists in defense of the old regime and of the traditional teaching. But the Wittenberg monk went on disputing, and writing, and publishing books, ' ' compelled, nolens, volens, to become more learned every day, since so many great masters are urging me on and giving me practice," as he says of himself. In the year 1520 he sends forth his Three Great Reformation Writings: To the Christian Nobility of the Qerman Nation; Concerning Christian Liberty; On the Babylonish' Cap- tivity of the Church. In the first he batters down the three walls of the Romanists. The first wall is the claim that the spiritual power is superior to the temporal ; the second is that no one may interpret the Script- ures except the Pope^ the third is that no one may call a council except the Pope. The first wall is battered down by the doctrine that all Christians are priests, and that if a company of Christian laymen should be carried into a desert and should agree to elect one -of their number to baptize, to celebrate Mass, to absolve and to preach,— "this man would as truly be a priest, as if all the Bishops and all the Popes had consecrated him." Against the * De Wette, Luther's Brief e, I., 17. THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. / second he hurls the Article of the Creed: I believe in a holy Christian Church. If the Pope were right, then we should have to say: "/ believe in the Pope of Borne, and reduce the Christian Church to one man, which is a devilish and damnable heresy." The third wall falls as soon as the other two have fallen. The Scriptures do not say that the Pope "has the sole power to call and confirm councils." Since the civil authorities are fellow Christians and fellow priests, they have the right to call coun- cils when there is need. He then proposes twenty-seven articles respecting the reformation of the Christian estate, in which he announces a programme for the complete reorganization of so- ciety and the Church. In the essay on Christian Liberty he lays down and defends these two propositions: "A Christian man is the most free lord of all, and is subject to none ; a Christian man is the most duti- ful servant of all, and is subject to every one." This paradox contains the essence of all that is taught on the subject of justifi- cation by faith and of all that is taught on the subject of love. For all is done by faith, "which makes us not only kings and the freest of all, but also priests forever, a dignity far higher than kingship, because by that priesthood we are worthy to ap- pear before God, to pray for others and to teach each other 'Vii«£,^<^vW mutually the things which are of God." In A Prelude on the Babylonish Captivity of the Church, Luther seeks to shatter the entire sacramental system of the Roman Catholic Church. Transubstantiation "must be held as a figment of human opinion, for it rests on no support of Script- ure or reason." "The sacrament of the Altar is the testament of Christ, which he left behind him at his death, distributing an inheritance to those who believe in him. Baptism also is a promise, and its profit depends on faith, for unless this faith exists and is applied, baptism profits nothing." The other so- called sacraments, as they exist and are practiced in the Roman Catholic Church, are rejected. "If we speak with perfect ac- curacy, there are only two sacraments in the Church of God, Baptism and the Bread. " It is denied that the Mass is a sacri- fice, and it is affirmed that Baptism does not justify, but faith in the promise to which Baptism is added. In a word, the treatise is directed e^sentially_ against the opus opera tum, or the doctrine that a sacrament is salutary simply because it has been administered. These three treatises, produced in quick succession, have been 8 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. very appropriately called The First Principles of the Reforma- tion* for they entered fundamentally and vitally into the entire subsequent movement, guided its course and secured its triumph, ^t Worms Luther was called on to renounce these principles. When he refused to do so he at once translated them into vivid reality and action, and made them the programme for himself and his followersT" They involved the translation of the Bible, which was begun the next year on the Wartburg; the purifica- tion of worship which was heralded by The Order of Worship in the Congregation, 1523, in which the author sounds the key- note: "Where God's Word is not preached, it were better neither to sing, nor to read, nor to assemble"; and by The For- mula Missae, 1523, which abolished the Canon of the Mass and introduced the communion under both kinds ; and by the German Mass, 1525-6, which "was to be arranged on account of the un- educated laity," which, together with the Formula Missae, has been followed as a model, and has exerted a normating influence on worship in the entire Lutheran Church, f In the meanwhile (1524) appeared the first German hymn-book, known as the Achtliederhuch , because it contained eight hymns, four from the pen of Luther, three from that of Paul Speratus, and one from an unknown author — the small beginning of a rich and powerful development which quickly spread over all Germany and helped to make the Lutheran Church pre-eminently a singing Church. In the year 1524 the Eucharistic Controversy broke out, which, on the part of Luther, culminated in the so-called GreatCon- fesjiorua f the Jjord's & iippe)iJ\52^, in which he proposed three things: (a) To convince his friends that the fanatics have not made answer to his reasoning; (b) to explain the passages that have reference to the sacraments; (c) to acknowledge every article of his faith as an ansM'er to his opponents, both during his lifetime and after his death. In this same year were pub- lished the Visitation Articles, composed by Melanchthon and edited bj^ Luther and Bugenhagen, as "an evidence and con- fession of faith," on which the churches in Saxony were re- organized according to the evangelical doctrine and principles * These essays are accessible in English in a book entitled : First Prin- ciples of the Reformation. Edited by Drs. Wace and Buehheim. Lutheran Publication Society. Philadelphia, Pa. t Luther's three formal treatises on worship are given in English in Christian Worship. By Richard and Painter. Lutheran Publication Society. Philadelphia, Pa. The originals are given by Eichter in Kirchenordnungen. THE BEGINNINGS OK THE GERMAN REFORMATION. » of worship. In the ne.xt year Lnther sent out the two catechisms as a remedy for the alarming religious ignorance which he had witnessed among the people during the Visitation, and which are still reckoned among the jewels of the Lutheran Church. Also in the year 1529, perhaps in July or August, Luther "helped to compose" the Articles of Alliance between Saxony, Niirnberg and Franeonian Brandenburg. We say "helped to compose," for this is the language by which Luther sets forth his relation to those articles, which are now more commonly known as "the Schwabach Articles"; and we know from an official declaration made at Schmalkald, in December, 1529, that "the articles of faith were very carefulh^ considered, and were composed with the wise counsel of learned and unlearned counsellors," that is, they had been composed by the theologians and the civil counsellors.* Hence there can be no doubt that the hand of ]Melanchthon was quite as active in composing those articles as was the hand of Luther, for Melanchthon at that time was just as hostile towards the Zwinglians as was Luther (as will be seen a little later), and he generally acted as penman when the theological views held in common by the Wittenberg teachers were to be stated in writing. October 4th of this same year Luther wrote the so-called Mair- burg Articles, which are an abbreviated and moderated revision of the so-called "Schwabach Articles. " -j- And to the writings mentioned in the three last paragraphs n\ust be added Luther's Postils, and scores of sermons, which had been read and pondered by all classes of the German people. The effect of this popular literature, presented in Luther's wonderfully vigorous and popular style, and also of the New Testament, now translated into the most classic German, was little less than a revolution in religious thought and sentiment wherever the German language was known and read, so that a dozen years after the posting of the Ninety-five Theses Luther had millions of followers and adherents among his countrymen, and not a few even beyond the mountains and the seas. 2. Melanchthon. No history of the German Reformation, whether we consider its beginning, its progress, or its conclusion, can be regarded as * Strobel, Miscellaneen, IV., 123. See also von Schubert in Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschichte, XXIX. Band, 3. Heft, 365 and note. fSee the article by von Schubert in Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschichte, XXIX. Band, 3. Heft, passim. 10 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. complete, which does not contain some account of the life and labors of Philip Melanchthon. In 1518 Frederick the Wise in- quired of Reuchlin, called the "phoenix of Germany," for a Professor of Greek in his new university. Reuchlin recommended his nephew, Master Philip Schwartzerd of Bretten, and declared, ' ' He Mdll serve your Electoral Grace with honor and praise. Of this I have no doubt, for I know no one among the Germans who surpasses him, except Erasmus of Rotterdam, who is a Hol- lander." Melanchthon accepted the Elector's call, and entered Wittenberg, August 25, 1518. Pour days later he delivered his inaugural. His subject was : The Improvement of the studies of Youth (De corrigendis adolescentiae studiis). Every- body was delighted. Luther was in ecstasy, and commended the youthful professor as "worthy of all honor," and as "verj- learned and highly cultured. His lecture room is filled with students. All the theological students, the highest, the middle, and the lowest classes, study Greek." * ',Now more than ever be- fore is Wittenberg committed to the new learning, and the new learning is avowedly to be used in the promotion of the new theology. Henceforth the two great men, the hero and the scholar, are as one in aim and in purpose.! For twenty-eight years they worked together for the purification of the Church and for the restoration of evangelical simplicity in doctrine and in worship. Each supplemented as well as magnified the work of the other. Hence they are entitled to equal honor for the work of the Reformation. Without Melanchthorl the posting o'f the Ninety-five Theses had produced only a monkish squabble, and had ended in a temporary theological diversion. Without Luther the teaching of Greek at Wittenberg had produced only a higher and purer humanistic culture. Their combined labors produced the German Reformation, changed the course of history and hastened the coming of the modern era^ In the Leipzig Disputation, 1519, Melanchthon stood by Luther and quietly assisted him in the debate. Soon he enters into controversy with Eck, and defends Luther's position in a way that brings astonishment to the theological world. A little later he defends Luther against the attack of the Sorbonne, and shows that no council had condemned Luther's doctrine. The Parisian oracle receives such a contradiction as it has never before heard. The Wittenberg contention is now lifted from the ranks of the monks and of the people to the lofty plane of theological science. * De Wette, I., 134-5. THE BEGINNINGS OF THE -GERMAN EEFORMATION. 11' It is Melanchthon who has introduced the Reformation to the attention of the learned. It is he who gives it dogmatic basis in his Loci Communes, 1521, which Luther called an "invincible book and worth}- of being placed in the canon." It is he who organizes schools and universities, and writes their text-books. He writes commentaries on Romans, Matthew, Colossians, and in this last he significantly modifies his own earlier and Luther's view of free-will. Melanchthon has become the first theologian of the age. In learning, in culture, and in ability to dispute, he has no equal in the Holy Roman Empire of the Ger- man Nation. Thousands of students sit at his feet, and scores go forth annually to proclaim the new gospel from the pulpits in central and northern and western Germany. Compulsory con- fession has been abolished. The papistical Mass has given place to the administration of the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Preaching has been made the central act in the divine worship. Princes and imperial cities have had their churches reorganized on an evangelical basis. 3. The Diet of Speyer, 1529. Not only were the pens of Luther and Melanchthon active during the twenties of the sixteenth century, but none the less those of Eck, Cochlaeus, Fabri and others, in defense of the Pope and of the Roman Catholic Church and its theology. Ger- many was in a state of theological .war. But the Pope and the Emperor were in a relation of political and military antagonism. Hence neither was in position to act effectively against the new teresy. The Diet of Worms did little or nothing to arrest its progress. The decree of the Diet of Speyer (1526) actually promoted its progress, since it left each Prince to do as he saw •fit in matters of religion.; The Diet of Regensburg, 1527, made no change in the decree of the Diet of Speyer, but resolved that, at the longest, within a year and a half a general council should be called. But as a condition of war between the Pope and the Emperor still existed, a council could not be held. As the close of the year 1528 brought a change of the entire political situation between the Pope and the Emperor, it was resolved to call a Diet at Speyer for February 2, 1529. This date was afterwards changed to February 21st. The object set forth in the proclamation was to consult in regard to the Turkish invasion and the religious schism in Germany.* * The Imperial Proclamation and the Reichstags-Proposition are given 12 THE BEGINXIKGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. Ferdinand, King of Bohemia and Hmigarj', was to represent his brother, the Emperor, at this Diet. He was as much opposed to the Lutheran movement as was his brother, the Emperor. Yet, like Charles, he could not afford to make a complete break with the Evangelical Estates, since he needed both their soldiers and their money against the Turks. But the general situation was such that the Evangelical Estates could hope for very little from this Diet, since they found themselves hopelessly in the minority. There were present twelve Spiritual Princes besides abbots and many prelates. Of the Catholic Secular Princes thirteen were present, though Prince Erick of Brunswick did not come until April 20th, as likewise also the Bishop of Cleve. Eight Evangelical Princes were present, though the Dukes of Bruns- wick-Liineburg came to Speyer first on the twentieth of April. The Emperor had appointed Ferdinand, three Secular and two Spiritual Princes as special commissioners to represent him in the Diet, which was opened, March 15th, with the reading of the Imperial Proposition by these special commissioners. The Prop- osition sets forth the danger from the Turks, and asks for help and support against the invaders, and calls attention to the dis- orders in the matter of religion. Here it was ehiphasized that since the relations between the Pope and the Emperor had re- cently changed for the better, a general council would soon be held in order to bring about unity in the faith. But until such council shall be held the Princes, both spiritual and secular, are forbidden by the Emperor, under penalty of ban and re-ban, to allow their subjects to be led to a false faith, or to new sects. The article on religion in the Decree of 1526 was explained in the most arbitrary way, and was actually declared null and void by the Emperor on his own authority. The Estates were also commanded to take the Emperor 's interpretation into the decree of the Diet. 'This meant the complete abolition of the Decree of 1526^ In a committee of eighteen, appointed to consider the Em- peror's Proposition, there were only three Evangelicals, the Elector of Saxony, Jacob Sturm, of Strassburg, and Christopher Tetzel, of Niirnberg. The committee was ready with its report April 2nd. The report was read before the Diet the next day. It recommended compliance with the Proposition, the revocation by J. J. Miiller in Historie von der Evangelischen Stdnde-Frotestation, etc., p. 14 et seqq., and in the St. Louis edition of Luther's Schriften, XVI., 248- et seqq. THE BEGINNIN'GS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. 13 of the Decree of 1526, and the eiiforeement of the Edict of Worms, in such a way that in those territories where the edict had been obeyed there could be no further secession to the evan- gelical faith; and in those lands in which the new doctrine had found entrance, and from which it could not be expelled with- out the use of force, all further innovations are rigidly to be avoided until the meeting of the proposed council* The Evangelical Estates rejected this proposition and declared that they Avould abide by the Decree of 1526. Then the majority asked that the report be returned to the committee for modifica- tion. But as the modification proposed still annulled the Decree of 1526, the Evangelical members of the committee, the Elector of Saxony, Jacob Sturm and Christopher Tetzel, refused to sign the report of the committee ; but they declared themselves ready to submit to an authoritative explanation of the Decree of 1526. The committee was unwilling to make further concessions, and delivered its report to the Estates as the judgment of the com- mittee. 'The Diet held session after session, as the Evangelicals still refused to surrender their rights under the Decree of 1526. Fin- ally, April 19th, the report of the majority of the committee was adopted and became a law of the Empire. Against this action of the majority the Evangelicals hastily drew up an answer and laid it before the King, who haughtily rejected it, declaring that he was acting under instructions from the Emperor, and that the case was settled. The Evangelicals then had their protest read in the Diet and incorporated in the minutes, and declared that they ^\'0uld take no-further part in the Dief.|) The burden of the protest was that the Decree of 1526 had been abolished prior to the decision of a general council. The next day, April 20th, the protest, rewritten, expanded in form, but not changed in meaning, expressly named Protest, and dated April 20, 1529, was signed by John, Elector of Saxony, the jMargrave of Brandenburg in Franconia, Ernest Duke of Brunswick-Liineburg, Philip Landgrave of Hesse, and Wolfgang Prince of Anhalt.f Efforts at reconciliation, made by certain Catholic Princes, were unavailing, as the King was inexorable, and as the Protest- * The Decree and the Protest that followed are given iu a Latin text by Coelestin, Historia, II., 192 et seqg. tHauser. Die Protestation von Speier (1904), p. 19. fHauser «i supra, p. 20, who gives a facsimile of the last page of the Protest and of the names of the five subscribing Princes. 14 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. ing Princes adhered to their protest. April 22d, these Protesting Princes were joined by fourteen imperial cities, namely : Strass- burg, Niirnberg, Ulm, Constance, Lindau, Memmingen, Kemp ten, Nordlingen, Heilbronn, Reutlingen, Isny, St. Galleh, Weissen- biirg in Franconia, and Windsheim, which, through their rep- resentatives, signed the protest and refused their approbation of the decision of the majority. On April 24th, the Diet held its last session. The decree, called Recess, was read, and adjournment was pronounced. But the Recess was absolutely silent in regard to the Protest of the Evangelicals. Hence the Protestants had to consider how they could give the necessary legal form to their Protest. In order to do this, the five Protesting Princes and the representatives of the fourteen protesting cities met together Sunday, April 25th, in a private house in the presence of witnesses, and had two imperial public notaries draw up a document (Urkunde) to the effect that the aforesaid princes and cities, in opposition to the decision of the Diet in reference to religion, and especially on account of the annulment of the decree of Speyer of 1526, and on account of enforcement of the Edict of "Worms, and also especially against the legality of the Recess of this Diet, make an appeal to the Emperor, and ask for a free Christian council to examine and to decide on the matters in dispute.* This document, drawn up in legal form by the notaries, con- stitutes the so-called Appellation to the Emperor. John Eck- inger, Alexius Frauentraut and Michael von Kaden were com- missioned to carry it and the necessary related documents to Spain, and to present them to the Emperor. But when they reached Genoa they learned that the Emperor had come from Spain to Italy. They then proceeded to Piacenza and obtained an audience on the 12th of September, though they were treated very ungraciously, were distrained of their freedom, and were forbidden to communicate with their principals. October 13th, the Emperor gave his answer to the effect that the Pro- testants should submit to the Recess of the Diet, and that he had so written them.f Nevertheless, the Protest and Appeal could not be ignored, either by the Emperor or by the Estates. *Hauser, ut supra, pp. 27, 28. The Instrumentum Appellationis (the Appeal) is given by J. J. Miiller ut supra, pp. 51 et seqq., and in St. Louis edition of Luther's Schriften, XVI., 286 et seqq. Other important docu- ments connected with this Diet are found in the two volumes to which reference has just been made. See also von Eanke, Histary of the Refor- mation, English translation, pp. 552 et seqq., and the Mealencyclopddie vol 18, pp. 594 et seqq. t For particulars see Sleidan, Bk. VII. Ad initium. THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. 15 There at Speyer five Princes of the Empire and fourteen im- perial cities had declared that in imitation of their ancestors they were willing to sacrifice their lives and spend their fortunes in the service of the Emperor, but that in the present case they have to do with matters pertaining to the salvation of their souls ; that for years there had been dissensions and quarrels about religion; that no redress of the grievances of the Princes had been made, and no heed had been paid to their demands; that they could not recede from "the doctrine which hitherto they had owned as true and holy without denying the pure and un- corrupted Word of God. ' ' That, as to the Popish Mass, it is well known that the ministers of the churches within their dominions had by strong and unanswerable arguments and testimonies of Holy Scripture quite overthrown it, and in its place had ap- pointed the Lord's Supper according to the command and institu- tion of Christ ; that they could not permit their people to restore the Mass, which had been abolished; that all men knew what was taught in their churches of the presence of the body and blood of Christ in the sacrament; that it was right indeed that the Gospel be taught according to the interpretations received by the Church, but the question still was, ^hat is the true ChurchD that the only sure and infallible way was to stick to the plain and simple teaching of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; that the decree of the former Diet had been made for the sake of peace and concord, but the present decree, should it be enforced, would bring troubles and discontents; and since the case was so, they did not consent to this decree, and would give reasons for their conduct to all men, even to the Emperor himself, and until the meeting of the general pro- vincial council they would not do anything that could not be maintained by law; that after all they were not ignorant of their duty in regard to what had been decreed about living in peace, and about not interfering with the goods of others, about the Anabaptists, about the preachers, about printing and about other matters of importance.* The Protest and Appeal constitute a great transaction. They are as courteous and respectful as they are bold and courageous. They are the declarations of men who had convictions, and who were willing to sacrifice everything for conscience' sake. Their * The Protest in condensed form is given in Latin by Sleidan, De Statu Rcligionis (edition of 1557), fol. 98 et seqq., and in Bohun's translation of the same (1689), pp. 119, 120. 16 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. content is that the Recess of the Diet is null and void, and that in matters of religion their signers will conduct themselves ac- cording to the decree of the previous Diet of Speyer, and as they thought they could give answer to God. Wisely and well has it been said: "The Protest of Speyer was a renewal and expansion of Luther's protest at Worms. The protest of a single monk had become the protest of princes and representatives of leading cities of the Empire, who now for the first time became an organized party. It was the protest of conscience against tyrannical authority. " * And von Ranke has said of it : "Thus distinguished princes, chiefly in Northern Germany, thus notable and rich cities, chiefly in Southern and Western Germany, all united in one thought, formed a power which commanded regard. They were resolved to defend themselves by their common forces against every act of violence from the side of the majority." -j- Christian Germany was now divided on the subject of religion. On the one side stood tradition and the hierarchy. On the other side stood the open Bible and the freedom of the' Christian con- science. Neither side wanted war. Catholics and Protestants alike desired a general council or a national assembly for the settlement of the dispute, and both the Pope and the Emperor had promised a council. So matters stood at the end of April, 1529. The Summer and Autumn was a period of anxiety to the Protestants. Luther and Melanchthon, at the command of the Elector of Saxony, rendered an opinion decidedly adverse to the Recess of the Diet and in support of the Protest. 5: 4. Efforts at Alliance Among the Protestants. The Protesting Princes and cities were not in- full doctrinal accord with each other. Philip of Hesse and several of the cities were strongly inclined to some of the views of Zwingli. "In the moment of need the Lutheran Princes had not hesitated to unite with them."§ But no sooner had they separated than the old antipathies i-egained their ascendency, especially in the minds of the Saxon theologians. It was but natural that it should be so. {^ was in' the spirit and in the habit of the times to require perfect agreement in the faith as a pre-condition of either ecclesiastical or political alliance. Hence "it can hardly * Schaff, History of the ChrisPian Church, vol. VI., pp. 691, 692. ■f Deutsche Geschichte. Seibente Auflage, 3, p. 115. j J. J. Miiller, ut supra, pp. 47 et seqq. Walcli, XVI., 3.58-361. St. Louis edition of Luther's Schriften, XVI., 283 et seqq. ?Von Eanke. History of the Seformation. English translation, p. 552. THE BEGIN^lINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. 17 be affirmed that these theological scruples ought to have been utterly disregarded, or that Luther was to be blamed for enter- taining them. "We must consider that the whole reformation originated in religious convictions, which admit of no compromise, no condi- tion, no extenuation. The spirit of an exclusive orthodoxy, ex- pressed in rigid formulse, and denying salvation to its antagon- ists, now ruled the world. Hence the violent hostility between, the two confessions, which in some respects approximated so nearly." * At the Diet of Speyer the Catholic majority had forbidden "the doctrine opposed to the venerable sacrament of the true body and blood of Christ." This action was aimed at the cities of Upper Germany, and was intended both to arrest the Zwing- lian influence in Germany, and to win over the Lutherans.! Nevertheless, the Elector of Saxony and the Landgrave of Hesse concluded "a particular secret alliance" with Niirnberg, Ulm and Strassburg, the object of which was to defend themselves only if they were attacked on account of their faith, or obstructed in the visitation of the churches, under pretext of spiritual juris- diction, from whatever source the attack might come.J Delegates were to meet in June at Rotach in the Pranconian mountains to consider the terms of agreement and the ways in which they should assist each other. But after the Diet it was discovered that the agreement con- templated also a political alliance. This might easily be construed as intended to operate against the Emperor. Any procedure of this kind was contrary to the fundamental principles of the Tjutheran theologians, who had always maintained that the faith should be defended, not by the sword, but by the Word of God. Hence an alliance such as had been contemplated had to be abandoned. ' The Lutherans could consent to no alliance not based on absolute agreement in the faith. The Luther-Zwingli controversy over the Lord's Supper was fresh in the memories of the Wittenbergers ; and the cities of Ulm and Strassburg had taken sides with Zwingli. Melanchthon, who believed that larger concessions would have been made by the Catholics had the Lutherans separated themselves from the Zwinglians, reproached himself for his silence on this subject, and returned home in * Von Eanke, lit supra, p. 565. t Wurtemhergisclie Kirchengesehichte, p. 301. % Von Eanke, ut supra, p. 563. Kolde, Beitrdge zur Reformationsge- scliichte (1896), p. 96. 18 THE BEGI^'JJINGS OF THE GERMAN. REFORMATION. great distress of mind. He wrote to one friend and to another abont it, declaring that his " conscience was disquieted ": that the matter had caused him " to neglect all the duties of friend- ship and all his studies "; that he would " rather die than to endure it longer ' ' ; that ' ' the godless opinions of Zwingli must on no account be defended. ' ' * On returning to Wittenberg, Melanchthon made his scruples known to Luther, whereupon the latter on his own motion wrote the Elector, May 22nd, and warned him against the Landgrave, " because he is a turbulent man," and against forming an al- liance with him and with the cities of Upper Germany, declar- ing that the proj^osed alliance is not of God, nor proceeds from confidence in God, but from human conceit; that it seeks and trusts to human help alone; that there is no reason for it; that it can bring no good results; that the Papists are not so strong nor have so much courage as to be able to accomplish anything : that to form an alliance with the enemies of God and the sacra- ment is to become partakers of their sins. .The cities by their ' ' heresy in regard to the sacrament sin in all. " " He is not less an infidel who denies one article than Arius or any other." ' ' We know and hold that they are wrong, and we cannot recog- nize their error or place it in doubt, therefore we cannot with a good conscience have anything to do with them." " They are audacious enemies of God and his Word."_t- This letter, and the more formal opinion that followed it, verj- much disturbed the Elector, for he himself, in connection with the Landgrave, had invited the Zwinglian cities to an alliance, had named the day for further conference, and had promised to send delegates to Rotach. In this quandary he sent Hans von JMinkwitz, his chancellor, to Rotach, but instructed him to con- sult the Niirnbergers, to consider the question of conscience, and to agree to nothing final, but only to a scheme for an alliance, which should become operative only when anyone is attacked " on aeount of the faith and on account of the things which are dependent upon and follow from the articles which are to be treated in a future council. ' ' % Thus purely defensive. There was no agreement on the Articles of Faith. It was found that the Niirnberg preachers entertained the same scruples that had arisen in the minds of the Wittenbergers, and that they * C. E. I., 1069, 1075, 1076. Von Eanke, ut supra, p. 564. t De Wette, III., 454 and 465. t The Instruction to Minkwitz is given by von Schubert in Zeitschrift f. Kirclig., XXIX., 3, p. 382. THE BEGINNI^'GS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. 19 had warned the council to have nothing to do Avith the "Sac- ramenters." The same sentiment was entertained by the ]\Iar- gravians. Hence the Recess of the convention, called Confederations- Notel, is very general in its character. It begins by proclaiming absolute loyalty to the Emperor and to the Empire, rehearses the essence of the Speyer Protest, and speaks about "the Divine Word, " " the Holy Gospel, our faith and religion ' ' ; but it does not say what any of these are, or how they are to be understood. It then declares that should any one of the parties to the alliance be attacked on account of his religion, the others will assist him * — substantially a repetition of the instruction given to Mink- witz. It has none of the elements of a confession of faith. But it was known, and had been again and again declared by representatives of the German and of the Swiss Reformation, that dissensions existed in regard to the faith. This was an inauspicious condition in view of the hostile attitude of the Catholic princes, and of the Emperor, who expected soon to be freed from embarrassing relations with France and with the Pope, ^lliance for defense on the part of the Protestants was but a dictate of ordinary prudence in the line of self-protection ; and efforts at alliance there were!) 1. Philip of Hesse, who was strongly drawn towards Zwing- lianism, and who had been disappointed by the issue of the Rotach conference, regarded the differences between the two great leaders as neither fundamental nor irreconcilable. He believed that the common interests of the Protestants were in peril, and that an alliance between the Protestants of Germany and of Switzerland was necessary for mutual protection. Ac- cordingly he resolved to bring the chief disputants to a friendly conference at his own castle, " though it should cost him six thousand gulden." Luther and ' a few of Ms adherents, and Zwingli and a few of his adherents, were invited to meet at Marburg, f Luther accepted the invitation reluc- tantly. Zwingli accepted it with alacrity. October 1-3, 1529, they discussed their differences — the first day Luther with Oecolampadius, and Melanchthon with Zwingli — for the most part in a dignified and friendly manner. The Lutherans did not find the Zwinglians so heretical as they had imagined them * The Confederations-Notei, -which ^Yas signed by the representatives of Saxony, Brandenburg, Hesse, Strassburg, Niirnberg and XJlm, is found in J. J. Miiller's Historie, pp. 236 et seqq. See Kolde, «t supra, p. 97. -f The in\'itation went to Wittenberg, July 1st. Kolde, ut surpa, p. 100. 20 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN EEFOHlMATION. to be. Nor did the Zwinglians find the Lutherans so obstinate as they had expected to find them. Both parties showed a reasonably conciliatory spirit. An agreement was reached on the doctrine of original sin, of the person and work of Christ, on the righteousness of faith, on the efficacy of the external Word, on Baptism as more than a symbol, and even on the article of the Lord's Supper, in that both parties believe and hold that bread and wine should be used ; that the Mass should be rejected, and that " it was given and ordained, in order that weak con- sciences might be excited by the Holy Ghost to faith and love. ' ' But they did not agree " as to whether the true body and blood of Christ are bodily present in the bread and wine. ' ' These points and numerous others were embodied in fifteen articles by Luther on October 4th, and were signed by Luther, Melanchthon, Jonas, Osiander, Brentz, Agricola, Oeeolampadius, Zwingli, Bucer and Hedio. They are known as the Marburg Articles, and will ever stand as a monument to the magnanimity of both parties. According to the latest and best conclusions of historical science they are based on articles which Luther had " helped to compose " for an entirely different purpose.* But they were not composed and signed as the basis either of a political or of a religious alliance between the two parties. Hence this colloquy failed to accomplish the object for which it was called, though the colloquists parted with the best of feeling towards each other, and Luther, both on the way home and afterwards, expressed himself again and again as hopeful of pacific results. 2. There is very strong reason to believe that very soon, per- haps immediately, after the Rotach conference, the Saxons, the Margravians and perhaps the Niirnbergers, began to move in the direction of the formation of a politico-religious alliance based oh the confession of the strictly Lutheran teaching, in other words, on articles of faith as the same had- been taught and were held at Wittenberg.f A meeting of representatives of Saxony, Brandenburg and Hesse was held at Saalfeld, July 8th. But nothing was accomplished, since Saxony and Brandenburg would not unite with Strassburg because of the views held by that city on the sacrament. Brandenburg expressed itself on this subject as positively as Saxony had done, and things seem to have been arranged for excluding rather than for including ^ Zcitschrift fiir Kirchcngeschichte (1908), XXIX., 3, 342 et seqq. t Kolde, ut suiira, pp. !)8, 99. THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. 21 Strassburg and other Upper German cities, though Niirnberg was to be included in the proposed alliance. From Saalfeld the Saxon court went to Wittenberg. Here, it is believed, about the middle of July, orders were given for articles of faith such as were required by Saxony and Branden- burg as the necessary pre-condition of the proposed politico- religious alliance : ' ' From the middle of July to the middle of September the work was done, attended by official communication with Brandenberg. At the middle of September a definite de- cision was made in regard to the form of the articles as a pre- supposition for the alliance of the Princes, to be concluded at Schleiz on the basis of these articles. ' ' * Such, it is believed, as the result of the most exhaustive his- torical and critical inquiry, is the course of the preparation of the so-called Schwabach Articles, which Luther ' ' helped to com- pose," — not at Marburg, October 5th (Riederer, Heppe), and not at Schleiz, as some have thought, but at Wittenberg, and which, therefore, preceded the Marburg Articles. These articles, sev- enteen in number, thus composed, were carried to Schwabach via Niirnberg, where the representatives of Saxony, Brandenburg and Niirnberg held a council on the evening of October 15th. By the evening of the sixteenth all the delegates found them- selves at Schwabach except the Hessian, who came the next day. Monday, October 18th, the transactions were begun and fin- ished.! Strassburg and Ulm declined to accept the Seventeen Articles, giving as the reason for their action, that articles of faith had not been proposed by the Rotach Conference; that these articles were not in harmony with the doctrines preached in their churches, and that they had received no commission from their constituents to sign articles of faith.J On Tuesday, 19th, all the delegates signed the Recess, in which, among other things, it was resolved to meet, December 15th, at Schmalkald, for the * Von Schubert in Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschiclite, XXIX. Band, 3. Heft, p. 377. In this connection see also Kolde, ut supra, passim. J. J. MiiUer, Eistorie, pp. 280 et seqq. t Zeitschrift fiir Kirehengeschiehte, ut supra, p. 356. For slight diflfer- enees in dates, Kolde, ut supra, p. 110, and Bealencyclopadie, 3. 18, p. 2. t Miiller, Eistorie, p. 303. Von Ranke, Deutsche Geschichte, 3. 127 Weber, Kritische Geschichte, A. C, I., Erste Beilage. Von Schubert, in the article from which we have quoted, Zeitschrift fur Kirehengeschiehte, XXIX. Band, 3. Heft (Aug., 1908), in thus placing the composition of the so-called Schwabach Articles before the composition of the so-called Marburg Articles, regards the latter as an abbreviated edition of the former. His argument is sustained by such an array of facts, and by such strong psychological and critical reasons, that it has commanded the consent of competent historical scholars. The author may not have spoken the last word on the subject, but 22 THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. purpose of reaching a consensus in regard to the controverted articles, and, if possible, to conclude the proposed alliance.* Meanwhile, since Rotach, dangers had thickened. The Em- peror and the Pope had buried their contentions in the Peace of Barcelona. It could now be easily foreseen that the temporal and the spiritual head of Christendom would unite for the sup- pression of the Protestants. Moreover, the commissioners who carried the Protest across the Alps had now returned, bringing the most dismal reports about the hostility of the Emperor. The affairs of the Evangelicals never looked so dark, and the need of a Protestant alliance never seemed so imperative. The Land- grave had become more insistent than ever for an alliance. As a consequence of this, and of the perilous situation, the Schmal- kald Convention was far more numerously attended than either of its predecessors had been. Besides princes and counts, nine of the protesting cities were represented. The conclusion of the whole matter is thus presented by von Ranke : ' ' The seven- teen articles were once more laid before the Oberlanders (who were here far more numerous than at Schwabach). Ulm and Strassburg, whose example was usually followed by the others, definitely declared that they would not sign them. The Luth- erans, in an equally decided manner, declared that, in that case, they could not enter into an alliance with them. Their own earnest entreaties, and the zeal with which the Landgrave ex- erted himself in their behalf — urging that there was nothing to be expected from the Emperor but disfavor and violence — were equally vain. The other party refused even to communi- cate to them the report of the delegates, unless they would first ' declare their assent to the profession of faith. ' ' f Thus the several efforts made to effect a Protestant alliance have failed. The year 1529, the most momentous in the history of the Reformation up to that time, closed with a dark and ominous horizon. Even at Nurnberg, in the following January, the Lutherans failed to agree on the proposition of a defensive alliance. In the very face of approaching danger they stood his conclusions certainly do supersede all older theories of the chronological and theological relations of these two series of articles. The Schwabach Articles are utterly incompatible with the frame of mind which both Luther and Melanchthon brought with them from Marburg, unless we are willing to conclude that both were double-faced. * The Recess in Weber, ut supra, I., First Beilage. f History of the Reformation, English translation, p.- 571. See also Strobel, Miscellaneen, IV., 112 et seqq., who gives the Protocol of this Con- vention. And Moller-Kawerau, Kirchengeschichte, 3 ed.. III., 93 which gives as the date of this transaction, Nov. 29, 1529. ' THE BEGINNINGS OF THE GERMAN REFORMATION. 23 still and took counsel only of God and of their own consciences. Unquestionably, this was not prudent, but it was great, ' ' says von Kanke. But in the last nine years Lutheranism has spread amazing!}' in central, western and northern Germany, and even beyond. In Electoral Saxony, in Franconian Brandenburg and in Hesse, it had become organized, and the University of Marburg had been established. The cities of Brunswick and Hamburg re- ceived each an evangelical Church order, respectively in 1528 and 1529. Sehleswig-Holstein became essentially Lutheran in 1526. Prussia was Lutheran since 1525. Magdeburg had been reformed by Nicholas von Amsdorf in 1524, and all the churches of Bremen, except the cathedral, were in the hands of the Luth- erans in 1525. In other countries also the Reformation had made important advances, as in Sweden, where it was introduced by Gustavus Vasa at the Diet of Westeras in 1527, and in Denmark in 1527, where it was accorded equal rights with the old Church. The cities of Stralsund, Hall, Liineburg and Liegnitz had re- ceived the Reformation respectively in 1525, 1526, 1527, 1527. In other words, Lutheranism now numbers its friends and ad= "herents by the millions. These millions of Lutherans are allied chiefly by a common opposition to the Papacy, to episcopal juris- diction, to a system of corrupt doctrines, to an immoral clergy, and by the determination to preach and to teach the Gospel ac- cording to the conception of it that emanated from Wittenberg.' /But they did not have in common an authoritative declaration of the Lutheran teachingT' This was now their greatest need. With this need staring them in the face, they started for Augsburg in April, 1530. Rotach, and Marburg, and Sehwabach, and Schmal- kald, had been prophetic in so far as they had expressed a sense of need.* * Important information on the Eotach Conference and on the Sehwa- bach and Sehmalkald Conventions is given in the Strassburg Politische Correspondenz, pp. 269 et seqq., 400 et seqq. and 418 et seqq. CHAPTER II. THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. On the 29th of June, 1529, Charles V. concluded "an indis- soluble peace, friendship and alliance" with the Pope at Bar- celona. On the 5th of August following he effected a reconcilia- tion with Francis I. of France.* Seven days later he landed at Genoa. February 22 and 24, 1530, he was crowned at Bologna, first with the iron crown of Lombardy, and then with the imperial crown. f But the situation in the Empire was by no means inspiring. The Turks had besieged Vienna, and were desolating the fairest portions of Austria. Some of the Em- peror's most powerful and loyal German Princes, and fourteen imperial cities had protested against the action of the majority at Speyer, and with their Protest had 'sent an Appeal across the Alps to the Emperor, to a national council and to impartial judges. Even a ruler less astute and less diplomatic than Charles would have seen the necessity of calling a diet and of instituting pacific measures for removing grievances and for averting dangers. Charles was equal to the occasion. Accord- ingly, January 21, 1530, he issued from Bologna an imperial Rescript, summoning a diet to meet at Augsburg, April 8th en- suing. The object of the Diet, as set forth in the Rescript, was to counsel about resistance to the Turks, and to consider the best methods of allaying the dissensions about religion. The references to the religious dissensions are couched in language at once mild and conciliatory : "To consult and to decide in regard to the disturbances and dissensions of the Holy Faith and the Christian Religion. And in order that all dissensions and errors may be abolished in a salutary manner, all sentiments and opinions are to be heard, understood and con- sidered between us in love and kindness, and are to be composed in sincerity, so as to put away what is not right in both parties, that true religion may be accepted and held by us all, that as we * The treaty was signed, August 3d, and ratified by oatli, August 5th. Baumgarten, Geschichte Karls V. II., 698-703. t Baumgarten, II., 704. (24) THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. 25 live and serve under one Christ, so we may live in one fellow- ship, Church and unity. ' ' * The Imperial Rescript, couched in such mild and gracious language, at once dispelled the darkness from the minds of the Protestants and awakened hope in their hearts. It recognized them as a "party," and gave full assurance that an amicable settlement of existing differences was to be expected. They were now to have a hearing before their peers in a diet presided over by an impartial judge, for in their intense loyalty to the Emperor they believed that he would judge th^ir cause with fairness and impartiality. Accordingly, when the Rescript reached Torgau, March 11th, it was at once decided that the Elector of Saxony should attend the Diet in person, and it was resolved, at the suggestion of the electoral counsellors, that the following named persons should accompany him as "learned counsellors"; "Dr. Martin, Jonas the Provost, Philip Melaneh- thon, Musa of Jena. Dr. Martin and Jonas are to remain at Niirnberg and await further orders. Master Eisleben as preacher; Master Spalatin to be employed in connection with faith, and for other reasons, together with other scholars. ' ' f 1. The Preparation for the Diet. Not only did the counsellors provide that the Elector should be attended by his theologians, who, in their own persons, might advise in regard to the doctrine that had been preached in his dominions, but the wise senior chancellor. Dr. Gregory Briick, forecasting the importance of the proposed Diet, addressed the following to the Elector in a letter : ' ' Inasmuch as the Imperial Rescript provides that the opinion and view of each one is to be heard, it would be a good thing for us to bring together sys- tematically, in writing, the views maintained by our party, and to fortify them out of Holy Writ, so as to present them in writ- * The original is given by Forstemann in Urkundenbuch zu der Geschichte des Reichstags zu Augsburg, I., 2-9. " According to other testimonies, a formal league was concluded, at Bologna, of the following import: The Emperor and Ferdinand were to make every effort to bring back the heretics, and the Pope was to supply the spiritual means. But if they stubbornly persisted, the Emperor and Ferdinand were to coerce them by arms and the Pope was to see that the other Christian princes assisted with all their forces." Again: " The Emperor was exhorted to unite with the Catholic estates, to work against the Protestants, at first with promises and threats, and then by violence, and after their suppression to establish an inquisition. ' ' Gieseler, Church History, IV., pp. 136-7, notes. To the same effect see von Eanke, 3., p. 163. See Baumgarten,^ Geschichte Karls V., vol. III., 24, note. Brieger, Geschichte A. C, p. 46. t Forstemann, I., 13 et seqq. 26 THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. ing, in ease the preachers should not be admitted to participa- tion in the transactions. This will facilitate business, and it will serve to remove misunderstanding to have such views and opinions presented. ' ' * In all probability it was this prudent suggestion that induced the Elector, March 14th, to write a somewhat lengthy letter to the Wittenberg theologians, in which he informs them that a diet is to be held at Augsburg, beginning April 8th, ensuing ; that such diet will probably take the place of a national council that matters pertaining to religion are to be considered; that what- ever is not right in both parties is to be corrected, so that "all may receive and hold one true religion, and as we all live and serve under one Christ, so we may live in one fellowship. Church and unity, and finally thus attain to a good unity and peace." He then instructs the theologians to prepare "Articles both of faith and other church usages and ceremonies," and to present them in person at Torgau by Sunday, the 20th; and further: "If the preachers and estates shall not be permitted to attend, ye, and especially you, Doctor Martin, shall await our further decision at Coburg." f It must be remembered that the Imperial Rescript had declared the restoration of Christian fellowship and unity to be the religious aim of the proposed Diet. The report of the Saxon counsellors to the Elector, Dr. Briick's letter to the Elector, and the Elector's letter to his theologians, prove to a demonstration that the Saxon court at Torgau was fully possessed by the thought, desire and purpose of reconciliation with the Church, and that they all enter upon the preparation for the Diet with such thought, desire and purpose in the ascendant. This is made so clear by these and other official documents, and is ex- pressed with such evident sincerity and simplicity, that it be- comes a chief point of view from which to study the history of the Augsiurg Confession, and it furnishes the necessary cue for ascertaining the intended meaning of the Confession; and it explains the conduct and the concessions of the entire elec- toral party in the negotiations subsequently made at Augshurg for the complete restoration of concord and unity. Hence, noth- ing can be further from the truth than the representation that the Saxon court went to Augsburg with a belligerent, defiant, aggressive spirit. They went in the spirit of humility and obed- * Forstemann, I., 39. t Forstemann, I., 41-44. the" diet at AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. 27 ieiice. They took the Emperor at his word, and sought to effect peace and reconciliation. Even the Wittenberg theologians and other theologians partook of the same frame of mind, as is evi- dent from their letters. Luther wrote to Jonas as follows : "The Prince writes us, that is, you, Pomeranus, Philip and me, a letter in common, to unite, and, putting aside everything else, to make ready by next Sunday whatever is necessary for the Diet on the coming eighth of April. For the Emperor Charles himself will be at Augsburg, and will amicably settle (amice corapositurus) all things, as he writes in his proclamation. Hence to-day and to-morrow, though you are absent, we three will do what we can. Nevertheless, it will be your duty also to obey the Prince, and, turning over your duties to your colleagues, to join us here to-morrow. For all is hurry. Christ grant that every- thing may be done to his glory. Amen. 12 o'clock, March 14, Anno 1530. ' ' * On the day following Melanchthon wrote to Jonas in a similar strain of delight and gratification: "A Diet has been appointed at Augsburg. The Emperor has graciously promised to review the case and to correct the faults of both parties." f /But this exhilaration on the part of the Protestants need not affect us with surprise. Notwithstanding all that had occurred, they still maintained that they stood in the unity of the Church. When the Emperor had announced his intention of granting a Diet, and of composing the controversies about religion, no one could feel like declining the gracious proposal. Everyone must feel like meeting him half way and trying to gain the most favorable decision for Protestantism. Yet the nature of the preparations made by the Wittenberg theologians is not definitely known. We know that they did not appear in Torgau on Sun- day, March 20th, for March 21st the Elector addressed them an- other letter, and urged them to come to Torgau and to bring their books with thpm, as some things awaited their attention.! Melanchthon was in Torgau March 27th, but Luther did not go.§ Whether Melanchthon took books and "articles of faith and *De Wette, Luther's Brief e. III., 564. t Corpus Reformatorum, II., 28. See the Preface to the Augsburg Con- fession; Melanchthon 's letters to Camerarius, C. E. II., 119, and p. 280; Deus fortunet concilia pacis; and Brentz's letter to Isenmann, June 24, 1530 : " In ea (Conf essione) petunt prineipes, ut amice controversia com- ponatur, et pax constituatur. " C. E. II., 125 ; Virch in Zeitschrift fiir Kir- chengescMchte (1888), pp. 68-71: "With evident approximation to the Catholic Standpoint." J. p -R TT QQ I KHatYm, Martin Luther (1883), II., 651; Plitt, Einleitung, I., 520, n. 2. "28 THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. ceremonies" with him to Torgau is not a matter of contempora- neous record. The ripest scholarship can only say with Pro- fessor Kolde: "A document with the title 'Torgau Articles,' or which on the basis of contemporaneous reports, can with cer- tainty be shown to have been delivered at that time, we do not possess. Hence the most diverse conjectures have been promul- gated. Yet the researches of Bngelhardt {Zli.-Th., 1865, 515, £f.) and especially of Brieger {Kirchengeschichtliche Stiidien. 1888, p. 268, ff.), have rendered it highly probable that the much sought 'Torgau Articles' are identical with an opinion (Gutachten) (Forstemann's Vrkundenbuch, I., 68-84), which, as an important document, was taken to Augsburg by the Elec- tor, and manifestly became the foundation subsequently of the Augsburg Confession. And this is not contradicted by the fact that the writing in question, contrary to the Elector's order to report 'on faith and ceremonies,' treats only of the latter. For the authors remember that according to the admission of their opponents, even the doctrine preached in the Elector's dominions, 'is Christian and comforting, and right in itself, and that the schism had arisen chiefly on account of certain abuses,' which had been introduced by the doctrines and statutes of men, and because they could not concede that their doctrine is new, or that it differs from the genuine, true, evangelical doctrine of the Church, they, according to their own declaration, limited themselves to the reasons for the abolition of those abuses. They also promised, in case there was a desire to know what else was preached in the Electorate, 'to present articles in which the en- tire teaching was embraced in an orderly way' in general, also, a further elaboration of the original Gutachten, which had been hastily composed and was intended to be presented, to the Diet by the Elector alone, was kept in view from the beginning, and was already resolved upon. ' ' * Indeed, if we accept the essay A, given in Forstemann's Ur- kuiidenhuch, I., 68-84, and in Jacob's Book of Concord, II., 75-86, as "the Torgau Articles," or as a part of the same, then it becomes at once obviously certain that doctrinal articles were . not presented to the Elector at Torgau in answer to his requisi= tion, for it is impossible to conceive that the Wittenberg theo- logians would say in that essay: "The things thus far stated have reference to external ordinances and customs, ' ' and promise "to give articles on the entire Christian doctrine in answer to * Article, Augsburger BekenntnU in Eeal-Encyclopddie, II., 243. See Kolde, Augsburgische Konfession, p. 2. THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. 29 a desire, should it be made," and then, at the same time, present articles on doctrine. Yet the question cannot be decided abso- lutely,* though the fact, now universally recognized, that the Augsburg Confession, in its original form — Apology it was at first called — did not contain articles of faith,t makes it as good as certain that articles of faith were not sent to Torgau by the Wittenberg theologians as a part of their response to the Elec- tor's requisition. And as for the statement made by some of the older historians of the Augsburg Confession.J viz., that "be- fore the journey to Augsburg began, Luther composed seventeen articles," which are "the archetype of the Augsburg Confes- sion," — such statement, both as regards the chronology and the purpose of the Sehwabach Articles, is purely gratuitous, since we know that the seventeen Sehwabach Articles, which are "the archetype" of the first seventeen articles of the Augsburg Con- fession, were neither composed nor even revised in view of the proposed Diet, as we learn from Luther's own words in the Preface to his published edition of those Articles. He says: "Seventeen articles have lately been published under my name with a title that indicates that I meant to lay the same before the present Diet. Of such a thing I never had a thought. It is true that I helped to compose such articles, for they were not composed by me alone, but not on account of the Papists, nor to lay before this Diet. It is very well known why they were com- posed. I had not even intended that they should be published, much less that they should go out with such a title under my name. And he who did it knows very well that I had neither commanded nor wished it. Not that I shun the light, or think that such articles are not right. They are too good and too precious to be used in negotiations with the Papists. For what do they care about such beautiful, holy, superb articles ? " § This Preface is decisive against the supposition that the Schwa- * See Brieger, KirchengescMcJitliche Studien, p. 311. t Die Aelteste Bedaktion der Augsb. Konf. Kolde. t Coelestin, pp. 25 et seqq. J. J. Miiller, p. 441. Chytraeus, Historia, p. 18. § Erlangen edition of Luther's Works, vol. XXIV., 337. These seventeen articles, known as ^the Schwabaeh Articles, were published early in the year 1530 by Hans Bern, of Coburg, with the title: " The Confession of Martin Luther composed in Seventeen Articles to be laid before the present Diet at Augsburg. ' ' Misled by the title, Conrad Wimpina, John Mensing, Wolfgang Eoderfer and Eupert Elgersma, Catholic theologians at Augsburg, wrote a refutation of the articles. Thereupon Luther, who was residing in the castle at Coburg, wrote a Preface (from which we have just quoted) to these seventeen articles and had the whole printed at Wittenberg under the title: " Martin Luther's Eeply to the Howl of Certain Papists." These articles, as published by Luther, reached Augsburg in May, as we learn from a letter written by Jacob Sturm to Zwingli. Zwinglis Werl-e, VIII., 459. 30 THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. bach Articles were sent to Torgau as a part of the preparations for the Diet. It was subsequent exigencies, as will be shown hereafter, which called the seventeen Sehwabach Articles into requisition, first, as the Elector of Saxony's Confession of Faith, and secondly, as the hasis of the first seventeen articles of the Augsburg Confession. 2. Torgau Articles. But it is now the conclusion of scholars and specialists in this field of Reformation history that, between March 14th and 27th, certain articles on abuses, now called "Torgau Articles," were composed by Melanchthon,* and were subsequently, possibly not before April 3d, taken to Torgau, and for that reason called ' ' Torgau Articles. ' ' But of contemporaneous documentary proof of this conclusion, and of the veritable existence of "Torgau Articles," there is not a line known to historians. That is, there does not exist a line, or even a word from the times, which tells us that the Wittenberg theologians wrote articles on "ex- ternal ceremonies, ' ' March 14th to 27th, and sent or carried them to Torgau; nor have we any document from the times inscribed Tor gall, Articles. ■ It is only highly probable, not historically and demonstratively certain, that the essay consisting of several parts, and discussing several subjects, discovered by Karl Edward Forstemann at Weimar,! and published by him in his Urkun- * See Engelhardt in Niedner's Zeitschrift, 1865, pp. 515-629, and especi- ally Brieger's learned and exceedingly acute essay in KirchengescMchtliche Studien, 1888, pp. 268-320. Also The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1897, pp. 301 et seqq. For the Refutation of the Papists, and Luther's Eeply, see St. Louis edition of Luther's Schriften, vol. XATI., 638 et seqq. t At the same time and place Forstemann discovered other essays, which he published in the VrTcunderibuoh, all arranged in the order of the alphabet from A to F. But the order in which these essays exist in the copy, that is, not in the hand of their author or authors, is D A B E F C. Forstemann introduced the entire list with the title : Der nach Torgau beruf enen Witten- berger Gelehrten Bedenken iiber die streitigen Artikel. Jacobs has given these articles in English in the same order, and has subtitled them; The Torgau Articles. BooTc of Concord, II., pp. 75-98. But neither Forste- mann nor Jacobs seems to have examined these articles critically. Indeed, the latter seems to have followed the former implicitly in accepting these articles taken altogether as the Torgau Articles and has named them The Foundation of the Articles on Abuses. He has also accepted the theory, as Krauth had already done {Conservative Eeformation, p. 223), propounded by Forstemann, that the Preface (exordium) spoken of by Melanchthon in his letter to Luther, May 4th (C. E. II., 39), is the whole first or doctrinal part of the Confession. But long ago Bretschneider (C. R. IV., 999 et seqq.) and Plitt (Einleitung in die Augustana, I., 523) gave ample reasons for the rejection of this theory about the Preface. And now comes Die aelteste Bedaktion der Augshurger Konfession, which explodes the theory forever, for it contains the ' ' long and rhetorical preface ' ' spoken of by Jlelanchthon.t . X See The Lutheran QnaTterly, January, 1907, pp. 44 et seqq. THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. 31 deribuch zu der Geschichte des Reichstags zu Augshurg im Jahre 1530, pp. 68-84, was written by Melanchthon at "Wittenberg, March 14th to 27th, carried to Torgau, and thence to Augsburg, and used finally in composing the second part of the Augsburg Confession. The data now known to exist will not allow more definite affirmations in regard to a basis of the Articles on Abuses. Hence no competent scholar would affirm so confidently of these essays as Forstemann did: "That incontestably they were written upon order of the Elector by the Wittenberg theo- logians, and that they are to be considered as without doubt the foundation of the second part of the Augsburg Confession." Criticism, conducted with ample learning and with great acute- ness by Bretsehneider, Plitt, Engelhardt, Knaake, Brieger, Kolde,* has reached the conclusion that all the essays in question must be excluded from consideration except A, and Brieger has summed up the result of the discussions, in these words : "As a result of our comparison we may set it down that A in fact served as preparatory work for the Augustana. The manner in which it is employed in Article 25, and in individual expres- sions of 23 and 24 and elsewhere, leave no doubt in regard to a perfectly demonstrable relationship, so that even those articles in which we are not led necessarily to employ A, this essay has, as a matter of fact, furnished the basis for the further elabora- tion, "f Bretsehneider, Plitt, Vireh and Kolde agree with this conclusion, though the three first named think that the essay -was written at Coburg, and Kolde has taken it into his Augsburg Confession as an appendix under the title : The Torgau Articles.% But the Essay A, whether it arose at Wittenberg or at Coburg, makes it perfectly clear that it was not the intention of the writer to exhibit doctrinal articles before the Diet. It contains not a single article of doctrine. It promises a "long and rhetor- ical preface," and then discusses The Doctrines and Ordinances of Men, The Marriage of Priests, Both Forms, The Mass, Con- fession, The Worship of Saints, German Singing. . The intro- duction is apologetic in character. Its aim is to vindicate "his Electoral Grace" against the charge of "dispensing with all divine service, and of introducing a heathenish, dissolute mode *See C. E. IV., 973-4; Plitt 's Einleitung, I., 320; Niedner's Zeitschrift (1865), pp. 550 et seqq.; Knaake's Luther's Antheil; Kircheng. Studien, pp. 268 et seqq. Real Encyc, II., 243; The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1897, pp. 303 et seqq. t Kirdhengeschichtliche Studien, p. 305. t Die Augsburgische Konfession, pp. 2 and 128 et seqq. 32 THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. of life and insubordination, from which the destruction of all Christendom results." It declares that his Electoral Grace has always been inclined to peace and has helped to maintain peace. It then says : "To this effect it is well to place first a long and rhetorical preface." It says further that "his Electoral Grace" is making provision for the preaching of the Gospel, and that "every one, even among the adversaries, must acknowledge that this doctrine, which is taught and treated, is Christian and eom= forting"; and finally: "The dissension is now especially con- cerning abuses, which have been introduced by human teach- ing and statutes, of which we will report in order, and will in- dicate for what reason my lord is induced to cause certain abuses to be abated." And if we analyze the introduction to these articles we find : 1. It uses throughout the first person singular, as "my lord," not our lord, when speaking of the Elector. This shows that the essay is the production of one man, not the joint composition of several. 2. It calls the adversaries themselves to witness to the purity of the doctrine taught in the Electoral dominions. 3. It declares that the dissension has arisen principally on account of abuses. 4. It shows that the essay was written for the Elector alone, and consequently that it is Saxon in origin, and was intended to vindicate the Elector before the Diet. And now when we turn to the Articles, we find that not one of them discusses a doctrine. They all treat of "human ordinances which cannot be observed without sin." The titles borne by these articles are in some instances identical, and in others nearly identical, with the titles given to the Articles on Abuses in Mel- anchthon's editio principes, Latin and German, of the Augshurg Confession, which fact forms a powerful argument in favor of the supposition that this essay was used in composing the second part of the Confession, and has its parallel in the fact that the doctrinal articles are simply numbered just as is the case in the Sehwabach Articles, which form the basis, in the main, of those doctrinal articles. The coincidence cannot be regarded as acci- dental in either case.* , We may, therefore, fairly conclude that in essay A we have the Torgau Articles, that is, the articles which were delivered to * The same two-fold parallelism meets us already in Die aelteste Eed- altioii dcr Augshurger Konfession. Kolde. THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. 33 the Elector of Saxony in answer to his requisition of March 14th, and which were used in composing Article XXI. and the Articles on Abuses, now contained in the ^Augsburg Confession. And when we come to compare the two sets of articles we find no difficulty in reaching the conclusion that the first part of Ar- ticle XXI. of the Confession has its prototype in the article Of the Invocation of Saints, in the essay. The same may be said of Article XXII., in its correspondence with the article Of Both Forms, in the essay, and likev\'ise of Article XXIII., as compared with the one of corresponding title in the essay, except that Article XXIII. is expanded greatly beyrfnd the size of its proto- type. There is resemblance also in Article XXIV. to the article Of the Mass, in the essay, though by no means is there identity in subject-matter, nor in the manner of treatment. The agree- ment between Article XXV., Of Confession, in the Augustana, and the article of the same title in the essay, is so strik- ing as to make it almost certain that the latter is the an- tecedent, or first draft, of the former. Article XXVI., of the Confession, Of the Distinction of Meats, has no antecedent in title in the essay. It contains a few forms of statement that may be traced to the first article in the essay. But there is no neces- sary relation between the two. In Article XXVII., of the Confes- sion, Of Monastic Vows, there are points of agreement with the article De Votis, Von Closter leben, in the essay, but the former contains about four times as much matter as does the latter. Article XXVIII., Of the Power of the Bishops, is the longest in the Confession. It covers a little more than eleven pages in the German editio princeps, as over against the article of similar title in the essay, which contains only 425 words. Brieger says that Article XXVIII. of the Confession contains not a trace from A. Engelhardt says that only the fundamental thought is the same, but that the entire treatment is different. Brieger declares that "the first sketch of Melanchthon 's twenty-eighth article is found in C," whose first article is entitled: Von vermoge der Schlussel. De potestate clavium. Already Bretschneider had expressed the same opinion and had been followed by Engel- hardt.* Kolde regards it as without doubt that here in C we have the original of Article XXVIII., of which we have three dif- ferent recensions: that in Forstemann, that in The Oldest Be- * C. K. IV., 1002. Bretschneider regards C as the work of which Mel- anchthon writes to Luther, May 22 (1530) : Nunc de potestate clavium etiam disputo. C. E. II., 60. Niedner's Z«itec7m/'f (1856), pp. 562-564. Kirchen- gcschicJitliclie Studien, p. 286. 34 THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAE 1530. daction, an.d that in the Augsburg Confession.* Thus it becomes morally, though not demonstrably, certain that we have certain articles on "external ceremonies" and abuses, in other words, "Torgau Articles," which were used by Melanchthon in com- posing the second part of the Augsburg Confession. Whether these articles were all written at "Wittenberg, March 14th to 27th, or some of them at "Wittenberg and others at Augsburg,t is not a matter of great interest. But they were used by Melanchthon with such complete independence, both in matter and in man- ner, that after decades of the most critical examination and learned inquiry it can be only said: "A document bearing the title 'Torgau Articles,' or one which on the ground of contem- poraneous reports can with complete certainty be designated as that delivered at that time, we do not possess. Hence the most diverse views have been published. Yet the researches of Engel- hardt (Niedner's Zeitschrift, 1865, pp. 500 et seqq.), and espe- cially those of Theodore Brieger (Kirchengeschichtliche Studien, Leipzig, 1888, pp. 268 et seqq.), have rendered it in the highest degree probable that the much-sought 'Torgau Articles' are identical with a Gutachten (Forstemann, Urkundenbuch, I., pp. 68-84; Theodore Kolde, Augsburgische Konfession, p. 128 et seqq.), which, as an important document, was taken along by the Elector to Augsburg, and which became the foundation of the subsequent Confession."! But now the question arises, "Who is the author of this Gut- achten, that is, of the Essay A? Bretschneider, Zockler, Cali- nich, Plitt, Knaake, Virch, Brieger and Loofs unite in excluding Luther. Brieger says: "Luther is excluded by reason of the manner in which he is spoken of."§ He alludes to the passage under Of Ordination: "It is to be apprehended that not many Dr. Martins will come after this time, who would control these important matters with such grace, and would avoid false doc- trine and war." II Knaake declares that Luther's part in the preparation for the Augsburg Confession must be confined to the Marburg and the Schwabach Articles.^ Loofs says: "Not com- * Die Aelteste Bedaktion der Augsburger Konfession, pp. 63 et seqq. t Brieger says: "Nothing indicates that this essay was presented at Torgau." Engelhardt agrees with Bretschneider; Plitt and Kolde unite in excluding C from the number of the "Torgau Articles." t Kolde in Beal-Encyclopddie," II., p. 243. Article: Augsburger BeTcennt- nis. I Kirchengeschichtliche Studien, p. 310. II Jacobs' BooTc of Concord, II., p. 83. '^Luther's AntheiX in der Augshurgischen Confession, pp. 20-25. THE DIET AT AUGSBURG IN THE YEAR 1530. 35 posed by Luther." * Brieger, after excluding Luther, naturally turns to Melanehthon, though he does not regard him as the sole author, but thinks that he received suggestions from the other Wittenberg theologians, especially from Luther and Jonas.. "Yet these are only conjectures. " f Calinich, after declaring that Essay A proceeded from Melanehthon, says: "The Essay A is not from Luther. ' ' J [Considering the well-known fact that Melanehthon was gen- erally, if not always, chosen as penman in the preparation of judgments and opinions to be delivered by the Wittenberg theo- logians, we will probably strike the truth by concluding that he wrote the "Torgau Articles" after consultation with Luther, Jonas and Bugenhagen, and that the said articles were carried to Torgau as a common answer to the Elector's requisition of March 14th. * DogmengescMclite, 4th ed., p. 818. t Kirchengeschichtliche Studien, p. 310. t Luther und die Augsburgische Confession, p. 28. CHAPTER III. THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. April 3, 1530, Luther, Melanehthon and Jonas left Witten- berg for Torgau. The following day the electoral train, con- sisting of one hundred and sixty persons, set out for Augsburg.* Among these were three princes, four counts and lords, seven noble counsellors, four learned counsellors, seven knights, sev- enty nobles and five theologians, f The rest were servants. They took with them three boxes containing civil and religious docu- ments, among which, in all probability, were the Marburg Ar- ticles and the Schwabach Articles, and one bearing the title : Judgment of the Learned at Wittenberg, which is to he presented to the Emperor in regard to ceremonies and things connected therewith, which is generally supposed to be the Torgau Ar- tieles.J The train proceeded via Grimma, Altenburg and Isen- burg to Weimar, which was reached on Saturday, the 9th, where the Elector was met by a messenger from Niirnberg, who announced that the Emperor was on his way to Germany and would certainly appear at Augsburg. § On Palm Sundaj^, Luther preached at Weimar, and the Elector and some of his train par- took of the Lord's Supper. || After resting a couple of days the party turned southward, and, passing through Grafenthal and Neustadtlein, entered Coburg, on the southernmost limit of the Elector's dominion, on Good Friday, April 15th. "During the Easter festival Luther preached, as he is reported to have done in Weimar and Grafenthal. He made scarcely any reference to questions of the day. He only declaimed most violently against the fanatics who, if they did not believe in the word of the sacra- ment, also could not believe on Christ the Son of God; as if it sufficed to warn the Elector once more against any association with the sacramentarians. ' ' ^ * Seckendorf , Historia Lutheranismi, TI., 152. t For names, see J. J. Miiller, Historie, pp. 455-6. t See Catalogue in Forstemann, I., 134-8. § Jonas, Brief wechsel, I., 145. jl Sehirrmaeher, Brief e uiid Akten, p. 372. II Kolde, Martin Luther, II., 328. (36) THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. 37 1. Luther Left at Coburg. The Electoral party remained at Coburg until April 23d, since some things had to be arranged in regard to the continuance of the journey, and especially in regard to Luther. Already, April 7th, the Elector had written from Isenburg to Niirnberg and had requested that renowned imperial city to receive Luther and to furnish him protection during the Diet, as he (the Elector) wished to have him in a place of safety, and, for the purpose of consultation, nearer at hand "than in our land,"* that is, in Coburg. As the Elector found no answer to his letter awaiting him at Coburg, he wrote again, April 15th, and repeated the re- quest of April 7th. But the next day, April 16th, Michael von Kaden came to Coburg to say that, April 13th, the Niirnberg Senate had decided not to receive Luther, nor to furnish him with a safe-conduct. t This piece of information at once deter- mined the place of Luther's residence during the Diet.f It had been the Elector's intention, as shown in the correspondence, to take Luther as far as Niirnberg, or within about one hundred mile§ of Augsburg, in order that, as "opportunity offered," he might consult him in the transactions of the Diet. But such intention miscarrying, because of the attitude of the Niirn- bergers, it was now decided to leave Luther at Coburg. Accord- ingly, on the morning of April 23d, about four o'clock, he was conveyed to the castle, which stands five hundred feet above the city and commands a wide prospect over Thuringian hills and valleys, and is so strong, by reason of its isolation and of its massive walls, that it resisted all the efforts of Wallenstein to capture it during the Thirty Years' War. It was the best that could be done under the circumstances. Luther was under the excommunication of the Pope and under the ban of the Empire. It was not expedient to take him to Augsburg. He was a subject for lawful arrest. In all probability he would have been assas- sinated on the spot. But while it is documentarily certain that the Elector and his counsellors wanted Luther nearer than Co- burg, it is highly probable that they did not want him with them at Augsburg. At least, we meet with no expression of desire to * Original given by Kolde in KirchengeschicMliehe Studien, pp. 155-7. ■f OiiginalinKolde's Analecta Lutherana, p. 119. % Von Kaden delivered this information viva voce, but he carried with him' an instruction written by Lazarus Spengler, which gives many reasons why Luther could not be received at Niirnberg. Original given by Kolde in KirchengeschicMliehe Studien, pp. 257 et seqq. Very justly does Kolde say: "The Niirnbergers did not have the steadfastness and the courage to expose themselves to danger." 38 THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. have him at Augsburg, and learn of no effort having been made to remove the obstacles that stood in the way of his going thither. There were, on the contrary, two personal reasons why Luther would have been persona non grata at Augsburg. He had come to be "hated" by the Electoral Prince John Frederick, who ascribed to Luther's influence much of the resolute opposition shown by the Elector to the Emperor.* His presence at Augs- burg would have been intensely exasperating to the Romanists, and would have rendered negotiations more difficult. He was enthusiastic in defense of his cause, uncompromising in spirit, and violent in discussion. It would have been highly impolitic on the part of the Elector, and very hazardous to his expressed purposes of conciliation and fellowship with the opposite party, to take Luther to Augsburg. It would have been equivalent to a declaration of war. Hence one can easily see how the entire cause of Protestantism, which was now on trial, would have been brought into greater peril by allowing Luther to appear at the Diet. This must have been foreseen by the Elector and his counsellors. Hence, after reading all the known contemporaneous docu- ments relating to the detention of Luther at Coburg, we cannot resist the conclusion that, much as the Elector desired to have Luther as near as possible for consultation, he did not desire to have him at Augsburg to assist in the pending negotiations. Such also, essentially, is the conclusion expressed or intimated by not a few historians who cannot be justly accused of tendenz, nor of prejudices, nor of insufficient information ; f and such a conclusion is in no sense contradicted by Luther's declara- tion: "It was not safe to take me to Augsburg," % nor by his expressions of impatience with his detention at Coburg. It was not Luther's fault that he was not taken to Augsburg. The responsibility in the matter rests with the Elector, who had to * See Melanchthon's letter to Luther, May 22d, in C. R., II. 61. St. Louis edition, Luther's Schriften, XVI., 689, note 3. An old translator of Mel- anchthon's letter says: "Denn er ist nun niemand ungnadiger als euch." Some have interpreted this hating as referring to Philip of Hesse. The context will not sustain such an interpretation. t Mathesius says : ' ' For great and important reasons Doctor Luther was left at this castle (Coburg), lest the enemy should be rendered more bitter by his presence, and the chief cause should be brought into dis- credit. " Eighth Sermon. See Pfaffi Geschichte des Augsb. GlaubensheTc. I., p. 198; Weber, Krit. Gesoh. A. C, I., p. 27; Strang, Martin Luther, p. 603; Facius, Geschichte A. C, p. 42; Niedner's Zeitschrift (1865), p. 570; Koehler, Journeys of Luther, p. 284; Kahnis, Dogmatik, II., 423; "Per- sonally too exasperating." + De Wette, Luther's Brief e, IV., p. 27. THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. 39 consider the peaceful issue of the Diet, as well as Luther's per- sonal safety. At all events, the Elector ordered Luther to remain at Coburg. Michael von Kaden explained to him, "briefly and very gently," the reasons why he could not be taken to Niirnberg; and von Kadem reports that Luther declared to him that his "original counsel had been that he be left at Wittenberg, since he did not believe that anything more would be accomplished at the pending Diet than had been accomplished at former ones. ' ' * 2. The Journey Continued. April 22d, the Elector received a letter from the Emperor in which the latter declared that he would certainly reach Augsburg the last of the month. The next day the Elector and his party left Coburg, and, proceeding via Bamberg and Niirnberg, reached their destination May 2d. Luther was safe in the castle at Co- burg. Yet his heart and his prayers went with his friends to the scene of danger and of testimony. Even on the first day of his residence in the castle, he wrote three letters, one to each of his three friends, Melanchthon, Jonas and Spalatin; but he makes no reference to the "Apology" and no serious reference to the Diet.f On the same day, namely, April 23d, he wrote to Winceslaus Link:"* "We are sitting here at Coburg, uncertain about the Diet and the coming of the Emperor. Perhaps you have more accurate information. My companions have gone to Augsburg, but the Prince wants me to stay here. Tou will see them, Philip, Jonas, Eisleben and Spalatin, in case the Diet is held." Also, on the same day, to Eoban Hess of Niirnberg: "I send you four living, speaking, most eloquent epistles. Gladly would I have been the fifth, but one said to me. Keep silent, you have a bad voice." J There is no mistaking the meaning of this last sentence. Somebody, perhaps the Electoral Prince John Frederick, perhaps one of the electoral counsellors, had expressed * See von Kaden 's official report to the Niirnberg Senate in Kirchen- geschichfliche Studien, p. 263. Von Kaden says inter alia: "1 think my gracious lord, the Elector, wiU send Doctor Martin back to Wittenberg. ' ' It is evident that neither von Kaden nor the Elector gave Luther all the reasons why he could not be taken further, for April 18th he wrote to Nich- olas Hausmann: "I am ordered by the Prince, while others go to the Diet to remain at Coburg, nescio qua de causa. Thus all things are uncer- tain 'from day to day." De Wette, IV., p. 1. Certainly the Elector had not been explicit. See Kolde. Kircheng. Studien, p. 225, and Rinn, Die Entsteh- ung der A. C, p. 17. tDe Wette, Luther's Brief e, IV., 2, 3, 4, 12. For the correct date of these letters see Enders, Vr. Martin Luther's Briefwechsel, VII., 304. t De Wette, IV., 6. 40 THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. an unwillingness to have Luther go to Augsburg, because his person would be very unacceptable to the opposite party. The explanation given by Engelhardt is as charitable as the facts will allow: "The meaning of the expression is not that they did not like his faith and his dogmatic views, but that they did not think him possessed of such gentleness and suavity as the proposed work of peace required. This, to be sure, was a second reason why the counsellors of the Elector agreed to leave him behind, but it was subordinate and entirely unessential for the question of theology. ' ' * There is no proof that Luther was to be entirely ignored in the transactions of the Diet, though there is abundant reason for his complaint that he was neglected by his brethren at Augs- burg, and it is certain, as will be hereafter shown, that he exerted little or no influence on the composition of the Augsburg Con- fession, or on his party, until long after the Confession had been delivered to the Emperor. But that he shoiild be kept from Augsburg, because of his impetuosity, and because of his unfit- ness for negotiations, is just what prudence would seem to dic- tate. Luther was not the man to appear in diets. He was not sent to Speyer in 1529, notwithstanding the pacific resolutions of 1526 ; nor do we hear that he was ordered to Hagenau and to Worms in 1540, and to Regensburg in 1541. He could fight devils and fanatics, could tear up stumps and stones, but he was not endowed with the patience and tact of the diplomatist. In these practical talents he was greatly surpassed by Melanchthon, who in diets and conferences served the cause of the Reforma- tion for thirty years with pre-eminent success. 3. The Elector of Saxony's Confession of Faith. In 1884, Professor Theodore Brieger, then of Marburg, later of Leipzig, while examining the Despatches sent to Rome by Cardinal Campeggius 'in 1530, read with astonishment in the report made by the Cardinal at Innsbruck, May 12th, the follow- ing : ' ' The Elector of Saxony has sent to the Emperor at Inns- bruck a declaration of his faith, which, so far as I can learn, is entirely Catholic at the beginning, but full of poison in the middle and at the end." Says Brieger: "A most surprising account, that the Elector John sent a confession of faith to the Emperor already before the opening of the Diet. Undoubt- edly, this step was taken upon advice of Count William of *Nieclner's Zeitschrift (1865), p. 570. THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. 41 Nassau, given by him to the Elector's ambassador, Hans von Dolzig, at Dillenburg, near the end of March. ' ' * The substance of this advice, as officially reported by Dolzig, is that the circumstances were such as to require that the Elector should send a conciliatory and complete report about the affairs of religion, to be laid before the Emperor and his counsellors prior to the opening of the Diet. In connection with this advice William and his brother, the Margrave Henry of Nassau, would act as mediators between the Elector and the Emperor. Also the report would have to be made in the Latin or in the French language (die lateynische oder welsche Sprach), since the Em- peror and his attendants were not well acquainted with any other language, t But instead of sending an account of the affairs of religion in his dominions to the Emperor, the Elector chose to send him a confession of his faith. The reason for this must be sought in the complete change of the theological situation. They had started to Augsburg with the expressed convictioij that even their opponents had acknowledged that the doctrine taught was right and pure. They were now suddenly disabused of that delusion. Already, February 19, 1530, the Dukes of Bavaria, on learning that the Emperor had summoned a diet, commissioned the theological faculty of Ingolstadt "to bring together in epi- tome all the articles which had been promulgated by Luther dur- ing the last twelve years, and to show their disagreement with the true Christian faith, together with the way in which they could be most appropriately refuted, in order that the dukes, in case of need, might have this book in hand." J Accordingly, the Ingolstadt theological faculty, notably Dr. John Eck, extracted four hundred and four articles from the writings of those "who disturb the peace of the Church," in which he indiscriminately denounces Luther,. Melanchthon, Zwingli, Carlstadt, the Anabaptists, as godless heretics, who scatter unnumbered errors of doctrine in all their books. "For to Luther we owe the new iconoclasts, the sacramentarians, the Capernians, the new Hussites, and their descendants, the Ana- baptists, the new Epicureans, who declare that the soul is mortal, and the Spiritualists, and the new Cerinthians, who deny that * KirchengeschichtUche Studien, p. 312. t See Dolzig 's Report in Forstemann 's Vrlcunderibuch, I., 127 et seqq. t Original quoted by Winter in GeschicMe der Schicksale der Ev. Lehre in und durch Baiern, p. 269. See Plitt, Einleitung, I., 527. "Wiedemann's Dr. Johann Eck, pp. 580-1. 42 THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. Christ is God."* These four himdred and four articles Eck, "the humblest minister of the Church," offers to defend at Augs- burg in the presence of the Emperor. A theological disputa- tion is now imminent. The Elector, who had fallen in with Eck's articles, immediately on reaching Augsburg, or perhaps on the way thither, had discovered that the doctrinal teaching of his theologians would be impeached. A confession of his faith was what the circumstances required of the Elector, and con- sequently a confession of faith was forthcoming. But for reasons which we do not know, the matter was con- ducted secretly. We find no allusions to it in the letters of the Elector's theologians and counsellors; and in the correspondence conducted between the Elector and his ambassadors at Innsbruck, and with Counts Henry and William of Nassau, and William of Neuenar, there is no expressed mention of a confession of faith ; nor do we possess any written official report of the part acted by the counts as mediators ; though there are allusions to certain transactions about the affairs of religion. But in the light of Professor Brieger's discovery, such allusions become perfectly in- telligible, as does also the following passage in a letter written May 31st by Jacob Sturm of Strassburg to Zwingli : ' ' There is a report, and it is of such a nature that it does not seem to be wholly without foundation, that the Saxon, through ambassadors, has sent to the Emperor at Innsbruck certain articles, in which he confesses his faith, and has added that he will not depart from that confession, unless by clear testimonies of the Scripture he is convinced and is led to change his mind. If this be true, as I have learned from men worthy of confidence, I think they are the same, or not altogether different from those which Luther has recently had printed, and which you will receive through this messenger, ' ' f — meaning, of course, the Schwabach Articles. But Professor Brieger did not make a copy of this "evan- gelical confession. ' ' In reporting his discovery, he says : ' ' Since I was able to note only a few sentences, I cannot state the more exact relation of this confession to the Schwabach Articles, that is, I cannot say in what way the seventeen Schwabach Articles were changed into the fifteen here present. ' ' % Fortunately, through the courteous assistance of several Amer- ican Catholic scholars, we obtained a copy of this confession from * A part of Eck's letter to the Emperor sent with the Articles. t Zwingli 's Opera, 8, p. 459. t KirchengescMchtliche Studien fiir Renter, 1887, p. 312; The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1901. THE JODENEY TO AUGSBURG. 43 the Secret Archives of the Pope in the year 1900, and published the same, with an English translation, in The Lutheran Quar- terly for July, 1901.* Hence we are now in a position to show the exact relation which this confession sustains to the Schwa- bach Articles. We discover that the form of the Schwabach Articles used in the preparation of the Elector's Confession was not that published by Luther while residing at Coburg, which had not yet reached Augsburg; but an older form, one in all probability verbally in accord with the original, which was discov- ered by Elias Frick in the city archives at Ulm, and published by him in 1714, in his German Edition of Seckendorf 's Historia Luther anismi, pp. 968, et seqq., published with diplomatic accu- racy by Georg Gottlieb "Weber in Vol. I. of his Kritische Geschichte der Augspurgischen Confession, 1783. f Hence it is with this form of the Schwabach Articles that we must compare the Elector's Confession, and when we make the comparison, we find, as observed by Brieger, that this confession agrees substan- tially with the Schwabach Articles, though there are forms of statement in the confession which cannot be called translations, but adaptations or changes made in view of the purpose which governed the mind of the Elector, and of his counsellors and theologians, from the day he resolved to go to Augsburg, to the day on which he left Augsburg, the purpose of approximating to the Roman Catholic doctrine as closely as possible. This becomes at once apparent in the change made in Article X., as the following comparison shows: SCHWABACH ABTICLES. The Eucharist or sacrament of the Altar also consists of two parts, viz., that there is truly present in the bread and in the wine, the true body and blood of Christ, according to the sound of the words: "This is my body, this is my blood, ' ' and that it is not only bread and wine, as even now the other side asserts. These words require and also convey faith, and also exercise it in all those who desire this sacrament, and do not act against it; just as Baptism also brings and gives faith, if it be desired.t THE ELECTOE'S CONFESSION. That the Eucharist or sacrament of the altar also consists of two parts: Namely, that truly and sub- stantially in bread and wine are present the true body and blood of Christ, according to those words: This is my body, this is my blood, and that by no means is it bread and wine, as, nevertheless, another party maintains. These words likewise require and implant faith, and strengthen it in aU who desire that sacrament, and do not act contrary to it, as also Baptism brings and imparts faith if it be believed. * Eeprinted by E. Stange in Studien und Kritiken, 1903, pp. 345 et seqq. t Second Beylage. t Jacobs, Book of Concord, II., 72. 44 THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. In Article IX. the Anabaptists are named, and their teaching is rejected. Article III. ends with the words: Lord of all crea- tures, and, therefore, contains only a little more than a third of the original, while Articles XI. and XV. of the Schwabach series do not appear in any form in the Elector's Confession. Such articles, in their evangelical form, as given in the Schwa- bach Articles — "that private confession should not be enforced by laws," and "that it is not necessary to enumerate all sins," and "that the doctrine which prohibits marriage and ordinary food and drink to priests, together with monastic life and vows of every kind, are nothing but damnable doctrines of devils" — such articles would have given mortal offense at Charles's court, and would have gone far to establish Eek's accusations. In Article XII., instead of "a holy Christian Church" (Art. XL, Schwabach) we have, very significantly, "one Holy Catholic Church;" and we find nothing to correspond to the declaration in Article XVI., that the Mass is the chief abomination. In a word, the Elector's Confession is a changed and Catholicized adaptation of the seventeen Schwabach Articles. Very much that is characteristic in those Articles, and distinctive as against the Roman Catholic teaching, is removed, and the whole confes- sion faces in a direction not contemplated by the Schwabach Articles; though the Schwabach Articles, by their teaching on Baptism and their reference to the Anabaptists as the blasphem- ers of Baptism, and by their teaching on the Lord's Supper, were well calculated to refute Eek's charge that the Lutherans, the Anabaptists, and the Zwinglians taught alike on the sac- raments. But, in regard to this Confession of the Elector, we must conclude that it was put in its present shape very hastily, either immediately after the arrival in Augsburg, May 2d, or possibly on the way thither, after the electoral party had left Coburg, since it was laid before the Emperor about May 5th, and was con- sidered at court May 8th.* That it did not make a favorable impression on the Emperor and on his counsellors, is evident from the fact that Campeggius has learned that it was regarded as full of poison in the middle and at the end. But that it should have fallen into oblivion, and should have remained unknown for more than three centuries and a half, is remarkable, when we consider the purpose for which it was prepared. And all * Forstemann, I., 174, 180. Seckendorf , Eistoria, II., Sec. 56, Add. III. J. J. Sriillcr, Uistorie, p. 476. Brieger, Kircheng. Studien, pp. 313-31.5. THE JOURNEY TO AUGSBURG. 45 that we know of its history is that it was prepared, was sent to Innsbruck, was delivered to the Emperor, was considered at the Imperial Court, and that it failed to conciliate the Catholics to the Lutherans. That it should have been based on the Schwabach Articles seems most natural, since only a few months earlier these articles, bearing the title: Artickel vom Churfiirst von Sachssen des glawens halb, had been accepted by the Elector as his con- fession of faith, and had been used by his authority in an effort to unite the forces of Protestantism. That the motive in the preparation of this confession was the desire to counteract the effect of Eck's Articles, there can be no doubt. The need now was that the Emperor should know what doctrines were taught under the protection of the Elec- tor. Count William's advice would doubtless be remembered, but only indirectly and remotely could it have been responsible for this particular step on the part of the Elector.- Eck's "most diabolical slanders,"* to use the words of Melanehthon, were the inciting cause of the preparation of this Confession, as they likewise were the exciting cause for the inclusion of Articles of Faith in the Augsburg Confession. And this confession has value now as the oldest known draft of the doctrinal articles of the Augustana, and possibly the form, real, or approximate, in which the doctrinal articles - were sent to Luther, May llth.f Hence we may say, that had the Emperor reached Augsburg early in May, or had the Elector of Saxony's Confession of faith been favorably received at Inns- bruck, we would not to-day have the Augsburg Confession, but the Confession of the Elector of Saxony, as the ecclesiastical and religious result of the Diet of Augsburg. It was thus a fortunate circumstance for Lutheranism and for Protestantism that the Emperor's coming was delayed until a confession of faith could be elaborated, which represented all the Lutheran Estates gath- ered at that memorable Diet of Augsburg, in the year 1530. It was seven Lutheran Princes and two Lutheran cities that gave to the Church and to the world the Augsburg Confession, and by that act laid the foundation of the Lutheran Church. * C. E. II., 45. Already, May 4th, Melanehthon had written to Luther about Eck's Articles. C. R. II., 39. t See Knaake, Luther's Antheil, p. 77, and Ender's, Luther's Brief - wechsel, VII., p. 331, note 2. CHAPTER IV. THE COMPOSITION OP THE AUGSBURG CONPESSION. There were valid personal reasons why Luther should not be chosen to draw up articles to be presented to the Emperor at the Diet. Articles composed by him would have been as offensive to the opposite party as his person was. They would also have borne the characteristic qualities of their author, and would have defeated the end in view, which was the restoration of peace and unity. Hence, very wisely has the judicious Weber written: "Since, according to the Imperial Rescript for the Diet at Augsburg, in 1530, the Emperor wished to remove all errors and disputes in matters of faith, and wished to hear the opinion and view of everyone, it was wise in the Elector not to turn over to Luther the further expansion of the articles com- posed by the theologians at Wittenberg, and to have him finish the articles which were to be .delivered to the Emperor. For, since Luther had been outlawed by the Emperor, and could not even be taken to the Diet by the Elector, but had to be left at Coburg, would it have been wise in the Elector and his associates to desire to deliver to the Emperor a confession of which the outlawed Luther was known to be the author? Would Luther, full of enthusiasm for the truth, violent in controversy with his ene- mies, often incautious and insulting in speech, have been able, to restrain himself in elaborating the Confession, when once he had to speak on the controverted doctrines and abuses of the Roman Church? Only read the Schmalkald Articles, composed for the Council of Mantua. Had he written the Confession in the same tone and spirit, considering the circumstances of the small band of Protestants at that time, could it have been read in the presence of the Emperor, Electors, Bishops and assembled Estates of the Empire ? Would it not have increased the bitterness of the opposite party, and thus, humanly speaking, have brought greater injury than profit to the good cause? Valdesius said of Melanehthon's Confession, which he read before it was delivered to the Emperor, that it was so bitter, that the opposite party would not tolerate it. What would he not have judged in the case of Luther's work? Even Cochlaeus, who compared the Schmalkald ^ (46) THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 47 Articles with the Confession, very correctly judged that it was far easier to listen to the latter, and that its words and thoughts were much less offensive than those of the former. Hence, it was well planned that Luther, with his fire and enthusiasm, who, when the truth was involved, cared as little for a king as for a stupid priest, in a matter so delicate as the affair of religion at that time, should not be allowed to speak before the Emperor and the Empire. For truth, when it has to contend with prejudice, oper- ates more effectively on the human heart when it appears in modest, pleasing attire, than when it appears in a course, rasping dress, which really discredits it, and exasperates and incenses, rather than conciliates the votary of prejudice. Therefore, the work was given over by the Elector to Melanchthon; for he, not less than Luther, was a friend of truth, had a much calmer soul, was gentle and modest, and with the beautiful and pleasing style, in- which he surpassed the theologians of his time, knew how to speak the truth without, in the least, compromising it, and without exasperating the opposite party." * 1. Melanchthon's State of Mind in 1530. But it is important here and now to inquire into Melanchthon's state of mind in the year 1530, in order rightly to interpret his conduct at Augsburg, and to ascertain the meaning of the Con- fession which he produced. He carried with him to Augsburg the mind common at that time to all of the Electoral party — the mind bent on conciliation and on reconciliation. This mind is clearly indicated, if not positively expressed, in the Torgau Articles, and in the Preface (exordium) to the Confession. He considered that neither he nor his fellow-Lutherans had separated themselves from the Catholic Church, but that they were members of the same. Consequently, they must maintain and obtain their rights within the Church. Besides, Melanchthon was an absolute imperialist. He reverenced the Emperor with a veneration that bordered on idolatry. He looked on him as one of those fabled heroes or demigods, that in olden times were believed to walk among men. He esteemed him endowed with all civil, domestic and Christian virtues, and applied to him the lines in which Horace describes the Emperor Augustus : * Kritische GeschicMe der Augsb. Conf., I., 26 et seqq. Vireh in Zeit- schrift fiir Kirchengeschichte (1888), p. 73. 48 THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. Hoc nihil majus meliusve terris Fata donaverunt, bonique Divi: Nee dabunt, quamvis redeant in aurum Tempora priscum.* He hated the democratic principles of the Swiss with a per- fect hatred, and believed that they were trying to draw the Lutherans into their schemes. Philip of Hesse, he called Anti- ochus. Besides, in his estimation, the Swiss held dogmata intol- erabilia, and had formed insidiosissima consilia. Under these cir- cumstances, and with his imperialistic and patristic predilections, he conceived that both he and his party stood very near to the Catholic Church and to the Emperor. Hence, apart from union with the Church and the Emperor, he foresaw only wars, blood- shed, devastation, civil and religious commotions.! Success on the part of Philip, and of the Swiss, would utterly defeat the purpose and the desire of his party to obtain and to enjoy their rights within the Church. Joined to these things were also the jealousies of the theologians, and the imbecilitas animi of the Princes, a,bout which he afterwards so bitterly com- plained; % and also Eck's four hundred and four Articles (de- scribed in the preceding chapter), in which the doctrines of the Lutherans were identified with all ancient and modern heresies. Such, beyond all question, as shown by his own letters, was the mental attitude of Melanchthon at Augsburg, in the year 1530. On the one hand he stood, almost with the devotion of a tnartyr, by the Empire and by the Church.^ On the other hand, he opposed, with the intensity of religious conviction, the politi- cal schemes and the "opposite" doctrines of the Anabaptists and the Swiss, whom he practically identified as aiming to overthrow the Church and the Empire.]] Unless we take these facts into consideration, we cannot under- stand the position of Melanchthon at Augsburg, nor gain a proper viewpoint for interpreting the purpose and meaning of the Augsburg Confession as Melanchthon conceived it and composed it.U * Carminum Liber, IV., II. C. E. II., 430 et geqq. t See The Lutheran Quarterly, Oct., 1900, p. 489. Ellinger, Philipp Melanchthon (1902), pp. 283-285. Hoennicke, Melanchthon' s Stellung auf dem Seichstage zu Augsburg 15S0, in Deutsch Ev. Blatter, Nov., 1908. + Melanchthon. Paedagogica, p. 38. C. B. II., 314. See also Kawerau, Kirchengeschichte III., Dritte Auflage, p. 101, who says: "The Saxons of the Electorate were far more inclined to come to an understanding with Ferdinand than with the Swiss. ' ' § See his letters to Campeggius, C. E. II., 81 and 170. II See C. E. IL, 104; XXIII., 749. 1["War die Konfession welehe der Kurfiirst von Sachsen in seinem und THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 49 Hence Melanchthon's coneessions at Augsburg — in the Confes- sion, in his correspondence with Campeggius, in the peace nego- tiations — did not proceed from personal weakness, but from an honest desire to serve his party, to carry out their determina- tion to remain in the Church, to vindicate the Lutherans from identification ^nth the Zwinglians and the Anabaptists, and to maintain the integrity of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Xation. 2. Melanchthon is Chosen. Now, it was while Melanchthon was in the frame of mind described above, that he was chosen to write an "Apology," to be used in defense of the Elector before the Diet. That the Elec- tor was influenced by some such considerations as those named by Weber, can scarcely be questioned, when we take into the account the circumstances and the differences in the dispositions and talents of Luther and Melanchthon. At all events, Melanchthon was chosen — certainly not without good and sufficient reasons; and this action on the part of the Elector and his counsellors, made Melanchthon for the time being the theological leader of the reforming party, as the Elector was its political leader. That Melanchthon occupied such a position is seen in the numerous opinions written by him at Augsburg, and in the fact that the Bedenken, brought by other theologians to Augsburg, were turned over to him for examina- tion; that the Niirnberg commissioners report his actions, and that he held interviews with Schlepper and Valdesius, the Imper- ial Secretaries. Never was leadership more wisely bestowed; never were its duties more conscientiously and faithfully exe- cuted; and it came to him so naturally and so fittingly that neither Luther, nor any one of the other theologians journeying together to Augsburg, has left on record a single word of com- plaint. Three hundred and eighty years of after-thought have justified the wisdom of the selection. Melanchthon's moderation, learning, culture, and his familiarity with the Wittenberg teach- ing, pointed him out as the man best fitted to draw up whatever writing was to be laid before the Diet. There can be no doubt that the selection was entirely acceptable to Luther, and that seiner lutherischen Glaubensgenossen Namen am 25. Juni vor Kaiser und Reich verlesen liess, im Sinne ausserster Annahrung an die alte Kirche und schroffster Absonderung von den Zwinglischen gehalten, so ging Melanch- thon in den spater gefiihrten Verhandlungen noeh sehr weit iiber diese Linie hinaus." Baumgarten, GeschicMe Karls V., 3, p. 28. 50 THE COMPOSITION OB' THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. Luther assisted him by his counsel, so long as the two remained together at Coburg. 3. Melanchthon Writes the Preface at Coburg. While the electoral party was sojourning at Coburg, April 15th to April 23d, Melanchthon wrote the "long and rhetorical preface"* or introduction to the Articles on Abuses. Formerly it was thought by some theologians that by Preface (exordium) is to be understood Part First of the Confession, or the Articles of Faith, which were intended to introduce the Articles on Abuses. But it was seen by those who took a deeper and more critical look into the Torgau Articles, that such a theory was utterly inconsistent with the declaration that the enemies of the Eeformation themselves approved the Wittenberg doctrine as pure and right, and that "the dissension now is especially concerning some abuses, which have been introduced by human doctrine and statutes, of which we will report in order, and indicate for what reasons my lord is induced to cause certain abuses to be abated. ' ' But now, by the discovery and publication of The Oldest Bedaction of the Augsburg Confession,^ such theory in regard to the Preface is utterly and forever exploded, for here we have that identical Preface, which up to June 1, 1530, at least, stood at the head of the Confession — Articles of Faith and Articles on Abuses — in so far as, at that time, it had been written. This Preface is "long and rhetorical." It covers seven printed pages octavo, and is of the nature of an oration addressed to the Emperor Charles the Fifth. It speaks wholly in the name of the Elector of Saxony and is syeophantically apologetic in tone and in contents. "It begins," as Dr. Kolde says, "with a very evident captatio benevolentiae. " It declares that the Elector places his hope and trust, next to God, in the mildness and goodness of the Emperor, who has always sought the peace of Europe, and that, too, without showing a trace of pride or of arrogance, or of desire for blood; also that nothing could be more acceptable to God than that the Emperor should employ his power for promoting the unity of Christendom, as had been formerly done by Theodoric, by Charles the Great and by Henry II., since the Holy Spirit admonishes Princes to take * Forstemann, TJrTcundenhuch, I., 68. t Discovered in the Niirnberg Archives in July, 1905, by Drs. Sehornbaum and Kolde, and published by the latter, July, 1906. See The Lutheran Quar- terly, January, 1907. THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 51 an interest in the Faith ; that the Electors of Saxony, Frederick and John, have never favored new doctrines, and have always been loyal to the Roman Emperors, and have sought the peace and unity of Germany. When indulgences were preached in Saxony, "Martin Luther spoke in opposition through a few small treatises in the school, and not before the people, and without abusing and maligning the Pope." But Luther's enemies attacked him in both languages and compelled him to reply. The Anabaptists had raised various disputes and had opposed the secular government, had denied the rights of private property and had declaimed against the preaching of the word, and against the sacrament. They had been opposed by Luther. The ceremonies are not abolished, ' ' but much rather are they observed with the true fear of God, and in truth it may be said that not in all Germany is the Mass held with greater fear of God, and with a better understanding on the part of the people than among us""." "The sacrament is received by the people with greater reverence and more frequently than heretofore," etc. ' ' Confession is still maintained, and the power of the Keys is much praised in preaching, and the people are admonished in regard of the great value of absolution." ' ' The preaching is pure and intelligible, and this is unques- tionably the chief sacrifice before God. ' ' The useful ceremonies are still maintained and also the festival days. The ordinances in the Electorate of Saxony "are, for the most part, according to the old usages and customs of the Roman Church, as shown in the holy doctrine. ' ' The Preface closes thus: ""We will now speak of doctrine, and will first recount the chief articles of faith, from which the Emperor can see that the Elector of Saxony has permitted nothing imchristian to be preached in his dominion, but has with all diligence held fast to the common pure Christian faith." We must say of this Preface that it is painfully apologetic from beginning to end. It proposes to place the settlement of the entire dispute and contention about religion in the hands of the Emperor. It makes no reference whatever to the Em- peror's promise (in the Rescript by which he summoned the Diet) that "the opinion and view of each one should be taken up and carefully considered." It proposes to make the Emperor arbiter; and it denies that any new doctrines have been intro- 52 THE COMPOSITION OF THK AUGSBURG COXFESSION. duced in the churches of the Electorate of Saxony. In a word this Preface evades the entire issue on which the German Re- formation justifies and forever must justify itself, namely, the matter and question of Doctrine, for if the German Reforma- tion be not a doctrinal protest and a doctrinal revolution as over against the doctrinal teaching of the Roman Catholic Church (and no other Church was at that time in the purview), at the beginning of the sixteenth century, then it had not at the beginning, and never has had, a right to exist, since on its own principle, laid down in Article VII. of the Augustana, the true unity of the Church consists in the purity of doctrine, and not in "uniform ceremonies instituted by men." Indeed, the Lutheran Church might tolerate every ceremony qua ceremony of the Roman Catholic Church, were it not for the doctrine that lies back of, informs, determines, and expresses itself through the ceremony, for as Guericke has well said, in speaking of the Church: "Its external phase, or constitution and worship, is for the most part, the necessary fruit and effect of the inner principle of doctrine and creed." And as a matter of fact, the German Reformation took its start in antagonism to the doc- trinal teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. The Ninety-five Theses attacked the doctrine of Indulgences. Luther's Three Great Reformation Writings of the year 1520 : The Address to the Christian Nobility of the German Nation, On Christian Liberty, On the Babylonish Captivity of the Church, which together contain the promise and potency of the entire German Reformation, are attacks on the most fundamental principles and doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. He had called the Pope Antichrist and the Church a harlot ; he had enunciated the doctrine of justification by faith alone, and had reiterated it a thousand times and in a thousand forms ; he had taught a new doctrine of the sacraments, of the Church, of the ministry; he had revolutionized the service of worship both in its funda- mental conception and in its forms. All these things had he done prior to the year 1530. Melanchthon had written the Loci Communes, which Luther had endorsed as "an invincible book, ' ' and had prepared the Visitation Articles, which had been ap- proved by Luther and Bugenhagen, and which had been ac- cepted by the Elector of Saxony as a basis for the reformation of the churches in his dominions. In a word, the doctrine which now, for at least a decade, had been taught in the Elector- ate of Saxony, was as different from the doctrine that had been THE COMPOSITION" OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSIOiN. 53 taught there two decades earlier, as John Gerhard's Loci Theologici is different from the Summa Theologica of Thomas Aquinas. But Melanchthon writes, and the Elector and his counsellors accept, and Luther endorses, this ' ' long and rhetorical Preface, ' ' which, to say the least, is an evasion of the fundamental ques- tions at issue between the Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church, namely, the doctrinal questions; and it is not too much to say, that, had this Preface been adopted by the Protestant Princes, assembled at Augsburg in 1530, and delivered by them to the Emperor, there would have remained no more of the German Eeformation, and there would be no Lutheran Church to-day, for reconciliation on the basis of this Preface and of the Articles on. Abuses would have been easy, had the Lutherans been able to convince the Emperor, and the Pope, and the Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church, that this Preface was a correct representation of the affairs of the churches in Ger- many, that is, that the Lutherans had attacked no doctrines of the Roman datholic Church, and had introduced no new doc- trines, that is, no doctrines that differed from the then current doctrinal teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, and had only abolished a few abuses in ceremonies which had been intro- duced without the consent of the Church. This "long and rhetorical Preface" was first written by Melanchthon at Coburg. May 4th he wrote to Luther from Augsburg: "I have -made the Preface (exordium) somewhat more rhetorical than I had written it at Coburg. ' ' * What is meant by the words "somewhat more rhetorical" we have no means of ascertaining, nor do we know the form of the Preface at this time. We know it only in the form in which it was sent to Niimberg, June 3d,t though great doubt was entertained about it May Slst.J Subsequently it was abandoned, and was lost sight of entirely until its discovery in July, 1905, as already noted, when it appears followed by Articles of Faith, in view of which, undoubtedly, the last paragraph, quoted above, was written. 4. The Articles of Faith. When Melanchthon wrote to Luther about the Preface, May 4th, he gave no intimation that he contemplated the introduc- tion of Articles of Faith into the "Apology," though he had * C. E. II., p. 40. t C. R. II., 83. t C. E. II., 78. 54 THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. already seen Eck's booklet,* which he describes as "a big batch of propositions." On the 11th of May he wrote to Luther as follows : ' ' Our Apology has been sent to you, though it is more properly a confession. For the Emperor will not have time to hear long discussions. Nevertheless I have said those things which I thought would be especially profitable and appropriate. With this purpose I have included about all the Articles of Faith, because Eck has published the most diabolical slanders against us. Against these I wished to present a remedy. Determine in regard to the whole writing in accordance with your spirit. ' ' f During the week from May 4th to May 11th, Melanchthon had prepared "Articles of Faith" and had inserted them between the Preface and the Articles on Abuses. This action changed the "Apology" into a confession, though the whole document was yet often called Apology. The reason given for including Articles of Faith is clearly enough stated by Melanchthon. It was the slanders contained in Eck's four hundred and four Articles. The reason was the same as that which had deter- mined the Elector to send a confession of his faith to the Emperor. He has discovered, as the Elector had, that the theological situation had changed. The "long and rhetorical Preface" and the Articles on Abuses will not meet the emer- gency. The doctrinal teaching of Luther especially, and also of Melanchthon, had been attacked, and they had been accused of heretical teaching on almost every subject of the Christian doctrine, and had been willfully confounded with all kinds of heretics, both ancient and modern. There was only one safe and proper course to take. Articles of Faith alone could furnish a "remedium." Thus Eck's Articles were the inciting cause of "the Articles of Faith," which changed the proposed Apology into a Confession of Faith. Of this there can be no doubt, and of this no competent writer on the genesis of the Augsburg Confession entertains a doubt as over against the supposition formerly entertained by some writers "in confessional rather than in historical interest," that the Doctrinal Articles consti- tuted the Preface. Melanchthon himself has spoken on this sub- ject in giving an account of the composition of the Confession, the fullest and the most explicit that ever came from his pen. He says: "Also some papal- writers had scattered slander in the Diet, by which abominable lies were heaped on our churches, as that they had many damnable errors, and, like the Anabaptists, * C. E. II., 39. t C. R. 11., 45. THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 55 were heretical and seditious. Now an answer had to be made to the Emperor; and for the refutation of the slanders it was resolved that all the Articles of Christian doctrine should be brought together in order, so that everyone might know that our churches were unjustly accused by these papal slanders. ' ' * Also in the Preface to the Latin Corpus Doctrinae: "I brought to gether with simple purpose the principal points of the Con- fession that is extant, embracing about the sum of the doc- trines of our churches, both that an answer might be made to the Emperor, and that false accusations might be refuted."! We know, then, how it came about that we have ' ' Articles of Faith" in the Augsburg Confession, but we do not know how many such Articles the Confession contained in. this first draft, mentioned, May 11th. We know, however, that it was very far from having the number that it now contains. In The Oldest Redaction, which represents the condition of the Confession, May 31st,. we find Articles of Faith numbered from one to eighteen, though there is no article 14 appearing between Zum 13 and Zum 15, so that in reality there are only seventeen articles, all told. There is no article on Church Government, and no articles that correspond to Articles XX. and XXI. in the final form of the Confession. Certainly it was in a much more inchoate condition, May 11th, for May 22d Melanchthon writes to Luther: "In the Apology we change many things dailjr. The article on vows I have removed because it was too brief, and I have supplied its place with another on the same subject somewhat longer. I am now treating also of the power of the Keys. I wish you would run over the Articles of Faith. If you think there is nothing defective in them, we will treat the rest as best we can. For they must be changed and adapted to circumstances. " $ Twenty days after Melanchthon had sent the first draft to Luther, the Confession still appears very inchoate, as compared with the form in which it was presented to the Emperor. The Articles of Faith, in phraseology, in content and in extent, differ widely from those of the Confession as it appeared, June 25th. A brief description will suffice to make the difference evident. Article TV., which in some .sense corresponds to Article Y. in the completed Confession, reads as follows: "The Holy Ghost is given by means of the Word and the sacraments, as Paul * Preface to the German Corpus Doctrinae. fC. E.'IX., 1050 et seqq. %C. E. IL, 60. 56 THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. says: Faith cometh by hearing. Here are rejected the Ana- baptists and the like who despise the Word and the sacraments, and think that the Holy Ghost is acquired by human prepara- tion." Article V. treats of Justification, but with verbal and material differences. Particularly do we notice durch Christum, "through Christ," instead of um Christus willen, "for the sake of Christ," which is so characteristic of the Lutheran conception of Christ's relation to our forgiveness and restoration to the favor of God. Article VII. aims to cover the content of Articles VII. and VIII. in the completed Confession. Of Article VIII., on Baptism, Professor Kolde says: "Article 8 has, manifestly, a purpose entirely different from that of the article which subsequently took its place. Hence, originally, it was not Melanehthon 's intention to treat gen- erically of Baptism in the Confession, but only of the neces- sity of Infant Baptism."* In a literal translation the article reads as follows : ' ' That little children should be baptized, and that by Baptism they are presented to God and are received into grace. Here again are rejected the Anabaptists, who say that Baptism does not profit children, and that little children are saved even without Baptism." The Article on the Lord's Supper is as follows: "9. That the body and blood of Christ are truly ['in the Supper among those who' is interlined] and are administered in the Supper, and those are rejected who teach otherwise." Kolde thinks that vescentibus, "to those who eat," was in the original, but was omitted because of the diffi- culty of translating it. "10. That private absolution should be held in the Church, although in confession it is not necessary that all sins should be enumerated, for that is impossible." In the articles on Civil Polity, on The Return of Christ to Judgment, and on Free-will, the differences between this Oldest Bedaction and the Confes- sion in its final form are great and striking. Of the article on The Return of Christ to Judgment, "the construction is entirely different," remarks Kolde. In general it may be said of the chief Articles of Faith in this Oldest Bedaction, that they contained much that is ambig- uous, vague and evasive, and that they incline much more to the traditional Roman Catholic doctrine than does the Confession in the form in which it was officially read and delivered. If we turn to the Articles on Abuses, we find, indeed, that they * Die Aelteste Sedaltion, p. 51. THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 57 are seven in number, and that they treat in general the same subjects that are treated under the head of Abuses in Part II. of the completed Confession, but the treatment is in many particulars very different, and in extent the articles are scarcely more than two-thirds of what they are in the completed Con- fession. Still we are not brought back to that first draft of the Confession of which Melanchthon writes, May 11th, and which was sent to Luther for his inspection. We probably stand about half way between the finished Confession and that first draft, called by the Germans Ber erste Entwurf, Der fertige Entwurf, Prima Adumbratio. On this subject Professor Kolde has wisely written: "Since j\Ielanehthon liked better to write Latin than German, and as, since from many indications, it may be concluded that the Latin recension was relatively finished earlier than the German, it is quite probable that Luther saw only the Latin. However, against this speaks the consideration that it was the Elector who sent the Apology to him, and who must have first read and approved it. Accordingly so long as no opposing proof can be adduced, it is probably to be concluded that Luther saw both recensions, in so far as they were finished. "But what was at that time really finished? As regards the number of articles seen by him, my investigations have anew established only this, namely, that Articles XX. and XXI. were yet wanting.* More important is the inquiry about the con- tent and shape of the articles as they were laid before him. On this subject nothing can be said with absolute certainty, but we will be justified in holding about the following as the facts : "The comparison of Na (The Oldest Redaction) with A (The Augsburg Confession) proves conclusively that the articles underwent great changes during the last two or three weeks before delivery. We cannot prove that Luther saw the form in Na; much rather does everything go to show that the text sent to him underwent manifold changes already before Na was finished. Finally, in the correspondence between Augsburg and Coburg there is not an iota of evidence that Luther exerted any influence on the later changes, or that any one of the later recensions was sent to him. Hence, the direct participation * In regard to Part II. it is certain that it was quite different from what it is in the completed Confession. Every article was changed even after May 31st. May 22d Melanchthon was revising Art. XXVII., and was probably writing for the first time Article XXVIII. See Brieger in Kircheng. Studien, p. 278. Beal-Encyc.,' II., p. 244. 58 THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBUEG CONFESSION. of Luther in the composition of the Confession — about which there has been discussion from time to time, finally again forty or fifty years ago, more in confessional than in scientific historical interest — is relatively small. Luther did help to draw up the Torgau Articles, and did also, as is certainly evident, counsel with Melanchthon before the Diet on all else that could come into consideration, and he even raised no objection to what he saw in May. But that also is all." * The facts show conclusively, that, barring the "long and rhetorical Preface," the Apology verius Confession, as sent to Luther, May 11th, did not contain more than about one-half as much matter as is contained in the Augsburg Confession as it was read and delivered to the Emperor, June 25th. Besides, judging from what we find in The Oldest Redaction, the form of all the articles sent to Luther, and, in many cases, the matter and the conception of articles, were subsequently so manifoldly and so purposefully changed and elaborated as to produce an entirely different document. It can therefore be truthfully affirmed that the Confession, as Luther saw it before its delivery, was only the first draft of the Confession as it was at the time of its delivery. The document was changed daily and was adapted to circumstances.f 4. Melanchthon Continues to Change. Melanchthon went on with his changes.J May 28th the Nvirn- berg commissioners, Kress and Volkamer, wrote home to their Senate "that the counsellors and theologians of the Elector are holding daily sessions on the Confession of Faith, with the purpose of giving it such a form that it cannot be passed over, but must be heard." § Three days later they write that "the Saxon Confession is not yet completed," and that they have received the articles in Latin, in so far as they have been * Die Aelteste Bedahtion, pp. 73-75. See also Brieger, KirchengescJiicht- Uche Studien, p. 278; Kolde, Aiigsb. Konf., p. 5, note 6. t C. E. II., 60. t Fikeucher, after quoting Luther 's letter of May ISth to the Elector, De Wette, 4. p. 17, says: "But Melanchth(ju was not yet satisfied with it (the Confession), and almost up to the moment of delivery he changed so much by additions and omissions, by remodeling, and by the introduction of entirely new articles, even by the choice of words, that a very different work resulted, though still based on the Torgau Articles. On each part, as finished, Melanchthon received the opinions of the theologians present. He even wrote to Luther, May 22d, for his opinion. But he (Luther) did not see the finished work until after it had been delivered to the Emperor. ' ' GescTiichte des Reichstags zu Augsburg, p. 53. § C. E. IL, 71. THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 59 brought together, but without the Preface and the Conclusion, about which there is the greatest doubt; and that they will send the German copy, on which improvements are daily being made, so soon as it is finished.* June 8th these same commis- sioners write that the Saxons have not yet finished the Preface and the Conclusion.! June 15th they write: "The Saxon Confession of Faith is finished in German. Herewith we send it to you. It does not yet have the Preface and the Conclusion, and, as Philip Melanchthon has stated, he has not put any part of these into German, because he thinks that this same Preface and Conclusion may probably be presented, not alone in the name of the Elector, but in common in the name of all the Lutheran Princes and estates, as he has already made a change in the German Articles, as you will see : Namely, where in the Latin it is stated, that in the Electorate of Saxony, this or that is preached and held, here in the German he has omitted the Electorate of Saxony, and has put a common term in its place, which may refer to all the estates." f But the Confession is not completed in German. It does not have the Preface and the Conclusion, nor Article XXI. : Of the Worship of Saints. % "The Article, Of Faith and Good Works, placed last in the German Confession is not in the Latin Confes- sion, ' ' write the Niimberg commissioners. And Part II., as shown by the Spalatin Manuscript in the Weimar Archives, is manifoldly different from the Confession in its completed form. To say nothing about the brevity of some of the articles, it does not contain Article VIII., Of The Power of the Bishops, in any form. It may possibly be that this is the "Conclusion" which the Niirnberg commissioners say is lacking. || Even in the * June 3d, these Niirnberg Commissioners received also a copy of the Preface to the Latin Articles. They had both the Preface and the Articles transcribed by Jerome Ebner 's sons, and they sent both to their Senate, saying, in a letter: "It lacks an article or two behind, and also the con- clusion, on which the Saxon theologians are still working. " C. B. 78. This Latin copy, sent to the Niirnberg Senate, was translated for the Senate by Hieronimus J. Baumgartner. This translation is The Oldest Sedaction of the Augsburg Confession, about which we have written on pp. 50 et seqq. t C. E. II., 87. t C. E. II., 105. § Kolde says: "The (21) Article, Of the Worship of Saints, was orig- inally written in Latin. The form that was subsequently placed in the Spalatin text is only a translation from the Latin. It appeared first in the I. Marburg and then in the French translation made from that. The Ger- nian recension, which went to Niirnberg on the 15th, did not contain it." Engelhardt says: "Article XXI. was added after June 16th." Niedner's Zeitschrift (1865), p. 60D. II The Spalatin Manuscript is regarded as' the oldest form of the German Text of the Articles of Faith that has come down to us. In this, both Kolde 60 THE COMPOSITION OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. Articles of Faith there are numerous, though mostly stylistic, differences between Spalatin's Manuscript and the Confession as delivered. But Melanchthon proceeds with his changes and his adaptations, so that by the time the Confession is delivered it has become very different from what it is as given in Spalatin's Manuscript, to say nothing about the first draft, which was sent to Luther, and The Oldest Redaction of May 31st. The "long and rhetorical Preface" disappears entirely, and a diplomatic common Preface is written in German and translated into Latin by Justus Jonas. The Epilogue is added* and the Epilogue- Prologue, beginning, "This is about the sum of the doctrine," which connects Part I. of the Confession with Part II., is in- serted. That is, neither of these important sections of the Augsburg Confession appears yet in the Spalatin Manuscript,! so late, say, as the middle of June. and Brieger agree. The latter says: "Of Spalatin's copy, it can only be said that it arose before the 15th of June. ' ' Zur Geschichte des Augsburger Reichstags von 1530, p. 17. Kolde, Die aelteste Redaktion, pp. 69, 70. Brieger regards the I. Ansbach as dating some days later, p. 18. The Spal- atin MS. is given by Porstemann, I., 312-343. * C. E. II., 112. t See Forstemann, ut supra, I., 322 and 342. CHAPTER V. THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. We need not detain ourselves with anj^ further consideration of the "long and rhetorical Preface," since that forms no part of the Augsburg Confession. "We have already seen that Part II. of the Confession was elaborated by Melanchthon out of the alleged Torgau Articles, but with so many changes, that their identity almost disappears, and the "Articles on tlae Abuses that have been changed" are, to all intents and purposes, new articles. It remains that we should here con- sider the sources of the twenty-one Doctrinal Articles, as they are generally called, or according to the title given by Melanch- thon in the Latin editio princeps: The Principal Articles of Faith. 1. The Marburg and the Schwabach Articles. October 4, 1529, Luther wrote fifteen Articles at Marburg, which, because of the place of composition, are called the Mar- burg Articles.* They discuss the following subjects: 1. The Trinity; 2. The Person of Christ; 3. The Work of Christ; 4. Original Sin ; 5-7. Justification by Faith ; 8. The Spoken Word ; 9. Baptism; 10. Good Works; 11. Confession; 12. The Magis- tracy; 13. Human Ordinances; 14. Infant Baptism; 15. The Lord's Supper.f But already, perhaps more than two months earlier, he had helped to write seventeen Articles of Faith at the command of the Elector of Saxony, which, because they were used at Schwa- bach, October 16th-18th following, are called The Schivabach Articles.% They discuss the following objects : 1. The Trinity ; 2. The Incarnation of the Son of God ; 3. The Work of Christ ; 4. Original Sin; 5. Justification by Faith; 6. Faith the Gift of God ; 7. The Preached Word ; 8. The Two Sacraments ; 9. Baptism ; * Luther's Werlce, Erl. Ed. 65, pp. 88 et seqq. Fac simile of the Original in Studien und Kritiken (1883), pp. 400 et seqq. Kolde, Augsb. Konf., I. Beilage. t Kolde, Beitrage zur Beformationsgeschichte, pp. 94 et seqq. f Luther's own edition in Erl. Ed. of Works, 24: 334 et seqq. From the Ulm MS. in Weber, Krit. Geschichte, I., Appendix. On the basis of the Strassburg Official' Text in 'KoMe, -Augsb. Konf., II. Beilage. (61) 62 THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 10. The Eucharist; 11. Private Confession; 12. The Christian Church; 13. Christ's Return to Judgment; 14. The Magistracy; 15. Monastic Vows and other Prohibitions; 16. The Mass; 17. Ceremonies of the Church. Both series of articles were written in German. Luther denies that he composed the Schwabach Articles alone. We may therefore conclude that he was assisted in their composition by Melanchthon and Justus Jonas, who were his faithful helpers at "Wittenberg. Nevertheless, they bear the characteristic qualities of Luther's mind, and express his views on all the subjects embraced by them. Now these two series of articles were taken to Augsburg by the Elector of Saxony. The former series is expressly men- tioned under the title : Acts and Decision of the Learned at Marhurg, Anno MC. XXIX., as being in the red chest, to which allusion has been already made. We know that the other was taken thither, because we find it employed by the Elector immedi- ately upon his arrival at Augsburg as the basis of his Confession of Faith described in a preceding chapter. It is well known that the former series was signed by Zwingli and his followers, as well as by Luther and his followers, at Marburg. The other series was not signed by Luther, nor by any of the Wittenberg, theo- logians, but they were subsequently acknowledged by Luther in a bold and defiant Preface at their appearance in print in May, 1530. If we compare the two series with each other, we shall find that the Marburg Articles express the Lutheran doctrine in mild and conciliatory language. No attack is made upon any teaching or doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. Only an allusion to the same is made in articles eleven and twelve. In the Schwabach Articles the tone is decidedly polemical against Rome, as in Article XV., where it is declared "that the doctrine which prohibits marriage and ordinary food and drink to priests, together with monastic life, and vows of every kind, are nothing but damnable doctrines of devils;" and in Article XVI., where the Mass is characterized as "before all abomina- tions." In Article IV. Luther's doctrine that "original sin is truly and properly sin" is brought out in contrast with the alleged Zwinglian view that it is' "only a weakness or defect." In Article X. Luther specially affirmed his doctrine of the true presence of the true body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist as against "the other side," the Zwinglians, who "assert" that only bread and wine are present. Hence, the Schwabach Articles, must be regarded as a more THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 63 positive and antithetical exhibition of Luther's teaching, than the Marburg Articles, and as . corresponding perfectly to the state of Luther's and Melanchthon 's mind during the Summer of 1529. When now it became necessary to change the "Apology" into a Confession, because of Eck's calumniations, it was natural, as well as in accordance with Melanehthon 's spirit, that recourse should be had to these two series of articles, both of which were at hand. The former he had subscribed, and the latter he had undoubtedly helped to compose. Both were official documents. Moreover, the latter was titled: The Elector of Saxony's Articles Concerning Faith, and had been employed by the Elec- tor in constructing the Confession of Faith, which he had just sent to the Emperor. Propriety and consistency would quickly unite in bespeaking the use of these documents in preparing Articles of Faith for public recital and presentation to the Emperor. As Melanehthon tells us that he assumed nothing to himself,* there can be no reasonable doubt that he took "Articles of Faith" into the "Apology" only after consultation with the Elector and his counsellors. It may be that these ordered the introduction of such articles, ' ' in order that false accusations might be refuted." In all probability it was not decided to include Articles of Faith in the Apology until after the recep- tion of Dolzig's report from Innsbruck of May 8th, which was in the hands of the Elector May 10th. From this report it was learned for certain that the Emperor would come to Augsburg and would at once give attention to the subject of religion, though only a short time could be devoted to such matters at the Diet.t This report would at once be considered at Court, and would lead to the prompt adoption of measures to meet the exigency. It was resolved to send the Apology to Luther, and this was done on the eleventh. It would have been an easy matter for Melanehthon, after counseling with his superiors, or after having received their order, to sketch Articles of Faith, such as those must have been which appeared in that first draft * Preface to Corpus Boctrinae, Latin. t Knaake, Luther's Antheil, p. 59. Forstemann, Urkundenbuch, I., 177 et seqq. It was this report that called forth the foUowing from Melaneh- thon to Luther, May 11th: "Our Apology is sent to you, although more properly is it a Confession. For the Emperor has not time to hear prolix discussions. Nevertheless I have said those things which I thought would be specially profitable and proper. With this design I have included almost all the Articles of Faith, because Eck has published against us the most diabolical slanders. Against these I wished to oppose a remedy." C. R. IL, 45. 64 THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBUKG CONFESSION. (scarcely more than fifteen hundred words), and to be ready with the same in time to meet the chronological conditions re- quired by his and the Elector's letter to Luther, May 11th. The .brevity of the Apology verius Confession is based on the fact, just learned, that the Emperor would have no time to hear prolix discussions. Yet it "included almost all the Articles of Faith," though not more than seventeen or eighteen, all told, and these bearing the marks of haste in composition. To furnish these Articles of Faith, Melanchthon would need only to rear- range and to condense the Elector's Articles of Faith, that had been sent to the Emperor, a copy of which had doubtless been kept by the Elector, and it is a fact that Melanchthon omitted from the Schwabach Articles the very articles that had been omitted by the Elector, namely, the fifteenth and the sixteenth; and the brevity of Melanchthon 's articles was determined by the information given in Dolzig's report. We may therefore fairly conclude, though we cannot prove absolutely, that the articuli fidei were introduced into the Apol- ogy May 10th or 11th. The facts, especially Melanchthon 's letter, seem scarcely to warrant the assumption of an earlier date. But we know certainly that they were introduced as a remedium against Eck's calumniations, and that they are based on the Marburg and more especially on the Schwabach Articles, and that the purpose originated at Augsburg, but whether with Melanchthon or with the Electoral counsellors, remains un- known. 2. ^ The Relation of the Marburg and Schwabach Articles to the Augsburg Confession. IJntil recently there were writers, both in Germany and in America, who tried to make it appear that Luther v?as the author of the Augsburg Confession, and that Melanchthon was its composer — ^that Luther's pen furnished all the matter for it and that Melanchthon 's pen gave it form and style. But mod- ern historical criticism has placed the question of the author- ship of the immortal Augustana in a clear and unquestionable light. It has excluded Luther entirely from participation in the composition of the Torgau Articles, except that he may have made suggestions. It has also shown that he had nothing to do with the inclusion of Articles of Faith in the Apology, and nothing to do in any way with the composition of at least five very important Articles of Faith embraced in the Confes- THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 65 sion ; while textual criticism lias shown with great accuracy just how much material passed from the Marburg and the Schwabach Articles into the first seventeen articles of the Augustana. Here we refer especially to the labors of Dr. Calinich* and Dr. Knaake,t who, by comparing article with article and word with word, have forever settled the question, for all impartial inquirers, of the relation of the Marburg and Schwabach Articles to the Doctrinal Articles of the Confession. Dr. Calinich, of Dresden, constructed the folloM'ing parallel: August ana. Schwaiach Articles. rticle 1 correa ponds to Article 1 2 4 3 2 and 3 4 5 5 7 and 8 " 6 6 7, 8,14 - " 12 " 9 9 10 10 " 11 11 12 lacking in the Schwabach Articles. 13 corresponds to Article 8 14 implied in " 12 15 corresponds to " 17 16 " " 14 17 " " 13 The author then calls attention to the fact that the four last Articles of Part I. of the Confession, namely, 18, 19, 20, 21, have no antecedents in the Schwabach series; that the for- mer follows the order of the latter only in Articles: 1, 3, 6, 9, 10, 11; that in the former, fifteen articles of the latter have found recognition: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 17 ; that five Articles of the former, namely : 12, of Repentance ; 18, of Free-will; 19, of the Cause of Sin; 20, of Good Works, and 21, of the Worship of Saints, are not found in the Schwabach series; that in the composition there have been expansions and elaborations : Article III. of the Augsburg Confession embraces 2 and 3 of the Schwabach series; Article V. of the Confession, embraces Articles 7 and 8 of the Schwabach series; while, on the contrary, Article 12 of the Schwabach series unites Articles 7, 8, and 14 of the Confession. * Luther und die Augsburgische Confession, 1861. 1i Luther's Antheil an der Augsb. Conf., 1863. 66 THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. It will thus be seen that Melanchthon made absolutely no use of Articles XV. and XVI. of the Schwabach series in the composition of the Augsburg Confession, and that there are five articles of the Confession that are entirely independent of the Schwabach series. Calinich has also examined in detail each of the first seventeen Doctrinal Articles of the Confession in connection with the corresponding article of the Schwabach series, and has shown the points of agreement and the points of difference. But we cannot transfer his work to these pages. Suffice it to say that he has shown how little, rather than how much, was transferred from the two older series of Articles to the Augustana. He gives the result of his comparison as follows : "1. The Schwabach Articles were taken as the foundation of Part I. of the Augsburg Confession, Articles 12, 18, 19, 20, 21 excepted. "2. In the re-writing changes were made, which in part have reference to the order of the separate articles, and in part con- sist of abbreviations and expansions. ' ' 3. The changes introduced are to be explained by reference to the different purpose of the rewriting, and are unessential in their nature. In a word, we nowhere meet with a doctrine which stands at all in contradiction to the fundamental prin- ciples laid down by Luther in the Schwabach Articles. ' '* Dr. Knaake made a much more minute verbal comparison than was made by Dr. Calinich, but we cannot transfer it to our pages, chiefly because of the difference between the German and the English languages. He, too, confines his comparison to the first seventeen Articles of the Confession, and declares that Luther's participation in the composition of the Confession does not extend beyond those Articles. According to his showing there are no antecedents for Articles VIII. and XIV. of the Confession; only a few words passed from the Marburg and Schwabach Articles to Articles I., II., III., VI., XI., XII., of the Confession; the damnatory clauses, and all that appeals to the teaching of the early Church and of the Fathers, Article I. excepted, appear for the first time in the Confession; Articles IX. and X. are much shorter than the corresponding articles in the Schwabach series; that by actual enumeration in the Ger- man, if we have not miscounted, only 438 words passed from the Marburg and the Schwabach series into the first seventeen of the Confession, which in these articles contains about 1600 * Pp. 25-26. THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 67 words as given in Tschaekert's Die Vnverdnderte Augsburgische Konfession, that is, considerably more than two-thirds of the words of these seventeen articles are the words chosen by ilelanchthon, though it is not to be concluded from this numeri- cal difference in the words used, that the influence either of Luther or of ]Melanchthon on the Confession can be mathemati- cally determined. Yet such an enumeration shows to a demon- stration that Melanchthon used his materials in an entirely inde- pendent way, so that they formed the hasis, and only the basis, of this first part of the Confession, so that we may conclude that the foundation of Part I., of the Augsburg Confession, is the work of Luther, but that the superstructure is the work of Mel- anchthon, and whatever superiority — and who can estimate its greatness? — the Augsburg Confession has over the Schwabach Articles, is due to Melanchthon, and the superiority is not only that of form and style. It enters into the contents, and is especi- ally prominent in the adaptation of the contents of the older articles to new needs and to new conditions. Hence we agree sub- stantially with Dr. Knaake, who says: "In regard to the con- tents, it is to be remarked that nearly all the Articles of the antecedents are worked up into the Confession, though it is not to be denied that there are differences. But this can be satisfac- torily explained by reference to the difference in occasion and in purpose. So, especially the additions and the omissions in the Augsburg Confession. For example : That in most of its articles there is added a repudiation of heresies, whereas only a few are mentioned in the Schwabach Articles, cannot surprise us, since the evangelicals at Augsburg wished to present their agree- ment with the common Christian Church, rather than to fortify their doctrine from the Scripture. In this way is explained the appeal in the Confession to the Church Fathers. But, despite such differences, the relationship of our articles to each other is clearly manifest, ' ' * that is, in the first seventeen, or rather, should we say, in fifteen out of the twenty-one Articles of Faith, since Articles YIII. and XIV. are not derived from the four- teenth Schwabach Article, though they may have been suggested by it. But, inasmuch as the essential thing in Article XIV. is the rite vocatus, it may be doubted as to whether even a suggestion in regard to that Article came from anything found in the Schwabach Articles. And, as for Articles: XVIII., Of Free- will; XIX., Of the Cause of Sin; XX., Of Faith and Good *P. 27. 68 THE MATERIALS USED IN' COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. Works ; XXI., Of the Worship of Saints, together with the Epi- logue-Prologue, in all, in extent of matter nearly one-half of the doctrinal part, and in importance and value equal to any other four articles, — for these four articles it has never been pretended that there are antecedents in the Sehwabaeh Articles, not even by way of suggestion. They are purely of Melanchthonian author- ship. We must conclude, therefore, that the Marburg and the Sehwabaeh Articles, the former wholly from the pen of Luther, the latter in part from his pen, stand as the strong foundation on which fifteen, or, at the utmost, seventeen doctriaal articles of the Augsburg Confession are based, and furnish not a little of the materials which Melanchthon, the master-builder, wrought into the superstructure of these articles. But he made such changes in the use of the materials thus furnished, by omissions, by additions, by adaptations, by the introduction of new thoughts and by the refinements of style, as cannot be described in words. They can be understood and appreciated only when we compare the Augsburg Confession article by article with its antecedents. But this relationship must be understood as confined strictly to Part I. of the Confession. The Marburg and the Sehwabaeh Articles had absolutely nothing to do with Part II. of the Con- fession. That part rests entirely on the Torgau Articles, which, by innumerable omissions, additions and adaptations, were shaped into the Articles on Abuses, which at the time were regarded as constituting the more important part of the Con- fession. 3. The Author of the Augshurg Confession. Who is the author of the Augsburg Confession, in the sense of ' ' one who composes or writes a book ; a composer as distinguished from an editor, translator, or compiler"? The facts of history, and the critical comparison of the finished product with the antecedents named, force the conclusion that Philip Melanch- thon is the author of the Augsburg Confession exactly in the sense in which we say that William Shakespeare is the author of Julius CcBsar, that John Milton is the author of Paradise Lost, that Edward Gibbon is author of The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. Each of these distinguished authors gathered certain materials together and kept them well in hand. Each arranged his materials in a manner peculiar to himself and adapted them to the end in view, added new thoughts and gave THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSIOX. 69 the whole the impress of his own genius. As a consequence each produced something new, something which did not previously have existence, though not something absolutely original in its matter, since absolute originality does not appear in the work of any human author^ — it is not found in the theology of Luther nor in that of Augustine, nor in that of Paul. Luther 's theology is that of Augustine, of St. Bernard, of Peter Lombard, of Thomas Aquinas, of William Occam, with certain eliminations and evangelical additions. He was a great religious genius, but none the less did he adopt and adapt the theological and religious thoughts of other great men who had gleaned in the same field. Melanchthon was not Luther's equal in the sphere of religion, but he was vastly his superior in the realm of theological learn- ing. He could not have written the Small Catechism; neither could Luther have written the Augsburg Confession. Each had his own transcendent gifts and each used his own gifts with transcendent success. As Luther's classic monument is the Small Catechism, so Melanchthon 's classic monument is the Augsburg Confession. In the erection of that monument he was not an editor, a translator, a compiler, but an author. At Augsburg, Melanchthon sought to bring into summary statement the doctrines common to the Evangelical theologians — the doctrines which he had exhibited in the Loci, and in the Visitation Articles, and which are found in his own and in Luther's many doctrinal discussions, and in Luther's sermons and postils. It was not his design to originate new doctrines, but avowedly to restate the doctrines of the Catholic Church of Christ. His confessional re-statement of the chief doctrines of Christianity was something as distinctly new in the life and history of the German Reformation as the Declaration of Inde- pendence was something new in the life and history of the Amer- ican people. The Augsburg Confession created an ecclesiastical organization, just as the Declaration of Independence created a political organization. As the latter defined the political rights and principles of the patriots who had fought at Bunker Hill, so the former defined the religious rights and principles of the Lutherans who had protested at Speyer. Each document is somethiag new, and it cannot be denied that the Augsburg Con- fession, taken as a whole, and as a conception, is vastly different from the Schwabach Articles, vastly different from any creed or confession of faith that had previously existed or that has since come into existence, vastly different from anything that 70 THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. had been written by Luther, or previously by ]\Ielanchthon — something wholly sui generis, though Melanchthon had written the Torgau Articles. But some dogmatieians, or those who have reflected the dog- matic temper, or those who have borrowed the Flacianist calum- niations, or those who have superficially examined the facts, have sought to assign Melanchthon a subordinate place in the prepara- tion for and in the composition of the Augsburg Confession. Quite different is the conclusion reached by those Lutheran historians who have taken counsel of the facts, and have allowed to the facts their just weight. Matthes, who wrote a Life of Mel- anchthon, and also an excellent work on Symbolics, says: "Per- haps no writing ever gave its author so much solicitude as this, in which every sentence and every word was most carefully pondered."* And Dr. Carl Schmidt, Melanchthon 's most learned and impartial biographer, after following the composition of the Augsburg Confession from its beginning to its end, con- cludes thus: "Such is the Augsburg Confession, which has be- come so famous in history. Although it was discussed by all the theologians present ; although even the, civil counsellors and the delegates added their word, and the Saxon Chancellor knew how 'to arrange it before and behind'; yet was it very especially the work of Melanchthon, and belongs to the most important written by him. Everywhere it bears the impress of his spirit. With astonishing clearness and simplicity it presents the doc- trine. Scholastic subtlety and terminology are avoided, so that it can be understood by the most imlearned," nor is it susceptible of being misunderstood or falsely interpreted. In vain would you seek a trace of a noind filled with hate or even acting under excitement. The calmness and moderation with which the whole is treated must take from opponents all pretext for complaint of unnecessary violence. All the doctrines are led back in the most logical way to the fundamental principle of justification by faith, and the same principle furnishes the rule by which to judge of ceremonies. ' ' f And Weber, who wrote the most critical and exact history of the Augsburg Confession that has ever been penned, has said: "Now is the time to examine the question, 'Is Melanchthon to be regarded as the author of the Augsburg Confession?' After * SymboKTc, Tp. 56. In the Life he says : " Diese Schrift von Melanchthon gam allein veifassten." And again: "From May 11th to June 24th, Luther was not again consulted." Jansen, Gesohichte des Deutschen Volkes, 17th and 18th Auflage, III., 184-5, note 1. t Philipp Melanchthon, p. 207. THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 71 what I have already said touching the manner and method by which he prepared the Confession, the question may be regarded as settled. For if he is the author of a writing to whom the matter and the wording belong, or if in a manner peculiar to himself he has worked up the materials found at hand, how can the authorship of the Confession be denied to Melanchthon? Grant that he had before him the materials in the seventeen Schwabach Articles, or, as I have shown above, those of Electoral Saxony, and the essays on religion furnished by the other theo- logians, did not he elaborate them in an original manner, and from the seed produce the beautiful tree, with its shady branches and fruit? Is La Fontaine or Racine or Corneille to be dispar- aged, because the first borrowed his materials mostly from other fabulists, and the others from history? Or, to give another illus- tration : Will anyone dare to say, without blushing, that Mascov, Bunau and Schmidt are not authors, but that they only brought the drafts and materials of history into a particular form ? Such is the note which so many theologians and historians of the Augs- burg Confession strike since the composition of the Bergic Form of Concord. Men have been at great pains and have invented empty arguments to circumscribe Melanchthon 's part in the pro- duction of the Augsburg Confession, to depreciate his work, and to reduce it to a clerkship. Melanchthon is not to be regarded as the author of the Augsburg Confession, but is to be regarded as having brought it into a particular form out of the seventeen Articles, which the illustrious man of God, Herr Luther, had previously drawn up ? Luther, Jonas and Bugenhagen wrought with Melanchthon on the Confession before he went to Torgau — Luther sent memoranda to Augsburg — Jonas translated the Confession into German (which translation is to be greatly pre- ferred to the original Latin), and gave Melanchthon opportunity still further to change his Latin draft, and to express its con- tents better — ^these and similar fancies, borrowed either from a false historical conception, or being absolutely without historical foundation, are the hollow echoes of the anti-Philippistic times, when Luther's zealous disciples envied and disparaged Melanch- thon 's fame. And I reckon it among the consequences of the Bergic Form of Concord, to which, as to a symbolically binding treatise on the doctrines defined in it, I accord full right, that since that time, it has been the fashion to belittle and to dispar- age the merit of Melanchthon." * * Kritische Geschichte, I., 47, 48. 72 THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSIOX. None the less clear and distinct is Planck, whose profound re- searches and independence of judgment give authority to his opinions. He says: "By May 11th, Melanehthon had finished a complete draft. This was sent by the Elector on that date to Coburg. But that draft wag changed so much from time to time, up almost to the moment of delivery, by additions and omissions, by elaboration and by the introduction of entirely new articles, ■ that a wholly different work arose, to which, however, the Torgau Articles furnished the foundation. It may be that Melanehthon was led to some of these changes and additions by the drafts brought to Augsburg by the theologians of the other Protestant Estates. Yet he did not make so much use of them that it can be said that he only compiled the Confession out of these different essays. It is also true that the judgment of the other theologians was passed upon each finished part of the work (see Camerarius, Vita Mel, ed. Strobel, p. 120), but it would be not only wrong, but foolish, to say that the finished Confession is not his work, but the joint work of those theologians. Yet such foolishness has been indulged in by the man's enemies." * Schopf writes : "The Modest Melanehthon counseled with the other theologians who were present at Augsburg, and with Luther, who had remained at Coburg, yet he was especially the author, and only he, with his gentleness, was qualified for the work. ' ' t Times almost without number does Melanehthon speak of him- self as the author of the Augsburg Confession, and no one ever disputed the correctness of his representation so long as he lived. And his friend and biographer, Camerarius, writing of the com- position of the Confession, says: "After the most careful de- liberation a writing was composed by the labor, study, care and immense toil of Melanehthon, which contains in several chapters a statement and explanation of all the doctrine. . . . When the entire burden was placed upon him and was borne by him, it was accomplished with the most laudable care, so that nothing might be done to wound his own conscience before God, or to injure his esteem before men, or to seem to bring destruction to the state." $ John Brentz wrote at Augsburg, June 24, 1530: "We have drawn up an epitome of our doctrine, Philip Melanehthon being * Geschichte der Prot. Theol., 3. p. 41, note. t Vie Symb. Bucher, p. 26. t Vita Fhilippi MeXanchthonis, Ed. Strobel, pp. 120, 121. THE MATERIALS USED IN COMPOSING THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 73 its author. ' ' * And those who buried Melanchthon inscribed on the lid of his coffin : Autor Confessionis Augustanae. But when Melanchthon and his Augsburg associates had passed away, and a generation of passionate zealots had come into place, who were more intent upon urging their own interpretation of the Confession, than upon ascertaining its history, it became the fashion in places to disparage Melanchthon in the Church which he had helped to create, and to name Luther the author of the matter and the doctrine of the Augsburg Confession," and to call Melanchthon the author of its form, of its rhetoric, of its style. That is, the profound scholar, the accomplished writer, the learned theologian, the trusted counsellor of Princes did the work of an amanuensis at Augsburg ! The Ttpwrov ifiiuSoi once started, it suited the taste and temper of a dogmatic age to keep it moving, though there have always been those who had the manly courage to protest against the great injustice. Happily, during the last seventy or eighty years, the materials for writing a correct history of the Augsburg Confession have been more and more brought to light. Historical criticism has done its noble work; and we are far enough away from the rivalries and strifes and bitternesses of the sixteenth century to be able to regard the transactions at Augsburg with clearer vision than the Epigoni could employ, since they were compelled to work in the shadow of the men who made the 25th of June, 1530, the birthday of a new era in the Church of Christ on earth. The discovery of the "long and rhetorical Preface" has put to flight forever the figment that the "Articles of Faith" con- stitute the Preface of which Melanchthon writes to Luther on the fourth of May.f And the discovery of Eck's 404 Articles has made it indisputably certain that Articles of Faith were in- troduced at Augsburg without consultation with Luther, that is, on the motion of Melanchthon himself, or at the command of his superiors; and we have seen the limited extent to which the Schwabach Articles were used in Part I. of the Confession, and as for Part II., that is out and out the work of Melanchthon, though he probably received suggestions from Luther at Witten- berg and at Goburg, hut never afterwards. * C. B. II., 124. t C. R. II., 39. CHAPTER VI. THE DELIVERY OP THE AUGSBUEG CONFESSION. Early on the morning of June 15th, the Princes assembled at the Bathaus in Augsburg to arrange for the reception of the Emperor. They spent several hours in disputing over ques- tions of rank and precedence. Then, at two o'clock, they pro- ceeded to the Lecha to meet the Emperor, and to escort him into the city, which he entered between eight and nine o'clock P. M., and then proceeded to the episcopal palace, which had been made ready for his reception. Here he detained the Pro- testant Princes for about two hours, haranguing them for having allowed their preachers to preach, and commanding them to join the Corpus Christi procession the next day. The excitement was so great that some of the Protestants were called out of bed and informed of what was going on.* 1. Preliminary Movements. The next morning, at seven o'clock, the Protestant Princes (the Elector of Saxony excepted, who was indisposed as a con- sequence of the late detention by the Emperor the previous evening) appeared before the Emperor and gave reasons why they could not interdict preachiag, nor enter the procession. Here they were detained until ten o'clock.f Then they visited the indisposed Elector, and there resolved to make reply in writing to the requisitions of the Emperor. Chancellor Briick then wrote a long opinion, giving reasons why the evangelical Princes could not interdict preaching; and the Saxon theolog- ians prepared a Bedenken on the question "Whether the Elector and other Protestant Princes can take part in the pro- cession of Corpus Christi day without doing violence to con- sciences. ' ' t On the morning of June 17th, the Princes presented to the Emperor their reason for refusing to interdict preaching. And * See Forstemann's Vr'kundenbucli, I., p. 263: Schirrmacher 's Brief e und Aden, 54, 57, 59. C. R. IL, 106. ' ^ ' "=1 " t Schirrmacher, ut supra, pp. 61, 482. C. E. II., 111. J See these papers in Forstemann's Urkundenhuch, I., 283 et seaa ■ Schirrmacher, p. 64. C. E. II., p. 110. (74) THK DEMVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 75 that day Adam Weiss preached before the Elector, and John Rurer, under instruction from Margrave George, preached in the Church of Saint Catharine.* In the afternoon of this day Melanchthon had a conference with the imperial secretaries, Schlepper and Valdesius. Here he declared that the difference between the Protestants and the Catholics had reference chiefly to Priestly Celibacy, to Private Mass and to the Communion in both kinds.f In the forenoon of the eighteenth the Protestants assembled at the Bathaus to hear the imperial decision in regard to the discontinuance of preaching. They made reply, and at first refused obedience to the imperial mandate. Finally it was ar- ranged that preaching should be discontinued on both sides,! and yet Adam Weiss preached on that day before the Elector. Melanchthon had another interview with Valdesius. Here it was proposed to settle the dissension without having the Confession read. Melanchthon promised to consider the matter. § In the evening the imperial interdict of preaching was proclaimed. We tbus see that the three days immediately following the Emperor's entrance into the city were occupied almost exclusively with the matter of the Protestant preaching. Hence Melanch- thon could write: "This matter was in dispute three days" — "This matter was then in dispute three days" — "At once he (the Emperor) forbade ours to preach. As they did not immediately obey, the dispute lasted three days. " | ] During these three days the theologians were mostly engaged in preparing Bedenken on various questions, in preaching and in holding in- terviews, and so active were they with their pens that he who looks at the documents prepared by them during these three days, as they are given by Forstemann and Schirrmacher, simply won- ders bow so much could have been done and written in so short a time. And yet the Confession had almost dropped out of con- sideration, for not once in all these documents, including two letters written by the Niirnberg commissioners June 16th, do we find a word about the Confession. Indeed, we know that work on the Confession was suspended, and that it was in danger of being abandoned.^! * Schirrmacher, p. 484; Forstemann 's VrTcundenbuch, I., p. 268; Miiller, p. 545; PfeUsehmidt, p. 55. t Schmidt, Philipp Melanchthon, p. 195. C. E. II., p. 122. % Schirrmacher, p. 58 et seqq.; Pfeilschmidt, p. 55. § Schmidt, p. 196. lie E II , pp. 117, 118; Bindseil's Supplementa Melanchthoms, p. 61. if Schmidt, p. 196; 0. K. XXVI., 209, 210; C. K. II., 112; BealencycW p. 249. 76 THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBUEG CONFESSION. The next day, June 19tli, which was Sunday, the Niirnberg commissioners, in a letter to their Senate, say that the Epilogue to the Confession has not yet been prepared, and that Melanch- thon is contemplating a briefer statement.* On this day IMel- anchthon wrote several letters, and Brentz a long one to Isen- mann, and yet neither of them speaks of any work having been recently done on the Confession. 2. Opening of the Diet. We now come to Monday, June 20th. At seven o'clock in the morning the Elector and other Princes went to the palace and attended the Emperor to the Cathedral, where Mass was held "prior to the opening of the imperial proposition." The Elector, as Arch-Marshal of the Empire, car- ried the sword before the Emperor, and with other Princes, both Catholic and Protestant, sat with him in the choir of the church on the right side, sixteen in all.f The Mass was celebrated by the Archbishop of Mayence. This was followed by a long ora- tion in Latin, delivered by the Papal Nuncio, Vincentius Pimpi- nelli. Bishop of Rossin.} Then the Offertorium was sung and the Da Paceni was kissed, the Elector of Saxony bearing the sword. § The services of worship being now ended, the Emperor, attended by the Princes and orders of the Empire, the Elector of Saxony bearing a drawn sword, went to the Bathaus. Here now the Diet was formally opened and the Imperial Proposition was read. 1 1 The first point had reference to the Turkish War, and does not concern us in this narrative. The second discusses the affairs of religion as they exist "in some parts of Germany." It recites how the Emperor, "as the supreme advocate, and the watchful and earnest defender of the orthodox faith, of the Christian religion and of the Catholic Church, in order that he might apply the remedy in time, had summoned the Diet of Worms," had instituted measures for quieting the distractions and reconciling animosities. But the Decree had not been obeyed. As a consequence, the way was opened for the entrance of many * C. E. II., 112. t See Coelestin I., 103, 104, and J. J. MuUer, p. 560, where names and circumstances are given. + See what purports to be Pimpinelli 's Oration, in Coelestin, I., pp. 105-115. ' ' ff § During the Mass in the church the sword was borne by Joachim von Pappenheim, hereditary Marshal of the Empire. See Coelestin, I., 1156, and J. J. Miiller, p. 562. II Coelestin, I., 1156; J. J. Miiller, p. 563. THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 77 evils and distresses and of diverse and opposing views in the Church. That he might gain a proper knowledge otthe situa- tion and might remove the schism and pacify the minds of men, he had made a long and dangerous journey. He entertains the hope that by his presence peace and concord will be restored. He therefore ' ' requests the Electors, Princes and all the Estates of the Empire to present, written in Latin and in German, their opinions and views, in order that, according to the letter of con- vocation, the affair might be the more profitably and the more speedily understood and brought to an end." "When the reading of the Proposition was finished the Electors and Princes rose to their feet, and after some deliberation first made reply, and then thanked the Emperor for his presence at the Diet. They were then commanded to send their secretaries to the Rathaus at three o 'clock P. M., to obtain each a copy of the Imperial Proposition. The Emperor now rose up and was con- ducted to the palace by the Princes. It was one o'clock P. M. The following account of the opening of the Diet is given by Kress and Volkamer, the Ntirnberg commissioners, who were present: "Since our last letter (June 19th) nothing further has been done, for on Sunday the Emperor went to the Cathedral to the Sacrament, and yesterday, Monday, the Mass of the Holy Ghost was sung at the Cathedral in the presence of all the Estates. Especially were the Elector of Saxony, Margrave George, also Hessen and Liineburg present, and they attended the Emperor in all the ceremonies. During the service the Apostolic Nuncio, in behalf of the Pope, from a lofty platform erected before the High Altar, delivered to the Emperor and to the Imperial Estates a Latin oration more than an hour long, and admonished them most earnestly to resist the Turk, and to put an end to the schism of the faith, and to settle other matters in the Empire. "Then the Emperor, the King, and all the Electors, Princes and Estates adjourned to the Rathaus, where Duke Frederick, in behalf of the Emperor, made a short address, and opened the Diet, and read the Programme according to which the Emperor would conduct the affairs of the Diet. Thereupon the Electors and Princes, through Margrave Joachim, delivered in reply an address expressive of loyalty and obedience. It was decided to give a copy of the Emperor's Programme to the Electors, Princes and Estates, that they might consider it, and afterwards come to- gether and consult. After this the Emperor and all the Estates, at one o 'clock — ^so long had the session lasted— left the house. ' ' * * C. E. II., 121-2. For fuller and more minute accounts of the opening 78 THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 3. Agreement to Present a Confession in Common. The Appeal sent from Speyer has brought an answer. An Imperial Diet takes the place of a national council. The Pro- testant Princes are now ordered to present, in writing, their views about the religious conditions in Germany. The hour for which they had long prayed and pleaded has come. But only in part are the Protestants prepared to meet the exigencies of that hour. The Elector of Saxony has his Articles of Faith, and his Articles on the Abuses which had been corrected, written both in Latin and in German. Other Protestant Princes had come to Augsburg with Bedenken. Concert of action had not been con- summated, though the subject had elicited attention and had incited to some action. Already, in Melanchthon 's letter of May 22d, to Luther, an intimation is given that the Landgrave of Hesse might subscribe the Saxon Articles, but the fact that the Landgrave showed strong sympathy with the Zwinglians and the Strassburgers placed difiieulties in the way of united action.* Even the Elector of Saxony treated the first suggestion of united action with rebuke,^ thinking that it might be of the devil.f But the matter is pressed by the Niirnberg commissioners, and finds ready response from the chancellor of Margrave George, who thought that it would be well for those who are at one in the articles of faith to present a common statement in the name of all the Princes and cities, and to follow the Margrave and the Elector. So far had the suggestion proceeded by June Sth.f of the Diet, see Sehirrmaeher, Brief e und Aden, 73-5; Coelestin, Historia, I., 103 et seqq.; Chytraeus, Historia, p. 52. For the Imperial Program in German, see Sehirrmaeher, pp. 79-81 ; J. J. Miiller, Historie, pp. 564 et seqq. ; FoTStemann, UrTcundeniuch, I., 306 et seqq. For the same in Latin, called Fropositio, see Coelestin, Historia, I., 120-1; CJhytraeus, Historia, pp. 53-60. * For political, as well as for theological, reasons the Lutherans as- sembled at Augsburg were intensely hostile to the views of the Zwinglians. Agricola preached again and again at Augsburg against the Zwingliau view of the Lord's Supper, and called the Zwinglians Geschriftsturmer. Michael Keller defended the Zwinglian view. The people of Augsburg strongly favored the Zwinglian preachers, and felt indignation against their assail- ants. Philip of Hesse, up to June 12th, had not attended the Lutheran preaching. See Jonas, Briefweohsel (Kawerau), I., 151-2; also, PoUtische Correspondent der Stadt Strassburg im Zeitalter der Beformation, 446 et seqq. Melanchthon and Brentz labored to turn the Landgrave from his Zwinglian sympathies. See the correspondence, C. E. EC., 92-103. They even invoked the aid of Luther. See Knaake's Luther's Antheil; Kostlin, Martin Luther, II., 216, 654; Sehirrmaeher, Brief e und Aden, p. 489. There can be no doubt that Eck's 404 Articles had quickened the zeal of the Lutherans against the Zwinglians. Nor had Melanchthon recovered from the opposition which he had conceived against the alliance with the cities of Southern Germany, which was to have been consummated at Eotach (see p. 18). tC. R. IL, 53. t C. E. II., 88. THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 79 Melanchthon has also caught the spirit of this moYemeiit, and for certain words, which have exclusive reference to the Elector, he has substituted common words which refer to aU the Estates, and has expressed the thought that the "Preface and the Con- clusion may be set forth, not alone in the name of the Elector, but, in common, in the name of all the united Lutheran Princes and Estates." Yet nothing had been said to the Margrave, nor to the Niimberg commissioners. But the latter are persistent and write to their Senate : "We thiak it would be well to speak with Margrave George, and then, in his name and in yours, to make a suggestion to the Elector. We offer this for your further consideration, and await your decision, especially as to whether we shall present a Preface and a Conclusion according to your conception, or shall request a Confession in common words, in the name of all the Princes and Estates, and shall send the same to you for further revision. ' ' * We are now brought to Wednesday, June 15th, the day on which the Emperor entered Augsburg, with the proposition of concerted action, practically confined to the Margrave and to the Niirnbergers. At least, we do not hear that the proposition is seriously entertained by the other Protestant Princes and Estates.! The next five days were occupied with matters that seemed to divert attention from the Confession. At least, we do not hear it mentioned in the circles of the Princes and Estates. But now that the Emperor's Programme has demanded that they present their views on the subject of religion in writing, it is easy to see that the importance of united action and of a common con- fession of their faith would not long remain absent from their thoughts. What seems so proper and natural to us, at so great a distance, seemed just as proper and natural to them in the thick of the danger. For already, on the evening of the 20th, "Duke John the Elector assembled his allies in religion at his lodgings, and exhorted them in an earnest and solemn address, faithfully and fearlessly to stand by and to defend the cause of God arid the pure religion, and not to allow themselves, by any threats or intimidations to be led to deny the same, since all machinations against God will be impotent, and the good cause will at length undoubtedly triumph." f This he did in view of * C. E. II., 105. t See letter of Niimberg Commissioners, C. E. II., 112. t Coelestin, Eistoria, I., 121-2. 80 THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. the fact that the Emperor had ordered both him and his co-re- ligionists to present themselves at the Bathaus, on "Wednesday, 22d.* But more important still were the transactions of the next day. Coelestin has given the following account: "On the twenty- first day of the same month, the Elector of Saxony, having sent all his counsellors and attendants from his presence, alone in secret, read the Psalter, and most fervently prayed God for the glory of his name and for the salvation of many souls, to assist, to promote, to advance, and to defend the cause of true religion. "He also wrote down his good pious reflections. These were given by John Dolsch, the Electoral Counsellor, to Melanchthon, who read them with admiration and retained them. The Elec- tor's autograph was subsequently exhibited by Dolsch at Leipzig to many learned and honorable men, who read it. "The same day, about 8 o'clock A. M., he carefully, alone, examined and pondered the Proposition which at the opening of ' the Diet had been read by order of the Emperor to all the Orders and Estates of the Empire. A little later, when about to take refreshments, he called his son, John Frederick, Philip Melanch- thon and Dr. Pontanus, and conferred with them very confi- dentially about religion, and made known his plans, distinctly affirming that he would neither confer nor act in political mat- ters, except the cause of religion be first taken up for decision and determination, and yet he would make no pronunciamento without the advice of his allies in religion. Therefore, at 2 o'clock P. M., he summons to his quarters the Estates kindred in religion. When all these had assembled at the appointed time, Duke John, the Elector, ordered Dr. Pontanus to read the Propo- sition to all the Evangelical Orders present, with a loud and dis- tinct utterance, so that each one could hear, understand and ponder it, and could declare openly and make known his opinion concerning it. When the Proposition had been read, the Evan- gelical Estates say that they are diligently considering the whole subject, and that they wish to meet the Prince the next day and to counsel with him. ' ' f We have another account of this meeting of the Evangelical Princes and Estates. On the afternoon of that same day, June 21st, the Niimberg commissioners wrote a letter to their Senate, finishing it at five o'clock. Referring, doubtless, to the matter * J. J. Miiller, Eistorie, p. 56. t Coelestin, Historia, p. 122 ; MuUer, Eistorie, p. 568. THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONJ'ESSION. 81 of a common confession, they say: "Since our last letter (June 19th) nothing further has been done." Then they add a "Post- script," written the same evening, and say: "After we had finished this letter, I, Kress, was summoned to the Elector's quarters. His Electoral Grace, Margrave George, and the coun- sellors of Hesse and Liineburg were there. They declare simply that, inasmuch as the Elector has already had a confession of faith composed, a copy of which you have received, they have presented themselves before the Elector and Margrave George for the purpose of joining the Elector. They are holding a ses- sion over those articles for the purpose of further revising, com- posing and finishing them. It is the desire of the Princes that your Excellencies should immediately send your preachers, or whom you will, but especially Osiander, and would instruct them to help us to consider and to deliberate over these articles and whatever else is needed in the transaction. ' ' * This ' ' Postscript ' ' supplements and confirms the account given by Coelestin, since both accounts recite the transactions of the same persons, viz., the Elector and other Evangelical Princes, on the same afternoon, viz., that of Tuesday, June 21st, and at the same place, viz., at the lodgings of the Elector of Saxony. Kress, the Niirnberg commissioner, was present at this meeting and re- ports the consummation of the Niirnberg-Margrave plan for a common confession and for united action. 'On this Tuesday after- noon the Saxon Confession begins its larger mission. It now be- comes the bond of union for the Evangelical ' ' party, ' ' and then the fundamental confession of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. To serve this larger purpose, it had to be revised, adapted and brought to a close. Hence it is not until Tuesday afternoon that we have what may be called the relatively finished Augsburg Confession, though Melanchthon, so the historians are careful to inform us, continued to make changes in it up to the last hour before its delivery to the Emperor. Certainly, this day witnessed a glorious consummation. It deserves to be celebrated as one of the memorable days in the history of Lutheranism ; for, had the Evangelical Princes gone before the Diet, each with his own confession, the result would have been inextricable confu- sion. Each would have defended his own, and doubtless would have done so at the expense of his co-religionists. But a com- mon danger, and the consciousness of being at one in faith, and the common obligation to obey the imperial requisition, brought * C. E. II., p. 124. 6 82 THE DELIVERY OK THE AUGSBtlRG CONFESSION. them to see the wisdom and the desirability of having and of presenting one and the same confession. The Nurnberg Senate and their commissioners at Augsburg, and the Chancellor of the Margrave deserve high praise for the wisdom, the statesmanship, and the perseverance shown by them in regard to this the most important proposition that had yet come before the Protestant Estates. Union at this time meant strength and the ability to withstand opposition. Isolation would have stood as a synonym for weakness, and would have invited defeat. Magnanimous was the Elector in having invited the other Estates to unite with him in a common response to the imperial proposition, and equally magnanimous were they in accepting his confession as theirs. 4. The Confession is Finished and Signed. Coelestin, after reciting what was done by the Elector and Princes, June 21st, continues right on as follows : ' ' When, there- fore, on the following day the Protestants came together, it was unanimously agreed, after deliberation, that no action should be taken touching political matters until religion and the Christian faith had been treated and decided upon, and that they would not assent to the demands of the Emperor to continue aid against the Turks until they had treated of, and reached a decision in regard to the articles of faith and the peace of the Christian Church." Coelestin then recites the Response made by the Princes to the Imperial Proposition, in which Response the declaration is made that attention must first be given in the Diet to the affairs of religion, and tells us that when the Em- peror had been informed of the action of the Princes, he com- manded that they should present to him, in writing, sealed, the confession and summary of their faith and a statement of the methods by which the abuses in the Church might be corrected and removed. From other sources of information we know that this presentation was ordered to be made on the following Fri- day.* Hence the action of the Evangelicals on the next day as reported by Coelestin : ' ' On the Vigil of John the Baptist, Thursday, June 23d, at the request of the Elector of Saxony, the Articles of the Confession were read in a large assemblage of the Evangelical Orders, with the purpose and intention especially, that if anyone thought that anything in them ought to be changed, he might speak freely and candidly and might so declare. When the reading was ended, * J. J. Miiller, Historie, p. 571. THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CIOXFESSION. 83 and they (the Articles of the Confession) were approved by all, it was decided to ask the Emperor the next day, that with his consent, they might be recited in the hearing of all the orders of the Empire. ' ' * A more minute account of this same transaction is given by the Niirnberg commissioners, who were present at and took part in this meeting on Thursday, June 23d. Early on Saturday, June 25th, they wrote a letter to their Senate. After reciting that on Wednesday the Evangelical Estates had decided to demand that the subject of religion should be allowed to take precedence of everything else, they report as follows: "Last Thursday morn- ing we and the legate from Reutlingen were summoned into the presence of the Saxon, the Hessian, Margrave George, and Liine- burg. There, in the presence of their Princely Graces, coun- sellors and theologians — there -were twelve theologians, besides other scholars and doctors — the afore-mentioned Confession of Faith was read, examined and considered, so that it could be read yesterday afternoon to the Emperor in the presence of the Estates of the Empire. Then, because the copying and the com- position of the Preface and of the Conclusion consumed consider- able time, the Elector and Princes, through their counsellors, besought the Emperor for an extension of time. But this was denied them, and yesterday, at three o'clock in the afternoon, the Emperor and all the Estates came to the House," f that is, to the Bathaus, as we know from other accounts that this second session of the Diet was held at that place. 5. The Confession is Bead and Delivered. The Diet assembled at the Bathaus about three o'clock P. M. on Friday. In a long oration, delivered in Latin, Cardinal Campeggius, pontifical legate a latere, exhorted the Princes to join the Emperor in exterminating heresy and in reconciling the minds of men, and in removing the dissensions, so that all might together carry on war successfully against the Turk and all in- fidels. This was followed by orations from the commissioners of Lower Austria, who had been sent to the Diet to implore aid against the Turk, who was spreading desolation in that part of the Empire. The hearing of those speeches and the deliveiy of suitable * Coejestin, Historia, I., 1236 ; J. J. Muller, Eistorie, p. 569 ; Briick, Geschichte, pp. 49, 50. t C. R. II., 127. 84 THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. responses occupied a very large part of the session. But when all this was over, the Elector of Saxony, the Margrave of Bran- denburg, the Dukes of Liineburg, the Landgrave of Hesse, and the Prince of Anhalt rose up together, and standing near the imperial throne, addressed the Emperor through Dr. Gregory Briick, the Chancellor of the Elector of Saxony : They say that they knew and daily have observed that many things pertaining to the articles of their faith, and to the ceremonies that are prac- ticed in their churches have been misrepresented to his Imperial Majesty, as that they have introduced new and unscriptural doc- trines, heresies, schisms and other monstrous and absurd opinions, and scatter and disseminate the same among the peoj.le. They most humbly entreat the Imperial Majesty, the Electors and Princes patiently to hear and to understand the sum of the doc- trine which is preached in their several dominions, since the matter pertains not only to their reputation, fortunes, blood and life, but to the welfare and eternal salvation of their souls. Then, after some consultation with King Ferdinand and the Catholic Princes, the Emperor signified through the Elector Frederick that, as evening was now at hand, and as the Confes- sion of the Protestants was in writing, it was his gracious pleasure that it be delivered to him. He, with his counsellors, would take it into consideration and return an answer. But this did not suit the Protestants. They insisted, through Chancellor Briick, that the Emperor should hear their Confession read. The Em- peror consulted with his advisers and again refused the request of the Protestants. The Protestants now "vehemently insist, and most humbly and for God's sake beg that their Confession should be read before all, as the exigency was very great, and no one was wantonly attacked in it. Whereupon the Emperor a third time had it announced that he was not inclined to grant their request; But as it was now late, it was his Majesty's desire that the Elector and Princes should present their Confession, and that to-day, at two o'clock P. M., he would consider it at the palace in the presence of the Electors, the Princes and Estates. "But the Elector and Princes again declare that they desire nothing so much as that the Confession be read before his Majesty and the Estates, and most earnestly pray this. But if it could not at this time be read to his Majesty, then it is their desire that his Majesty, instead of hearing it at the palace, as he had offered, should about that time appear again at the Rathaus THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG COXFESSIOX. 85 and allow the Confession to be read, and should leave it in their hands, that they might revise and correct it, inasmuch as they had been hastened. The Emperor persisted that the hearing should take place at the palace, and consented that the Confes- sion should remain in the hands of the Elector and the Princes until that hour. This the Princes had to accept. Consequently the Confession is to be read to-day." Such is the account given by the Niirnberg commissioners, eye- witnesses, of the efforts made by the Protestant Princes, on the afternoon of June 24th, to have their Confession read, and of the Emperor's persistent refusal to hear it, at least in the large assembly. The Protestants were impelled by the exigency that forced them to introduce articles of faith into their Apology. They meant to counteract the effect of Bck's slanders on the mind of the Emperor and of the Catholic Princes. This is clearly stated in Briick's address to the throne. They wanted the Emperor and the Catholic Estates to hear their defense read in the most public place and before the largest audience. As Eck's articles had been delivered to the Emperor and to the public in print, it was but just that the refutation should be delivered in the most public and formal manner. That the Empergr, under advice of his counsellors, refused to hear the Confession read, is doubtless due to an apprehension that the public reading of the Confession would create sympathy for the Protestant cause, and would give a wider circulation to the Protestant doctrines. The result of the persistence on both sides was a compromise. The Emperor agreed to hear the Confession read. The Protest- ants agreed to read it in the palace, toit meanwhile they keep it in their hands for revision and correction. It was in this interval that the Confession was brought to its final form. For some days the Protestant theologians, and espe- cially Melanehthon, had been working day and night on it in order to give it the best possible shaping for its high destination.* To what extent it is changed in these later days of its composi- tion we do not loiow. But the Niirnberg legates say: "The Confession, in so far as the articles of faith are concerned, is in substance almost in accord with that which we have already sent you ; but in some parts it is improved, and everywhere it is made as mild as possible, though, in our judgment, nothing neces- * Salig, Eistorie, I., 195 ; J. J. Muller, Eistorie, p. 571. 86 THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSIOX. sary has been omitted. Hence we have agreed to all this, and in your name have joined the Princes and Reutlingen. ' ' * June 25th comes apace. The Protestant Confession has re- ceived the last refining touch from the hand of its author. It is now ready to be read and to be delivered to the most invincible Emperor Charles V., Cassar Augustus, at a Diet of the Holj' Roman Empire of the German Nation. At three o'clock P. M. King Ferdinant and the Elector and Princes, together with the legates who had signed the Protestant Confession, repaired to the Episcopal Palace and were shown into the chapel, where the Emperor was accustomed to hold his devotions. The room could hold comfortably about two hundred persons. The multitude of those who stood without was very great. But the Emperor forbade admission to all except the Princes and their counsellors and the commissioners of the imperial cities. The others, to whom admission was refused, remained in the court below and heard as best they could. At one end of the little room, on a raised platform, sat Charles V., richly clad, under a splendid canopy. On the right he was flanked by the Elector of Saxony, followed by a long line of Princes. On the left sat King Ferdi- nand under a small canopy, flanked by the Electors of Mayence and Cologne, the empty chair of Treves, by Archbishpps and Bishops. In the midst of these sat Dr. John Eck. Towards the rear sat the commissioners of the cities and the civil counsellors. In the middle of the room sat the two imperial secretaries. The supreme moment came at four o'clock, when the Protestant Princes made as though they would rise and stand during the reading of their Confession. But the Emperor bade them sit down. Then Drs. Briick.and Beyer came forward in front of the Emperor, the former holding in his hand the' Latin copy of the Confession, and the latter the German copy. The Emperor asked that the Latin copy be read, but the Elector of Saxony interposed, and said: "We are on German soil. Therefore I hope his Majesty will also permit the German language." After a short address by Dr. Briick in the name of the Protestant Princes and Estates, the Confession was read by Dr. Beyer in the German language. The reading lasted two hours. The Em- peror, the King, Princes and Bishops, and others, listen with * The letter of the Niirnberg commissioners, from which we have copiously quoted in this section, was written very early in the morning of June 25th C. E. II., 127-130. See Coelestin, Ristoria, I., 133-4; J. J. Muller, Sistorie, pp. 580 et seqq.; Chytraeus, Historia, p. 69; Fikenscher, Geschichte des Beichstags zu Augsburg, pp. 81 et seqq. THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 87 the closest attention, though the Emperor is said to have slept for awhile.* When Dr. Beyer read from the Confession (Art. XXIII.) that four hundred years before that time the Pope pro- hibited marriage to the German priests, and that the Archbishop of Mayenee had encountered much opposition in enforcing the edict, the King asked the Archbishop of Mayenee if that was true.f After the reading Dr. Briick took both copies and was about to deliver them to Alexander Schweiss, one of the imperial secretaries, to be passed by him to the Elector of Mayenee. But the Emperor reached out his hands and took both copies.t The German copy he gave to the Elector of Mayenee, to be deposited in the imperial archives. The Latin copy he retained by him and subsequently had it placed in the imperial archives at Brussels. Both copies were originals, and both are supposed to have perished, at least it is not known that either is in exist- ence anywhere in the world. Neither did the Protestants keep a certified or official copy of their Confession. The Emperor commanded his secretary, Alexander Schweiss, to translate the Confession into French and Italian, and to see that not one word was omitted in the translations,' but that the whole matter be correctly expressed. Cardinal Campeggius sent a copy of the Italian version to the Pope, Clement VII. The am- bassadors of the Kings of England, France and Portugal, and the representatives of other foreign potentates, had the Con- fession translated into their respective languages, and sent to their Principals. § "Thus it happened," says J. J. Miiller, "that this Confession of Faith, almost like lightning, spread in a moment from the East to the West, and was espoused not only by individuals, but by entire nations — ^yea, it shall stand not only before the Pope, but before the Devil, and before the gates of hell to the last day." But this account of the reading and delivery of the Confession, drawn from the most authentic sources, may with profit to the reader be supplemented by reports from those who were eye- witnesses of the transactions of that day, which dates the birth of a great Evangelical Church. * C. n. II., p. 145 and p. 245. tCoelestifl, I., p. 189; Spalatin, Annales, p. 139. + Spalatin, p. 139; Briiek, Gesohichte, p. 55. Neue Kirchliehe Zeitschrift (1906), p. 788. § J. J. MuUer, pp. 585 et seqq.; Coelestin, I., 141; Salig, I., 210 et seqq.; Rehirrmacher, p. 93. 88 THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. The Elector of Saxony, writing to Luther, June 25th, evi- dently before three o'clock P. M., says: "On the day of John the Baptist (June 24th) we, with our allies, presented ourselves before the Emperor, the King of Bohemia, the Electors and Estates, at a public meeting, and offered, in accordance with the imperial command, to present our Articles in Latin and German, to read publicly and deliver the German. Though we several times humbly begged to read them publicly, yet we did not succeed, for the King and the opposing party resolutely resisted it. But we have the assurance that the Emperor will hear the Articles to-day in the palace — so arranged that not many per- sons can be present." * On June 26th the Niirnberg commissioners write to their Sen- ate as follows: "Yesterday, Saturday, at 3 o'clock P. M., the Confession of Faith, as it was when last we wrote you, sub- scribed by the Elector, the other Princes and, in your name and in that of Reutlingen, was delivered in Latin and German to the Emperor in the presence of the King, the Electors, Princes and Estates, assembled in the palace. It was first read in German before their Majesties, the Electors, Princes and Estates by the Saxon Chancellor, Dr. Christian (Beyer), publicly and distinctly, so that all present could- easily hear it. Then the Emperor, after conferring with the other Electors and Princes, announced through Duke Frederick to the Elector of Saxony and his allies, that his Majesty had heard the Confession. But inasmuch as the matter was somewhat lengthy, and also highly important, necessity was laid on his Majesty to consider and to counsel well over the whole matter — that he would do this and would demean himself in the matter as becomes a gracious Christian Emperor, and when he shall have made up his mind on the subject, he will again summon the Elector and the Princes. For this answer and for the gracious hearing the Elector, Princes and allies re- turned hearty thanks to the Emperor, the King, the Electors, Princes and Estates, with the assurance that they had acted with all loyalty and friendliness ; also that if his Majesty should sum- mon them again, they would willingly appear, and not only in regard to this mattej, but in regard to all the matters for which * German in Schirrmacher, pp. 88-9, and in Chytraeus, p. 456 ; Latin in Coelestin, I., p. 140. Valdesius, in his History of the Diet of Augsburg, given by Cyprian, Beylage VII., says that the Lutheran Princes wantecl their Confession read publicly for the purpose of catching the popular ear. No doubt each party correctly interpreted the motive of the other. The Protestants were successful in their principal contention, viz., that the Con- fession should be read. THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 89 the Diet had been summoned by his Majesty, they would per- form their duty. "Then the Emperor, as has since been reported to us, spoke with the Elector and Princes privately, and requested them to retain the Confession by them, and not to allow it to be printed. This they promised to do. His Majesty did not conduct himself ungraciously during these proceedings. We have also heard more than one say that no objection could be found with such a Confession, and some of the Electors and Princes regard it as moderate. ' ' * In Schirrmacher's Brief e und Aden, pp. 89, 90, we have the following account : "On Saturday after John the Baptist 's day, the Elector of Saxony, Duke John, the Margrave George of Brandenburg, Duke John Frederick of Saxony, Duke Ernest of Brunswick and Liineburg, Landgrave Philip of Hesse, Duke Francis of Brunswick and Liineburg, Prince Wolfgang of Anhalt, and the two cities, Niimberg and ReutlLngen, had the CONFES- SION of their faith and of the entire Christian doctrine that is preached in their principalities, lands and cities, publicly read in German, article by article, with joyous courage and heart, and that not only in the presence of all the Electors, Princes, Estates, Bishops, Counsellors, that were present, but also before the Roman Emperor himself and his brother, King Ferdinand. "It was read by the Saxon Chancellor, Dr. Christian, so loud and so distinctly that it was heard not only in the hall, but also in the yard below, that is, in the Bishop of Augsburg's court, where the Emperor's lodgings are. "The Confession had been composed in German and in Latin, but on account of the shortness of the time it was read only in the German. The Estates also promised a fuller explanation in case anything should be found lacking in the Confession, and they declare that they do not .decline the council that has been so long promised and ordered." f 6. The Effect of the Beading of the Confession. The effect of the reading of the Confession before the Emperor and Estates, and in the hearing of so many people in the court below, was twofold. In" the first place, it strengthened and ratified the bond of union which the Protestants had established * C. E. II., 142 et seqq. t See an almost verbally identical account of the reading of the Con- fession in Spalatin's Annates, pp. 134-5. 90 THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. between themselves when they subscribed their common Confes- sion, on June 23d. By compliance with the terms of the Im- perial Proposition they had brought their cause orderly and lawfully before the Diet of the Empire, and had obtained the promise from His Imperial Majesty that their cause should be carefully and becomingly considered. They had achieved the object of their presence at Augsburg, not by violence, not by resistance to the civil power, but with all humility and with protestations of loyalty and devotion. They were bold for the honor of God and in defense of truth against calumny and de- traction. As a consequence, they were made strong by the great transaction, as men are always made strong when they perform a duty that involves their reputation, their lives, the eternal destiny of their souls. The second effect was that Eck's "most diabolical slanders" had been refuted. The Confession read showed that the Luth- erans did not blaspheme God, nor profane the sacraments, nor disseminate absurd and monstrous opinions; that they were not the allies of the Anabaptists and of all the ancient and modern heretics whom the Church had condemned; that they did not abolish the divine worship, nor rave against the Church worse than the Turks. On the contrary, the Confession showed the Emperor and the Catholic Estates that the Lutherans stood on the Scriptures and on the ancient foundations of the Church, and on the teaching of the Fathers; that they preached the Gospel, administered the sacraments and inculcated obedience to the civil authorities. In a word, the Confession set forth a com- plete refutation of all the accusations that had been made against them. The effect upon the Catholics was indeed great. The Em- peror exclaimed: "The Protestants do not err in the articles of faith."* Bishop von Stadion said: "What has been read is true, the pure truth, and we cannot deny it ; " f and he declared that he would concede both forms, the eueharist and the mar- riage of priests, rather than see the parties separate from each other.J Matthew Lang, Archbishop of Salzburg, said: "The Mass and the prohibition about eating, and other human regu- lations, are not right, but it cannot be endured that a miserable monk should do all the reforming." § Duke William of Bavaria, after having heard the Confession read, not only spoke kindly * Coelestin. f Waleh, Introductio, p. 176. t C. E. II., 150. § J. J. Miiller, p. 589. THE DELIVERY OF THE AUGSBURG COXFESSION. 91 to the Elector of Saxony, but assured him of his good will, and said he had been differently informed about Luther's teaching; and when Eck told him that Luther's teaching could be refuted from the Fathers, but not from the Scriptures, he replied: "As I understand the matter, the Lutherans sit on the Scriptures and we alongside of them. ' ' * "Even that great persecutor of the truth, Duke Henry of Brunswick, invited Melanchthon to his table, was very friendly, and assured him that he could not deny the articles in regard to both forms, the marriage of priests and the prohibition of meats. Archbishop Hermann of Cologne, Palsgraf Frederick, Duke Eriek of Brunswick-Liineburg, Henry Duke of Mecklenburg, the Dukes of Pomerania, Count George Ernest of Henneberg, and even the Emperor 's confessor, a Spanish barefoot monk, also Paul Ricener, King Ferdinand's physician, were aU convinced of the truth, only they did not freely confess it. The Confession made a very strong impression on the Elector Hermann of Cologne, who not only showed the closest attention during the reading, but afterwards often read it through and tested it according to God's Word, and in 1536 began a reformation in his own arch- bishopric. ' ' t But the supreme benefit to the Lutherans was that, as their Confession quickly spread over Germany, and, indeed, over all Europe, it disabused innumerable minds of the prejudices that they had entertained in regard to the Lutheran doctrine and practice, and converted enemies into friends. The Lutheran Church had taken the place of the Lutheran party, and now be- gan to go forth conquering and to conquer. * Eotermund, p. 102. t Rotermund, Geschichte der Augsb. Confession, p. 102. CHAPTER VII. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. The Augsburg Confession is a historical document. It arose in an age of great events. It is itself a great event. It has been in active operation for nearly four hundred years. It has itself made history. Kings and potentates have fought against it. Kings and potentates have fought for it; It has been laid down as the foundation of civil and religious alliances. Treaties be- tween nations have rested upon it. It has determined and helped to determine the religious and ecclesiastical destiny of the vast majority of the Protestant peoples of the whole world. It has shaped more theological thinking and writing than all other Protestant confessions together. It still lives and moves and acts. Millions of Christians own and acknowledge it as the sum- mary of their faith. Millions would surrender their lives rather than surrender the truths which it embodies and enshrines and inculcates. A marvelous document, then, is this Augsburg Confession. In depth and compass of influence it has no equal in Protestant Christendom. The philosopher, the theologian, the historian, has each made it the subject of his reflections, but no man has yet adequately set forth the qualities of its greatness. It may be doubted whether its author fully understood it, and whether the witnesses who subscribed it fully comprehended its con- tents and its significance. And we may say that no estimate of the Augsburg Confession that has ever been given has satis- fied either its friends or its foes. It stands as a sort of mystery of the ages, embodying a history of the past and enshrining a prophecy of the future. Each generation inves- tigates its history anew and interprets its prophecy afresh. The fact that it has survived the attacks of its foes, and the defenses of its friends — both often alike injudicious — is evi- dence that it is endowed with preternatural vitality. And yet the Augsburg Confession is not perfect. It does not contain all that we have a right to desire in it, nor is everjrthing which it contains in the form and in the degree which we have a right to expect that they should be. We must take it as it is, noting well (92) THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 93 its content and pointing out the desiderata. As a historical docu- ment it must be described and interpreted historically. We have no right to say dogmatically what the Augsburg Confession ought to have been, or ought not to have been. We cannot transport ourselves back to the year 1530 and have the mind in us that was in the author and in the subscribers of the Augsburg Confession. They faced a great exigency and wrought a great work. We might have failed. Hence, instead of moralizing or of philoso- phizing, or of dogmatizing, we content ourselves with the humbler, but the more profitable, service of describing the Augsburg Con- fession, and that chiefly in the words of those who, as special students of its history and as adherents to its teaching, speak from fulness of knowledge and from loyalty of appreciation. 1. Estimates of Historians. Leopold von Ranke, after describing the origin of the Confes- sion and Melanchthon's effort to verify the articles, not only by appeal to the Scriptures, but also to the Fathers, says: "And in my opinion it can by no means be denied that the doctrine as it appears here is yet the product of the living spirit of the Latin Church, which still existed within its fold, of all its productions perhaps the most remarkable, intrinsically the most significant. In the very nature of the case it bears the complexion of its origin, in that the fundamental conception, which proceeded from Luther in the article of justification, imparted to it characteristics of individuality. But this is true of all things human. The same fundamental conception came into active prominence more than once in the Latin Church. Luther only laid hold of it again with all the energy of religious need, and in the conflict with opposing conceptions and in presenting it to the people, gave it universal validity. No man can say that as it appears here it contains any- thing that is sectarian. Hence they (the Lutherans) opposed the more, accidental dogmatic formula as they had appeared in the lator centuries. They were not inclined to ascribe normative and demonstrative authority to a Church Father, but they were conscious that they had not severed themselves essentially from his conception. There is a secret tradition which does not ex- press itself in formula, but rather in the original conception of the idea, which is not determined by all the necessity which it seems to have, and yet it dominates the activity of the thinking, creating spirit. They felt that they still stood on the old founda- tion as it had been fortified by Augustine. They ttied to break 94 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. dowa the particularism by which the Latin Church had allowed itself to be fettered in the later centuries, and to cast off the yoke. They went clear back to the Scripture and held to its let- ter. But were not the Scriptures for a long time earnestly studied even in the Latin Church, and held to be the norm of faith? Was not much which was received by this Church act- ually grounded in the Scriptures ? To this they held. The rest they let go. "I do not venture to say that the Augsburg Confession estab- lishes dogmatically the meaning of the Scriptures. It is only an effort to bring back the system developed in the Latin Church to the point of agreement with the Scriptures, or to a conception of the Scriptures in the original spirit of the Latin Church, which had wrought so unconsciously that no one had bound him- self to any manifestation of it. Our Confession is its purest, its most genuinely Christian manifestation, as it proceeds most di- rectly from its source." * Friedrich von Bezold, Professor in the University of Erlangen, has written as follows: "By the force of external circumstances Melanchthon, who had been shoved into the place of Luther, showed himself a diplomatist both in the Confession and during the negotiations at Augsburg. It could perhaps be said that the Erasmian qualities of this learned man had an opportunity for the first time rightly to unfold themselves, when, separated from the dominating presence of Luther, he ventured to take an inde- pendent position. Already in that document, which originally was not regarded as a confession, but as an 'Apology,' as a vin- dication against the Eomish accusations, he took all pains to ex- tend the fraternal hand to the Catholics, in that he emphasized as strongly as possible the connection with the ancient Church as it had been continually maintained by Luther, and dropped into the background the irreducibly divisive elements or entirely passed them by in silence. For example, the divine right of the papacy, the character, indelebilis of the priesthood, the sacraments as numbering seven, remained undiscussed, while in the doctrine of the Lord's Supper a form was selected which is so ambiguous that the Catholic theologians could only lament the lack of an express recognition of tran substantiation. The harsh doctrine of predestination was omitted. For justification by faith and for other evangelical fundamental doctrines appeal is to be made not * Deutsche . Geschichte im Zeitalter der Eeformation. Dritter . Band. Siebente Auflage, pp. 173, 174. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 95 only to the testimony of the Scriptures, but also to that of the Church Fathers. The entire purpose was to show that the ex- clusion of the Lutherans from the Church was unjustifiable, and to exhibit the whole controversy in the harmless light of a 'dif- ference in regard to some traditions and abuses. ' And yet Mel- anchthon feared that 'many would take ofEense at our candor,' as if offense with the opposite party could have been avoided without complete submission ! Ranke judges not incorrectly that 'the doctrine as it here appears is yet a product of the living spirit of the Latin Church, which still existed within its bosom. ' But even if many of those expressions of Catholic princes and prelates, which the Protestant tradition has reported, be recog- nized as true, it was nevertheless a prodigious misconception of the nature of the Romish Church to suppose that there remained the possibility of any other agreement than that between victors and vanquished. From the beginning Melanehthon had confi- dently reckoned that a complete renimeiation of the Zwinglians would not fail to make its impression upon the Catholics and upon the Emperor." * Gustav Kawerau, formerly Professor of theology in the Uni- versity of Breslau, now at Berlin, after briefly reciting the his- tory of the composition of the Confession, continues thus : "The Augsburg Confession means to be estimated historically as a proof that the Evangelical Estates, notwithstanding their inno- vations, belonged to the Catholic Church. As a party standing within the bosom of the Church, and contending for the right of existence, it faced the opposing party in an effort to prove its agreei^ent with the Church's recognized Articles of Faith (nos nihil docere contra ullum fidei articulum), to fortify its par- ticular form of doctrine not only by the Scriptures, but also with the testimonies of recognized Catholic authorities, and to prove that aU its innovations concerned the abolition of the abuses that had entered. Hence that there is nothing in their doctrine which differs from the Scriptures or from the Catholic Church or. from the Uoman Church in so far as it is known from writers. . . . The entire difference has reference to some few abuses, f They separate their cause as sharply as possible from that of the Zwinglians and the Anabaptists. Their doctrine of the Lord's * Geschichte der deutsehen Beformation, pp. 619, 620. t So read all the authoritative codices and the first exemplars of the Editio Princeps. See Tsehackert, Die unverdnderte Augsi. Konfession, p. 115, note 24. Kolde, Eistorische Einleitung in die Symb. Bucher, p. xxii., note 3. 96 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG COXFESSIOX. Supper they conform as closely as possible to that of the Cath- olics without expressing dissent in regard to transubstantiation. The papacy, 'for reasons,' is absolutely not mentioned. Its doc- trinal articles are set forth in harmony with the scheme of the Catholic Dogmatic. Important constituent parts of the Lutheran Gospel (for example, the Priesthood of Believers) are not men- tioned. Nevertheless, ilelanchthon succeeded here in bringing the Reformation doctrine of salvation to classic expression, and upon decisive points again and again he showed its importance with telling effect (especially in Art. 20). And as a matter of fact, despite the harking back to ecclesiastical authorities, the normative authority of the Scriptures is still m^ide decisive. ' ' * Theodor Kolde, Professor in the University of Erlangen, a specialist in the department of Symbolics, passes judgment on the Confession as follows: "From its origin is to be explained the tone and the peculiar character of the Confession. It is at once a confession and an apology, and is intended to promote the cause of peace and to repel the reproach of departure from the original doctrine of the Church, and of fellowship with the sects. And the entire first part (Articuli praecipui fidei, Arts. 1-21) serves to show that the Evangelicals agree with the Catholic Church, and where they have perhaps departed from the tradi- tional form of doctrine, in this they wish to restore the- original ,true doctrine of the Church to the place of honor. In so far, Ranke is not wrong when he says 'that the. doctrine as it here appears is yet a product of the living spirit of the Latin Church, which still existed in the bosom of the same. ' Many points which we to-day regard as Very important, and which even thesa were so, are not treated. The author was content, for instance, to con- fess the Lutheran doctrine of Baptism, and of the Lord's Supper in a few generic words.f There is no rejection of the other Romish sacraments, and Confession and Repentance are introduced in a way that does not exclude the possibility of conceiving that Re- pentance is also a sacrament. Transubstantiation is not rejected, and the sole authority of the Scriptures is not emphasized as a principle. And thus we can still find much wanting in it which the love of peace and necessity for united action at that time * Lehrbuch der KircliengescMchte, 3. Auflage, III., 108, 109. Kawerau notes the fact that the Lutherans continued till 1546 to represent themselves as having not departed in their Confession from the consensus of the Catholic Church. Kircheng., 3. Auflage, III., 108, note 4. t Melanchthon says, in a letter to Veit Dietrich: "There is in it (the A. C.) an article on the Lord's Supper according to Luther's view " C R. IL, 142. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBDKG CONFESSION. 97 regarded as not well to insist upon. Luther would certainly have expressed himself very differently (Conf. De Wette, IV., 110), though the Confession contains nothing un-Lutheran. And despite the fact that the author had changed so much in it, it has from beginning to end a uniform character, and by means of the emphasis which it lays upon justification by faith alone in the fourth article, around which, to a certain extent, the other articles are grouped, and through which they receive their real confirmation, it brings the faith of the new evangelical churches to expression in an unique way. ' ' * These four estimates of the Augsburg Confession agree in es- sentials. The eminent authors regard the Confession as Catholic, as Lutheran, as evangelical, but at the same time they hold that it is defective, and that it falls short of being a clear and full expression of Lutheranism. They all note the presence of the Catholic traditional teaching and the appeal to the Fathers of the Church. Alike they declare that the entire Confession is ruled by the article of justification by faith, which, without ques- tion, is a distinct Lutheran conception, since Luther almost from the beginning of his reformatory career had regarded that as "the article of a standing and of a falling Church," meaning that the Church would stand so long as she held fast by this ar- ticle, and would fall so soon as she let go this article. Three of our authors call attention to the fact that several doctrines peculiar to Rome's teaching, as well as articles on which the Reformers had laid great stress, are omitted from the discussion in the interest of peace and of the desire on the part of the con- fessors to make good their claim to be regarded as members of the Catholic Church, and to be distinguished from the heretics whom the Catholic Church had condemned. Three of them refer specifically to the article on the Lord's Supper and remark its close approximation to the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on the subject, the ambiguity of the form of statement, and the silence in regard to transubstantiation, which had been most emphatically rejected by all the Reformers. Three of them declare that the Confession is a product of the spirit which still lived in the Catholic Church. These estimates are generic rather than specific ; but it cannot be denied that they weU describe the Confession, both as to what it is and as to what it is not. They exhibit the Confession as Lutheran in a negative and apologetic, rather than in a positive * Realencyclopddie, 3. Auflage, Art. Augsh. Behenntnis. 7 98 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. and aggressive sense. It is no doubt true that the churches of the Evangelicals taught all that is contained in this Confession. In so far there was no misrepresentation. But there is misrep- resentation if we take into consideration the compass of the teach- ing in the churches of the Princes and commissioners who had signed the Confession. The divine right of the papacy, the character indelebilis of the priesthood, the Romish theory of the sacraments, the opus operatum, purgatory, and the worship of saints, had been denounced in the churches times almost without number, and in language the most positive and bitter. All this is passed over in silence by the Confession as it was read and delivered to the Emperor. The doctrine of the universal priest- hood of believers, the doctrine of the sole authority of the Script- ures in matters of faith and salvation, and the doctrine of the ecclesia invisibiUs as the essential Church in distinction from the ecclesiastical organization — ^these doctrines, which had been preached in the churches and had been taught in the schools and had been discussed in a widely disseminated literature, find no place in the Confession. Therefore, while firmly maintaining that the doctrinal articles of the Augsburg Confession express no doctrine that is un- Lutheran or Mnevangelical, that is, that is incapable of a Luth- eran and an evangelical iaterpretation, we cannot hold that the statement made at the close of Article XXI., viz., that the doc- trinal articles constitute about the sum of the doctrine preached and taught in the churches of the subscribing Princes and cities is correct. And by no means do we hold, as already we have indicated, that "the entire difference has reference to some few abuses." At the bottom of the whole Reformation movement, and at every step of its progress, was the question of doctrine, which has controlled and shaped, and which stiU controls and shapes, the course of Lutheranism. Hence we do not wonder that Luther should find fault with the Confession for consciously pass- ing over certain important articles.* * Enders, Luther's Briefwechsel, 8, p. 133. The tactics and diplomacy of Melanchthon at Augsburg and the deficiencies of the Augsburg Confes- sion in its omissions of certain important articles of Lutheran teaching, have furnished a subject for frequent comment by Protestant and Catholic historians. See Sine Kafholische Beleuchtung der Augsburgischen Kon- fesskm (1898) by Professor Tieme, of Leipzig, p. 31. Also see article by Pastor in the Catholic Kirchenlexikon, I., 1644-5, who notices the omission of "alone" from the article on Justification, and says: "The few devia- tions from the old doctrine are stated so vaguely and cautiously that an agreement must appear easy. Of several deviations it is expressly declared that they do not touch the essence of the doctrine. Several doctrines are THE CHARACTKUISTICS OF THK AUGSBURG CO.VFESSIOX. 99 But we have now to do with the Augsburg Confession as it is, and not with our conception of what it ought to be. Its defi- ciencies we may deplore. Its contents make it the fundamental Confession of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, which began its existence as a particular Church the moment this Confession was delivered to the Emperor Charles V., June 25, 1530. 2. The Scheme of the Confession. The Augsburg Confession is not a system of theology, and was not meant to be such. It does not contain all the articles usually embraced in a system of theology. For instance, it has no article on Holy Scripture, none on the Holy Spirit; and yet the articles are not brought together in an arbitrary manner. In the main they follow each other in logical order, and are through- out ruled by a principle, that is, they have a common center in the Article of Justification, in the sense that other articles serve as the presupposition of this Article or receive their special form and complexion from this Article : The first three articles, which treat, respectively, of the "one divine essence," of Sin, of Christ, form the objective ground for the fourth Article, which teaches that man is not justified by reason of his own merits and works, but freely for the sake of Christ by faith. With this Article the next two are organically joined. This faith that justifies is ob- tained through the preaching of the Word and the administra- tion of the sacraments, which are the means of grace employed by the Holy Spirit (Art. V.) ; and this same faith brings forth good fruit in obedience to the will of God, and is itself restated in words attributed to St. Ambrose (Art. VI.). Then, in logical order, comes the Article on the Church (VII.), which is the con- gregation of all who possess this justifying faith and have in common the preaching of the Word and the administration of the sacraments as noted in Article VI. And to provide against the supposition that the means of grace can be effective only when ministered by godly men, it is declared that it is lawful, and hence not inefficacious, to use the ministry of ungodly men, since the Word and sacraments are of divine appointment, and hence have objective validity, or a validity not dependent upon the character of the ministrant. Articles IX. and X. particularize in regard to the sacraments, declaring, respectively, that God's passed over in silence, especially that of the Primacy, of indulgences and of purgatory." See Jansen, Geschichte des deutschen Volkes, 17th and 18th editions, vol. III., 185 et seqq. 100 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. grace is offered in the one, and that the body and blood of Christ are present and are administered in the other; while in Articles XI. and XII., which form the sacrament of absolution or repent- ance (see Apology, Art. XIII.), it is declared that those who, after their baptism, have fallen, can obtain forgiveness of sin, provided they repent and believe in the Gospel ; and Article XIII. completes the discussion of the sacraments by describing them as signs of grace (see Apology, Art. XXIV., C). In Articles XIV. and XV. the Confession turns to the external organization of the Church, to the call of the ministry and to the proper ob- servance of ecclesiastical rites. Article XVI. declares that civil government is an ordinance of God, and that Christians may hold public office, discharge the duties of subjects and enjoy the benefits of society. And in contrast with the order of this world, we are taught in Article XVII. that Christ will come at the end of the world to raise the dead and to judge all men and to assign them their portion forever. These first seventeen articles form the trunk of the Confession. They are followed by four, which not only supplement, but sup- ply independent testimony. They relate to the appropriation of salvation and to the Christian life. Article XVIII. recognizes the ability of man to work civil righteousness, but denies his ability to work spiritual righteousness without the grace and as- sistance of the Holy Spirit. Article XIX. supplements Article II. by declaring that not God, but the will of the devil and of the ungodly is the cause of sin. Article XX. supplements Article IV. by reaffirming that man is justified by faith for the sake of Christ, and that this is "the most important article of the Gospel"; and it supplements Article VI. by declaring yet more fully that good works must follow faith ; while Article XXI. de- clares that we may imitate the faith and works of the saints, but that the Scriptures do not teach that they are to be invoked. We thus see that justification by faith is the ruling thought of the first, or doctrinal, part of the Confession. It is this fact, preeminently, that makes the Confession Lutheran,, and that saves it from the reproach of being a conglomerate of doctrines brought together without regard to a common center around which the articles are grouped, and without a principle to impart the qual- ity of unity to the entire scheme. Hence justification by faith has been called the material principle of Lutheran Protestantism, by which is meant not that all the doctrines of Lutheranism are derived from that Article, but that, as already said, they all take THE CHAEACTEKISTICS OF THE ADGSBUEG CONFESSION. 101 their form and complexion from the fundamental thought that men are justified by faith for the sake of Christ. And none the less does this fundamental thought rule in the second part of the Confession. "As in the first, so in the second part, the doctrine of justification by faith is the fundamental evangelical doctrine, which forms the rule for the evangelical character of ecclesiastical institutions. The fundamental error of the Mass is that it is meant to be a justifying work (Art. 3), and yet the Scriptures teach that we are justified by faith alone. In regard to Confession it is observed that satisfactions are prac- ticed without mentioning the righteousness of faith (Art. 4). The first doubt raised against the traditions is : ' The doctrine of grace and of the righteousness of faith, which is the principal part of the Gospel, is obscured, though it ought to stand out and be exalted in the Church, so that the merit of Christ be properly recognized, and that faith, which believes that sins are pardoned for the sake of Christ, be placed far above all works' (Art. 5). Twice more is it emphasized in this Article that the dangerous feature of those traditions is the thought that by this means grace can be acquired. In regard to monasticism it is repeatedly em- phasized that it especially prejudices justification by faith. Also in the Article on spiritual power it is declared that the enact- ments of the Bishops have prejudiced the doctrine of justifica- tion (Art. 7). "From this presentation it is evident that the Augsburg Con- fession holds justification by faith as the fundamental, the car- dinal, doctrine of the Gospel, which must determine all the doc- trines and forms of the Church. When in the fifth Article of the first part it says: 'By the word and sacraments the Holy Spirit is given, who works faith in those who hear the Gospel, namely, that God, for the sake of Christ, receives us into grace, ' we realize that justification by faith is set forth as the sum of the Gospel. The same is said in Article 20, in which not merely the history of the Gospel, but also the effect of the Gospel, is designated as a matter of true faith : ' This article, namely, the pardon of sins, namely, that through Christ we have grace, righteousness and the pardon of sins. ' " * Professor 0. Zockler has judged the Confession in the same way. He calls Article IV. "the most concentrated expression of the Reformation consciousness," and -declares that that Article "must be regarded as the ruling center, though the two follow- * Kahnis, Die LutJierische Dogmatil-, II., pp. 432-3. 102 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. ing articles form the necessary supplements, in so far as Article 5, Of the Ministerial Office, points to the root, and Article 6, Of New Obedience, to the fruit of justifying faith." He holds that the first seventeen articles contain the fundamental course of thought; that the next four are supplementary, and that the seven articles of the second part form a supplementary excursus. In accordance with these general conceptions, Zockler has con- structed the following scheme of the Confession : I. Fundamental Part. (Fundamental Statement of the Doctrine of Salvation according to its Chief Factors). [Art. 1-6 and supplementary Articles 18-21]. a) The Presuppositions of Salvation : Art. 1. God. Art. 2. Sin— its Effect on Free-will (Art. 18) and its Cause (Art. 19). Art. 3. The Redeemer — (Prejudice to his sole Mediatorship through the Worship of the Saints (Art. 21). b) Salvation itself : Art. 4. Justification. Art. 5. The Word of God and the Min- isterial Office the ground of Jus- tification. Art. 6. The New Obedience as Fruit of Justification. Faith and (Art. 20). Works II. Special-soteriological Part. (The Mediation of Salvation in the Church). [Art. 7-17 and practical-polemical Articles 22-28] . a) The Objective Mediation of Salvation in the Church, a) The Church and the Means of Grace in Themselves : Art. 7, 8. yS) The Sacraments of the Church : Art. 9. Baptism. Art. 10. Lord's Supper (Both Forms : A. 22 ; Mass ■ A 24). Art. n, 12. Confession, Repentance— (Worship and Disci- pline in Relation to Confession : A. 25). Art. 13. The Use of the Sacraments. r) The Service of the Church or the Office of the Means of Grace : THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 103 Art. 14. Church- Government — (Consecration of Priests : Art. 23 ; Power of the Bishops : Art. 28). b) The Subjective or Ethical Mediation of Salvation. q) Its Realization in this Life. 1. Art. 15 in the Regulations of the Church — (for example : Distinction of Meats : A. 26). 2. Art. 16 in the State and in the Family — (Compare the Ar- ticles on Priesthood [23] and Cloister-vows [27]). ;S) Their Final Consummation through Art. 17. The Return of Christ.* * Die Av^sburgUcht Confession, p. 95. CHAPTER VIII. ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. The Augsburg Confession consists of four distinct, but closely related parts: 1. The Preface, which introduces the Confession, recites the occasion of its composition, the end had in view by the evangeli- cal Princes in presenting their Confession, and their appeal to a general free council.. 2. The Prmcipal Articles of Faith ( Articuli Fidei Praecipui : Artickel Christlicher Lahr), commonly spoken of as Part I. This part contains twenty-one articles, and exhibits "about the sum of the doctrin.e" taught in the churches of the sub- scribers. 3. The Articles on Abuses (Articuli in quibus reeensentur Abusus mutati). This part contains seven articles, and is spoken of as Part II. 4. The Epilogue, which states that the principal abuses have been recounted, and that the subscribers are prepared to fur- nish additional information, should it be required. In the codices* of the Confession, in the Melanchthon editions of the same, in the first edition of the Book of Concord (1580) Germanf and Latin, the articles of Part I. are given without titles. In the Latin editio princeps, and in the older Latin editions generally, these articles are numbered I., II., III., etc. In the German thus: Der Erste, Der Ander, Der Dritte. But in the German Book of Concord, first official edition, they are numbered thus : Der I. Artickel, Der II. Artickel.J In the first Authentic Latin edition of the Book of Concord (1584) these articles have the same titles that appear in modern editions of the Confes- sion. § In all the editions and recensions of the Confession that have * Except that Article XX. in the codices has as title : Vom Glauben und Werkeu. De fide et bonis operibus. Tschaekert, p. 102. t Art. XX. has as title : Vom Glauben und Werken. i Following the example of Coelestin, Historia, II., fol. 151 et seqq. § Following the example of Coelestin, ibid., II., fol. 177 et seqq., but not always giving the same titles that were given by Coelestin. (104) ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION'. 105 come to our notice, the Articles on Abuses, both Latin and Ger- man, have titles. In the following analysis of the Articles, we introduce each article with a translation of the title given in the Latin Book of Concord of 1584. But our analysis is confined strictly to the Confession as it was delivered to the Emperor, as the same has been reproduced from authentic codices by Professor Tschackert," for this, and this alone, the form delivered to the Emperor, must forever be held as the true, original, unaltered Augsburg Confession, the editio princeps being already a varied edition, and the later Melanchthon editions being still more varied.! And further : "We place the German and the Latin texts exactly on a par as regards authority, though they do not always agree perfectly in their representations. And when we appeal to the Apology, this is done for the reason that the Apol- ogy, though an after-thought, and polemical in tone, is, never- theless, the most authoritative explanation of the Confession. 1. Analysis of Part I. Art. I. Op God. 1. The unity of the divine essence and the trinity of persons. 2. The one divine essence is God, with infinite attributes: "Creator of all things, visible and invisible." 3. The three persons are Father, Son and Holy Spirit, of the same essence and power, and co-eternal. 4. Person signifies not a part or a quality in another, but that which subsists by itself. In Greek : Hypostasis. Subsistence, not to be confounded with substance. 5. Appeal to the Council of Nice, A. D. 325. (The first Gen- eral Council of the Church.) 6. Rejection of the heresies rejected by the early Church : (a) The Manichaeans, who from the 3d to the 7th century taught that there are two eternal antagonistic principles, light and darkness, the one the author of all good, the other the author of all evil. (b) The Valentinians, a Gnostic sect, arose about the middle of the 2d century, and taught the existence of thirty eons, who had proceeded from the First Cause. (c) Arians, followers of Arius (about 318), asserted that Christ was similar to God, but not very God. * Die unverdnderte Augsburgische Konfession, Leipzig, 1901. t See Chapter XIV. 106 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. (d) Eunomians, 4th century, who held that Christ was cre- ated, and subordinate. (e) Mahometans, followers of Mahomet (7th century), who teach that Christ is a great prophet, but not the Son of God in essence. (f) Samosatanians, old (followers of Paul of Samosata, 3d century) and new (perhaps Lewis Hetzer and John Campanus) , who denied the antenatal and personal deity of Christ, and held that the Word is only the voice, and that the Holy Spirit is the motion created in things. Art. II. Op the Sin of Origin. 1. The universality of sin: "All men." 2. Propagated by natural generation : '' Conceived and born with sins." The fall of Adam. 3. Description of the sin of origin: Negative: "Without true fear of God and without true faith in God. ' ' Positive : Dis- ease and corruption of human nature in its origin. "These are the chief faults of human nature, conflicting especially with the first table of the Decalogue." Apology. 4. The evil effect of the sin of origin : Condemns and brings eternal death. 5. Kemedy for the sin of origin : Regeneration : (a) By the Holy Spirit as the efficient cause. (b) Through Baptism, as a means of grace. (See Art. V.) "Baptism removes the imputation of original sin." Apology. 6. Condemnation of the Pelagians and of others (perhaps Zwingli is included) , who deny that the sin of origin is sin. 7. Such detract from the sufferings and merit of Christ, and make justification before God a human acquisition. Akt. III. Op the Son of God. This Article sets forth the doctrine of the person, the states, the work of Christ. 1. He is the Son of God. He became man by being born of the Virgin Mary. Has two natures united in one person. Is true God and true man. The hypostatic union. 2. The State of Humiliation : (a) Conception, birth and circumcision. (b) Education and visible intercourse with men. Matt. 13 : 55 ; Luke 2 : 48. (c) Passion on the Cross. ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 107 (d) Death and burial. 3. State of Exaltation : * (a) Resurrection from the dead. (b) Ascension to Heaven. (e) Session at the Right Hand of God. Theanthropos. ("Everything that is said about the Humiliation and Exaltation of Christ is to be assigned to the Man, for the divine nature can be neither humbled nor exalted. . . . Although the two natures are distinct, yet the person is one, so that all that Christ does and suffers, God has truly done and suffered, even though it happen to only one nature." Luther, Kirchenpostille. XII. 210). 4. The Offices of Christ : (a) Is Mediator between God and man. " Christ suffered and died to reconcile the Father to us." Apology. (b) As Priest offering himgelf a sacrifice for all the sins of men. Priestly Office. (c) As Sanctifier of believers through the Holy Spirit. Prophet. King. ("He has risen again, to reign, and to justify and sanctify believers " ) . Apology. (d) As Judge of the living and of the dead at his second coming. Art. XVII. (Expansion of Part II. of the Apostles' Creed). Art. IV. Op Justification. 1. The ground of Man's Justification before God. (a) Negative: Not his own person, nor work, nor holiness. No meritum de congruo nor meritum de condigno. (b) Positive: For the sake of Christ, who suffered and died for us. Christ tHe all-sufficient Reconciler and Mediator. The meritorious Cause. 2. The human condition: Faith — ^not as something meri- torious, but as instrument of appropriation.' Instrumental cause. "Christ is not apprehended as Mediator, except by faith." Apology. 3. Its source : The grace of God. ' ' The promise, and, that too, * Of the Descensus ad Inferos Musaeus {Epit. Form. Concordia^, p. 313) says: "Tot opiniones quot capita," and that the adherents at the Augs- burg Confession of his day differed widely in regard to this article. Up to and during the year 1530 Luther regarded it as belonging to the humilia- tion of Christ.. In his sermon at Torgau, in 1533, he assigned it to the Exaltation of Christ. See The Lutheran Quarterly for July, 1889, p. 407. The Formula of Concord treats it as a part of the Exaltation. So the dogmatieians, as a rule. In the Confession the Descensus "is neither explained nor assigned to the Exaltation." Baumgarten, Erleuterungen, p. 41 108 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. gratuitous, and the merits of Christ, as the price and propitia- tion." Apology. 4. Its character : A free gift. Imputation. ' ' This faith God imputes for righteousness." "This faith, encouraging and con- soling in these fears, receives remission of sins, justifies and quickens." Apology. 5. The faith that justifies is special, is personal. The believer believes that he himself is received into grace, and that his sins are pardoned for the sake of Christ. Fides est fiducia. (Urn Christus willen. Propter Christum, specially characteristic of Melanchthon). 6. Justification an instantaneous act of God. It occurs the moment men believe. 7. The doctrine founded in the Scriptures. Rom. III. and IV. "Upon this Article depend all things which we preach and practice against the Pope, the devil, and the whole world. There- fore, we must be sure concerning this doctrine, and not doubt." Luther in the Schmalkald Articles. Part Second, I. Art. V. Of the Ministry of the Church. 1. Note the connection of this Article with the preceding article: "This faith" — the way in which it is obtained. 2. Through the means of grace — the Word and the Sacra- ments. The instrumental cause of justifying faith. 3. By the operation of the Holy Spirit, who employs the means of grace as instruments. He is the efficient cause of faith. Works faith "where and when he will." (a) Place and time are in God's keeping. ("As and where he will." Schwabach Arts. VII.). . (b) In those who hear the Gospel. All are meant. Particular- istic Predestination is excluded.* 4. The preached Word the chief means of grace, referred to four times. Sacraments, the subordinate means of grace.f (Sacraments not mentioned in the corresponding Marburg and Schwabach Articles, VIII., VII.). 5. The message of the Gospel: That God, for Christ's sake, justifies those who believe. 6. God instituted the ministerial office. (a) It is, therefore, of divine origin. * In the year 1531, Melanchthon wrote to Brentz: "In the Apology throughout I have avoided that long and inexplicable subject of Predesti- nation." C. R. 2: 547. t See The Lutheran Quarterly for July, 1894, p. 362. ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 109 (b) Its function is to preach the Word, and to administer the sacraments. 7. Men should hear the Word preached. (a) As Law the Word of God reveals sin and its fruits. (b) As Gospel, it is the preaching of forgiveness for the sake of Christ, and works faith. "The Gospel freely offers, for Christ's sake, to us who have been vanquished by sin and death, reconciliation, which is received, not by works, but by faith alone. ' ' Apology. 8. The Anabaptists are condemned, because they taught that the Holy Spirit can be received by human preparation, with- out the external Word. By "and others" reference is supposed to be made to the Papists, to Zwingli, Carlstadt and Schwenck- feld.* ' ' The Holy Ghost, to speak in proper order, gives this faith or his gift to no one, without preaching, or the Gospel of Christ preceding. ' ' Art. VI. Op New Obedience. 1. "That faith," the faith that justifies, ought to produce good fruits and good works. 2. Good works do not precede, they follow faith. 3. Their necessity: Debet, Oportet. Not a matter of choice. 4. Their form: Things commanded by God. "We speak not of ceremonies, but of that law which prescribes in regard to the motives of the heart, namely, of the Decalogue. Because faith brings the Holy Spirit and begets a new life in hearts, it is necessary that it produce spiritual affections in hearts." Apol- ogy. 5. The Motive : (a) For God's sake: Um Gottes willen. Propter voluntatem Dei. (b) Not as a means of justification before God. "We receive remission of sin and righteousness through faith in Christ." 6. Appeal to the Ancients. Pseudo-Ambrose. Art. VII. Of the Church. 1. The Church defined: The assembly of all believers. The congregation of the saints. 2. True marks of the Church: The pure preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments, in accordance, with the Gospel. * Baumgarten, Erleuterungen, p. 44; Waleh, Introductio, p. 276. 110 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 3. Nature of the Church : (a) One. No particular Church is the one Church, but of the one. (b) Holy: Because in essence "the congregation of the Saints." Ecclesia invisibiUs. (c) Abiding. It must be and abide forever. "For this King- dom of Christ, which the Holy Spirit vivifies, always exists." Apology. Matt. 16 : 18. (d) Christian. Christ is its efficient cause. 4. The unity of the Church is not destroyed by dissimilar rites and traditions. 5. Consent in regard to the teaching of the Gospel and the administration of the sacraments is sufficient. ~ Art. VIII. What is the Church 1 1. Properly the Church is the assembly of all believers and saints. Art. VII. The Ecclesia invisibilis. 2. With the believers and saints are associated hypocrites, false Christians, and open sinners, not living members of the body of Christ: The empirical Church. Ecclesia visibilis. The ecclesiastical organization. ' ' The Church, according to the exter- nal participation of goods and rites. " Apology. "Members of the Church, according to the external fellowship of the signs of the Church, i. e., of Word, profession and sacraments. ' ' Apology. 3. The ministration of the Word and sacraments is of divine appointment. Their essential quality is not changed by the minis- trant, who does not represent himself, but Christ. Matt. 23 : 2. 4. The validity depends upon the institution of Christ. 5. Lawful to use sacraments which are administered by wicked men. (a) Wicked in life and conduct.* (b) Not heterodox in doctrine. "Impious teachers are to be deserted, because these do not act any longer in the place of Christ, but are antichrists. " Apology. "When, therefore, they teach wicked things, they are not to be heard." Apology. 6. Rejection of the Donatists and "all others" — perhaps the Wyklifites are meant — who teach that it is not lawful to use * "Here the duty of ministers to be in a state of grace and to be pious is not taught, nor is the full equivalence of the ministry of good and evil teachers affirmed, nor is even the necessary exclusion of blasphemous per- sons from the office of the ministry controverted." Baumgarten, Erleu- terungen, p. 50. ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. Ill the ministry of the ungodly, and hold that the ministry of such is ineffective. 7. The means of grace have objective validity. The immoral character of the ministry does not invalidate them. The Holy Spirit works faith by them. Art. V. Art. IX. Of Baptism. 1. Baptism is necessary (German text). Necessary to salva- tion (Latin text).* 2. The grace of God is offered by Baptism. 3. Children are proper subjects for Baptism. (a) By Baptism children are presented to God. (Sacrament of initiation). (b) By Baptism children are received into God's favor — become acceptable to God.t (Means of grace. Art. V.). 4. Adults are not excluded from Baptism, by the Article. (At the time of the Reformation there were but few adult baptisms in Germany. Perhaps all the people, except Jews, had been baptized in infancy) . 5. The Anabaptists, who teach that the Baptism of Children is not right, and that children are saved without Baptism, are condemned. Art. X. Of the Lord's SuppER.t 1. The body and blood of Christ (German: "True body and * In the Apology Melanchthon repeats, but does not explain, these words : "Baptism is necessary to salvation." It is a theological gloss to say with Baumgarten : " To be understood of the necessity of the ordinary means ' to salvation and of divine command." Erleuterungen, p. 51. The inter- pretation given by Gerhard is forced and is open to grave objection: "We teach that Baptism is indeed the ordinary sacrament of initiation and the means of regeneration absolutely necessary to aU, even to the chUdren of believers, for regeneration and salvation. Meanwhile, nevertheless, in the case of privation or of impossibility, the children of Christians are saved by an extraordinary and special divine dispensation. For the necessity of Baptism is not absolute, but ordinate." Loci IX. (Cotta), p. 282. There is no proof that Melanchthon meant any such thing. He in no sense quali- fies his necessarius (read the damnatory paragraph in the Latin text). There is no wonder that the Catholic Confutators "approved and accepted" the article "concerning Baptism — viz., that it is necessary, to salvation." In the "Variata" Melanchthon added: "As a ceremony instituted by Christ." Gerhard declares that there is no promise appertaining to the children born outside of the Church. Such he commits to the judgment of God. Hid., p. 284. t Very properly does Dr. Plitt say: "Child-faith is not a doctrine of the symbols." Grundriss der SyrriboUTc, 4te Auflage, p. 101. As proof, he refers to The Large Catechism. MuUer, Die Symb. BUcher, p. 494, Sec. 55, 57. % This tenth article of the Augsburg Confession has been, and is still, interpreted by Roman Catholic theologians as teaching the Roman Catholic 112 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. true blood") are truly present in the Lord's Supper. "Under the form of bread and wine." (German.) 2. The body and blood ("true body and true blood": Ger- man) of Christ are administered to the communicants. "There administered and received." German. (No distinction is made between worthy and unworthy communicants.) 3. "Therefore the opposite doctrine is also rejected." Ger- man text. "And they disapprove those who teach otherwise." Latin text. ("The brief antithesis of this article was without doubt di- rected against the so-called Swiss of that time." *) doctrine of the Lord's Supper in its essential features. See Fabricius, Harmonia Conf. Augustanae (1587), pp. 188, 189. What the Confutators principally desiderated in the Confession, namely, the essentialiter and the mutari, that Melanchthon supplied in the Apology, where he appeals to the Mass Canon of the Greek Church, and with appro- bation quotes Theophilact of Bulgaria: Panem non tantum figuram esse, sed vere in carnem mutari. The vere et substantialiter adsint in the Apol- ogy is taken from the Confutation. The words in the German text of the Confession: Unter der gestalt des hrots und weins (Tschackert, p. 88) do not express the genuine Lutheran doctrine of the Lord's Supper. In the Large Catechism Luther does not say: "Under the form of bread and wine," but: "In and under the bread and wine," which distinctly af&rms the presence in the Lord's Supper of the bread and wine; whereas, iu the words of the Confession, we have the very language of the Roman Catholic ofBeial teaching. See the Latin Confutation: Sub specie panis et vini. C. R. XXVII., 106, and in the German Confutation: Unter der Gestalt des Brods, unter der Gestalt Weins. C. R. XXVII^ 196. See Denzinger's Enchiridion Symholorum et Definitionum, Ed. VII., Index, p. 468, under: Christus fit praesens . . . manentibus duntaxat speciebus panis et vini, and the many references given. See Kolde, Die Augsb. Konfession, p. 35. See- berg, DogmengeschicKte, II., 330. Loofs, Dogmengeschichte, p. 820. The quae videntur in the Apology is ambiguous. Every tyro in Latin knows that it can just as well be translated: "Which seem" (see the Latin dictionaries), as "Which are seen." "Article 10, Of the Holy Supper, in its original form expresses the Catholic doctrine since it teaches that the true body and the true blood of Christ are truly present under the form of bread and wine, are admin- istered and received." Pastor, in Catholic Kirchenlexikon (1882), I., p. 1644. Dr. Calinich, Head Pastor in Hamburg, a learned Lutheran specialist on the Augsburg Confession, has discussed the question: "Can the tenth Article of the Augustana be understood in the sense of transubstantiation ? " Beyond all question he establishes this proposition: "In reality there is no expression in the Confession and Apology which speaks directly against the conception (Fassung) of transubstantiation, and not one, which could not also be interpreted by the opponents iu their sense for transubstantia- tion." Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche Theologie (1873), pp. 541 et seqq. The question is not, ' ' What was Melanchthon 's personal view ? ' ' but "What did he concede on this point to the opponents at the Diet of Augs- burg!" P. 549. For Melanchthon 's personal view on the Lord's Supper, see C. R. II., 222. * Schultze, Bandbuch zur SymboUschen Theologie, p. 46. Erhard Sehnepf, in his Confessio de S. Coena, says that the adverb vere, though admitted to be ambiguous, was employed because not one of all those who adhered to the Augsburg Confession agreed with the Zwinglians. Quoted by Cyprian in Hist, der Augsp. Confession, p. 56. ANALYSIS OF THE ADGSBURG CONFESSION. 113 Art. XI. Of Confession. 1. Private Absolution, which presupposes Private Confes- sion, was to be retained in the chiirehes of the Confessors. (This is the office of the Keys.) 2. The enumeration of all sins is not necessary. For this is impossible. Ps. 19 : 13. According to the Vulgate, 18 : 13.* Art. XII. Of Repentance.-j- This Article contains four leading thoughts in the thetical part. 1. That all the fallen, who repent of sins committed after Baptism, can at any time return to the grace of God. 2. That the Church ought (debeat) to grant absolution to such. 3. The two parts of faith: (a) Contrition and sorrow on account of the sin committed. * In the fourth Lateran Council, 1215 (Mansi, 22, p. 1010), it was de- creed that everyone, on coming to years of discretion, should confess all sins, at least once a year, to his own priest. In the Lutheran Church, private confession was at first voluntary. Later, in portions of the Lutheran Church, it was made obligatory, as a test of orthodoxy, and as a preparation for the Lord's Supper. "It is well known that in several Protestant coun- tries, as in Sweden, Denmarh, Holland, and in several parts of Upper Ger- many, confession was entirely abolished. In Saxony, Pomerania, Mecklen- burg, it was all the more firmly held on to." Klepper, Liturgik, p. 240. See article in The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1896, especially pp. 357 et seqq. Tittmann, in his notes on the Augsburg Confession, says of Art. XI.; "The article teaches that this Private Absolution must be re- tained, not because it is of divine institution, but because it is salutary to afford this consolation to individuals when they hear the voice in the name of God announcing the forgiveness of sins, as it is well stated in the Apology. Hence, although the entire institution of Private Confession and Private Absolution is only human, nevertheless Melanchthon rightly says that it is impious to remove Private Absolution from the Church" (p. 82). See Ernesti, Praelectiones, edidit EedUng, p. 74. t It may be a question whether Poenitentia in this Article should be translated by Eepentance or by Penance. In the first English translation of the Augsburg Confession (Taverner, 1536) we have "Penance or Re- pentance ' ' in the title of the XII. Article, and Penance in the Article itself. But it is certain that Melanchthon regarded Poenitentia as a sacrament. In the Apology, writing of the number and use of the sacraments, and of the signs of a sacrament, he says: "Truly, therefore, the sacraments are Baptism, the Lord's Supper, Absolution, which is sacramentum poeni- tentiae." From the German: "So now true sacraments are Baptism, the Lord's Supper, Absolution." "Since Article XIII., Be usu Sacramentorum, is placed after Baptism, the Lord's Supper and Eepentance, it is evident that the Augsburg Confession recognizes three sacraments. (See Apology, p. 202.) But the Schmalkald Articles enumerate two sacraments." See- berg, Dogmengeschichte, II., p. 331. "The three sacraments of the Augus- tana and the Apology are Baptism, Absolution, the Lord 's Supper. ' ' Loof s, Dogmengeschichte (1906), p. 824. See The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1907, pp. 345, 346. With Luther, sacrament was res sacra, with Melanchthon it was rittts. See Apology, De Numero et Usu Sacramentorum. 8 114 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSIOX. (b) Faith, which believes the remission of sins for the sake of Christ. i. Good works as the effect and consequence of repentance. In the antithesis are condemned: 1. The Anabaptists, who deny that the justified can lose the Holy Spirit. 2. Those who contend that some persons may become so per- fect in this life that they cannot sin. 3. The Novatians, who will not absolve the lapsed. 4. Those who do not teach that the pardon of sins comes through faith, but that it is merited by our satisfactions. (Doubtless referring to some papal teachers. See Carpzov, Isagoge, p. 379, and Waleh, Introductio, p. 302; Baumgarten, Erleuterungen, p. 57.) Art. XIII. Of the Use of the Sacraments. The use of the saerainents is: 1. External and ecclesiastical as marks of our profession. But more than that: 2. Internal: Signs and testimonies of the divine will to- wards us. 3. For the purpose of exciting and strengthening the faith of those who use them. Means of grace. Art. V., Effective Signs. (a) To excite faith may refer to the baptism of children. (b) To strengthen faith can refer only to adults. 4. Rightly used when received with faith.* ("Augustine says, the faith of the sacrament, and not the sacrament, justifies." Apology.) Art. XIV. Of Ecclesiastical Orders. 1. Complementary to Article V. 2. Emphasis on publicly: Should not publicly teach. (Any private Christian may teach his own household, or administer the sacraments in case of urgent need.) 3. Vocation {rite vocatus) is the essential thing. 4. Vocation is mediated by the local Church or by the repre- sentative Church. Implies examination in regard to doctrine (1 Tim. 3), Christian character (2 Tim. 2: 15), and motive. * There is no antithesis to this Article, either German or Latin as the Confession was read and delivered, nor to the German Textus Receptiis Tschaekert, pp. 61, 92, 93. ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSB.URG CONFESSION. 115 (Ordination is of apostolic usage, but not of divine com- mand.*) Art. XV. Of Ecclesiastical Rites. 1. This Article does not contradict Article VII. 2. Rites must be retained in the Church: (a) If they are without sin. (b) If they promote peace. 3. Rites are necessary: (a) When well chosen they promote piety and assist in de- votion. (b) They aid in exercising Church discipline. 4. Rule for selecting and retaining Rites in the Church : (a) They must be such as will not burden pious consciences. (b) They must be such as will promote piety and good order. 5. Christians must be taught that rites and ceremonies are not an essential part of religion : (a) That they do not reconcile God. (b) That they do not merit grace. ("The chief service of God is to teach the Gospel." Apology.) Art. XVI. Op Civil Affairs. 1. The civil order is of divine appointment. 2. Christians are subjects of the civil order. 3. They owe obedience to the civil order. 4. They may enjoy the benefits of the civil order and dis- charge the duties of citizens, each according to his calling. 5. Obedience has its limitation. It is confined: (a) To lawful ordinances. (b) To things that do not command to sin. 5. The Article condemns: (a) The Anabaptists, who opposed the civil order. (b) Those who placed Christian perfection in the desertion of the civil order. ("Christian perfection consists not in the contempt of civil ordinances, but in the dispositions of the heart, in great fear of God, in great faith." Apology.) Art. XVII. Of Christ's Return to Judgment. In its thesis this Article affirms : 1. The return of Christ: * For more than three centuries after the Augsburg Confession was de- livered, some Lutheran churches did not practice Ordination. 116 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. (a) At the last day. "End of the world": Latin. (b) To judge. 2. The resurrection of all the dead. 3. The bestowment of eternal life upon the pious. 4. The condemnation of the devil and of wicked men to eternal punishment. In its antithesis the article condemns: 1. The Anabaptists, who teach that the punishment of the wicked will have an end. 2. Chiliasts, who scatter Jewish opinions about the reign of Christ in the world before the resurrection of the dead. (John Denck and Louis Hetzer are supposed to be meant. Walch, Introductio, p. 313.) Art. XVIII. Op Free-will.* 1. Civil righteousness is distinguished from spiritual right- eousness. (a) The former has as its object the things of this life. In the Apology: "Carnal or human righteousness, righteousness of works." (b) The latter has for its object God, his righteousness, spir- itual blessings. 2. Free-will (the natural man) has of itself some power to work civil righteousness. 3. Only by the grace, assistance and operation of the Holy Spirit can man work spiritual righteousness, that is, become acceptable to God — "heartily fear God, or believe, or cast innate evil desire from the heart." (German text).! (a) Absolute passivity neither expressed nor implied. (b) Some activity on the part of man clearly implied. "Faith is not only knowledge in the intellect, but also confidence in the will, that is, it is to will and to accept that which is offered in the promise, namely, reconciliation and remission of sins." Apology. 4. Appeal to Augustine. He is not the author of the book quoted. Authorship in doubt. 5. Nothing new in this teaching. Has been constantly taught by the Church. (The antithesis first appears in the Latin editio prinCeps. It * By Free-will (Liberum Ariitrium) in the Lutheran theology is meant the will (voluntas) conjoined with the intellect. Loci Communes, C. R. XXI., 653. Ernestl, Praelectiones (1878), p. 86. t See The Lutheran Quarterly for April, 1907, pp. 203 et seqq. ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 117 is wanting in all the Codices. "This paragraph was not in the original as delivered.")* Art. XIX. Of the Cause of Sin. 1. God creates and preserves nature. But : 2. God is not the author or cause of sin. 3. The depraved will of the wicked is the cause of sin. ' ' The perverted will works sin in all the wicked and in the despisers of God" (German). 4. "When God does not help, the will of the wicked turns away from God. John 8 : 44.' Art. XX. Of Good Works. 1. Supplementary to Articles IV. and VI. 2. Refutation of the accusations that the subscribers forbid good works. 3. In their writings they admonish to the performance of good works. 4. Their opponents mostly preach of puerile performances. 5. Their opponents teach that we are justified by faith and works. 6. Our works do not reconcile us to God. 7. Grace and justification are acquired only through faith for the sake of Christ. 8. The doctrine of faith is the most important doctrine in the Church. 9. The conscience is not tranquilized by works, but only by faith. 10. Faith is the confidence which comforts and reassures frightened souls. 11. The doctrine of faith does not forbid good works. Art. XXI. Of the Worship of the Saints. 1. The saints are to be remembered. 2. They are to be imitated as examples in doing good. 3. The Scriptures do not teach that the saints are to be wor- shiped and invoked for assistance. 4. Christ the only Reconciler and Mediator between God and man. (German text.) 5. The highest form of worship according to the Scriptures is to seek and to invoke Christ in every case of need. (German * Tschackert, ut supra, pp. 101-103. 118 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. text, which in this article is the original, and differs much from the Latin translation). The Conclusion to Pakt I. 1. Affirms agreement of the Confession: (a) With the Scriptures. (b) With the Universal Church. (c) With the Roman Church. 2. Reproaches the opponents with unkindness in charging the Confessors with heresy. 3. "The total difference {tota dissentio) has reference to some few abuses." ("Is this true? Does a Lutheran differ from the Romanists only on the subject of ecclesiastical rites? Certainly not. And for this reason learned men have been greatly exercised over this passage.") * Neither is this true: "The difference and quarrel are chiefly about some traditions and abuses." German text. The Refor- mation was preeminently a revolt against the doctrinal teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. (The words tota and paucis did not appear in the second form of the editio princeps, nor in later printed editions.) f 4. In great part the ancient rites are carefully observed. 5. It is a calumny to say that all ceremonies have been abol- ished by the Confessors. I • 2. Analysis of Part II. The Prologue. 1. Connects Part I. with Part II. 2. "Only some few abuses have been omitted." (Which is only a part of the truth.) 3. The doctrine is in accord with the Scriptures or the com- mon Christian Church. 4. The Emperor is importuned: (a) To give gracious 'audience to the Confessors. (b) Not to hear those who scatter calumnies among the people. 5. Ceremonies properly rendered conserve and promote rev- erence and piety among the people. * Ernesti, Fraelectiones (1878), p. 97. t Tschackert, ut supra, p. 61; Kolde, Eistorische Einleitung in die Symh. Biloher, p. XXII., note 3. ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 119 I. Of Both Species. 1. In the Lord's Supper both species are given to the laity. 2. This cvistom sanctioned: (a) By the Scriptures. Matt. 26 : 27 ; 1 Cor. 11 : 26-28. (b) By the early Church teachers. (c) By the Canons of the early Church. 3. Communion under one species is an innovation. Contrary to the divine command. 4. The Procession is omitted. Because : (a) It does not agree with the institution of Christ. (b) Is a division of the sacrament. II. Of the Marriage of Priests. 1. To avoid scandal priests are allowed to marry. 2. The marriage of such is justified by the Scriptures : 1 Cor. 7:2, 9; Matt. 19:12; Gen. 1:28. 3. Vows of celibacy cannot take away the commandment of God. 4. The marriage of priests allowed in the ancient Church. 5. An innovation in Germany. "Four hundred years ago." 6. God instituted marriage as a remedy for human infirmity. ("Is this true? since God instituted marriage already before the Fall. The language here must be understood of the institution of marriage which was repeated after the Fall.") * 7. Human laws cannot abolish or change the divine com- mandment. (German text, which is about twice the length of the Latin text.) III. Of the Mass. 1. The accusation that the Mass had been abolished in the churches of the Confessors is repelled. 2. The Mass is retained and celebrated with reverence. 3. Almost aU the usual ceremonies are retained.! Quod vero non ad vivum resecandum. Ernesti. 4. The mode of celebrating the Mass: Communicants were privately examined as to fitness.! * Ernesti, Praelectiones, ut supra, p. 102. t For the more correct apprehension of the case, see Luther's Formula Missae (1523), and his Deutsche Messe (1526), and the many Kirchen- ordnungen that had been already introduced. t Explieat modum celebrandae missae, mempe ut non modo sacerdos panem et vinum sumat, sed omnis populus, qui adsit, si qui sunt idonei, h. e. qui antea explorati sunt, vel privatim in aedibus saeerdotis, vel in sella confessionaria. Ernesti, ut supra, p. 103. Many of the earlier Luth- eran Kirchenordnungen order the priest to commune first. 120 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBUEG CONFESSION. 5. Private Masses have been abolished. Because : (a) They have been regarded as a work to satisfy for daily sins. (b) They are contrary to the ancient custom of the Church. 6. They are celebrated on holidays and at other times, if any wish to use the sacrament. IV. Of Confession. 1. The practice and doctrine of the Lutherans in regard to Confession : (a) It is not abolished. (b) As a rule the sacrament is administered only to those who have been examined and absolved. (c) It is to be highly regarded, inasmuch as it is the voice of God. (d) Faith is required, which believes that absolution is a voice from heaven. This belief in Christ obtains the remission of sins. 2. Enumeration of sins not necessary. Art. XI. Ps. 19 : 31 ; Jeremiah, 17 : 9. 3. The ancients did not regard enumeration of sins as neces- sary. 4. Confession is of human authority. "Confession is not commanded by the Scriptures, but was instituted by the Churches." German text. 5. Confession is retained on account of Absolution, which is its chief part. V. Of the Distinction of Meats. 1. The common opinion is that human traditions are works which serve to merit grace. The evil effects of such an opinion: (a) The doctrine of grace and justification is thereby ob- scured. (b) Traditions obscure the commandments of God. (c) They bring great danger to consciences. 2. The allegation that the Lutherans hinder all good dis- cipline is rejected. 3. Very many ceremonies and traditions are observed, as reading in the Mass and singing. 4. Such ceremonies do not justify before God. 5. Such freedom in external ceremonies was maintained by the ancient Fathers. ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 121 VI. Of the Vows op Monks. 1. It is lawful to contract marriage, since it is in accord with the commandment of God. 2. Cloister vows are not obligatory. They lack the qualities that make vows obligatory. 3. They obscure the righteousness of faith. 4. They deceive the people by holding up false views of sanctity. VII. Op Ecclesiastical Power. 1. The power of the Keys, or the power of the Bishops, is the power or command to preach the Gospel, to forgive and to retain sins, and to administer the sacraments. 2. The spiritual and the civil powers must not be confounded with each other. (a) The spiritual power has the command to preach the Gospel and to administer the sacraments. (b) The civil power administers the external affairs of men. (c) The Bishops have no divine right to administer civil affairs or to carry the sword. They have such power only by human right. 3. The Lutherans teach that the Bishops have no power to teach anything contrary to the Gospel. 4. It is contrary to the divine command to burden the Church with the bondage of the law, as though we ought to merit grace by Levitical observances. 5. Bishops or Pastors may make ordinances that will pro- mote good order in the Church, but not for the purpose of merit- ing grace. 6. St. Peter forbids the Bishops to oppress the Church. 7. Bishops are besought not to force consciences to sin. 8. It is not proposed to deprive the Bishops of their power. They are besought to allow the Gospel to be purely preached. (The German text of this and of the preceding article is verj^ much longer than the Latin.) The Epilogue. 1. Only the chief articles, about which there has been contro- versy, have been treated. 2. Many abuses, causing endless contentions, have been passed over in the interest of gentleness. 3. Nothing has been said in unkindness. 122 ANALYSIS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 4. Nothing has been received in doctrine or in ceremonies con- trary to the Scriptures or to the Catholic Church. 5. In obedience to the Imperial Edict, these Articles are de- livered "as a declaration of our Confession and of our doctrine." 6. If further information be desired, it will be preseirted ac- cording to the Scriptures. Then follow the signatures, according to the German critical text, thus: John, Duke of Saxony, Elector, etc. George, Margrave of Brandenburg, etc. Ernest, Duke of Brunswick and Lunenburg, etc. Philip, Landgrave of Hesse. John Frederick, Duke of Saxony. Francis, Duke of Brunswick and Lunenburg. Wolfgang, Prince of Anhalt. Albert, Count and Lord of Mansfeld; and the Cities Niirn- berg and Reutlingen. The same names, with the omission of Albert, in the same order, are attached to the Latin critical text. The German textus re- ceptus appears without the names of John Frederick, Francis and Albert. In the editio prince'ps, both Latin and German, the name of Albert does not appear.* While the Diet was yet in session at Augsburg, the cities Weissenburg, Heilbronn, Kempten and Windsheim declared their approval of the Confession. * Tschaekert, Die unverdnderte Augsburgische Konfession, pp 230, 231 CHAPTER IX. THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. Charles V. was by nature and by practice pious, as the word pious was understood in his day; that is, he was ardently de- voted to the doctrines and practices of the Roman Catholic Church, and instant in the observances of religion. He also felt that by virtue of his position as Emperor he was the protector of the Church. But he was of a mild and pacific disposition, and possessed a fair amount of independence. These estimable qualities of his nature were shown in Italy, when, in opposition to the will of the Pope, he decided to call a diet in order to settle the disputes about religion in Germany ; were shown in his Proc- lamation that the opinions and views of both parties should be considered with patience and charity; and were shown none the less when in Germany he refused to determine his attitude to- wards the Protestants by the clamors and counsels of the Cath- olic Princes and theologians. Hence it was in the spirit of moderation, and not in the spirit of violence, that he undertook to act the difficult part of mediator between the Church of Rome and the dissidents in Germany, who had introduced new doctrines and ceremonies, had refused to obey the Edict of Worms, and had sent to the throne a pro- test against the decision of the Catholic majority at Speyer in 1529. Moreover, these Lutherans, as they were now generally called, had avowed their loyalty to his person and to his rule. They had also just complied with his command to deliver, in writing, a confession of their faith and a statement of their grievances. This document was also a state-paper. The Em- peror was bound by the promises of his Proclamation and by the nature of his office as ruler to give it official attention. Be- sides, this document had called into existence a distinct party of religionists, who were conscious of standing, and who had con- vinced others that they were standing in at least some sort of opposition to the Church of Rome. For these and other reasons, the Protestant Confession could not be ignored. Then, too, the Emperor had declared, when the Confession was delivered, that he would take into consideration the matters of which it treated. (123) 124 THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. He was now face to face with a great obligation and with a great occasion. The Confession made by the Protestants could not be ignored. 1. Preparations for the Confutation. Sunday, June 26th, the day after the reading and delivery of the Confession, the Emperor summoned the Catholic Estates to a council. Here, according to a report rendered by Melanchthon, three methods of procedure were proposed: "The first was the most ferocious, namely, that the Emperor should simply force all the Princes and the people to obey the Edict of Worms. The second was more moderate, namely, that our Confession should be committed to good and learned men who are allied with neither party, that they may pass judgment upon it. This was pro- posed by King Ferdinand. A third now seems to have prevailed, namely, that a confutation of our Confession be read to us. " * According to others, two distinctly opposite propositions were made. The one was that the Emperor should take up arms and enforce the old Edict. The Archbishop of Salzburg said : ' ' Either we must oust them or they will oust us. Which of the two be- comes us?" Another violent member of the Council, alluding to the fact that the Confession had been written with black ink, was heard to say: "Were I Emperor I would add to it red rubrics," to whom another remarked: "Sir, only look out lest the red spurt into your own face." But by no means were all disposed to such violence. The Archbishop of Mayence pointed out the danger that would come from an open breach, should an attack be made by the Turks.f Milder counsels prevailed. Finally it was decided that a Reply should be made to the Confession of the Protestants. But this Reply dare not be of the nature of a counter-confession, neither dare it stop with a mere criticism of the Protestant Con- fession. It must take into the account certain conditions exist- ing in the Church. Hence, in a written opinion handed to the Emperor the next day, it was recommended that the Protestant Confession should be examined by a committee of learned and unobnoxious men, who should approve all that agreed with the teaching of the Catholic Church, and refute all that stood in opposition to that teaching. For the correction of existing abuses the Emperor should provide the necessary ways and means. Charles laid this opinion before Cardinal Campeggius, the * C. E. II., p. 175. t See Von Eanke, ut supra, p. 179. THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. 125 Papal Legate, who heartily approved it, and at once elaborated a plan of procedure : The statements of the Protestants were to be investigated as to their correctness, and everything that had been masked "should be unmasked with modesty, wisdom, court- esy, and with all Christian charity." Everything in the Con- fession that accorded with the teaching of the Fathers should be approved, and everything found in it that deviated from the true religion should be completely annihilated, in order thus to show that all such teaching had been already condemned. Should the Protestant Princes complain that their theologians had -been misjudged, the objections thus raised should be disproved by appeal to the Confession. The heretical propositions found in the Confession should be met by positive and well-grounded statements from the teaching of the Catholic Church. And as the Protestant Confession had been composed both in the Latin and in the German language, so should the reply be composed in the same languages. Then, after it had been submitted to the Emperor, and had been examined by the Princes, it should be read before the Diet. Finally Charles was reminded of the con- duct of Charles the Great, who first overthrew the Saxons, and then brought them into the Church ; that is, Charles V. should, in case of need, subdue the Protestants by force of arms, an^ thus save them to the Church. Not all of these suggestions were approved by the Emperor, but it was decided to appoint a committee to examine and to refute the Protestant Confession, and Cardinal Campeggius was placed in charge of the entire procedure, even including the ap- pointment of the committee,* consisting of twenty or more theologians, who had either been ordered to Augsburg by the Emperor, or had come thither in the retinues of the Catholic Princes.f In this committee were men of high position, ample * See Die Konfutation des Augsburgischen BeTcenntnisses. Ihre erste Gestalt und ihre Geschiehte. Von Johannes Ficker. P. xx. t Spalatin reports twenty. Luther's Werlce, Jena, V., p. 40. Brentz reports twenty-four. C. K. II., p. 180. Others report twenty-two, and others twenty-six. It is probable that twenty is the original number, and that others were added, or were substituted for those who were excluded from the meetings and conferences of the committee because of their love of mildness and peace. Eck gives the number twenty-six. The following is regarded as the oflacial list: John Eck, Proehancellor of the University of Ingolstadt; John Fabri, Provost in Ofen and Coadjutor Bishop at Vienna; Augustine Marius, Suffragan of Wiirzburg; Conrad Wimpina, Professor of Theology at Frankfort; John Cochlaeus, Court Preacher to George of Saxony; Paul Haug, Provincial of the Order of Preachers; An- drew Stoss, Provincial of the Carthusians; Conrad Collin, Prior of the Dominicans' at Cologne ; Conrad Thoman, Presbyter at Eatisbon ; Barthol- 126 THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. learning and commanding influence. For years some of them had been engaged in violent controversy with the "Wittenberg Re- formers, and particularly with Luther. This is especially true of Eck, Fabri and Coehlaeus, who had paraded hundreds and hundreds of errors against the "Wittenberg teaching. And yet these men were charged to do and to write nothing that savored of rashness or violence, for it was the policy of the Emperor and of the Catholic Princes to act with moderation, and simply to refute the errors of the Protestant Confession. But already before their official appointment on the com- mittee, even as early as June 26th and 27th, some of them had been getting ready to make reply to the Protestant Confession. Indeed, the minds of some of the theologians were made up against the Confession. They regarded it as a work of dissimula- tion, of deception, of concealment, and as in contradiction with the teaching of the theologians of the Princes. In a word, the Confession was prejudged, and the theologians of the Princes were to be assailed by those who for years had been their most violent and bitter antagonists. Such is the psychology of the situation, and the knowledge of this fact, that is, of the mental attitude of the chief conf utators, is absolutely necessary for a clear and correct understanding of the Confutation as it appears in its first form, for in this form the Confutation can scarcely be called a Reply to the Confession, but a prolix and violent polemic against the preachers of the Princes, and especially against Luther, who is belabored with epithets and imputations. 2. The Composition of the Confutation. The committee came to its appointed work with fulness of preparation and with an abundance of materials. Several of its members were experienced controversialists, and had the con- fidence of their party. They had in their hands several copies of the Latin Confession which the Emperor had caused to be made for their use. Some of them had brought with them bundles of omew Arnoldi of Using; John Mensing, Court Preacher to Joachim of Brandenburg; John Dietenberger, Canon of Mayence; John Burkhard, Vicar of the Order of Preachers ; Peter Spelser, Vicar to the Bishop of Constance ; Arnold of Wesel, Canon of Cologne; Medard, Court Preacher to King Fer- dinand; Augustine Tottelin, Theologian of Bremen; Wolfgang Redorfer, Provost of Stendal ; . Hieronimus Montinus, Vicar to the Bishop of Passau ; Matthias Kretz, Preacher at Augsburg. See Salig, Eistoria, I., 229 et seqq. Laemmer, ut supra, pp. 145, 146. C. R. XXVII., 3, 4. J. .7. Miiller, His- torie, 655, 656. Spalatin, Annates, pp. 140, 141. run CATHOLIC COXFUTATIOX. 127 extracts from the writings of Luther, and books which they and others had written against the Lutheran heresy. For use at the Diet of Speyer, in the year 1524, a number of theologians had been commanded by their Princes to make extracts from the writings of Luther. Cochlaeus had extracted ninety-one errors from three of Luther's sermons, and from thirty-six of his postils he had collected five hundred. There were also Eck's four hundred and four Articles, of which we have already spoken. Fabri had made collections of heretical passages from Luther's writings. Especially had he sought to show that during the last ten years Luther's writings had abounded in contradictions: "One book contradicts another; one sentence, one statement, contradicts another; yea, one letter contradicts another — in a word, Luther, instead of being a man, has become a mad, irra- tional beast. ' ' * This collection of contradictions, to which was prefixed a Pre- face, Fabri was encouraged by Ferdinand to deliver to the Em- peror. The object in view was to inflame the mind of Charles against the Lutherans, and to turn him from his accustomed course of moderation. And surely, if it had been in the power of calumnies and detractions to effect such a result, it would have been effected by this Preface. For here Luther is "called that apostate, the most pestiferous pest of the Church of God." "Luther is as far from the Martyrs as the Holy Spirit is from Satan, as a lie is from the truth." "From being a pious monk he has become a most dissolute apostate; from being a chaste priest he has become a most foul whoremonger; from being a man of modesty, he has become a most loquacious buffoon ; from being orthodox, he has become a heretic ; from being a Christian, he has become an apostate; in a word, instead of being a man, he has become a brute and an irrational animal." "A heretic, that is, one who against his o^vn conscience has introduced the most abominable and unheard-of heresies, and has taught the people the most pernicious doctrines." "Luther tries to pluck up by the roots the authority of the Church, the decrees of the councils and the decisions of the Holy Fathers and of the Popes." "Ought we, therefore, hesitate to reject and to condemn the capricious writings of Luther and the heretics of our country, since he says one thing when he stands, another thing when he sits, one thing in the morning, .another in the evening, yea, one thing when sober, another when drunk?" * Ficker, ut supra, p. xxiv. 128 THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. The Preface closes by saying that this evil must not be met by violence and by arms, but by wise counsel, and by that benignity for which the Austrian Princes have been distinguished, for in this way the Princes who, in their blindness and ignorance, have favored Luther's doctrines, may be induced to drop him, and to force their people to come back to the light of the pristine and true Gospel. With such an abundance of materials in hand, the work of composition moved on apace. At first the work was parted out among the individual members of the committee. But it was soon discovered that this method of procedure would fail to bring the desired unity. Thereupon it was resolved to place the composition in the hands of one man. For this work John Eck was unanimously chosen by the theologians present. He himself says : "I prepared the reply to the Saxon Confession. ' ' * Twice a day the committee met and revised his work ; and Campeggius, who was confined to his quarters with the gout, kept his eye on the work and hastened it to a conclusion. On July 9th the Reply was finished in draft. The re-writing began the next day, and the committee promised that in three days it should be ready for delivery. But meanwhile the Emperor, through the Count Palatine and others, inquired of the Protestant Princes whether they had addi- tional articles to present, or would rest their cause with those which had been already proposed. The Princes consulted their theologians, and replied the next day that they had presented the most important articles of doctrine, and had condemned the abuses which conflicted with that doctrine ; that it was not neces- sary nor possible to enumerate all the abuses which existed. They pray the Emperor to make haste, as they had been on expense for a long time, but, God willing, there shall be no failure on their side.f This answer, though somewhat ambiguous, pleased the Em- peror, and the Catholic Reply to the Protestant Confession was finished on the 12th. The next day, July 13th, it was delivered to the Emperor, together with a pile of books and pamphlets, for which he had not called, but which were intended to support the Reply and to influence his decision. J In all, there were 351 * Ficker, ut supra, p. XXXII., note 2. C. E., XXVII., 24, note t C. E. II., 184, 185. t The title of the Eeply was as follows : Catholica et quasi extemporanea responsio super nonnullis articulis Caesareje Majestati hisce proxiniis diebus in Dieta Tmperiali Augustensi per Illustrissimos Electorem Saxoniae et THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. 129 folia. The Emperor received them graciously, and when the theologians departed he extended to each one three fingers of his right hand. But the result was entirely different from what they had expected. The prolixity of the Reply, the accusations and calumnies which it contained, so displeased the Emperor that he remanded it back to the committee with instructions to re- duce it in size, to make it more temperate, and to confine it to the matters that were contained in the Protestant Confession. A revision was speedily made by Coehlaeus, but this was not de- livered to the Emperor. Then a second revision was made. This also failed to please the Emperor. Consequently he ordered an- other revision and commanded the omission of all remaining accusations of the Protestants. This further revised form was presented July 30th* or 31st, but, quite contrary to the expec- tation of the committee, it also was rejected. Another revision was ordered, with instructions to omit everything that could offend the Lutherans, to translate the Latin into German, and to present it within two days. This, the fifth form, was accepted by the Emperor and the Catholic Princes, and was ordered to be read publicly in the German language as the Emperor's reply to the Augsburg Confession.f Accordingly, August 3d, in the afternoon, it was read in German by Alexander Schweiss, one of the imperial secretaries, in the room in which just forty days alios quosdam Prineipes et duas civitates oblatis. Folia 106. The other documents handed to the Emperor at the same time bore the following titles : Antilogiarum, hoc est eontradictionum Martini Lutheri Babilonia, ex eius Apostatae libris per D. Joaimem Fabri excerpta. folia 36. Hereses et errores ex diversis Martini libris in unum colleeti. folia 61. Hereses Sacris Conciliis antea damnatae per Lutheranos iterum ab in- feris reductae. folia 14. Hereses et errores Martini Lutheri per Leonem ante decennium con- demnati folia 4. Hereses et errores Martini Lutheri ante septennium per TJniversitatem Parisiensem condemnati folia 12. Condemnatio facultatis theologiae Lovaniensis folia 2. Epitome aliquot heresiarum et errorum Martini Lutheri folia 12. Monstra seetarum ex Luthero et Lutheranis enata folia 12. Lutherani Evangelii abominabiles nimiumque pernitiosi damnatissimi. fructus folia 12. Christenliche darzue in ganz kurzer zeit gemaeht und gegebne antwurt liber etlich artickel, so der Romischer Kayserlichen Majestat diss nechst versehinnen tags auf gemaines 'reichs versamlung zu Augsburg durch dy Durchleuehtigsten Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Churfursten von Saxen und etlieh andere f ursten auch zwayen Steeten fur gebraeht und uberantwurt worden sein foUa 80. Fieker, XLIX. *Laemmer makes the date July 30th; ut supra, p. 156. C. R. XXVII., 31, names July 31st. t Laemmer «t supra, pp. 158-160. Pastor, Die Kirdhl, Eeunionsiestr., p 42 C E 'XXVII., 21-23. Francke, Liiri SymboUH, XXX-XXXII. 130 THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. before, less one, to the very hour, the Protestants had read their Confession. The German is, therefore, the official form of the Confutation, though the Latin has been far more generally used. After the reading, which lasted two hours, the Emperor signi- fied through the Elector Frederick that he considered the Con- futation Christian, and entirely incapable of being refuted. It was therefore his Majesty's most gracious will that the Elector of Saxony and his associates in religion should subscribe to it as the Catholic and sacrosanct faith, and should return to the bosom of the Church, which he confidently hoped they would do. Should they do this, there was nothing that they might not expect at his hands. Should they refuse, then he must act as it became the guardian and protector of the Church.* To this the Elector of Saxony and his co-religionists responded that, so far as they could learn from the hasty reading of the Confutation, an attempt had been made to refute their Confes- sion by the testimony of the Scriptures and by quotations from the Fathers and the Councils. In a matter pertaining to the salvation of their souls they ought to have a copy of the Con- futation, that they might examine it and see whether they had been -refuted or not; and this, they remind the Emperor, is in harmony with the declaration of his Proclamation that the views of both parties should be heard and considered. The Emperor replied that he would take the matter into consideration. After two days he replied that they might have a copy on the conditions that they would not publish it nor allow it to be copied, and would not make reply to it, since now both parties had spoken and written.f As the Protestants could not accept it under these conditions, it was not delivered to them. Here the matt,er stood for the time being. 3. The Contents of the Confutation. Of the first form of the Confutation, only recently brought to light, and published in 1891 by Ficker, it may be said that in the long preface it discusses the following points : 1. There are some articles in the Protestant Confession that agree with the teaching of the Church. The Princes should be exhorted to persevere in this doctrine, and on no account to de- part from it. * Chytraeus, Eistoria Aiigsh. Conf., p. 213. Salig, Eistorie, I., pp. 274-6. Sleidan, Z>e Statu Beligionis, p. 1076. Epilogue to the Confutation. t C. E. II., 253, 254. Chytraeus, ut supra, 215, 216. Laemmer, itt snnra pp. 160, 161. TllK CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. 131 2. The Confession contains some articles in regard to which the preachers for a decade have been preaching to the people the very opposite, and thereby have been creating doubt among the people. Such books should be destroyed. 3. The Confession contains numerous articles that agree neither with the Scriptures nor with the teaching of the Church. The Emperor should advise the Princes to depart from such errors and heresies and to disallow schism. 4. Besides these manifestly erroneous articles, Luther is the prime author of many heresies which have been examined in the coimcils and condemned. The Princes and their preachers should desist from these heresies. 5. Besides the innumerable errors of which Luther is the author, wicked and intolerable sects have sprung up, such as the Capernians, who oppose the Eucharist, and the Anabaptists, who oppose the baptism of children. The Emperor should proceed to exterminate these abominable heresies. The Princes should not tolerate these sects in their lands, nor give place to new ones. The Confutation next proceeds to discuss the Confession, ar- ticle by article. Sometimes the article is quoted in full, and some- times only in part. Quite generally the thesis and the antithesis of the doctrinal articles are approved. But in every ease the authors proceed to arraign the theologians of the Princes and to condemn their teaching. In some instances the discussions are elaborate, and consist, on the one hand, of condemnations of the Lutheran teaching in general and in particular, and on the other hand, of exhibitions of the teaching of the Catholic Church on the article in question. Here there is no lack of learning. The Canon Law, the decrees of councils, the dicta of the Fathers, are handled with great familiarity. But the style is pedantic and the tone is dictatorial, and instead of argument we find abuse and vilification. In a word, the Confutation in this its first form can scarcely be regarded as a reply to the Confession, but much rather as an assailment of Luther and the Lutherans. But it is valuable in that it furnishes a consensus of Roman Catholic teach- ing at that time, and exhibits the mind and heart of Dr. John Eek, its chief author. When the Confutation passes to the second part of the Con- fession it finds nothing to approve in regard to the abuses that have been corrected, but it defends the rites and ceremonies of the Catholic Church with vehemence, and with passionate decla- mation against Luther and the Lutherans — a piece of private 132 THK CATHOLIC COXFl-TATION. polemic, and not a dignified reply to an official document. Had it been read before the Diet as the Emperor's reply to the Prot- estant Confession, it would have exasperated the minds of the Protestant Princes and aggravated the situation. Happily, it was rejected by the Emperor and was allowed to be buried in oblivion for more than three hundred and fifty years. Turning now to the Confutation as it was read, August 3d, we find an entirely different document. Not only does this official Confutation differ from the first in length, but in tone and in contents. The treatment is almost entirely objective. There is but little controversy with Luther and the preachers. Quota- tions from the Fathers and from the official teaching of the Church are comparativelj' rare. In form it is digni- fied and respectful; in argument it is poor and weak. It may be called a criticism, an arraignment, of the Confession. It cannot be regarded as a confutation of the Confession. It is doubtful if it satisfied its composers. It is certain that it made no formidable impression on the Protestants. Cochlaeus says: "While it (the Confutation) was being read in German by Alexander, one of the imperial secretaries, at a public session of the Emperor and the Princes, many of the Lutherans imperti- nently laughed; others took exception to passages of Scripture quoted in the document, and afterwards censured. ' ' * Brentz wrote to Isenmann, August 4th: "The entire document smacks of Cochlaeus, Fabri and Eck. It is absolutely stupid, so that I am ashamed of the Roman name, because they do not seek out men who can reply to us heretics in a prudent and decorous way."t Melanchthon to Luther, August 6th: "Since the Con- futation is so utterly puerile, there was great rejoicing after the reading. "t And to Myconius, August 8th : "Believe me, when the Confutation was read many good men felt greatly encour- aged, since they have learned that our opponents have absolutely no knowledge of Christ. ' ' § Forty-three years after the reading, the Confutation appeared in print for the first time, under the title: Caroli Gcesaris et Gatholiconim Priiicipum ad oblatam a Protestantibus Confessio- nem responsio,\\ that is. Reply of the Emperor Charles and of * Com. de Actis et Scriptis Lutheri, p. 209. See Pastor, ut sunra, d 43 t C. E. II., 245. L ,v ■ t C. B. 11., 253. § C. E. II., 260. 1 1 In Harmonia Confessionis Augustanae. By Andreaa Fabricius Leo- dins. Colonae, 1573. THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. 133 the Catholic Princes to the Confession presented by the Protest- ants. The word "Confutatioiji" is not a part of the ofScial title. Indeed, that word seems to have been first used in this connec- tion by the Lutherans, though Charles, in giving orders for the publication of the Reply * — orders which were not executed — em- ployed the ^\•ord ' ' conf utavimus. ' ' f In length it corresponds very well to the Augsburg Confession. In print it covers about thirty pages. It consists of Prologue- Epilogue, Part I. and Part II. But as it is quite too long to ap- pear in full in these pages, we give the suramary of it made by Cochlaeus and published at Dresden in the year 15314 4. Summary of the Imperial Reply to the Confession of the five Princes and six cities at the Diet lately held in Augsburg.^ The first Article, Of the Holy Trinity, is wholly approved in all points. The second, Of Original Sin, is approved in part, namely, in that original sin is truly sin, etc.; in part not, namely, in that they say that original sin is to be without the fear of God, and without trust in God, and it is concupiscence, which remains in children after baptism. The third. Of the Two Natures of Christ, that he is true God and Man, is approved in all parts. The fourth. Of the Merit of Good Works, is approved in that we by our own powers can merit nothing. And therefore the Pelagians are justly condemned as heretics. But it is rejected in that they do not confess with us the merit of good works which are done by means of divine grace. The fifth. Of the Word and Sacraments, is approved, in that by these, as by an instrument, the Holy Spirit is given. But it is rejected in so far as they speak of faith alone, and say nothing about love and hope. The sixth, Of Good Works, is approved, in that faith ought to produce good works, and is rejected in that they say that faith alone justifies, in regard to which they do not correctly under- stand the words of Christ, Luke 17, of Paul and Ambrose on Romans 3, 4, etc. * Laemmer, ut supra, pp. 161, 162. t Fieker, ut supra, p. 153. i C. 'R. XXVII.' 240-244. Also Walch, Opera Lutheri, XVI., 1274-1279. In St. Louis Edition of Luther's Works, XVI., 1069-1073. 134 THIC CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. The seventh, Of the Church, is rejected, where they mean to have it understood that only the congregation of the saints is the Church, for in the Church good and bad are congregated. But it is approved in that the Church abides forever. The eighth, Of Ministers of the Church, that even the wicked may preach and may administer the sacraments, is approved in all parts. The ninth. Of Baptism, is also wholly approved, that children should be baptized, and that the Anabaptists should not be ap- proved. The tenth. Of the Venerable Sacrament of the Altar, is also approved, yet with this addition, that it should be steadfastly believed that the whole Christ is under each form of the sacra- ment, and that the substance of the bread is truly changed into the body of Christ. The eleventh, Of Confession, is also approved, with the requi- sition of two things. First, that confession should be made at Easter time, according to the chapter: "Every one of both sexes. ' ' Secondly, that each one should be careful to confess all sins of which he knows himself to be guilty, and should not pur- posely conceal any. The twelfth, Of Penance, is approved, in that sin may be forgiven the sinner, if he repents, so often as he sins. But it is rejected, first, in that it presents not more than two parts of penance ; secondly, in that they say that faith is a part of pen- ance; thirdly, in that it does not confess satisfaction, the third part of penance. The thirteenth, Of the Use of the Sacraments, is wholly ap- proved, namely, that the sacraments are not only signs among men, but also witnesses of the divine will towards us. The fourteenth. Of the Clerical Estate, is approved, namely, that no one should preach or administer the sacraments, unless he has been properly called, with this addition, that such call should be made according to the ancient order of the Christian Church, not when the choice is made by the civil authority or by the people, but when the Bishop, or he whose duty it is according to law and custom, calls or institutes. The fifteenth. Of Ceremonies in the Churches, is also approved, in that they should be observed, in so far as they can be observed without sin. But it is rejected in that they say that such cere- monies are contrary to the Gospel, if they are performed to rec- oncile God, or for sin. THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. 135 The sixteenth, Of Civil Government, is wholly approved, with the condemnation of the Anabaptists, who wish to tolerate no civil government among Christians. The seventeenth. Of the Final Judgment, is also wholly ap- proved, with the rejection of the Anabaptists and others who would concede redemption and salvation finally to the devils and the ungodly. The eighteenth. Of Free-will, is also approved, namely, that we have free-will in human affairs ; but in divine affairs we can do nothing without the grace of God. The nineteenth, Of the Cause of Sin, is also approved, namely, that not God, but the will of man is the cause of sin. The twentieth. Of Good Works, is rejected. For they will not confess that by good works one may acquire the remission of sin. The twenty-first. Of Honoring and Worshiping the Saints, is also rejected, because they confess the error of the Vigilants, the Waldensians, the Picards and others, and will not invoke the saints. In this they act contrary to the Scriptures of both Testa- ments, and to all teachers, etc. End of the Articles. The Second Paet op the Confession op the Princes. Op Abuses. In this part no article is approved, for what they call an abuse is not an abuse. Of Both Forms of the Sacrament. From the Scriptures and the Holy Fathers it is proved that under one form, namely, that of the bread, it has always been the custom to receive this sacrament after the Mass, and much more is it an abuse to administer both forms to the laity, con- trary to the order of the Church and without the command of God". Of the Marriage of Priests a.nd Monks. Here also it is proved from the Scriptures, from the ancient Fathers and from many councils that not the purity of the priests, but much rather the unchaste marriage of the monks and pastors is an intolerable abuse, for, more than eleven hundred years ago, this thing was condemned in the heresy of Jovinian, and all their arguments were answered and refuted on the sure foundation of the Scripture. 136 THE CATHOLIC CONFUTATION. Of the Mass. First: That they, contrary to the usage of the universal Church, hold the Mass in German, is rejected. Secondly : That they regard it as an abuse that he who serves at the altar should live from the altar, because the Scripture permits this. Luke 10 and 1 Cor. 9, etc. Thirdly: That they, from wantonness, contrary to the honor of God and the last wills of the founders, have abolished so many of the endowed masses. Fourthly : That they renounce the sacrifice of the Mass, which is (as shown by Augustine) an old heresy of the Arians, and the sacrifice of the Mass is proved by many passages of the Scriptures, and from the most ancient teachers and councils. Therefore the Mass is by no means to be abolished. Of Confession. First: It is regarded as an abuse in Luther's sect that so few people confess. Secondly: That they say nothing about peni- tence and satisfaction for sin. Thirdly: That they misunder- stand and misinterpret the words of Chrysostom in regard to oral confession. Fourthly: That they do not confess all secret sins of which they are conscious, which is an old heresy of the Montanists, who are ashamed to confess all sins. Of the Distinction of Meats. First: It is rejected that they, contrary to Christ, Luke 10, and to Paul, 1 Thess. 2, etc., despise a statute and a rule of the Church. Secondly: That they regard such a statute as un- profitable. Thirdly : That they say that it is contrary to faith, contrary to the Gospel, contrary to the commandments of God. Fourthly: That they regard it as impossible. Fifthly: That by such institutions they misunderstand Christ and Paul. Sixthly: That they would have all such things free and unfor- bidden. Of Monastic Vows. First. It is rejected that they, contrary to so many passages of both Testaments, would abolish such vows. Secondly: That they regard the monastic life as improper, contrary to so many thousands of holy people, who from the beginning of Christianity to our day have lived and been happy in such a life. Thirdly : That they, contrary to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testa- ments, would have such vows to be voluntary. Fourthly: That THl! CATHOLIC COJJFUTATION. 137 they say that such vows are impossible, contrary to so much Scripture and to the promise of Christ. Fifthly : That they say that monks and nuns should not be divorced. Sixthly: That they say that such a life is contrary to the Gospel, whereas it is in harmony with the Gospel, and it forsakes father and mother, hoiise and home, for the sake of Christ, according to his counsel, JMatt. 19, Luke 9 and 14, etc. Of Ecclesiastical Power. First : It is rejected that they wish to abolish the jurisdiction, the authority, the franchises, the privileges of the clergy, which have come to them from emperors and kings. Secondly: That they, contrary to the Scriptures, do not concede the authority of the clergy, and suppress their jurisdiction. Thirdly: That, contrary to the Scriptures and to the imperial laws, they despise the liberty of those who have taken orders. Fourthly: That they wish to subject the ministry to civil tribunals, which is contrary to the Scriptures and to imperial laws. Fifthly : That, contrary to the command of the Church, they allege a wanton liberty, vrhich we are under no obligation to observe. Sixthly: That they, on account of abuses, wish to fling away also good ordinances of the clergy. Finally the Imperial Majesty wishes that they return to Christian unity and help to correct all abuses. Amen.* * Besides this Epitome of the Confutation made by Coehlaeus, we have one made by Camerarius and some other Lutherans while the Confutation was being read, and another, made at the same time, by someone who was in the retinue of the Margrave of Brandenburg. The former of these is found in Volume IX., pp. 421-423 of the Wittenberg edition of Luther's Works. The latter is found in Chytraeus' History, pp. 119-125. Both have been reproduced in Corpus Seform-atorum, Vol. XXVII., 227 et seqq. These furnished the basis of Melanehthon 's Apology of the Augsburg Con- fession as it appeared in its first form. CHAPTER X. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. The Augsburg Confession was written, signed and delivered with the avowed purpose of repelling hostile attacks and of expressing agreement in doctrine with the Roman Church. Neither the theologians nor the Princes had any intention of leaving the Catholic Church, but much rather was it their in- tention, by repudiating heresy and by affirming the Catholic doctrine, to vindicate their right to remain in that Church. This attitude of mind accounts for the mild and conciliatory char- acter of the Confession, which declares that it contains no doc- trine that differs from the Roman Church in so far as it is known from writers. Already before the completion and sign- ing of the Confession Melanchthon had been invited several times to interviews with Alphonso Valdesius, one of the imperial secretaries, for the purpose of discussing the affairs of the Luth- erans, and of ascertaining what the Lutherans desired and of inquiring how assistance could be rendered. Melanchthon de- clared that the matter was not so tedious and clumsy as it had been reported to the Emperor, and that the dissidence related chiefly to both forms of the sacrament, to the marriage of priests and monks, and to the Mass, as the Lutherans did not approve private Masses.* We also learn at the same time that the Em- peror desired to have the matter settled quietly, and not to have an open discussion, inasmuch as an open discussion would only promote anger and discord.f On the 24th of June Brentz wrote to Isenmann that the Confession had been drawn up "very politely and moderately. In it the Princes seek to settle the controversy amicably, and to restore peace. ' ' J Thus we see that already before the reading of the Confession the atmosphere was charged with a desire for peace, though the Protestant Princes "stood fast in the confession of the Gospel." The day after the reading and delivery of the Confession, Mel- anchthon, in a letter to Luther, expressed the opinion that the * C. E.. II., 122. AVhether Melanchthon or the Catholics took the initia- tive in these interviews remains a question, t C. E. II., 123. t r. K. II., 124-5. (138) EP'FOKTS AT RECONCILIATION. 139 future discussion would be limited to both species iu the Euchar- ist, to marriage and to private Masses.* A daj-^ later he thinks that the chief controversy will be in regard to private Masses, and inquires of Luther: "How much can we concede to the enemy ? " f July 4th, Osiander wrote to friends that the Em- peror 's confessor had approved the Lutherans, and bade them be of good courage, and adds: "In a word, there is no one who does not desire that this matter be settled on just and Christian conditions, except certain petty German Bishops, petty tyrants and pseudo-theologasters, who, beset by the furies, really desire nothing but blood. If they do not repent, may God re- gard them according to their works." + On the sixth of July, Melanchthon, under instruction from the Protestant Princes, wrote a letter to Cardinal Campeggius, in which, after praising the Cardinal's moderation, he urges him to take the lead in restoring harmony. He declares that the Protestant Princes very much desire peace; "for they see that if any disturbance should arise there is danger that there may be greater confusion in regard to religion and the Church. Therefore they pray that your Most Reverend Lordship shall not suffer itself to be de- flected from this supreme moderation, but take care that peace be restored, which at such a time seems to be profitable for the entire realm, especially since they suffer no doctrines to be taught which differ from the Scriptures and from the Church. In turn they privately offer their service to your Most Reverend Lordship, and promise publicly that in so far as it can be done without wounding their consciences, they will accept such con- ditions as will promote peace and concord, and as will tend to retain, confirm and establish the ecclesiastical order; and they declare that they by no means wish the ecclesiastical order and the lawful authority of the Bishops to collapse. ' ' § Immediately after the delivery of the Confession the Emperor had vTritten to Rome that a good beginning had been made for the restora- tion of peace, and in later letters he seems to have expressed similar hopes. On the sixth of July his confessor wrote him: * C. R. n., 141. t C. R. II., 146. .t C. B. II., 163. 5 C. E. II., 171. See also Melanchthon 's letter to Cardinal Campeggius in C. E. II., 168 et seqq., in which, among other things, he says: "We hold no doctrine different from the Eoman Church. . . For no other reason do we bear much odium in Germany than because we with the greatest constancy defend the doctrines of the Eoman Church. Such fidelity to Christ and to the Eoman Church we will, please God, show to the last breath. ' ' 140 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. ' ' It appears that God is working wonders through your Reverend Majesty, and after the beginning of the healing of this dis- order, it is evident that we may hope that the end will be much more favorable than our sins deserve. ' ' * And the personal relations between the parties were most friendly. July 17th, King Ferdinand invited the Elector of Saxony, the Landgrave of Hesse, the Margrave of Brandenburg and others of their party to a dance, "since they also are very good fellows." f When the Lutherans had declined to receive a copy of the Confutation on the conditions made by the Emperor, at once the Electors of Mayence and Brandenburg, the Dukes of Bruns- wick and Saxony, came to the Elector John of Saxony and offered themselves as mediators between the Protestants and the Emperor; whereupon the Elector of Saxony exclaimed: "It is not that we have a breach with the Emperor. He summoned this Diet for the very purpose that we might be one in regard to the faith, and for this we are entirely ready. ' ' J And at the same time the same Catholic Princes presented themselves most humbly before the Emperor and begged to be appointed med- iators between the parties. The Emperor was pleased with their proposition. Thus we see that on both sides the desire for peace and har- mony in the faith was strong, and, we may believe, equally sincere on both sides. The Protestants could not brook the idea of leaving the Catholic Church, nor that of being thrust out of it. The Catholics knew fuU well what it meant to the Catholic Church to have the Protestant Princes and their peoples sep- arated from that Church. There is no doubt that both parties felt the awful power of the old dogma "that there is no salva- tion out of the Church." Hence the strong desire and the many efforts for rapprochement. 1. The Committee of Sixteen. In compliance with the request of the Catholic Princes noted above, a committee of sixteen persons was appointed August 6th. It consisted of the Elector of Mayence, the Elector Joachim * Pastor, Eeunionsbcstrehungen, p. 42. t Hid., p. 43. Besides theological disputations at Augsburg, we read of banquets, where Lutherans and Catholics feasted together, of jousts and tournaments. In one of these, King Ferdinand was thrown from his horse three times and was hurt. Six persons were killed in one day. C. R. II., 355. Lindsay, History of the Heformation, p. 371, note. I Pfaff, Geschichte, I., p. 308. Plitt, Apologie der Augustana, p. 45. The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1900, pp. 368 et seqq. C. E. II., 254. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. 141 of Brandenburg, who was made spokesman, Duke Henry of Brunswick, Duke George of Saxony, the Archbishop of Saltz- burg, the Bishop of Worms, the Bishop of Strassburg, the Bishop of Augsburg, Duke Albert of Mecklenburg, the Abbot of Weiagarten, Count Martin of Ottingen, George Truchsess, and the delegates respectively of Treves, Cologne, Baden and the Palatinate. The Committee held a meeting in the forenoon of the day of its appointment, and consumed most of the time in listening to violent disputes between its own members, especially between the Bishop of Augsburg and the Archbishop of Saltzburg. The former opened the session with an address in which he admon- ished the Committee to do nothing contrary to God's Word, to right and justice, since the Lutherans had not attempted to over- throw a single doctrine of the Christian faith. Hence every effort should be made to restore and to establish the former peace and concord of the Church. The Archbishop of Saltzburg demanded to know why the Bishop of Augsburg had so suddenly changed his opinion, since he had recently heard him speak very differently. The Bishop of Augsburg replied that he had done many things in his life-time which were wrong, but the time and the occasion demand a change. He charged the Archbishop with palliating idolatrous abuses and defending impious doctrines, and prays God to be restrained from such impiety. Then Joachim of Brandenburg turned upon the Bishop of Augsburg and denied the truthfulness of his statement that the Lutherans had opposed no article of faith, affirming that the Lutherans had denied and rejected the Catholic Church and the worship of the saints. Finally the Archbishop of Mayence, disgusted with such altercations and disputes, begged that they should make an end to disputing, and turn their attention to the aboli- tion of abuses and to the restoration of peace throughout the Roman Empire.* So passed the morning session. The afternoon session was even worse and more violent. The Catholic Princes heaped reproaches upon each other and charged each other with lying, and scarcely abstained from blows.f Consequently, nothing was done that day to promote the interests of peace. The next day, August 7th, leading members of the Committee * See Coelestin, Sistoria, III., 25, 26. Chytraeus, Eistorie, p. 215. J. J. Miiller, pp. 706-709. Schirrmacher, p. 191. Salig, Vollstdndige Eistorie, I., 277'. t Ut supra. 142 EFFORTS AT RJCCONUILIATION. held an interview with the Protestant Princes and demanded that they should abandon their false doctrine and return to the Church. The Elector of Saxony asked for time to deliberate. Thereupon the violent Elector Joachim of Brandenburg turned upon him and declared that unless he should abandon the teach- ing of Luther, the Emperor would proceed against him with arms and would subjugate him and take away his rank, his pos- sessions, his life, and would bring his subjects, with their wives and children, back to the old faith.* Coelestin tells us that this harsh and violent speech frightened the Elector of Saxony almost as though he had been stunned by a thunderbolt, and that, returning home, he could not conceal his alarm from his theologians, but told them that unless he should abjure and renounce the known truth of the Gospel he would be attacked by force, and that both he and his subjects would be brought to extreme peril and distress.f In the afternoon of the same day Chancellor Briick and a special committee prepared an answer to the demands of the Catholic Prinees-t They complain that their cause has not been properly heard, as had been promised in the Imperial Proclama- tion of the Diet; that a copy of the Confutation had not been given them. They declare that they cannot conscientiously ap- prove the propositions made by the Catholic party, and they note the fact that the Emperor had time and again promised to call a council to discuss these matters. § This answer was read before the Catholic Committee by Chancellor Briick on the afternoon of the ninth of August, and was subscribed by eight Princes and six cities, Kempten, Winsheim, Heilbronn and Weissenburg having now accepted the Augsburg Confession. On the eleventh the Catholic Committee made reply to the Protestant answer through the Elector Joachim of Branden- burg. We have not the full text of this reply, but only so much of it as some of the Protestants took down volante calamo at the time. Its substance is as follows: First. The Protestants complain that the Emperor has not redeemed the promise made in his Proclamation, that the views of both parties should be heard and considered. This is a false * Coelestin, III., 26. J. J. Miiller, v,t supra, pp. 714, 715. Salig, ut supra, I., 279. t Coelestin, III., 26b. t C. E. II., 266. § This answer of the Protestant Princes is found in Latin in Chytraeus, pp. 221 et seqq.; in J. J. Miiller, pp. 716 et seqq.; in Waleh, XVI., 1632 et seqq. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. 143 accusation, sinCe the Bmpei?or has more than fulfilled his promise, and has even inquired whether the Protestants had anything^ more to present. Secondly. The Confutation was not given them for good and sufficient reasons, since the Imperial Laws forbid, on peril of body and life, to dispute and to wrangle about the Articles of Faith. The Imperial Edicts about matters of the faith had not been observed by the Protestants, but had been treated with mockery and insult. So it would go with the Confutation. If the Protestants would observe the conditions, it would be given to them, or it should be read as often as they desired. Thirdly. As regards conscience, the Protestants appeal to their consciences when matters of conscience are not involved, and where they ought to have consciences they have none, since their preachers, contrary to the Holy Scriptures and to the Chris- tian Church, have made unchristian laws and ordinances, have deceived the common people, and have everywhere tolerated the sects, as the Iconoclasts, the Sacramentarians, the Anabaptists and others. Their consciences should teach them that they ought much rather follow the Catholic Church than its seducers. Fourthly. A free council has indeed been promised, but on account of wars in Germany and in Italy it could not be held. Should a council be held, whether sooner or later, but little good can be expected, for the Lutherans have accused the old councils of errors. A council would only give occasion for derision and insult. For the present it were better to propose means and ways for concord.* Two days later, that is, August 13th, the Protestant Princes make a very long reply to the latest reply of the Catholic Committee. At first it was delivered viva voce by Dr. Briick, but then, on account of its very great importance as involving soul and honor and possessions, it was committed to writing and formally read to the Committee, f "We can give only the substance: 1. They (the Protestants) cannot deny that the Emperor had heard their Confession as was promised in the Proclamation. But the point of the Proclamation is that the views and opinions of both parties should be considered in love and kindness, so that what is not right on both sides might be put away. This had not yet been done, for it had only been insisted that the * Original in Waleh, XVI., pp. 1635-1637; St. Louis Edition of Luther's Schriften, XVI., 1352-1355; J. J. Miiller, 722, et seqq.; Latin in Chy- traeus, Eistoria, 222 et seqq. See Salig, I., 281-2. tC. K. IL, 279; Salig, L, 282; Sehirnnacher, p. 519. 144 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. Lutherans should abandon their views and condemn their doc- trine, before the views of their opponents should be condemned. 2. What had been said in regard to the Confutation they could not approve. They had not ridiculed nor given occasion for ridiculing the Imperial Edicts. They could not discover that they were forbidden by the Imperial Laws to dispute on the faith. Thej'^ knew how far matters of faith could be discussed, and how far not. It is not forbidden by the laws to confess the Christian faith, and in a Christian and charitable way to point out and to abolish abuses. Inasmuch as the Catholic doctors had the Confession in hand so many weeks, how could it be expected that the Lutherans should be satisfied with the mere reading of the Confutation? 3. As regards their consciences they confess that they are men and sinners, but by the grace of God they have more peace- ful consciences than some who had persecuted the doctrine, driven away the preachers, and had not given place to the truth. They had reposed their consciences, not upon their preachers, but upon the truth of God's Word; and they had never turned from the unity of the Empire and of the Church, but by admis- sion of the Word of God they had promoted it. 4. They had nothing in common with the sects. But so many abuses have been taught that they can no longer be borne. Had the Bishops been careful, unity could have been maintained. At the Niirnberg Diet, Pope Adrian confessed that all these griev- ances had proceeded from the Roman court and from other prelates. In their Confession they had said nothing about many abuses in the Roman Church. 5. As regards their preachers, they knowingly tolerate no immoral preachers. But it is weU known that on the other side ministers live with harlots, say the Mass frivolously, and prac- tice simony. 6. They are still ready, so far as is consistent with God's Word, to maintain the authority of the Bishops, and in every- thing to unite with others, in so far as their consciences will permit. 7. That in appealing to a council, they seek nothing contrary to law, but rather do they evince their obedience, because a coun- cil is the regular way of treating such matters. Should other feasible ways be proposed for the settlement of the alienation, their approval will not be wanting. They thought that it would be more in harmony with the Emperor's Proclamation for both EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION". 145 sides to choose an equal, but small, number of men who would treat with each other on the articles in dispute, and aim to bring about an agreement. On their part, they were ready to do all that could be done with a good conscience.* We thus learn that the Catholic Committee was harsh, mina- tory and denunciative. The Protestant Princes were firm, mod- erate, conciliatory. Both parties desired unity. The Committee demanded the unconditional surrender of the Ptotestants to the Catholic Church. The Protestants demanded the abatement of well-known abuses, and sought to effect unity by conferences and by mutual concessions. But the proposition of the Protestants for the appointment of a smaller committee, to be composed of an equal number of representatives from each side, was so evi- dently wise and just, that it was approved the next day by the Emperor and his counsellors.! 2. The Committee of Fourteen. The following day, August 15th, "a committee of fourteen persons was ordered by His Majesty, seven from each side, who should consult together and should treat of the matters pertain- ing to God's Word and to the faith, and should consider in a friendly manner how the difference in faith could be removed. ' ' % The Committee was to consist of one Prince, one Bishop or cler- ical Prelate, two jurists and three theologians from each side. The Committee, as actually constituted, consisted of two Princes, two jurists and three theologians from each side, as follows: From the Catholic Side. Duke Henry of Brunswick. The Bishop of Augsburg. The Chancellor of Cologne. •The Chancellor of Baden. Dr. John Eck, Theologian of the Duke of Bavaria. Dr. Conrad Wimpina, Theologian of Elector Joachim. Dr. John Cochlaeus, Theologian of Duke George of Saxony. § * Answer in Chytraeus (German), 130 et seqq.; J. J. MuUer, pp. 727-741; Walch, XVI., 1637 et seqq.; Chytraeus (Latin), 225 et seqq. See Salig, I 282-4 ''tSchirrmacher, pp. 211, 520; Chytraeus, p. 232. , . , ^ , tWe have here combined the accounts found m Spalatm's Annales, pp. 152" 153, and in Sehirrmacher, pp. 211, 212, 521. See J. J. Miiller, pp. 742-3 § Duke Henry of Brunswick served on the Committee for a very few days, but when he was sent in pursuit of the Landgrave of Hesse, who had 10- 146 EFFORTS AT EKCO.NCILIATIO.N. From the Side of the Protestants. Duke John Frederick of Saxony. JMargrave George of Brandenburg. Dr. Gregory Briick, Chancellor of the Elector of Saxonj-. Dr. Sebastian Heller, Chancellor of Margrave George. Master Philip Melanchthon, Saxon theologian. John Brentz, Theologian of Margrave George. Erhard Schnppf, Hessian theologian.* The Committee held its first meeting on the afternoon of August 16th. But already two days earlier the Archbishop of Mayence, Duke George, and others, had commissioned Dr. John Eck to prepare an opinion on all the articles of the Augsburg Confession. In the execution of his commission, Eck followed in general the Confutation of August 3d. He approved the following ar- ticles as agreeing with the teaching of the Church : 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19. The following articles he regarded as differing in part from the teaching of the Church: 2, 4, 11, 12, 14, 15. The following, he declares, differ from the teaching of the Church : 7, 20, 21.t He declares that all the articles of Part II. of the Confession differ from the teaching of the Church. He then says: "In a word, articles difficult of reconciliation, and not acceptable to the Church, are : "Of the Worship of the Saints. "Of Communion of both Kinds. "Of the Marriage of Priests. "Of Monastic Vows. "Of the Sacrifice of the Mass. "Of Human Institutions. "I think all the difficulty lies in these six points. Whatever difficulty there is in the other articles can be easily settled ajid removed by a committee of two Princes and two learned men from each side. ' ' J left Augsburg, August 6th, "without the knowledge, will and permission of the Emperor" (Pastor, p. 44; Schirrmacher, p. 189; G. K., II., 291), Duke George was appointed in his place. * Schirrmacher, pp. Ill, 112; Chytraeus (Latin), p. 238; J. J. MiiUer, Eistorie, pp. 742, 743; C. E. II., 311, 312. See The Lutheran Qitarterly, July, 1900, pp. 374 et seqq. ' fEck wrote this opinion August 14th. Chytraeus (Latin), p. 232; Wiedemann's Dr. Johann Eck, p. 593. Of Article X. he says: "Articulus X. concordat de veritate eiieharistiae, non tamen rapiatur ad utramque speciem. ' ' t The Opinion, in its full text, in Chytraeus (Latin) , pp. 232 et seqq. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. 147 And on August 15th, the Protestant theologians presented to the Protestant Princes an Opinion on the subject of concord. Very justly does Plitt say that "this Opinion sounds extra- ordinarily pacific." * It opens thus: "It is our humble opinion that the Princes ought to seek out all means and ways to pre- serve a permanent peace, and to prevent injury to the country and to the people. We cannot answer before God if we persist in an unnecessary schism. We observe that daily the people are becoming more wanton, that erring sects are increasing, and that — which may God forefend — war is threatened, which may overthrow both the Church and the Empire. Such important matters should be carefully considered. "If the Princes have neglected the proper means, they are responsible for all slaughters, etc. They are negligent in regard to the blessings that may follow, viz., that the doctrine of justifi- cation, and the Gospel of Christ, may come to many millions of persons by whom Christ may be glorified. "It is of the utmost importance that discipline be adminis- tered in Church and in school, lest the people become rude and heathenish. But now no proper discipline can be established or maintained while this schism lasts. It were better to become Jews, and to live under discipline, even though some practice evil, than to become heathenish and wild, since God preferred the Jews to the heathen. "Therefore we most humbly pray the Princes, for God's sake and for their own welfare, to strive to make peace, and see to it that, should the enemy become too harsh, our consciences should become easier. God grant that the delinquency may not be with us." Then, after further preliminary discussion, the theologians name four conditions, from which, they say, they cannot depart : "1. That the doctrine of faith, works and Christian free- dom, as it has hitherto existed among us, shall be preached ac- cording to the Confession. "2. That both forms of the sacraments be given to the laity. "3. That it be not required to restore Private Masses, as the opposing party has hitherto held them, making them an offering for the forgiveness of the sins of the living and the dead. Coelestin, pp. 36-37. Schirrmaeher, pp. 203 et seqq. German translation in the German Chytraeus, pp. 135 et seqq. English translation in The Luth- eran Quarterly for July, 1900, pp. 383 et seqq. Already on the fourteenth of August, Eck had declared that "they did not want any Princes on the committee, for the Princes are self -conceited fools." C. R. II., 279. * Apologie, p. 50. 148 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. "4. That marriage be left free to the priests and to other ministers." To the Bishops they concede full jurisdiction in spiritual mat- ters "as in affairs of marriage, and of the ban for the punish- ment of open sins, but not in matters pertaining to civil govern- ment. ' ' Of the Pope they say : ' ' Though the Pope be Antichrist, yet we may be subject to him as the Jevrs were subject to Phar- aoh in Egypt, and subsequently were subject to Caiaphas. But the pure doctrine must be allowed. ' ' They think that the matter of monasticism might be left free, and that the restoration of the episcopal jurisdiction might be made, so that the Bishops should ordain the priests, and should regulate the ceremonies, but only to the extent that they do not oppose or persecute the Lutheran doctrine, nor bind impious burdens upon anyone.* Bck's Opinion and the Opinion of the Lutheran theologians formed the two foci towards which the discussions of the Com- mittee centered, though there were numerous deflections from both sides, but in the direction of a steady approximation. 3. The Meetings of the Committee. This Committee held its first session in the Bathaus on the afternoon of August 16th. Dr. Hieronymus Vehus, Chancellor of Baden, was appointed spokesman on the Catholic side, and Dr. Gregory Briick, chancellor on the Protestant side. George Spalatin was chosen to act as secretary. It was mutually agreed that the discussions should be conducted in an amicable manner ; that the conclusions reached should be referred to the Emperor ; that nothing should be considered that is contrary to the "Word of God and to the teaching of the Church, and that the pro- ceedings were not to be divulged except to those who are inter- ested. The Augsburg Confession was made the basis of dis- cussion. ' These preliminaries having been determined, the debate be- gan. Dr. John Eek and Philip Melanchthon were the chief de- * Given in Sehirrmaclier, pp. 287 et seqq. In a somewhat fuUer text in C. E. II., 281 et seqq. Spalatin 's Annates, pp. 229 et seqq. Latin in Chy- traeus, pp. 236 et seqq. Coelestin, III., 31 et seqq. Forstemann (who erroneously dates August 18th), II., 244 et seqq. On the margin opposite to the section about the Pope, Briick wrote with his own hand: "I am in doubt about this. Since we say. that the Pope is Antichrist on account of his enormous sins, how can we with a good conscience reverence Antichrist and practice his abuses? If this be done, the Pope is not opposed to us. If we are subject to his human difEerence, even this does not make any difference. But he claims and defends the papacy jure divino." C. E. II., 284, margin. EFFORTS AT EECONCILIATIOX. 149 baters. Spalatin, the secretary, has left us a report of what ensued. No objection was made by the Catholics to the first article of the Confession. Eck complained that in the second article Melanchthon had employed unusual words, but he de- clared that in other respects the article was unobjectionable. There was perfect agreement in regard to the third article. The main contention that afternoon was over the fourth article, and particularly over the word sola in the formula, faith alone saves. Eck said that that word could not be tolerated. Brentz replied that it could not be surrendered, for it had been employed by Ambrose and Hilary, and was derived from Paul. Finally Eck said: "You confess that forgiveness of sin takes place by grace which makes acceptable, and by faith in a formal way, and by the Word and the sacraments in an instrumental way. The article is to be so stated." Of Articles V., VI., VII., VIII., Eck said: "In foundation and in substance we are not divided. ' ' Spalatin reports further : "No objection was made to the ninth article, of Baptism. The tenth article, de eiocharistia, of the venerable sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, was not found wanting, except that the word realiter or substantiaUter, or, in the German, wesentlich, should be added. ' ' * Both Spalatin and Schirrmacher say that "in this first session they agreed on eleven articles of the Confession." The twelfth was under discussion when the session closed. The next day, August 17th, the Committee was in session both in the forenoon and in the afternoon. As the result of deliberation, the parties agreed on fifteen out of the first twenty- one articles of the Confession. Three were held under dispute and three were reserved to be considered in connection with Part II. On the eighteenth the Lutherans made a Declaration of the articles on which the Committee had agreed: "On the first article there is agreement. * Anndles, pp. 159 et seqq.; Miiller, Historie, p. 752. CocMaeus reports in his PMlippioae Quatiior, H. la, thus: "The Lutherans of their own accord gave up and renounced this word Sola, and no longer said that we are justi- fied by faith alone. Therefore, a brief statement of concord was then drawn up in the briefest possible form of words — and unless my memory fails me, it was written by Philip himself, namely, that justification or the remission of sins takes place per gratiam gratum facientem et fidem formaliter, per verbum vero et sacramentum instrumentaliter. " Quoted from PEtt, Apol- offie der Augustana, p. 49. Melanchthon, in his account of this colloquy, says: "He (Eck) wanted us to write: Quod jtistificamur per gratiam et fidem. I made no objection; but that fool doesn't know the meaning of the word grace." C. E. II., 300. "The sola fide was at least formally dropped." Holler's KirchengescUchte (2d ed.), p. 102. 150 j:ffort« at reconciliation. "When in the Latin it is said that man is by nature born without the fear of God and without faith in God, it is to be understood, not only that young children cannot have this power (Wirkung), but that, weakened by nature, they are unable by natural powers to have the fear of God and faith. And to be born without such power and gifts is a want of righteousness which we are understood to derive from Adam. ' ' In the German this point is so clear that it was not attacked, namely, that we are not able by nature to fear God and to be- lieve. Adults are also included. "Of natural lusts we hold that the sin of nature remains, but the guilt is removed by Baptism. "On the third we are agreed. "As an explanation of the fourth, fifth and sixth articles we confess that remission of sins takes place through grace, whereby we have a gracious God, and that in us it takes place through faith, and by the Word of God and. the sacraments as instru- ments.* "On the seventh article there is agreement. "In the eighth article. Of the Church, we confess that in this life there are many wicked persons and sinners in the Church. ' ' On the ninth, tenth and eleventh articles there is agreement. ' ' In the twelfth article, Of Sin, we do not deny that Repentance consists of three parts, viz., Contrition, which is alarm, and leads to the confession of sin. Confession. Yet here we should have proper regard to absolution, and should believe that sin is for- given on account of the merit of Christ. The third part is Satisfaction. Thus we hold alike. Yet we are not agreed as to whether satisfaction is necessary to the remission of punishment. "On the thirteenth article there is agreement. "On the fourteenth article there is agreement, so far as per- tains to words. But the subject has been referred to the article. Of Ecclesiastical Power. "The fifteenth article has been referred to the article. Of Episcopal Jurisdiction and Monastic Yows. "On the sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth ar- ticles there is agreement. "On the twentieth article, so much as pertains to the preach- ers and the Apology, for these will be considered in the proper * Chytraeus gives the Latin text thus : Quod remissio peccatorum fiat per gratiam gratum facientem et per fidem in noMs. P. 267. Spalatin has ivritten : "In the fifth, sixth and seventh articles we are agreed. ' ' Fbrste- mann, II., p. 231, margin. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. 151 place, since we are not considering such things in this negotia- tion. But as regards the faith, we abide by the fourth article and the declaration in regard to it. In regard to good works, we are agreed that we must and ought to do good worlds, and that works that proceed from faith and grace are well-pleasing to God. But whether these works are meritorious, or in what man- ner they are meritorious, also whether or how we shall trust in them — here there is no agreement. Hence it is deferred. "On the twenty-first article we are agreed in regard to two points, namely, that the saints and angels with God in heaven pray for us; and the custom of the Church which cherishes the memory of the saints and prays God to assist us by the prayers of the Church, is Christian and is to be held. But as regards the invocation of the saints, we are agreed in this, namely, that there exists no express command of the Scriptures which en- joins upon anyone the invocation of the saints. But as to whether the saints, according to the received custom of the Universal Church, may be invoked with intention — on this there is diiference of opinion, since the Elector, the Princes and other allies regard it as doubtful and as dangerous on account of the many abuses, and because there is no express Scripture for it. " * This is the first, and, consequently, the oldest official declara- tion {Erklarung is the title in German) made in regard to the Augsburg Confession, and it was made by no less than seven persons, who had been active in the preparation of the Confes- sion, two of whom had signed it as containing the doctrines taught by their preachers in their dominions. Then, too, it must be borne in mind that this declaration or explanation was such as satisfied the minds of the most pronounced adherents of the Roman Catholic Church, as Duke George, Eck and "Wimpina. The question must here be raised. Is such declaration or explana- tion the true and intended meaning of the Augsburg Confession ? Or, in other words, Were such doctrines taught in the dominions of the subscribers of the Augsburg Confession? Or was such a declaration or explanation wrung from the Committee in view of threatened and impending evils? If we afSrm in regard to * Forstemann's Urlcundenbuch, II., 230 et seqq., taken from Spalatin's Manuscript found in the Ansbaeh Archives. There is also a copy in the Weimar Archives. It is probable that J. J. Miiller copied this into his Bistorie, pp. 745, et seqq. It varies in some places from Forstemann's copy. In Jena edition of Luther's Works, V., 103, 104. St. Louis ed., XVI., 1383-4. Latin in Coelestin, III., 55, 56. Chytraeus, 267, 268. These texts also differ somewhat from each other. But the differences are not material. 152 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. the first two questions, then the Augsburg Confession, in its chief articles, includes, rather than excludes, the characteristic teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. If we deny in regard to the first two, then we are forced to affirm in regard to the third question, and consequently to declare that the Lutheran seven were deficient in those qualities of moral heroism for which some of them have been long and loudly praised. The data given in the Declaration furnish the legitimate premises for one or the other of these conclusions. But the historian does not have for his chief mission the de- duction of conclusions, but the exhibition of the facts. There is the Declaration. It speaks for itself. It shows conclusively that the Protestant seven were willing to make peace on terms that must have proved humiliating to themselves, and disastrous to their cause. Their compromise on Article IV. of the Confes- sion fully justifies Seekendorf's comment that it contains the seeds of disputes.* They had indeed, in great part, at least, if not entirely, surrendered the acropolis of the Lutheran Confes- sion, namely, that men are justified by faith alone for the sake of Christ. Had concord been established on the basis of this Declaration, there can be no doubt that the way would have been opened in the dominions of the Princes for the restoration of the Roman Catholic doctrine of justification as the same had been taught in the scholastic theology, and as it was subsequently promulgated officially by the Council of Trent. And what shall we say in regard to Article X.? Here the agreement is categorical. The German texts are all alike, ex- cept in the spelling: Im Neunden, zcehenden und eilfften ar- tickeln ist man gleich, that is, in articles nine, ten and eleven they are agreed. In the Latin, Coelestin has: In 9, 10, 11 articulis consentimus, that is, in articles 9, 10, 11 we agree. In Chytraeus: In 9, 10, 11 consensus est, that is, in 9, 10, 11 there is agreement. Hence, we are bound to conclude either that the Protestant seven had allowed the Catholic seven to understand Article X. in their own way, and to read into it the Roman Catholic doctrine of the sacrament, or that they held at the time, and had purposely expressed in Article X., a view of the sacrament that could be harmonized with the Roman Catholic teaching. The latter alter- native, rather than the former, must be accepted. The explana- tion given by Pastor, that Eck understood the theological terms * Historia Lutheranismi, II., 179. EFFORTS AT EECONCILIATION. 153 in the scholastic sense, and Melanchthon in the new sense given to them by Luther, is totally inadequate.* It only exposes Mel- ' anchthon to the charge of deception, since he knew the scholastic meaning of theological terms just as well as Eck did. He could not have failed to understand Eck's meaning. Moreover, his own language shows what he must have meant, unless again we are willing to subject him to the charge of purposeful deception. For already on the fourth he had written to Cardinal Cam- peggius: "We confess that in the species of the bread the true body of Christ is contained, or by concomitance, the blood, and therefore the whole Christ. In the species of the wine likewise the whole Christ," f and had used the very language of Mediaeval Catholicism. In the Apology (Prima Adumbratio) offered to the Emperor September 22d, he wrote : "Of the tenth. Neither do we imagine that the dead body of Christ is taken in the sacra- ment, or the body without the blood, nor the blood without the body. But we believe that the whole living Christ is present in either part of the sacrament. ' ' J And that they did not mean to exclude the doctrine of tran- substantiation, we can readily conclude from the defense of Article X. in the first edition of the Apology, published with the editio princeps of the Confession in 1531. Here, on the one hand, Melanchthon writes not one word against the Roman Cath- olic doctrine of the Lord's Supper; but on the other hand, he introduces the word essentialiter, which had been disiderated in the Catholic Confutation and also in the first session of the Committee of Fourteen, and quotes with approbation from the Greek Canon of the Mass as follows: "We have learned that not only the Roman Church afSrms the bodily presence of Christ, but the Greek Church both now holds and formerly did hold the same view. For that is proved by their Canon of the Mass, in which the Priest publicly prays that when the bread is changed it may become the body of Christ. And the Bulgarian (Theo- philact of Bulgaria), a writer, as it seems to us, not foolish, says that the bread is not only a figure, but is truly changed into the flesh of Christ. ' ' § And that this article was interpreted in favor * Seunionsiestrelungen, p. 48. t C. R. II., 246. t C E. XXVTI., 285, 333. In the chief parts Melanchthon employs the vei7 language of the Papal Confutation. C. K. XXVII., 106. See Cochlaeus, I II. Artickeln: "Under the species of bread and wine and under each of the same, the true body and the true blood of Christ our Sa-nour, are essentially and truly present." A. IV., 4. ' § In Jonas' German translation of the Apology and in the edition that 154 EFFORTS AT RECONCII.IATION. of transubstantiation by the Catholic writers is known to all who ■ have read the lucubrations of Andrew Pabricius in his liar- monia Confessionis Augustanae. It is also surprising that there should have been agreement in regard to the eleventh article. Spalatin has recorded exactly the following: "Of Article XI., Of Confession, Dr. Eck says: 'In the chief thing {EmCbtsach) it agrees with the Church. The sin which one does not know, one need not confess.' " * Wlien we recall that the canons of the Roman Catholic Church require every member of that Church to confess at least once a year, and that, too, to his or her own priest, we cannot but conclude that there was either a great lack of candor, or an enormous self-deception on the part of the evangelical members of the Committee of Fourteen. They knew, every one of them, what was meant in the Roman Catholic Church by Confessio (Beicht), and absolutio privata. Every one of them had gone to Confession and had received private absolution many a time before he had allied himself with Luther; and they all must have known what Eck meant by ' ' the chief thing. ' ' Hence, the Protestant seven were by no means justified in allowing Eck, and his part of the Committee, to rest unchal- lenged in the canonic and traditional sense of those words, unless they themselves meant that they should be so understood by themselves and by their party. Eck may have been cunning, but, undoubtedly, the Evangelicals were either weak or obtuse. Hence, the Niirnberg Senate was fully justified in its sharp censure of the concession made in this article, since such con- cession involved the return essentially to the Roman Catholic auricular confession and the enumeration of sins, and connected the Eucharist inseparably with Confession.! Something also might be said about the agreement on Article XIII. But we must remember that this article, as it was read and presented to the Emperor, did not have the damnatory paragraph about the opics operatum. Neither did Article XVIII. have, at that time, the damnatory paragraph. Even the partial agreement on Article XX. gives occasion for surprise, since in this article the Confession had borne explicit testimony against accompanied the octavo edition of tlie Confession (autumn of 1531) the quotation from the Bulgarian is omitted. Already it had given offence. See The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1900, p. 387, vote. * Annales, p. 167. t Coelestin, III., 81 ; Chytraeus,. p. 299. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATIOK. 155 the Roman Catholic teaching, that men are justified by faith and works. But the minds and hearts of the Protestant seven were so intently centered on the work of reconciliation, that they seem not to have comprehended the significance and the bearing of the Catholic demands, and of their own concessions. They had clasped hands with the Catholic seven on fifteen articles of the Augsburg. And that the extent of the Protestant concessions may be- come still clearer to us, we present the following from the Catholic side.* "The first part of the Confession contains twenty-one articles, in which they agree with us entirely in fifteen, but in the others partly : For three are deferred to the Abuses, namelj', the eleventh, the fourteenth, and the fifteenth. Three differ in part, namely, the twelfth, the twentieth and tlie twenty-first. I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. To be / XI. ^.„ / XII. 1 l)iTTP'r 1 Agree ( VIII. treated XIV. . XX. IX. later ( XV. '" ^^''^ ( XXI." X. XIII. XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. "In discussing justifying faith," says this report, "we were unwilling to admit that we are justified by faith alone, because the Apostle James does not admit that. Then it was agreed to saj^ that we are justified by faith, but not by faith alone, because no Scripture has that, but rather the contrary. There- fore, when the word Sola was omitted, it was agreed that justi- fication or remission of sins takes place per gratiam gratum * Given by J. J. Miiller, p. 775 et seqq. The tabulated exhibit is found in Coelestin, III., 44; Ghytraeus, Historia (German), p. 150; in Chytraeus (Latin), p. 243; in Muller, p. 781. 156 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. facientem et fidera formaliter per verbum et sacramentum in- strumentaliter, that is, by grace that makes acceptable, and by faith formally, and through the Word and the sacrament in- strumentally. " Of the 'tenth article this report says: "Thej' agree that the body and blood of the Lord are truly present, and for better explanation vere et realiter, German, wesentlich was added." Of the thirteenth article it is said : "They agree that the sacraments were instituted, not only that they might be marks of profession among men, but rather that they might be signs and testimonies of the will of God toward us." Of article eighteen it is said: "They agree that man has free-will, but without grace it cannot work grace. ' ' It will thus be seen that the Committee had agreed on fifteen out of the twenty-one Articles of Faith; that they had partly agreed in regard to three others, and that three were to be dis- cussed in connection with the Articles on Abuses. The conces- sions were almost entirely from the Protestant side. Hence, the Catholics, in their report, could represent the Lutherans as agreeing with them. It is certain that the Lutheran seven virtu- ally surrendered the article that, more than any other, is distinc- tive of Lutheranism, "the article of the standing and falling Church." Indeed had reunion been effected on the basis of the report of either half of the Committee (and the two reports are essentially identical). Protestantism would have been strangled in the hour of its birth, and Rome would have re- gained her sway over the entire German Church. The fact is, the Protestants, as we shall hereafter learn, had almost com- pletely lost their courage, and seemed willing — that is, the Saxons and Margravians — to purchase peace at almost any price. Happily, there was an influence, partly from . without and partly from within — the Niirnbergers, the Liineburgers, the Hessians and Luther — which saved the day. CHAPTER XI. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. CONTINUED. In the afternoon of August 18th, the joint Committee met at the Bathaus and took up the Second Part of the Confession.* The Catholics preferred to begin with the last article, fearing that a report should reach the people about the action on both species in the Eucharist. But when the Lutherans objected, the Catholics prepared terms in writing, protesting, however, that "they woidd not decide nor conclude anything, but would refer everything to the Estates and to the Emperor. ' ' f The proposi- tion of the Catholics was laid before the Lutherans the next day, and is as follows : "By permission of the Apostolic See or of its Legate, and with the consent of the Emperor, the supreme advocate of the Church, both species of the sacrament be allowed the Lutherans on about the following terms : "I. That their pastors administer both species to their own parishioners only, and only in those places where such cus- tom has prevailed for some years already. "II. That it be preceded by private confession, according to ancient custom. "III. That at Easter, and whenever this sacrament be ad- ministered, they teach the people that God has not commanded to receive both species. "IV. That they teach that the entire Christ is present, and is received under one species not less than under both. "V. That they teach that those do not sin who commune under only one species. "VI. That when their subjects desire only one species, they shall give, or cause it to be given to them. "VII. That they shall not reserve the species of wine, nor carry it through the streets to the sick, but in the Church or at home during the celebration of the Masses, administer both species to those who desire them. ' ' t * Spalatin, Annales, p. 169 ; J. J. Miiller, p. 781. t Sehirrmaeher, pp. 222, 223. } Sehirrmaeher, pp. 229, 230 ; Coelestin, IIT., 446 ; Chytraeus, pp. 244, 245. (157) 158 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. The next day, August 20th, the Lutherans reply: "They are willing that the sacrament be preceded by con- fession. They are willing that their pastors and preachers speak pacifically on these subjects until there is a future decision in a council. They confess likewise that the entire body of Christ is under the species of bread. They deny that hitherto they had forbidden the sacrament under one kind to anyone, where it could be had. They deny that among them the species of wine had been reserved in vessels or carried to the sick. Finally they wish that the venerable sacrament be held in honor among them as hitherto." Such is the Lutheran Reply as reported in Schirrmacher, and by Coelestin and Chytraeus, who proceed to say: "When the Catholics sought to have certain ambiguous words explained, the Lutherans, after considering the matter for some time, re- plied, August 21st, that every person intending to commune should previously make confession on the more important points by which his conscience was burdened, in order to seek counsel and consolation on these things. "Secondly, they declare that they believe that the entire Christ, his body and blood, true God and man, is truly under either species, or under the alternate species: Sub utraque specie aut etiain sub utralibet, aut altera vere esse. "Thirdly, they declare, during the discussion, that they do not condemn those who formerly took, or now take, only one species. Neither do they believe that they do wrong who receive one species. Nevertheless, they, are not willing to have this preached to theirs. Also the deliberation between the seven and the seven was only in regard to both species. Hence, it is evident that there was not much difference between the parties on this subject. For in these things they differ from us only in that, while they and we believe that those do not sin who re- ceive one species, they (the Lutherans) do not want this preached to theirs, though they confess that the entire Christ is truly under one species. Nevertheless, they contend that the command of Christ, given alike to ministers and to laymen, is to take both, because he said: 'Drink ye all of it.' But ours respond from Mark: 'And they all drank of it,' so that it is understood that it was said to the twelve disciples who supped with him. Hence, but for obstinacy, there would easily have been an agreement on this subject."* » Coelestin, III., 446. EFFORTS AT HECONCILIATIOX. — CONTINUED. 159 The demands of the Catholics, as noted above, are distinct and iinequivocal. The concessions made are very small, and of very limited application. They make no surrender or modifica- tion of the principle of communion imder one species. The Protestants maj' administer the communion under both species to their own parishioners, and only in those places where the custom has long been in use. The reply of the Lutherans must be regarded as ambiguous and evasive. It does not categorically reject the communion under one species, as the Confessors had done on the basis of the Scriptures and of history in Article XXII. of the Confes- sion. It virtually denies what had been there affirmed. ]More- over, concomitance is admitted in amplest terms, and the private confession of the more important sins is approved, and is con- ceded as a prerequisite to communion. Hence, as a consequence of the slight concessions made by the Catholic seven and of the large concessions made by the Lutheran seven, the report is justified in saying that "there was not much difference between the parties on this subject," that is, on the Article De Utraqiie Specie Sacramenti (Art. XXII.). 2. The Propositions of the Catholics. Having failed to agree on Article XXII. the joint Committee took the remaining articles of the Confession in order. The propositions of the Catholic seven and the responses of the Lutheran seven are reported by Spalatin, and are given with great fulness in Latin by Schirrmacher, Coelestin and Chytraeus, and in German by J. J. Miiller. JBut as they are too long to be transferred in full to these pages, we content our- selves here with a synopsis. 1. In regard to the marriage of priests, the Catholics demanded that it should be tolerated only where the custom had existed for some time already; that there be no new mar- riages; that priests should be allowed to return to celibacy; that, so soon as it could be done, celibate priests be put into the places of married ones; that married priests be ejected from office, unless a dispensation could be obtained from the Pope or his legate. The Lutherans reply by making reference to their Confes- sion, where they give reasons for the marriage of the clergy. "On this subject there was no further discussion between the 160 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. seven and the seven, because there was greater difference here than in regard to both species, ' ' says the report. 2. In regard to the Mass, the Catholics demand that both public and private Masses shall be celebrated on the altar at the usual festivals, and that both canons of the Mass be used, adding that in the Mass Christ is offered mystically and fig- uratively in memory of his passion on the Cross. The Lutherans reply that the Masses are celebrated in the usual ecclesiastical attire, and with the usual ceremonies. When they are interrogated about the Canon and about Private Masses, they make no written reply, but persist in rejecting the Canon and Private Masses. 3. In regard to Confession, Article XXV., the Catholics pro- pose nothing in writing, because the matter had been already treated in Article XI. when discussing the parts of penitence. The Lutherans refer to that in their written reply, and add these three things: First, that confession ought not to be omitted, on account of the great consolation in the absolution. Secondly, that it may be known how grand and salutary is the power of the Keys. Thirdly, that the people may be accustomed to confess their sins; also that those sins are remitted which are not enumerated. On these subjects there was no need of further discussion between the parties. 4. Under Article XXVI., Of the Difference of Meats, the Catholics proposed the restoration of fasts, festivals, confessions, prayers, processions, ceremonies and the distinctions of foods and times, as they had been observed by the Catholic Church from of old. The Lutherans respond that for the sake of charity, and for the peace and unity of the Church, general ceremonies maj-^ be observed, but that they are not to be regarded as necessary to the worship of God. They consent that for the hearing of the Word of God, and for the administration of the sacraments, the following days are to be observed : All Sundays, Christmas, St.' Stephen's, St John the Evangelist's, the Lord's Circum- cision, Epiphany, Holy Week for celebrating the Passion of Christ, Easter with two or three holidays. Ascension Day, Pente- cost with two or three holidays, the Principal Festivals of the Virgin, the Feasts of all the Apostles. 5. Coming to Article XXVII., Of .Monastic Vows, the Cath- olics demand the complete restoration of the monastic institu- tion, in all its privileges and exemptions. The Lutherans refer to what they had said on these matters in their Confession, ex- EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. 161 press their willmgness to leave it to the consciences of monks and nuns to remain in the cloisters or to leave them until a decision could be obtained from a council, are willing to allow the monks and nuns their accustomed manner of life, dress and ceremonies, are willing to defend them from violence and wish to leave the income of the dismantled monasteries with the secular power for the purpose of supporting those who have gone out, and also for supporting preachers, parishes and schools, until a council could be held. 6. As touching Article XXVIII., Of Ecclesiastical Power, the Catholics demand that the power and jurisdiction of the Bishops remain intact. As regards abuses, they order that the Lutheran Princes shall consult with the other Princes of the Empire, and shall obey the common conclusion; though should trouble arise with the Bishops as regards jurisdiction, or in any other matter, the Lutheran Princes shall suflEer no prejudice on account of such an arrangement. The Lutherans agree that the jurisdiction and power of the Bishops shall remain, yet they refuse to justify their neglect of preaching, of the admin- istration of the sacraments, of ordination and other abuses; that the pastors and preachers should be subject to the Bishops, that ecclesiastical jurisdiction in matters ecclesiastical should not be impeded, and that episcopal excommunication, in cases appertaining to ecclesiastical jurisdiction, shall not be impeded, provided it be done in accordance with the teaching of the Scriptures. "All these things as they had been transacted, were laid before the Electors and other Princes and Estates of the Holy JRoman • Empire by the Catholic deputies, August 22d, and publicly read, ' ' * that is, the Report, of which we have given a synopsis above, was read by the Catholic members of the Com- mittee as their Report of the transactions of the Committee of Fourteen. 3. The Lutheran Corrections. Both Coelestin and Chytraeus say that the Report of the Catholics is not accurate, and that it was therefore found neces- sary to have corrections made.* This, of course, was done by Melanchthon, and it cannot be denied that his corrections do change the purview, though they still leave much to be desired. We cannot here quote all that he wrote in correction of the * Coelestin, III., 47 ; Chytraeus, p. 253. n 162 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. Catholic Report, but it is important and just that we recite in full the most essential point: "In regard to Article IV., of Justifying Faith, they report that there was agreement, so as to say: That we are justified by faith, but not by faith alone, because that is not contained in the Scripture, but rather the contrary. But we do not concede that it is not contained in the Scripture that we are justified by faith alone, but that the contrary is contained. Therefore, we openly contradicted it by quoting Paul, Rom. 3: 'Without works,' and Ephesians 2: 'It is the gift of God,' and, 'Without works.' "Then, after a long discussion, our opponents conceded that remission of sins occurs neither on account of preceding nor of subsequent works or merits. "Likewise they said that it occurs through faith: And they added, per gratiam gratum facientem: They added also sacra- menta. "When this was conceded, we said that we did not exclude gratiam and sacramenta by the word Sola, but that we exclude works. That if they would confess that remission of sins occurs through faith, not on account of merits preceding or follow- ing, we would not quarrel about the word SOLA. And the addi- tion was made to our Article that we confess that remission of sins occurs per gratiam gratum facientem et fidem formaliter, per Verbum et Sacramenta instrumentaliter. The Princes of both sides remember that this was the order of the transaction. ' ' * In regard to the other points this is the substance : 1. Of the invocation of the saints, both sides agree that it is not expressly, commanded in the Scriptures. 2. That in confession only the chief sins should be enumer- ated. 3. That they do not wish to teach that those who receive the sacrament under one form do not sin. They excuse those who take the sacrament under one form from necessity and com- pulsion. 4. In regard to celibacy they say that all do not possess the gift from God. Hence, it is to tempt God, to refuse the use of God's order without the gift. 5. Against the allegation of the Catholics that they have rejected Private Masses and the Canon without just reason, they reply that they gave ample reasons wh3'^ they could not ap- prove either. The common Mass is observed by them with great » Coelestin, III., folio 47. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. lUS reverence and with the usual ceremonies. Masses for the dead have no value. Very many come to the sacrament causa ventris, and hence receive no benefit. These corrections do change the purview, though they are by no means satisfactory, and, as we shall learn hereafter, they gave grave offence to many in the Lutheran party. But as Melanchthon 's corrections were too long to be read before the Emperor, they were reduced to two articles : Of Both Species of the Sacrament and Of the Marriage of Priests. As these two articles were presented as a kind of ultimatum on the part of the Lutherans, they should appear here in full. Of Both Species op the Sacrament. "1. The institution of Christ and the distinct word: of the Evangelists is : Drink ye all of it. "2. That it was so observed formerly in the entire Church by the Holy Fathers and Bishops, for more than a thousand years. "3. It is not known when, nor by whom, the species of the wine was abolished — not indeed in the Canons. - . "4. The Emperor should consider that a divine command is not abrogated by the reasons adduced and by the writings inappropriately cited by the opponents. "5. We cannot consent that the species of the wine should be prohibited. ' ' 6. Nothing in the- divine appointments is to be rashly changed, nor are we to consent to changes. "7: Much less can we approve and praise it when the oppo- nents say that it is an abuse for the laity to receive both species. For an institution of Christ cannot be called an abuse. "8. In regard to these things Christ has threatened, Matt. 5, that whosoever shall break one of the least of the command- ments, shall be least." Op the Marriage op the Priests. "1. This subject does not call for a long discussion, for it is clear. "2. The contrary is an impious opinion, because it is a doctrine of devils. ' ' 3. It is contrary to the command of God. "4. It is contrary to the creation of God. "5. It is contrary to the order of God. 164 EFFOKTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUKD. "6. It is an impossible vow. "7. But a vow cannot take away the command, creation and order of God. "8. Only let the Emperor consider how great is the scandal everywhere. "9. The opponents do well to laud chastity, but why do they not practice that which they praise? Also there is chastity in Marriage, as Paphnutius says. "10. Inasmuch as they declare that cliastitj' is possible, why do they not also exhibit it? The lives of the celibate priests are known. "11. Even though chastity were possible, nevertheless mar- riage is not to be prohibited by law. For it lays a snare for consciences, and is a doctrine of demons, and has given power to the Pope to load the priests with this burden. ' ' 12. Ambrose has said : Chastity can be only recommended ; it cannot be enjoined. It is a matter of wish rather than of command. "13. Moreover, it is a divine command: Let each one have his own wife. Let a Bishop be the husband of one wife. Not all can receive this word: It is not good for a man to be alone. But a divine command cannot be removed by a human prohibition, for the obligation of the contracting parties is a matter of the divine law. "14. They that prohibit marriage become guilty, and are partakers of all the scandals and fornications. "15. They also become participants and guilty of the shed- ding of all the blood of all who are killed on this account. "16. It would also be a great cruelty to deprive the Church of its priests by prohibiting or separating them from pious wives. For where could we get suitable celibates for all the parishes ? "17. For many centuries in the primitive Church, even upon the confession of the opponents, the marriage of priests and Bishops was practiced. "18. Even to-day in the Eastern Church there are married priests. ' ' * The Joint Committee of Fourteen finished its work August 22d.t The same day the Lutheran part of the Committee made a verbal report at the lodging of the Elector of Saxony.J The * Coelestin, III., 48, 49. t Coelestin, III., 49&. t C. E. II., 300, 301. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. 165 Catholic part of the Committee reported to the Catholic Estates at the Rathaus* Seckendorf says, justly, that neither party expressed itself with sufficient accuracy and perspicuity. Badh party concealed rather than revealed its true sentiment, and each party accused the other of the lack of candor. Yet there were still unreduced differences, but the concessions made by the Lutherans were far-reaching, — "concessions, which, in fact, iii- volved the restoration of the externals of the Church to an extent such as was no longer to be expected."! Consequently the propositions and concessions made by the Lutherans awoke strong opposition from within their own ranks.J But with these reports and statements the negotiations of the Committee terminated. "Doctrine," as Plitt says, "had been wholly cast aside," and the discussions had been narrowed to two or three articles, about which there was the chief conten- tion, namely, the sacrament and the marriage of the priests. But on these points neither party would yield to the other. With the Catholics it was a matter of tradition and of the Church's teaching. "With the Lutherans it was a matter of con- science and of the teaching of the Scriptures. Thus the Com- mittee of Fourteen failed to agree on a basis of reconciliation. The learned and judicious Rotermund has closed his account of the transactions of the Committee of Fourteen with the fol- lowing observations: "Both formerly and in recent times the two parties engaged in efforts to restore harmony have been bitterly reproached. The Roman Catholics have been accused of cunningly and deceitfully circumventing the Evangelicals by trying to make the impression of a reformation in doctrine, in order to lead them again under the domination of the Church. It must indeed be conceded that they used cunning artifices for the purpose of recovering their opponents from so wide an estrangement. But it certainly could not have been their pur- pose to deceive them. Melanchthon and the two others of his party must have been extraordinarily short-sighted, not to have observed in the beginning of the colloquy, that the Roman Cath- olics were not willing to change anything in the essentials of their faith and church polity. Never did the hope of peace between the Protestants and the Roman Catholic Church seem so near its realization as in the negotiations of the two corii- • Sehirrmacher, p. 524 ; Cochlaeus, Eigtoria, p. 406. tVon Eanke, Geschichte, III., 197. J See Moller-Kawerau Kirchengesckichte, dritte Aufl., III., p. 113. 166 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. mittees from the 16th to the 20th of August, and never would a peace have brought with it such pernicious consequences for the Protestants, as this one, had it been effected. If the ruling of a higher power be not recognized here, then it remains iner- plicable^ that a better use was not made of the yielding temper of the Protestants. Both parties were agreed on the first ten, the thirteenth, the sixteenth to the nineteenth articles of the Confession. Fortunately, the negotiations with reference to the Lord's Supper came to naught." * But in justice to Melanchthon, and also as an important side- light on this entire section of Lutheran confessional history, we add here a report written by Melanchthon, August 21st, on the articles which had not been settled by the Committee : "1. That faith makes righteous before God, not our work or service which goes before or follows ; but for the sake of Christ, if we believe that God for the sake of Christ is gracious to us. "2. That we ought to do good works, though we do not thereby merit grace and righteousness before God ; but faith ac- quires grace not on account of our woi-k. "3. That in Confession it is not necessary to enumerate sins. "4. That though sorrow and repentance must and ought to exist, yet sins are not forgiven on account of sorrow, but through faith, if we trust the absolution, or the Gospel, that for Christ's sake our sins are forgiven. Therefore, repentance must be fol- lowed by faith, which comforts the conscience, and believes that sins are forgiven for the sake of Christ. "5. That it is not necessary for the remission of penalty to add satisfaction in repentance. "6. That the sacraments do not justify without faith, ex opere operato. "7. That for the true unity of the Church and of the faith uniformity of human institutions is not necessary, but agree- ment in Articles of Faith and in the use of the sacraments. "8. That worship instituted by men, without the command and "Word of God, for the purpose of meriting grace, are con- trary to the Gospel, and obscure the merit of Christ. "9. That cloister-vows and the monastic life, instituted as the worship of God for the purpose of meriting grace, are con- trary to the Gospel. ' ' 10. That human ordinances, which can be held without sin * GescMchte, p. 131. EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. 167 and promote good order in the Church, should be observed out of love to avoid offence. That we should understand that such works are not a necessary worship of God. Also that the Bishops have no right to oppress consciences with such traditions. There- fore it is not a sin if such traditions be dropped without giving offence. "11. The invocation of the saints is an uncertain and dan- gerous thing. It obscures the ofi&ce of Christ whom the Scriptures hold up to us as Mediator and Redeemer. "12. That those who forbid both forms act contrary to the institution of Christ and the Scriptures. "13. That those who forbid marriage act contrary to the command of God, which commands to flee unchastity, and that each should have his own wife. "14. That the Mass is not a work which merits grace ex opere operato, or even merits the application of grace to others. But the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ in order that grace may be offered to us who receive it by faith, not ex opere operato." * He then tells us that these doctrines are held by the Elector of Saxony and his allies as right and Christian, and that if there be other controverted doctrines, these should be referred to a council, but meanwhile one party should not be assaulted by the other. There can be scarcely a doubt that this Opinion was written by command of the Elector. One cannot but wish that some of the steadfastness which it exhibits had been injected into the Confession as the same was delivered to the Emperor. Another side-light on these peace negotiations is furnished by Melanchthon 's letter to Luther, written August 22d : "Yesterday we ended the Conference, or rather the Strife, which was conducted in the presence of Judges. At the begin- ning the Judges were Henry of Brunswick, the Bishop of Augs- burg, Eck, Gochlaeus. Later Duke George took the place of Henry of Brunswick. For Brunswick was required to follow the Macedonian (Philip of Hesse), who, they fear, is mustering an army. In regard to the doctrines, things are about as follows : Eck found fault about the word Sola, when we say that men are justified by faith. Yet he did not condemn it, but said that the unsophisticated are offended. I forced him to confess that the righteousness of faith is correctly taught by us. Nevertheless, * C. E. II., 297-9. 168 EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. he wanted us to write that we are justified by grace and faith. I did not object, but that fool does not know the meaning of the word grace. There was another dispute about the remission of penalty and about satisfactions. There was a third about merits. On these two subjects there was no agreement. Though he did not assign much to. merit, we did not accept that even. Then we took up the subject of both species. Here he tried hard to show that it is not commanded to take both species. We regarded it as absolutely indifferent whether we take one or both. And if we should teach this, he would cheerfully allow us both species. I could not accept this, and yet I excused those who hitherto by mistake have taken one, for they clamored that we are condemning the entire Church. What think you? The appointment of Christ refers to the laity and to the clergy. Hence, when we are forced to use the sacrament, minds ought to retain the form of the entire sacrament. If you think thus, write it unequivocally. In regard to the Mass, Vows, Marriage, there was no dispute. Only some propositions were made. These we did not accept. I cannot divine what the end will be. For although our opp'onents also need peace, yet some seem not to consider how great will be the danger if the matter should result in war. We propose very moderate conditions. We render obedience and jurisdiction to the Bishops, and we promise to restore the common ceremonies. What weight this will have I do not know. You will pray Christ to preserve us. " * This letter confirms rather than contradicts the report ren- dered by the Catholic Committee. It shows that large conces- sions had been made by the Lutherans, and that the distance between the two halves of the Committee is not very great. But the letter also helps to confirm the impression, made at every step of the negotiations, that the Catholic party regarded no reconciliation possible that stopped short of a complete submis- sion on the part of their opponents. 3. The Emperor's Diplomacy. But while the Joint Committee was disputing over the Articles of Faith, the Emperor Charles was plying the arts of diplomacy. Through the Bishop of Mayence and through Frederick of the Palatinate and others, he tried to get George of Branden- burg and the Elector of Saxony to abandon the cause of the Reformation on which they had embarked. To the Elector he * C. E. II., 299. EFFORTS AT EECONCILIATION. — CONTINUED. 169 refused formal installation over his own dominions, except upon condition that he would first return to favor with the Roman Church. He declared to George that, unless he obeyed, the title of his nephew, son of his brother Casimir, should be taken from him. And the Landgrave of Hesse was approached with the promise that if he would make his peace with the Emperor, Ulrich, Duke of Wiirtemberg, should be reinstated, and that the controversy which he had with the Count of Nassau should be settled by the intervention of the Emperor. But nothing was effected by these diplomatic efforts.* * Sehirrmaeher, p. 241. CHAPTER XII. THE EFFORTS AT EECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. The failure of the Committee of Fourteen to agree upon a basis of reconciliation did not deter either party from further ei?orts. The fact that only two or three matters, and those appertaining to ceremonies, and not really to doctrines, remained unsettled, encouraged the so-called Catholic middle party to try again. They thought that the difficulty was connected with per- sons rather than with the subjects at issue. Duke George especially was regarded as the stumbling-block. Hence it was re- solved by the Catholics to eliminate him from the negotiations. But in order to do this diplomatically, some of the Catholic Princes importuned the Elector of Saxony to agree to the ap- pointment of a committee of three on each side further to con- sider the points at issue. But such a proposition did not com- mend itself to some of the Lutherans. Some looked upon it as ' ' vexatious and knavish, ' ' and they discussed the matter in three separate meetings. Finally they agreed to it, but with the dis- tinct understanding that nothing more was to be conceded to the Catholics.* 1. The Committee of Six. On the side of the Catholics, Bernhard Hagen, Chancellor of the Elector of Cologne; Hieronymus Vehus, Chancellor of Baden, and Dr. John Eck; on the side of the Lutherans, Dr. Gregory Briick, Chancellor of the Elector of Saxony ; Dr. Sebas- tian Heller, Chancellor of Margrave George of Brandenburg, and Philip Melanchthon ; were chosen to constitute a Committee of Six.f The Lutheran three were instructed to confine them- selves to five points: The Mass, Communion under both kinds, the Marriage of Priests, Monastic Vows, Episcopal Power, and to make no additional concessions, and to ascertain whether the opposite party would make additional concessions.! August 24th the Joint Committee of Six met at the Rathaus. * C. E. II., 312; Schirrmaoher, p. 242; Spalatin, p. 189; Sleidan (English Translation), p. 132. t Coehlaeus, Commentaria, p. 212; C. E. II., 312; Forstemann, II., 291- Coelestin, III., 60; Gieseler, IV., 142, 143. t Strassburg PoUtis. Corresp., p. 487. (170) THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 171 Immediately the Catholics insisted on communion in one kind, on the Mass with the traditional ceremonies, and with both canons, on priestly celibacy, on the support of the cloisters with the wonted service and dress, and on the episcopal government of the churches ; in a few words, they insisted on almost everything that was distinctive of the Roman Catholic system of doctrine and practice. But the Lutheran Three are now clearly on the alert, and place themselves much more in an attitude of defense than they had done when acting on the Committee of Four- teen. The severe but just condemnation of their former course, and the conditions that had attended their appointment on this Committee, had not only tied their hands, but had evidently quickened their Protestant consciences and strengthened their nerves. They do not now seem like the same men. Hence, they reply to the proposals of the Catholics in a more positive tone: They cannot permit the communion under one kind, except in oases of necessity. They cannot tolerate Private Masses, since such Masses are regarded as an opus operatum, and as sacrifices for the living and the dead. They reject the celibacy of the clergy, because it is a human invention, and marriage is an order of God. They will abide by what was agreed to in the Committee of Fourteen. They wish to refer the matter of episco- pal government and of church ceremonies to a free general council.* But during this, as at other meetings, the Catholics indulged in "the most atrocious threats," and Melanchthon complains of the utter lack of courage in the Lutheran Princes.f And in this criticism of the Lutheran Princes Melanchthon is abundantly sustained by the recorded observations of other Lutherans who were at Augsburg in an official capacity. Hence, others rather than Melanchthon are to blame for the concessions that were made. Two days later, Friday, August 26th, in the afternoon, the Committee of Six met again at the Bathaus. But the Catholics proposed nothing essentially new as a means of reconciliation. The Catholics refused to remove any of the abuses, since they held that "their usages were right and must abide, and that in some things they would only have patience with the Lutherans. ' ' The Lutherans again refuse to concur in the proposals which had been made, "but declare that should other Christian proposals * Coelestin, TIL, 60 et seqq.; Forstemann, II., 290 et segq.; C. R. II., 312-314. The Proposals of the Catholics and the Reply of the Lutherans are given by MiiUer, Historie, pp. 801 et seqq., taken from Briick's Geschichte. t C. R. IL, 314. 172 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. be made, such as would bring no burden upon their consciences, another interview would not be declined." In subsequent nego- tiations the Catholics reported that since agreement could not be effected the Emperor was disposed to order a council, but under the condition that all innovations, both in doctrine and in church usages, should be discontinued among the Protestants, "and thus the common Church should be restored. ' ' * To these later proposals which, we repeat, really contain noth- ing new, the Lutherans reply that, inasmuch as through the carelessness and neglect of the Bishops, false and seductive doc- trines and usages have been introduced into the churches, as was shown in the Articles of the Confession, the Princes felt bound before God and their own consciences to make a Christian reformation, as justified by the Scriptures and by the laws of the Pope himself. It was in accordance with precedent that in mat- ters of faith a reformation should be introduced. They promise that they will lay the latest proposals of the Catholics before their Principals. This they did, and on Sunday, August 28th, an answer, both verbal and in writing, was rendered. The answer is a state-paper, rather than a theological argument. It reviews the circumstances that attended the appointment and negotiations of the Committee of Fourteen. It then states that the Lutherans had done all that they could do to' make peace, and had conceded everything that could be conceded with a good conscience and with a proper regard for the honor of God ; they had steadily appealed to a general council, that the Elector and other Orders, notwithstanding the opposition of some of their allies, have consented to the appointment of the Smaller Com- mittee; that the Elector and Princes are not willing to proceed further, nor will they accede to the terms proposed by the Smaller Catholic Committee, since this is not more favorably inclined to peace than was the Larger Committee. But, should more suit- able terms be proposed for composing the difficulties, and for establishing peace, the Lutherans are . ready to respond. The Catholics know the causes of the Abuses, and the sources of the doctrines contained in the Confession: the only cure for the Abuses in the Church is a free general council; the Catholic Orders should insist on the calling of such a council ; that mean- while the Protestant Orders will do all in their power, by the * For all the facta contained in this paragraph, see Schirrmacher, pp. 243, 528; Porstemann, IT., 301; C. R. II., 313; J. J. MuUer, Historie, pp. 817-820. ' FF THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION'. CONCLUDED. 173 help of God, to promote peace, and will so administer their affairs as to give account to God and to the Emperor.* This paper, which in all probability was written by Chancellor Briick, is firmer and more decided in tone than any Lutheran paper that had preceded it during the negotiations for peace. There can be no doubt that the Lutheran Three had been strengthened and stimulated by the opposition shown to the con- cessions made by the Seven. They had remembered their instruc- tions. They probably saw the danger of schism in their own ranks. The Saxons and the Margravians, who had taken the lead in these peace negotiations, almost to the exclusion of their allies in religion, could not afford further to risk the alienation of the Liineburgers, the Hessians and the Evangelical cities. By some means, perhaps through the clear-sighted criticisms of their allies, the Committee of Three had come to see that the Cath- olics were ruled by the principle of ecclesiastical authority, by tradition, and by the theology of the Middle Ages.f They had also learned finally that the Catholics would not concede their appeal to a general council, except upon the condition that the Protestants, both in doctrine and in practice, should return to harmonious action with the Catholic Church, that is, would them- selves again become Roman Catholics. These discoveries, which become increasingly manifest in the later negotiations, would naturally lead the Protestants to place more emphasis on the fundamental principle that the Word of God must determine and shape all articles of faith and all usages of the Church. Thus the antitheses of the two systems, of Catholicism on the one hand, and of Lutheranism on the other, rose into greater prominence. At any rate, the Lutherans begin now to act more like Lutherans. A reaction has manifestly set in, and the Answer of August 28th marks the beginning of the end of the peace negotiations. J Henceforth the Saxons and the * Briick 's Geschichte, pp. 120 et seqq.; Miiller, Historie, pp. 820 et seqq.; Cliytraeus, pp. 273 et seqq.; Forstemann, II., 306 et seqq. Latin in Coe- lestin, III., 59 et seqq. tSee Eck's letter to Melanehthon, August 27th (C. R. II., SIG, 317), in which he says of the opus operatum: "I am so certain of this thing that I would not hesitate to witness to it by my death. ' ' t The Margrave of Brandenburg is still greatly frightened, as we learn from his conversation with the Elector of Brandenburg, reported by the Nurnberg legates, August 29th. He believes that war is imminent, and that it would furnish a good opportunity for the Turks to carry out their plans, according to the old proverb : Duobus litigantibus tertius rideiit. C. E. II., 319. The Nurnberg commissioners report: "They, the Lutherans, did not think that it was obligatory upon them to betake themselves to methods and proposals beyond what had been already made. " C. E. II., p. 321. 174 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. Margravians take a firmer stand. Of this we have ofiScial evi- dence: On the morning of August 29th, the Niirnberg legates are assured by Chancellor Briiek that "in his opinion nothing additional would be conceded," and when, on the morning of the same day, they lay the Remonstrance of the Niirnberg Sen- ate before the Elector of Saxony, they receive an apologetic answer about the concessions that had been made in the Com- mittee of Fourteen, and are informed that additional conces- sions will not be made, at least not until others shall have been consulted. The same morning, Melanehthon and others were commis- sioned to write a reply to the Catholic Confutation of August 3d.* Three days later, September 1st, Melanehthon wrote to Luther: "Day before yesterday (August 30th), our conference was closed. We refused to accept the conditions in regard to one part of the Sacrament, the Canon, Private Masses, and Cel- ibacy."! 3. The Remonstrances. We have already referred to the dissatisfaction of some of the Lutherans with the concessions made by the Lutheran Seven in the Committee of Fourteen. This had reference particularly to the Hessians, the Liineburgers and the Niirnbergers.t August 23d, the Niirnberg commissioners, Kress and Baumgartner, sent a copy of the Articles of Agreement to their Senate. § Imme- diately after its arrival, it was laid before the city council and the theologians of Niirnberg, and on the 26th, a "Judicium et C en- sura" was dispatched to Augsburg, with instructions that it be laid before the Elector of Saxony and the Margrave of Branden- burg. || In the letter of instructions the Niirnbergers express their displeasure that so much had been done behind their backs, and behind the backs of other allies of the Lutheran cause. They dread the displeasure of the Princes, but they must be true to God, to their own consciences and to their own souls. They say that they can by no means approve the concessions that have been made. The "Judicium et Censura" is as follows: "The Senate of Niirnberg has, so far as the shortness of the time would permit, carefully read and considered the document *C. E. II., 351; Sehirrmaeher, p. 530; Plitt, Apologie der Augustana p. 87. , , t C. E. II., 336. t Sehirrmaeher, p. 243. S C. E. n., 301. \\Mitteilungen des Vereins filr Geschichte der Stadt Number a Viertes Heft, p. 36. THE EFFOBTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 175 lately put forth at Augsburg by committees appointed by the papal party, and has had the same considered by its theologians. We find that the document contains three classes of articles : "First, those on which the Committee agreed, and which have not hitherto been the subject of controversy. These we now pass by. ' ' Secondly, those articles which have been hitherto the subjects of controversy, and have not yet been agreed upon. In regard to these it is right, Christian and proper, that those things should be firmly maintained which ours have publicly preached, and which they have set forth in the Confession as true and Christian. "Thirdly, those articles, which in part are matters of doubt, and in part subjects of controversy. "In regard to the controverted articles, or as quite recently they have been called, the doubtful articles, the Senate and its theologians, and beyond doubt other Christian people, are of the opinion that in that document much has been yielded, granted and conceded to the Papists, which either wounds the conscience, and cannot be sustained by Scripture, or which will bring evil and scandal upon those who have hitherto preferred Christ and his Gospel. Some of these articles and their objectionable features we will briefly indicate : ' ' First, it would be not a little inconvenient for pious rulers to obligate themselves and to agree to allow the monks, nuns, and cloisters to remain in their primitive condition, and to use the ceremonies that have been in vogue among them, for in many places it would follow that the old Patrocinia, preaching, impious Masses, fraternities, funeral rites, and many like things would be restored in the cloisters and would allure and seduce inno- cent people. And by the diversity of ceremonies, such confusion would be introduced, that among the common people, especially in large communities, nothing but constant sedition could be expected, to say nothing about the things arising from the same source, that would be silently tolerated. "Secondly, it is not well, and it will in no small degree pro- mote error, to concede to the Papists, as they have hitherto taught, that there are three parts in repentance. For there is no doubt that by Confession, the Papists mean auricular confession (Ohrenbeicht), and by satisfaction, the satisfaction of works. Now, let everyone consider, if these two parts be conceded to them as necessary parts of repentance, how much thej"^ would thereby gain : and let everyone consider whether the Word of God and 176 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. the Holy Scripture can allow this. Or should the matter be glossed and explained differently from what the Papists under- stand it, yet it will never be understood by the common people otherwise than according to the papal sense. "Thirdly, if the communion is to be administered to no one who has not previously made oral confession, then the way will be opened for scruples and errors. But it would be perilous to bind the communion absolutely to confession, and to bind the people to confession. What would this be, except to bind the con- science again to oral confession, to which no one should be again bound by compulsion or necessity ? This would also be to restore the papal torments, and it would force the people on the day of communion and at some particular time to confess at the whim of the pastors. "Fourthly, the article about fasts, the eating and abstaining from flesh, is perfectly ridiculous and detrimental. For thus the people would be forced against their will again to observe quadragesimal and other festival days. Thus, Christian liberty, under the guise of maintaining peace and unity, would be destroyed. Christian liberty, as likewise every other article of faith, we ought to maintain, as Paul commands. Abandon Chris- tian liberty, and institute necessity, and the Papists will have it all their own way. "Fifthly, there is no Scripture to be found anywhere that teaches, or allows us to infer, that deceased saints, or the angels of heaven, pray to God for us. Also there is no mediator, inter- cessor, or high priest before God, as all Scripture shows, except Christ alone. What use is there, then, what advantage do all have, from conceding and yielding this article to the Papists, which they have tried to base on the Scriptures, but of which the Scriptures have not a trace ? And every intelligent person knows well what abuses have followed gradually from this article. "Sixthly, in this a larger jurisdiction has been granted and conceded to the Bishops than they themselves have hitherto ever demanded or have ever had. Should this article be established, then no more subtle and direct way of utterly wiping out the Gospel in a short time could be thought of. For if, as heretofore, the Bishops should have full power over the priests ; if the Bish- ops, by virtue of their episcopal authority, are to be able, unhin- dered, to punish delinquent priests ; if the pastors and priests are to be presented to the Bishops, as this article unqualifiedly pro- poses, without any limitation of the episcopal power, what else THE EFFORTS AT RECO^'CILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 177 will follow, or what is to be expected, except that the Bishops will never permit a truly Christian pastor to be presented? Or should they allow such an one to be presented, they will be forever making charges against him, or will be other^vise inter- fering with him, so that he cannot remain. Or what pastor would expose himself to such perils, or would preach, if there be no appeal to the rulers for protection against the? Bishops, and if he had nothing but death and ruin to expect ? How could the rulers answer before God and their own consciences for their subjects? But if the preachers should be thus harassed, arrested, persecuted, expelled, how long would the Gospel and the Chris- tian religion remain? And how could the Papists offer a more subtle contrivance to the Christian Estates for deferring the articles, about which there is dispute, to a future council, than by having them accept this article of the Jurisdiction of the Bish- ops? For, in this way, they have hit upon a method and plan by which thej^ can quickly overthrow the Gospel, together with the preachers and pastors, so that it can never again be defended, according to law and reason, against the Emperor, the Empire, and the allied Estates. "Finally, such are the difficulties and objectionable features arising from several articles and from several passages in the document submitted. Should this document be accepted, con- ■ sciences will be wounded, and a large part of the papal abuses will be confirmed, the Gospel will be held in contempt, the Evangelical Estates will be regarded as apostates, the Scriptures will be neglected, things will be done contrary to the Scriptures in many ways, and one evil will beget another." * With additional words and arguments, the Niirnberg Senate remonstrates and warns against the concessions that had been made, and further points out the evil consequences that must result from a reunion on such a basis. In a word, the "Judicium et Censura" is a clear and pronounced condemnation of the Arti- cles of Agreement made by the Committee of Fourteen. The Evangelical consciousness of the Niirnbergers has been fairly outraged. Hence, this remonstrance, which is one of the noblest testimonies of that age of noble testimonies to the truth. Its effect upon the Elector and the Margrave cannot be questioned. 4. Other Remonstrances. 1. Dr. Geryoh Seller, of Augsburg, an ardent friend of the * German in Chytraeus (1577), p. 173 et seqq.; Liatin in Coelestin, III., 81 et seqq., and in Chytraeus, pp. 297 et seqq. 12 178 THE EFFORTS AT KECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. Reformation, hearing of the concessions that had been made by the Protestant Committee, wrote a most earnest and trenchant letter to Spalatin, about August 20th or 21st. We can give only the salient points: (a) In the proscription of marriage to the priests "the Evangelicals have not considered the interest of Christ and his kingdom,, but their owix interest." (b) If the communion is to be received under one species only, "why has it been so bitterly contended that communion under one species is contrary to the Gospel?" "If for the sake of peace one species is to be conceded, then for the sake of peace neither species ought to be taken. ' " (c) "Though the Mass is a memorial sacrifice, yet the Canon would have to be tolerated, and the words oblation, host, sacri- fice would have to be understood not as of a memorial." He insists on the removal of the Canon of the Mass, because it introduces a mode of worship that is contrary to the Word of God. "Would not all Lutherans and Evangelicals cry out that those things have now been brought to ruin that were hitherto preached by the Leaders? Such union would be like drawing a cloud over the sun. You say this must be endured for the sake of peace. Paul did not so love peace as to circumcise Titus and Timothy. He circumcised the one out of deference to the weak, but he refused to circumcise the other when he saw that it would bring prejudice to the faith. But the Papists are not weak. Rather are they blind. Hence they are to be allowed to go. But if concord should be effected on these conditions, not peace, but the greatest commotion and many perils would follow." By such and similar arguments Dr. Seller opposes the course taken by the Lutherans, and insists that "such remedies will not heal the disease, but will make it worse." * 2. Lazarus Spengler, Secretary to the Niirnberg Senate, was one of the noblest spirits of the age, a thorough Protestant, and one of Luther's most devoted friends. On or about August 26th he wrote a letter to Augsburg that is full of warning and of expressions of dissatisfaction with the concessions made by the Protestant portion of the Committee of Fourteen. He does not propose to judge the Articles from the standpoint of the theo- logian; but he declares that he "cannot regard them as harmless as safe for the conscience, and without injury to the glory of God." It is especially offensive to him to hear it said in the * Forstemann, II., 286 et segq. THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 17fl matter of the Private Masses, "We cannot help it." He answers thus : ' ' There is a difference between not being able to help a thing and approving it. If it be beyond my power to prevent a thing that I regard as wrong, and it come to pass, then before God and my conscience I am innocent. But if I approve a thing that is wrong, which, as one in authority, I might hinder or prevent, or not allow, with what kind of conscience can I answer before God, before my subjects and before the whole world?" He was most indignant that in such grave matters neither Luther nor the allies of the Evangelical cause had been con- sulted. He says: "Everyone must confess that Dr. Martin Luther is the one through whom, as His instrument, God Al- mighty has preached and published his word in Germany, and that up to his time he has been the leader and standard-bearer in this valiant transaction. Now, in my opinion, it is wholly improper to allow him, the originator and leader in those mat^ ters, the most learned and experienced theologian in Germany, to be ignored, and that these articles should not be submitted to him before they are delivered and approved. Are we to suppose that Luther is so puerile and cowardly that, should anything injurious and offensive be decided on behind his back, he would sit still and say nothing, and affect that what we had resolved on pleased him ? . . . "I fear this: Because we regard the Princes at Augsburg as our champions in matters of faith, and have looked up to them and have entrusted so much to them, God may in this way show us what it is to trust more to men than to Him. I do not suspect Philip Melanchthon of having done anjrthing that is impious and un-Christiau, because I have hitherto regarded him, and still regard him, as a wise, learned, pious and honorable man. Neither shall this transaction cause me to suspect him of having done anything so entirely reprehensible. For I consider that he is too pious knowingly to approve a thing that is against his conscience and contrary to the Gospel. But consider that Melanchthon has not had the experience of Luther. He has not yet been violently attacked as Luther ha? been. He is too unsophisticated for those cunning, unscrupulous court-knaves. He has also not yet learned the devil as is necessary in dealing with such people. It may be that in cases where the funda- mentals are preserved, his love of temporal peace would lead him to yield and to consent, where Luthet, or another, would do otherwise. " * * Pressel's Lazanis Spengler, p. 72. 180 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 3. The Liineburgers, the Hessians and the legates of the Evangelical cities were, as we have already indicated, violently hostile to the concessions that had been made bj- the Lutheran Seven, and especiallj' were they displeased with the agreement to restore the full authority of the Bishops. We do not, indeed, have any written protest or remonstrance from the parties named above, but we have contemporaneous accounts that report their ' ' great displeasure, ' ' and the earnest contentions they had with the Saxons, and their expressed unwillingness that anything more should be conceded.* Melanchthon himself tells us that one of the Niirnberg legates, Baumgartner, had written him that had he (Melanchthon) been hired by the Roman Pope, he could not have undertaken a better method of reinstating the papal domination than that which had been proposed.! And John Brentz reports that the populace actually charged that the Lutheran portion of the Committee had been corrupted by papal gold, while those who were better disposed called the measures proposed "impious," and accused the Lutheran Seven with defection because they restored the episcopal jurisdiction.! The whole situation is described by Hieronymus Baumgartner, of :Niimberg, in a private letter to Lazarus Spengler : ' ' Dear Mr. Secretary: I cannot refrain from informing you confi- dentially how I regard the transactions of the Diet, in so far as they have reference to the faith. "First. You know from what has transpired how our party has been already solicited and urged, now by one devil and now by another, who clothe themselves in pleasing forms, yea, at times, appear and act as angels of light. The opposite party has not indeed accomplished its purpose, and the proposals made by ours have not been accepted, yet we find that the present inten- tion is to report these proposals in the Recess as approved. And although this has not yet occurred, yet they do nothing in vain, but are always wringing some concessions from us. These eon- cessions they hold on to, and will use them when our distress is the greatest. But God, by special grace, has appointed that the Confession has been delivered; otherwise our theologians would make a very different confession, as they would gladly do, if we would follow them, though they do not agree with each other. * See letter of Bernhard Besserer, of Ulm, in Kolde's Analecta Lutherana 1). 148; C. E. II., 313; Schirrmacher, pp. 242, 843; Coelestin, III 586 t C. R. II., 336. ' ' t C. R. II., 337, 33S, THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 181 Philip has become more childish than a child. Brentz is not only destitute of tact, but is coarse and rude. Haller is full of fear. These three misled the pious Margrave, and made him pusillani- mous. They persuade him to do what they wish, though I observe that he wants to do right. The pious Vogler must have it said of him in his absence : If he were yet here so much that is good and pacific could not have been accomplished. In these negotiations the Elector has no one more sagacious than Dr. Briick. But he has been so influenced that now even he acts with hesitation, because he has no one to stand by him. For the other Saxon theologians dare not say a word publicly against Philip, or he is aroused, and replies, as lately he did to the Chancellor of Liineburg : If anybody dares to say that the pro- posals made are not Christian he lies like a villain. Whereupon he was answered : If anyone says the contrary, etc. Besides, those who act in a courageous and Christian manner are un^ ceasingly slandered in every way, as we were witnesses in regard to the Hessians, who in these matters have conducted themselves most uprightly and honorably. "In a: word: So soon as we reject some harsh and ungracious decision of the Emperor, they try so to entangle us as to have us give up the favor of God without getting that of the Emperor. It has continued to be the case that whenever the Princes are together, someone comes to the Elector and tells him what he honestly and sincerely thinks of matters, etc., and says that if some concessions be made in this or that part, etc., matters can be mended. Then comes Philip with his articles and explana- tions. Meanwhile these are reported to the Margrave by IleUer and Brentz. If we refuse the broth they have concocted, their theologians run round and say that we will not allow peace (as though peace could be made by our concessions), and wish to act in concert with the Landgrave, whom they have outrageously slandered. ' ' * There can be no doubt that this picture is painted in striking colors and is somewhat overdrawn ; but that in its main features it is true to the life, is made sufficiently evident by mimerOus. letters and reports written by other hands. Baumgartner, who was one of Niirnberg's legates to the Diet, was too intelligent and experienced a man not to be able to comprehend the situa- tion, and too honorable to wish to misrepresent it, though. the intensity of his convictions may have led him into slight hyper- • C. R. II., pp. 363, 364. 182 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. bole. At any rate, the situation was a most distressing one. It cannot be denied that the feet of the Saxons and the Margravians had slipped back almost into the ways of Rome. Neither can it be denied that it is due preeminently to the Niirnberg, Liineburg and Hessian laymen that the reactionarj^ movement set in, which, in its consummation, saved the day at Augsburg. For these laymen, as official and private documents demonstrate, not only resisted the making of further concessions, but criticised and condemned those that had been made in the Committee of Fourteen. Even Melanchthon himself has conceded as much. In a letter to Luther, written September 4th, he says: "Our allies are manifestly playing the Elbe. Hence I am strengthened in the conviction that we ought to make peace. The Niirnberg legates and the Hessians do not keep within bounds, and the LUneburgers agree with them. Ours think that no opportunity of m.aking peace, provided it be honorably made, ought to be lost."* The general efEeet of such protests, remonstrances and criti- cisms, as we have reproduced in the preceding pages, upon the Saxons and the Margravians, was at once to arrest progress in the way of concessions and to turn their faces to the surer foundation which had been established in the Confession. Hence we find that the Lutheran Three in the Joint Committee of Six were far more steadfast than were the Lutheran Seven, although the Three had been a part of the Seven. 5. The Climax. Copies of the Articles of Agreement, proposed by the two halves of the Committee of Fourteen, were promptly sent to liuther by the Elector of Saxony, with the request that he render an opinion on them.f Melanchthon wrote to Luther, August 22d, and gave him the chief points in the negotiations.J Luther replied August 26th. His letter to the Elector is a masterful ■expose of the poison, deceit and danger that lie concealed in the aforesaid Articles. As this letter shows how clearly Luther com- prehended the situation at Augsburg, and how firmly he main- tained his position against the chief corruptions of the Roman Catholic Church, and as it is one of the most important and effective productions of his pen, we give it in full : "Grace and peace in Christ, Illustrious High-born Prince, Most Gracious Elector and Lord : * C. K. II., 350. t Coelestin, III., 52a. J 0. R. II., 299. THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 183 "I have received your letter, together with copies from both parts of the Committee. Now, inasmuch as Tour Grace desires my opinion on the same, I will herewith obediently render it. The conditions and methods proposed by them, and accepted by ours, are by no means to be tolerated; and I am supremely astonished that such things should have been proposed. As regards the Articles from our side, this is my judgment: When our opponents desire us to teach that one form of the Sacra- ment is right, and that it shall not be enjoined, but left free to use one or both forms. Your Grace knows very well that it is our chief contention that nothing must be taught, or done, that is not clearly in accord with God's Word; lest, as Paul says, we run in vain and beat the air. We have trouble enough, even when we go according to and abide by the sure Word. It is certain that the doctrine about one form of the Sacrament is a pure human invention, and is not at all supported by the Word of God. But, on the contrary, the use of both forms is established by the clear words of God. Hence, we cannot either approve or teach that the use of one form is right. For there stands Christ, Matt. 15 : 9 : Fe serve me with the doctrines of men. "Besides, in using only one form, we treat the words of Christ with indifference, where he so heartily and earnestly enjoins, Do this in remembrance of mc. Even they themselves do not believe that it is a matter of indifference. For, on account of this, they have burned, hounded, persecuted many, and have condemned it as a great heresy. Hence, not only on God's account, and our owTi, but for their sake, we must not allow that it is a matter of indifference. We must regard them as murderers and scoun- drels, since, forsooth, they have persecuted and condemned an indifferent thing as a heresy. They themselves do not believe that it is a matter of indifference. Much less can we so teach. Let them recall and bring back all they have persecuted for this cause. It is a very fine complaint they make, viz., that they can- not hold the people where we do not preach that they are right. I am delighted to hear such a wise reason. It is as though God must not allow his Word to be preached in order that they may hold their people and remain tyrants. "Of Private Masses, I say the same : They are the invention of men, are without support from God's Word, and are an abuse. Our opponents do not strive to compel us to restore these, but only not to forbid them. We do not prevent such, but cannot approve them. If one human invention be admitted, then another 184 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. must be admitted. That is the way it goes. If we allow the Pri- vate Masses, then forthwith we must drop the Gospel and accept a human invention; for there is no reason why one and not all human inventions should be received. To forbid and to con- demn all is to forbid and condemn one. ' ' They pretend that it is not the function of rulers to prevent such things. They know very well that the office of ruling and the office of the ministry are not one and the same, and that Princes have nothing to do with such things. But the question is whether a Prince, as a Christian, will approve this, and not whether he act as a Prince. Whether a Prince should preach, and whether he should approve preaching, are different matters. It is not the Prince, but the Scripture, that disapproves of Private Masses. It is in the power of the Prince to say whether he will allow the Scriptures or not. No man on earth can force him to do it. "Should the Canon be allowed with a proper interpretation? Yes, provided it be placed in the hands of safe expounders. Long ago, I might, have undertaken to explain the religion of the Turks, and to reduce all kinds of unbelief to the Christian faith. It is well known that they have sold Masses as a sacrifice and a work. Now they would explain them. In a word, it is human invention, such as cannot be tolerated in the affairs of God. Besides, it, is dangerous and vexatious. And, since they do not abstain from Private Masses, and do not agree with us in regard to the Mass, viz., that it is not a sacrifice, why do they wish to retain the offensive word, seeing that it is unnecessary and dan- gerous ? We do not unnecessarily expose ourselves to danger, for this is forbidden, and it is to tempt God. St. Augustine says: Maintain the doctrine, but correct the language. Speaking of fate, he says: He that understands fate as the decree of God, understands it aright. Yet he will not tolerate the Word, but says: Correct the language. Shall we adopt an obscure and uncertain word, when we find it hard to maintain those that are clear and plain? "And what advantage is there in retaining the word sacrifice in the Canon? The Canon so plainly declares the Mass to be a true sacrifice, that no man can explain or understand it otherwise. For, it is stated, that God, by the hand of his angel, will have such a sacrifice of the Mass brought up before the Holy Altar. This cannot be explained as meaning a memorial of the suffer- ings of Christ, for this must be done by preaching. In a word, THE EFFORTS AT - EECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 185 in the Canon the prayer is made that God will accept this sacri- fice, since it is the body and blood of His dear Son, as though a man must intercede for Christ with God. That is blasphemous and infamous. Hence, the Canon is not to be tolerated. "Finally. We will suffer everything and make concessions so far as that is in our power. But, we pray that they will not demand of us what is not in our power. But, it is not in our power to accept anything contrary to God's Word ;. and it is not in our power to accept a form of worship that is contrary to God's Word. Fasts and festivals instituted by men we can accept as far as they. have been established by the civil government, as a civil ordinance ; for all such things belong to the secular power, which is adorned with ceremonies, robes, gestures, fasts and festivals. Such things God subordinated to reason, and has enjoined that they be treated as optional matters. Gen. 2. They are earthly things, and their nature is earthly, and they are all subordinated to reason, as Paul said: Eule over the earth. Now, inasmuch as the ciAdl government is the highest work of reason, it can act and command in these matters. "Such is my answer given in haste to Your Princely Grace's inquiries. I commend Your Princely Grace to the favor of God. "Friday after Bartholomew (August 26th) anno 1530. "Obediently, "Maetust Luthee, D."* On the same day, Luther wrote to Spalatin as follows: "I learn that you somewhat reluctantly have begun a marvelous work, namely, the reconciliation of the Pope and Luther. But the Pope refuses, and Luther begs to be excused. Take care lest your labor be in vain. If you succeed against the will of both of us, then I will follow j'our example, and will reconcile Christ andBeliel."t On the same day, he answered Melauchthon 's letter of 22d, as follows: ' ' Grace and peace in Christ : If the matter was to end in this way. My Philip, I am astonished that they could tolerate, and could treat of the matter in a friendly way. Is there not indeed guile and treachery there ? You now have to do with Coehlaeus with the Archbishop of Salzburg, and with those ghostly monks who were rowed across the Rhine at Speyer.l What is there that » De Wette, Luther's Brief e, TV., 140-143. t De Wette, IV., 144. j Historia de Spectris Spirensiius. Sehirrmaeher, 194-196. 186 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. I have ever less expected, less desired, than to negotiate for agree- ment in doctrine? It would be like driving out the Pope, or as though our doctrine and the papacy could be conserved together. There is the semblance of a treaty, and of an alliance, in order th£tt the Pope may remain. He is willing to concede and to per- mit, provided we obey. But, thanks to God, you have not ac- cepted these things. "You write that you forced Eek to confess that we are justified by faith. Would that you had forced him not to lie. Eck, for- sooth, confesses that there is the righteousness of faith. But, meanwhile the papacy defends every kind of abomination, kills, prosecutes, and condemns those who profess the doctrine of faith ; and instead of repenting, it goes on. The same is done by the entire party of the adversaries. Seek for terms of concord with these people (si Christo placet), and toil in vain until they get a chance to destroy us. "What you write in regard to both species is correct. I agree with you that it is not a matter of indifference, but a command to take both species if we wish to take the sacrament. In the Church of God, and in the worship of God, we cannot arbitrarily either institute or tolerate what cannot be defended by the Word of God, and I am not a little annoyed by this sacrilegious word indifferent. Admit one thing in the Word of God to be indif- ferent, how will you hinder everything from becoming indif- ferent? They cry and vociferate that we condemn the entire Church. We say that the Church has been led captive, and has been oppressed by the tyranny of one species, and hence it is to be excused, just as the entire synagogue in Babylon was excused, because it could not observe the law of Moses in ecclesiastical rites and in its sacraments,, as it could in Jerusalem. Now, did they cease to be the people of God, because, as captives and forbidden, they did not observe the rites enjoined upon them? But Eck wants himself and Ifis to be proclaimed the Church. We, on the contrary, say that we do not condemn the entire Church, but that in mutilating the sacrament, they condemn the entire Word of God (which is more than the Church) . "As touching the rendering of obedience to the Bishoi)s, and as touching jurisdiction and common ceremonies, as you write, see that you do not yield more than you have yielded, lest, in defending the Gospel, we be forced to a more difficult and dangerous war. I know you have always made an exception of the Gospel in these agreements, but I fear that hereafter they THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 187 will charge that we are perfidious and fickle if we do not do as they wish. They will accept concessions large, largius, largissime, and will make their own stride, strictius, strictissime. " In a word, I am out-and-out displeased with the tractatus de doctrinae concordia, since such is plainly impossible, unless the Pope is willing to put away his popery. - Was it not enough that we gave account of our faith, and seek peace? Why should we expect to convert them to the truth? We came for the pur- pose of learning whether oi' not they would approve our position, but willing to allow them to remain what they are. We inquire. Will they condemn or will they approve ? If they condemn, what profit is there in wishing to try to have agreement with enemies? If they approve, what need is there to wish to retain the old abuses? But, since it is certain that we are condemned by them, and that they do not repent, but try to retain their own affairs, why do we not understand that all that they attempt is deceit and lies? For you cannot say that their affairs proceed from the Holy Spirit, since such things are destitute of repent- ance, of faith, of piety. But the Lord, who began this work in us, will perfect it. To him I heartily commend you. August 26th, 1530. ' ' Martin Luther. ' ' * Luther \vrote also the same day to Justus Jonas : ' ' Grace and peace : I have seen and read the decisions of yours as touching our cause. What I wrote to Philip, that I write to you, namely, that in fealty to Christ, and for my sake, as I am a Christian, you and all ours believe that Campeggius is one big, notorious devil. Words cannot express how vehemently I am excited about those terms proposed by the other party, so that the demons are ridiculing and mocking our cause. This is the trick of Cam- peggius and of the Pope, first to try our cause by violence and threats, and if this does not succeed, then to assail it with treachery. You have experienced violence and threats, and you bore the terrible advent of the Emperor. Now you are bearing treachery and those ghostly monks that were rowed across the Rhine at Speyer. That is, they are proposing harmony in doc- trine. This is a mystery indeed. What but violence and deceit could you expect from the father of deceit and lies, the author of death and violence ? But he who gave you power to overcome violence, will give you grace and strength to overcome deceit. Of * De Wette, IV.j 145. 188 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. these things I have written to the Prince and to Philip. The messenger must return in haste. Quit ye like men. Don't trust the adversaries, except they prove their position by plain Scripture. The Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen. From the Hermitage, August 26th, 1530. ' ' Martin Luther. ' ' * In these four letters, Luther employs argument, irony, sar- casm,, denunciation, in order to express his opposition to the Articles proposed for the reunion of the Catholics and Lutherans. He simply will not tolerate the Articles. They are an abomina- tion to him. They are in conflict with tlie fundamental princi- ples of the Gospel. It is Luther versus the Pope ; it is the Word of God versus the institutions of man; it is Christ versus Beliel. There could be no reconciliation along such lines. The point of contact was wanting. And as evidence of Luther's abiding and growing opposition to the Articles of Agreement, we have his letters of August 28th to Spalatin, Melanchthon and Jonas, in which he warns in the strongest language against the wiles of the enemy and against the making of further concessions.! About the same time, he wrote an "Opinion,"} in which he instructs his colleagues at Augsburg about concessions to the enemy. As touching the doctrinal Articles of the Confession, nothing is to be yielded, inasmuch as such Articles are founded • on Holy Scripture, and have not been refuted by the adversaries. He then takes up the various subjects contained in the Articles on Abuses. In the matter of both species in the Eucharist, he declares that nothing can be conceded, since no man can change an insti- tution of God, neither, "can we teach in our churches that those do not sin, nor act contrary to the command of God, who either administer or receive only one species." "The marriage of the priests we neither can nor ought to prohibit, since it was instituted, appointed and confirmed by God." "We cannot allow Private Mass to be restored or to be celebrated in our churches, since everybody knows that it is an idolatry and an abuse." "We distinctly declare that we cannot receive and approve either the Small or the Large Canon, since in express terms they make of the Mass a work by which grace and the remission of sins are bestowed ex opere operato upon the priest and upon the lay wor- * De Wette, IV., 147, 148. tDe Wette, IV., 155-158. + Erl. Ausg., 65 : 46 et seqq. THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 189 shiper." He is willing that the cloister people shall remain in the cloisters and have food and shelter, but their Masses and their ungodly manner of life shall not be tolerated. He thinks that the episcopal jurisdiction might be allowed, provided the Bishops will not seek to persecute and to exterminate the Luth- eran teaching. Meats and festivals cannot be allowed to burden the conscience. The "Opinion," of which we have presented only the salient features, is a trenchant criticism of the concessions made by the Protestants in the Committee of Fourteen. It shows that its author is out-and-out opposed to making any more concessions than had been already made in the Confession; and his reasons for rejecting the Abuses are even stronger and clearer than those given in the Confession itself. Luther, who had taken no active part in the preparation of the Confession after April ■22d, and who in the earlier days of the Diet had been little more than an interested spectator, and who for much of the time had been neglected or ignored, has now stepped to the front and has assumed command of the Lutheran forces at Augsburg and begins to determine their movements. He speaks as dictator and prophet. This is shown in a letter written by him to Lazarus Spengler of Augsburg: "I have commended the cause to God, and have it so well in hand that no man can force me to yield anything, nor can I be deserted so long as Christ and I are one. For though too much has been conceded (for this I was not pre- pared), yet the cause is not lost, but a new conflict has been begun in which our opponents will be convinced that they have acted dishonorably. For, besides and beyond the Gospel, nothing can be conceded, whoever holds the field by guile. For, in maintain- ing the Gospel, it is very different from what our opponents allege against us, because what is the wisdom of man as against God? Therefore, let your heart be at peace. We will concede nothing against the Gospel. But, if ours concede anything con- trary to the Gospel, then shall the devil take that party. That shall you. see. August 28th, anno 1530. "-Martin Luther, D." * But while Luther's letters of August 26th were speeding post- haste from Coburg to Augsburg, new negotiations for peace Avere proposed. The Catholics were not satisfied with the Lutheran * De Wette, IV., 158. 190 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. Reply of August 28th. Hence, the next evening, August 29th, Duke Henry of Brunswick, the Bishop of Liege, and Count Hoyer, of Mansfeld, took supper with the Elector of Saxony. The Duke and others, in speeches, not all of which were seasoned with grace, insisted on the appointment of a new committee to take the matter of reunion under final advisement.* The Luth- erans considered the proposition the next day and rejected it.f For a week or more, there had been a growing dissatisfaction with the concessions that had been made, and a growing deter- mination to make no additional concessions to the Catholics, and a growing unwillingness to engage with them in further nego- tiations on the subject of reunion. "Besides, on that day came Luther's answer, and that gave the easting vote, "J or as another has said: "Turned the scale, 'as a freeing from evil enchantment.' " All honor to the clear eye and to the brave heart of Martin Luther. He saw the danger from afar, and from afar he gave the alarm. His followers now recoil from the * Schirrmacher, 248 ; Coelestin, III., 61a. t C. E. II., 334. JDr. H. Virck, in Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschichte, "Vol. X., 312. (1) Already on the morning of the 29th, Luther's answer was expected (C. K. II., 322, 327). Written on the 26th, it could easily have reached Augsburg on the evening of the 29th or on the morning of the 30th, since "the mes- senger must return in haste." De Wette, IV., 147-8. (2) The next day the Elector asked permission to return home. This he would scarcely have done had he not been convinced by Luther's answer of the futility of any further negotiations. (3) The promptness and decisiveness manifested in rejecting the proposition of the Catholics show the presence of a new' in- fluence. (4) Seokendorf says distinctly: "It seemed good to the Protest- ants, strengthened by Luther's letters, to abstain from that deceitful nego- tiation for concord." Lib. II., §LXXV. ; and Maurenbrecker says: "In my opinion Luther's letters of August 26th to the Elector John, Spalatin, Mel- anchthon, Justus Jonas and Brentz (De Wette, IV., 140-145) were undoubt- edly the deciding factors."- (GescMchte der KathoUschen Reformation, p. 411.) (5) On the morning of the 29th Melanehthon informs Luther that his answer has not yet been received (C. E. II., 327). September 1st he informs him: "Day before yesterday (August 30th) our conference came to an end. For we .were not willing to accept the terms in regard to one part of the Sacrament, the Canon, Private Masses, and Celibacy." (C. E. II., 336.) See also Enders (Briefwechsel Luther's, vol. 8: 216, 239), who says: "This letter, as like- wise the following of August 26th, came to Augsburg on the 30th. ' ' Bern- hard Besserer, in his letter to XJlm, August 24th, says that EC letter has been received from Luther, which shows that he has become "perfectly furious" over the situation at Augsburg. Such, a Luther letter as Besserer describes is not extant, but that such a letter had been received at Augs- burg, cannot be doubted. Besserer 's letter, which only recently has been published, throws much light on the situation at Augsburg just after the dissolution of the Committee of Fourteen. It is given by Kolde in Analecta LutTierana, pp. 148-9. The letter declares that there is great dissatisfaction among the Evangelicals with the concessions that had been made in the Committee. THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATIO>'. — CONCLUDED. 191 brink of the precipice to which the insidiac of their enemies and their own imhecilitas aiiimi had led them. Hence, the language in which their final decision is recorded shows a marked change of sentiment and a marked difference in tone." On the morning of 29th, the Elector of Saxony had "graciously heard" the Niirnberg Remonstrance, and, as we have learned, had promised, that he would make no more con- cessions. And now. when Luther's letters came, the change was made complete. In the face of the most strenuous opposition from their most devoted allies, and in view of Luther's emphatic rejection of the Articles of Agreement, it would have been morally impossible for the Saxons and the Margravians to have continued this solemn farce with the Catholics, in which, if it can be said that the Catholic Seven played a subtle and deceit- ful part, it can be said also that the Lutheran Seven did not play a manly and courageous part. They did not stand firmly by all the doctrines and principles enunciated in their Confes- sion. It is sad to reflect that in the negotiations almost every- thing is made to turn finally on subjects which the Confession itself had treated as ' ' Abuses. ' ' The so-called doctrinal articles — Articuli fidei Pi'aecipui — of the Confession seems to have dropped quite out of sight; at least they are not held in the Small Committee as a ground of difference and as a sufficient reason for separation. One may be thankful that in the long contention of over two months, so much that is fundamental to Protestantism was saved; but it would have been a thousand times better had the Lutherans, both in their Confession, and in the subsequent negotiations, given a clearer, a sharper state- ment of the distinctive evangelical doctrines, and had made a more valiant defense of those doctrines, as Luther, Melanchthon and others, had enunciated and defended them in their private writings. Nevertheless, the Augsburg Confession, as it was sub- sequently edited by its author and published, and as it was explained in the Apology, in the Loci Communes, in the Repeti- tion (1551) and in many Opinions, and as it was defended by its author and others in diets and in colloquies, became, and is to-day, the great evangelical bulwark against Rome, both in doctrine and in practice. It is the fundamental Creed of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, and is the only distinctive Creed * See Sehirrmaeher, p. 147; Coelestin, III., 61a; Sleidan (Eng. Trans.), p. 132; Spalatin, 190; C. E. II., 320. 192 THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. that has had universal recognition in the Lutheran Church. Therefore, it is the Creed of Lutheran Catholicity. But, with the action of the Lutherans on August 30th, the negotiations for union and concord came practically to a close. The crisis is now past. The opposition that had set in when the concessions of the Lutheran Seven became known, and Luther's letters, had forced the. Saxons and the Margravians back beyond the point of danger, and had brought them to a better under- standing with their more steadfast allies. jMelanchthon, indeed, still longs and sighs for peace and reconciliation, and some of the Catholics make fresh proposals and desire to continue nego- tiations; but all in vain. The Lutherans as a body remain firm, and reply that they can concede no more than had been conceded, and that they will rest the matter with God and a good con- science.* Luther continues to exhort his friends to steadfast- ness, while the Elector of Saxony insists on taking his leave of the Diet. Finally, September 22d, the Lutherans offer to -read their Apology of the Augsburg Confession.! The next day, the Elector of Saxony, accompanied by his illustrious chancellors and by his theologians, left Augsburg. His example was fol- lowed the same evening by the Dukes of Liineburg and the Prince of Anhalt, and on the next day by the legates of Reutlingein, Heilbron and Kempten. Practically, the Diet of Augsburg was now brought to a close. Further negotiations and conferences could make no essential change, for the chief Lutheran leaders had departed from Augs- burg. The work for which they had gone thither, namely, tb defend themselves against false accusations, and to sue for peace had been done. The Augsburg Confession — confession and apol- ogy in one — ^had passed into history; the reunion efforts had come to naught; the Catholics and the Lutherans were further apart at the close of the Diet than they had been at its begin- ning. All subsequent efforts to reunite them have failed. Their fundamental principles are different. Lutheranism is based on the Word of God. Catholicism is based on the authority of the Church. Lutheranism holds that the institutions of men have no dominion over the conscience. Catholicism holds that the in- stitutions of the Church bind the conscience as conditions of * Spalatin, p. 190. t August 29th, Melanehthon was commissioned to write the Apology. Schirrmaeher, p. 530 ; Plitt, Apologie, p. 87. This shows that the Lutherans had decided to discontinue negotiations. THE EFFORTS AT RECONCILIATION. — CONCLUDED. 193 salvation. Lutheranism teaches that the Confession itself is open to revision and to improvement in statement.* Catholicism pronounces an anathema on all Avho reject her canons and decrees.! * See Bishop von Scheele's SymboUk, pp. v. and 31, in Part First, and pp. 80, 81 in Part Second. t See Council of Trent, Passim. 13 CHAPTER XIII. Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. During the dogmatic era of the Lutheran Church it was quite the custom among the Gnesio-Lutherans, as indicated in Chap- ter II., to speak of Luther as the chief author of the Augsburg Confession. The reasons given for this judgment were, that Luther, at the request and with the approval of his Wittenberg colleagues, had composed seventeen doctrinal articles, and about March 20th had carried the same to Torgau, on account of which they were called the Torgau Articles; that out of these Torgau Articles Melanchthon arranged the Confession; that "Luther suggested, digested, and prescribed the material out of which the Confession was woven ; ' ' that he directed and controlled all the theological deliberations at Augsburg, and that nothing was done at Augsburg without his consent.* It is needless to say that in the main these reasons are fictions and fancies, and not facts, and they would not be noticed here but for the fact that half a century and more ago some Lutheran theologians in Germany, and some in America, writing and contending more in support of a confessional prepossession than in the interest of historical science, have revived the old con- tention. But historical criticism, conducted in the interest of historical science, has settled the question of the authorship of the Augsburg Confession, and has determined the extent of Luther's influence in the composition of the said Confession. As all the chief facts were given in Chapter II., it may suffice to say here that Luther knew absolutely nothing about the change of the Apology into a Confession of faith until he received the copy of the first draft sent him by the Elector on the eleventh of May. After this he did not see the Confession in any form until he received the copy sent him by Melanchthon, June 26th. .1. The Long Silence. In this interval occurred a long silence in which Luther heard nothing from Augsburg. That there was a long period of silence. * See John Wigand, Historia de Augsb. Confessione, Cyprian, p. 123. Calovius, Exegema, Cap., II. Bocrncr, Insiiuaiones Symb. Theol pp 32 33 (194) Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. 195 and that Luther bitterly complained of it, cannot be questioned. June 19th he wrote to Dydimus, of Torgau: "For an entire month ours have reported nothing from Augsburg. " * On the twentieth he wrote to Jonas: "At last your letter has come, My Jonas, after that for fully three weeks you have well tor- mented us with unbroken silence, though I wrote- Philip twice that you should not thus be silent. Had it not been for the circumstance of the times I should have thought of revenge. But the time of prayer does not permit to be angry, and anger does not permit prayer. Nevertheless I have taken care to render you notorious, especially at Wittenberg. You cannot blame the messengers. They faithfully delivered, especially the one hired by you. From the time when he delivered yours, I have received nothing except this last one about the coming and the entrance of the Emperor, and yesterday about your complaints. But I will avenge this at the right time. ' 'f Messenger after messenger came to Coburg, but they brought no letters for Luther, and he began to suspect that the Lutherans at Augsburg were conceal- ing something from him. J Finally, when letters did come, he was so angry that he would not read them.§ Melanchthon and Jonas tried to throw the blame on the letter-carriers, but Luther indignantly replied : " It is not the fault of the carrier. It is your fault and yours only, but may Christ by his Spirit forgive you and strengthen and teach you." || Dr. Knaake says : ' ' Melanchthon 's silence extends over the entire time from May 22d to June 15th. ' ' ^ Kostlin says : "Luther remained vdthout a letter for four weeks."** Plitt says: "For three weeks long he (Luther) heard nothing from Augsburg." ft And Kolde: "He (Luther) had every reason to be angry, since at one time his friends in Augsburg left him for three weeks without any news. Even Jonas, who wrote him about things of small importance, regularly forgot to say how matters stood with the Evangelicals and with the Evangelical Confession. The Augsburgers tried in vain to shift the blame upon the faithful carriers. Luther knew that they really had not written." J J As the letters of Melanchthon and Jonas were sent by a special messenger, they probably reached Coburg May 26th. From that time on to June 20th Luther received no news from * De Wette, IV., 44. II Luther 's Antheil, p. 51. tDe Wette, IV., 45. ** Martin Luther, II., 655. t De Wette, IV., 60. tf V- Martin LutTier, p. 369. § C. E. II., 141. ti Martin Luther, II., 339. II De Wette, IV., 50. 196 Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. Augsburg; that is, for about twenty-five days. "The messenger was innocent and Luther's complaint was well founded," saj's Kawerau.* These facts show to what extent Luther directed and shaped the course of events at Augsburg, and to what extent he exerted an influence in the composition of the Augsburg Confession, in which Melanchthon was daily making changes by recasting arti- cles, by omitting the Preface, b.v adding articles and giving new shape and coloring to the entire Confession. And it was during that long period of silence especially that the principal changes were made. The draft sent to Luther, ;\Iay 11th, was gradually becoming the finished Confession without any knowledge of the fact on the part of Luther, and without a single word of advice or suggestion from him, so that instead of being now the Con- fession of the Elector of Saxony it had become the Common Confession of the Lutheran Princes assembled at Augsburg. Of all these changes, we repeat, Luther knew nothing at all, except what may be gathered from the slight notification contained in Melanchthon 's letter of Maj- 22d: "We are dail.y making changes." Hence Luther cannot be held responsible for the finished Confession. He had given his approval to the first draft, but to no more. Prom May 22d to June 25th he was written to, by the Elector June 1st, by Jonas June 12th and 13th, by Melanchthon June 13th, by Jonas June 18th, by Melanchthon June 19th. But not one of these letters informs him of the work that is being done on the Confession, or inquires for his opinion, or asks his advice about the Confession-Apology that is the subject of so much care and activity at Augsburg. And of the letters written by Luther from Coburg to his friends, April 23d to June 29th, in so far as thej-^ have come down to us, eighteen in number, only one, that of May 15th, to the Elector, makes any reference to the Confession. All the others are as silent about the Confession as though such a thing had never existed. But what is the most remarkable of all is the fact that Luther never wrote a line to Melanchthon about the "Apology" * Jonas, Briefwechsel, I., p. 160 n. Professor Credner calls attention to the fact that Luther nowhere and never laid the weight on the Augsburg Confession that he laid on Melanchthon 's Loci Communes, nor spoke of it as he spoke of that book. ' ' The chief weight, ' ' says Credner, ' ' that Luther laid on the Augsburg Confession arose from the fact that by it, in a great assembly of the Empire, the overwhelming proof was furnished that the doctrines and Articles of Faith, in which the Evangelicals differ from the Catholics, are not contrary to the Holy Scripture. The chief passage is found in his Warning to his beloved Germans, .Tena ed., V., fol. 280 et seqq." Ercirterungcii KirchJichcr Zritfragcn, 1848, p. 109. Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. 197 until after June 25tli, though ^lelahchthon three times, May 4th, 11th, 22d, gave Liither information about the "Apology" and at least furnished Luther the opportunity to write him about it. Such are the facts, and they show to a demonstration that from ]May 2d to June 25th, Luther's influence at Augsburg was small indeed. Within that period he was not the inspirer and director of the movements at Augsburg. For three ftill weeks, or more, he was left in total ignorance of what was going on there. For more than four weelcs he was not informed in regard to the daily changes that were made in the "Apology." And yet, it is not intended by this recital of facts to intimate that Luther exerted no influence at Augsburg within these dates. He prayed for his friends at Augsburg, and exhorted them, especially the Elector and j\Ielanchthon, to steadfastness. But this he did much more after June 25tli than he did before that time, as his letters show.* It was not until he had read the copy of the Confession sent him by ilelanchthon, Jiine 26th, and was asked what further concessions were to be made,t and perceived that the leading Lutherans were intent upon recon- ciliation with the enemy, that he threw himself into the scale and measurably resumed the old dictatorship, which many a time had brought inspiration to the hearts of friends, and had sent dismay into the hearts of the foe. Even then, he could and did write to jMelanehthon : "I am displeased, because in your letters you wrote that in this matter you follow my author- ity. I will neither be nor be called your authority. ' ' 1 Perhaps no one has stated the case, ,as made known by the facts, better than Professor Plitt. He says: "It would be a mistake to suppose that Luther from Coburg directed affairs on the Evangelical side, at Augsburg. From his fortress, he followed all the proceedings there with the closest attention. He had them continually before him. He lived through them, and fought through them inwardly, and especially did he carry them in his believing, praying heart. As a matter of fact, he exerted a great influence on the course of events. But he did not purposely and intentionally do so. On the contrary, so far as was in him, he purposely refrained from such influencing, and repeatedly expressed himself to the contrary, when something * De Wette, IV., 53, 49, 62, 63, 65, 82, 83, 84, 88, 89, 91 et passim. tC. R. II., 144. , 1 De Wette, IV., 53. 198 Luther's relations to the auusburg confession. of the kind was expected of him at Augsburg. I'he cause is not mine, he said. Only at the beginning of his sojourn at Coburg, in his Admonition to the Clergy Assembled at Augsburg,'^ did he undertake, in his own strong and free way, to warn them for their own sakes, not to aim the bow too high, inasmuch as Miinzer's spirit is not yet dead, but finally to propose peace, as he summoned them to make the Gospel free. And then, when his friends at Augsburg showed signs of weakening, and the es- sential thing seemed to be in peril, even with greater vehe- mence did he cast his sword into the scale. In other matters, he quietly held himself aloof, and let things come to him, in order to express himself about them occasionally as it seemed good to him. ' ' f The above must be regarded as an intelligent, fair and impar- tial statement of the facts touching the question of Luther's influence on the Diet at Augsburg. It will be observed that the learned author does not even mention the Augsburg Confession as coming within the scope of that influence. He also declares that it is a mistake to suppose that Luther directed affairs at Augsburg. Had he known The Oldest Redaction of the Augs- burg Confession, and had he been able to comprehend the crude form of the draft sent to Luther, May 11th, and had he had before him the conclusions of the learned in regard to the Tor- gau Articles, he doubtless would have said that Luther's influ- ence on the composition of the Augsburg Confession was so small that it could not be estimated. If now the question should be asked. Why did Luther take so little interest in the composition of the Confession and in affairs generally at Augsburg, prior to June 25th, the following reasons may be given: 1. Only once was he oUicially consulted about the Confession, May 11th. 2. He was very much occu- pied with the translation of the Prophets, and of ^sop, and with other literary work. Of his literary labors, he makes fre- quent mention in his correspondence.J 3. He did not expect that anything of importance would be accomplished at or by the Diet.§ • This Admonition was addressed to the Catholic, not to the Lutheran, clergy at Augsburg. Erl. Ed. of Luther's Works, 24: 356. It has been called Luther's Augsburg Confession. It was known at Augsburg by June 7th. Its sale at Augsburg was forbidden by command of the Emperor C. E. II., 91. fDr. Martin Luther's Lehen, pp. 363-4. t De Wette, IV., 10, 15, 43, 44, 45. § C. R. TL, 141. Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. 199 2. After the Reading of the Confession. On Sunday, June 26th, Melanchthon wrote Luther, saying: "Our defense has been presented to the Emperor. In my opin- ion it is sufficiently vehement." On the following day, June 27th, he wrote to Veit Dietrich, who was with Luther at Coburg, and said: "We have sent you a copy of the Confession. Keep it by you, so that it be not published. But write me back the Doctor's opinion of it." * June 3d, he wrote again to Dietrich, and said : "I desire to know whether the Dr. is in a better humor, and what he thinks about the Apology. ' ' f These letters make it very evident that Melanchthon was im- patient to learn what Luther thought about the finished Con- fession, which was now so vastly different from what it was in that first draft which had been sent May 11th. But not only did he wish to know what Luther thought about the Confession, he wished to know also what Luther might think about additional concessions to the enemy, and about certain important sub- jects of dispute. Hence, in the letter of June 26th, he wrote, among other things, the following: "I now think we will have to decide before the enemy makes reply, what we will concede to them. The entire deliberation will be about both species, about Marriage, about Private Mass. Answer with reference to these things, and especially with reference to Private Mass, which our opponents seem utterly unwilling to surrender." These extracts furnish the proof that Melanchthon did not regard the Confession as the Protestant ultimatum, nor con- sider that the negotiations with the Catholics were closed. He looked on the Confession rather as the first step in the direction of the attainment of that harmony with the Church of Rome, which had been broken by the Wittenberg movement, and which the Saxons especially were seeking to restore. And the sequel shows that he was altogether correct in his prophecy as to the subject of future controversy, subjects as we have learned that do not so much concern the articles of doctrine, but belong chiefly to the matters which the Confession itself had catalogued under "abuses which have been corrected." This letter, besides throwing a good deal of light on the end for which the Confession was written, shows that Melanchthon had two objects in view in sending a copy of the finished Confession to Luther, and in writing the letter that accompanied it to Coburg. The one was to draw out Luther on the subject * C. E. 11., 147. t C. R. II., 157. 200 Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. of further eoneessions to the enemy. The other object was to get his opinion in regard to the abuses named. The letter and the copy of the Confession reached Coburg June 29th. Luther replied immediately "I have received your Apology, and I wonder what you mean by asking what and how much must be conceded to the Papists. As touching the Prince it is a differ- ent question, as to what he is to concede, if danger threatens him. So far as I am concerned, more than enough has been already conceded in that Apology. If thej' refuse that, I do not see what more I can concede, unless their reasons and writings should appear clearer to me than I have hitherto seen them. I am occupied day and night on this matter, thinking, revolving, discussing, searching the Scriptures. Confidence in our doe- trine grows upon me. I am more and more confirmed, so that, God willing, I will allow nothing more to be taken from me, come what may. ' ' * It is only now that Jlelanchthon begins in eai'nest to seek counsel and assistance from Luther. In this same letter of June 26th, he writes also: "In these momentous concerns we follow your authority." To this Luther makes reply as fol- lows: "I am displeased that in your letter you write that in this matter you follow my authority. I am unwilling to be, or to be called, your authority in this matter. Even though the word might be properly interpreted, nevertheless I do not desire it. If the matter be not at the same time equally yours, I am unwilling that it should be called mine, and should be imposed on you. If it were solely mine, I myself would act. ' ' This letter of Luther's, the salient points of which we have given, is clear and decisive. It shows that on this day he is taking very little responsibility for the movement of affairs at Augsburg, and that his relation towards the Confession is one of criticism, rather than one of approbation. 1. "What Melanchthon regards as "sufficiently vehement," Luther regards as too conciliatory — as having conceded too much to the enemy. Hence, liis opinion of the Confession, as expressed in this letter, is not unqualifiedly approbatory. There can be no doubt that it would have pleased him better, had it been more decidedly anti-Romish, and there can be no doubt that had Luther been at Augsburg, and had been allowed to take part in the composition of the Confession, the same would have been less conciliatory, that i.s, more Lutheran and more positively * De Wette, IV., 51 et seqq. Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. 201 aggressive against Rome than it is. To verify this conclusion, one has only to read Luther's writings, both the controversial and the didactic, his letter yet to be quoted, and the complaints of the Romanists that the Confession, as it had been given to them, did not fairly and fully represent the Lutheran teach- ing.* 2. The letter shows that Luther is fixed in his determina- tion to allow nothing additional to be wrested from him. The Elector may do, under the circumstances, what he pleases. But Luther has resolved to make no more concessions. In the common cause too many concessions have been already made. The conviction grows upon him that his teaching is scriptural. 3. He is not willing that the men at Augsburg shall shift the responsibility from themselves and place it upon him. It is a common cause in which they are engaged. The men at Augs- burg are not to take refuge under his authority. They must meet the foe in their own name. From the position so emphatically taken in this letter, Luther made no recession. In his subsequent letters written during the Diet, in his references to the Confession and in his references to the negotiations going on there, we find no deviation from the sentiments expressed in this letter. He remains as consistent as truth, and as firm as adamant. Some of his references to the Confession are decidedly qualified, and his protests against the spirit of compromise existing at Augsburg, and against the con- cessions made there, are clear and imequivocal, so that we may say, truthfully, that with this letter of June 29th begins Luther's real influence in determining matters on the Protestant side at Augsburg, that is, it may be truthfully said, that from this time on Luther directs his party at Augsburg, and helps to shape the conclusions that are finally reached, so that Professor IMaurenbreeker, in treating of the portion of the Diet's his- tory now under review, and of Luther's letters of August 26th, is fully justified in saj'ing: "Luther's letters nerved and strengthened the resolution of the Protestant Princes, and helped to bring back to the theological spokesman (Melanehthon) the Protestant consciousness, that in him had vacillated and hesi- tated. But for Luther's heroic interposition, who Imows that the proceedings at Augsburg would not have had a very lament- able ending ! " t * See Fieker, Vie Erste Konfutation, p. 40 ; Cochlaeus, Vermahnung, E., II. t Gescliichte der Katholischen Keformation, p. 30-5. 202 Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. July 3d Luther wrote again to Melanehthon, saying: "Tester- day I carefully re-read your entire Apology. It pleases me very much. But it errs and sins in one thing which operates against Holy Scripture, where Christ says in regard to himself: We will not have this man rule over us, and it strikes against that condemnation : The stone which the Guilders rejected. Where there is so much darkness and blindness, what can you expect, but to be rejected? They do not concede to us the name of builders. This they claim for themselves, and justly. We ought to glory in the name of destroyers, scatterers, dissipators, since we are classed with the wicked, and that Stone itself is classed with robbers and is condemned. Hence we have no hope of salvation except in the Lord alone. Let him do wonders. He cannot desert this Stone, because he is made the head of the corner." * Some persons would see only irony in this extract, except in the second sentence. But a person who does not have a theory to defend, will see in the second sentence. "It pleases very much," a strong expression of approbation couched in general terms, and in what follows a particular criticism, and then irony. The interpretation given to this extract by Calinich', and approved by Knaake, both capable and honest scholars, cannot be success- fully impugned: "It is evident that here he (Luther) repeats the stricture, previously indicated, viz., that Melanehthon had not included the article ' of the Pope as Antichrist. ' " f This interpretation is fully sustained by what Luther wrote to Justus Jonas, July 21st: "I now imderstand the meaning of those demands for more articles. Satan, forsooth, still lives, and he knows very well that your Apology Leisetreterin con- ceals the articles about purgatory, about the worship of saints, and especially about the Pope as Antichrist. Miserable Emperor, if he called this Diet for the purpose of hearing Luther's replies, as though they did not have enough to answer in the present Apology. ' ' t * De Wette, IV., 67. t Calinich, Luther und die Augsb. Confession, p. 57. Knaake, Luther 's Antheil, p. 78. + De Wette, IV., 110. The Latin is: Apologiam vestram Leisetreterin dissimulasse articulos de purgatorio, de sanctorum cultu, et maxime de Anti- christo Papa. Fliigel defines Leisetreter, the masculine, as, "sneaking fel- low, spy, eaves-dropper." Grleb: "Spy, eaves-dropper, a sneak, sneaking fellow." Grimm's Worterbuch: Der vorsichtig auftritt, gewendet auf einen mensehen, der um seines vorteils willen nirgens anzustoszen strebt. Luther associates the Leisetreter with the insolent spirits and hypocritical priests (Heuehel-Pfaffpn) Grimm, sub voce. Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. 203 There can be no question that Luther here finds fault with the omission of three important articles, which had been the subjects of his fiercest polemic against Rome; and there is no mistaking the meaning of the word Leisetreterin in this con- nection, as applied to the Confession as a whole. He applies it as an opprobrious epithet. The connection in which it is used makes this too plain to admit of question, and then come in the standard dictionaries and Luther's use of the word in other con- nections bringing irrefutable corroboration. Not only did the Confession move too wearily, in Luther's estimation, but it omitted three important articles. He would have had the Con- fession move as an open and aggressive force, and include articles against the assumptions of the Pope, against the doc- trine of Purgatory and against what he regarded as idolatry in the Roman Catholic Church. But at the same time, Luther recognizes the fact that the Confession contains more — and this was, and especially in its revised and published form, is its glory — than the Papists could answer. And as to the deter- mination to resist further concessions, that is evidenced by the letter which he wrote to Melanchthon July 13th: "For my part I win not yield a Iiair, nor suffer it to be yielded. Rather will I await every calamity, since they are proceeding so obstin- ately. ' ' * He declares that Christ and Beliel cannot be recon- ciled, since the chief contention is about doctrines. "The Pope is opposed to reconciliation, and Luther begs to be excused. ' ' t Indeed Luther's letters of July and August show, with absolute conclusiveness, that he regarded reconciliation as impossible and as undesirable. And he constantly insisted that his friends at Augsburg should make no additional concessions. But his instructions were not heeded as they should have been, and as a consequence the historian has to record at this point one of the most humiliating chapters connected with the entire history of Lutheranism, namely, that of the so-called compromise efforts between the Lutherans and the Catholics during the month of August, A. D. 1530. 3. Other Opinions. But there are other opinions of Luther in regard to the Augs- burg Confession, every one of which, in so far as we have been able to discover them, will be exhibited. July 6th Luther wrote to Conrad Cordatus as follows : "By • De Wette, IV., 88. t See De Wette, IV., 85, 88, 114. 204 luthee's relations to the augsburg coxfessiox. order of the Emperor it (the Confession) was produced and read before the whole Empire, that is, before the Princes and Estates of the Empire. I am exceeding glad that I have lived to this hour in which Christ has been preached publicly by his illustrious confessors in such a large assembly in such a very beautiful confession."* On the same day he wrote to Nicholas Hausmann: "Jonas has written me that our Confession (which our Philip prepared) was publicly read by Dr. Christian, chancellor of our Prince, before the Emperor and the Princes and Bishops of the whole Empire. " f On the same day Luther published an open letter to the Cardinal Archbishop of ilayence, of whom he had just written to Hausmann: "The Archbishop of Mayence is said to be very eager for peace." This letter to the Archbishop is hard to characterize. Judged by our democratic standards, it sounds sycophantic. But we dare not apply our standards of etiquette to the conditions of the sixteenth century. The letter allots to Albert all the grand titles of his birth and offices, as "Most Reverend Father in God, Cardinal Priest of St. Chryso- genus, Primate of Germany, Administrator in Halberstadt, Mar- grave in Brandenburg, etc., ily j\Iost Gracious Lord," and addresses him as "Most Reverend, Most Illustrious, High-born Prince, Most Gracious Lord." But the letter exhibits Luther's wonted bitterness against the Pope and his determination to stand fast in his teaching, because it is the teaching of God's Word. After briefly reciting the reasons why the letter is to be sent, not in manuscript, but in printed form, published, the writer proceeds as follows: "I humbly pray Your Electoral Princely Grace graciously to receive this my letter. Since Your Electoral Princely Grace is the chief and highest Prelate in Germany, and can do more than anyone else, I have risen above my scruples, and address Your Electoral Princely Grace most humbly in this letter, in order that I may do my full part, and acquit my conscience before God and the world; and should misfortune and God's wrath follow (as I dreadfully fear), that I may be without blame, as one who has sought in every way to promote, and has offered peace. "Doubtless you and all the others heard the Confession pre- sented by ours. I have the comforting assurance that it has been so composed that it may joyfully say with Christ, its Lord, •De Wette, TV., 71. j De Wette, IV., 69; Enders, 8: 81. LCTHER's relations to the AUGSBURG CONFESSION". 205 (John 18; 23) : 'If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil, but if well, why smitest thou me?' It shuns not the light, but can sa.y with the Psalmist: 'I will speak of thy testimonies before kings, and shall not be ashamed.' Whosoever doeth the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest that they are wrought of God. "On the contrary I can easily conceive that our enemies will not accept this doctrine. IMuch less will they be able to refute it. I have no hope that we will be imited in doctrine. They have become so embittered and enraged, that they would go into hell — which stands open for them — rather than yield to us, and forsake their own wisdom. We must let them go. We are innocent of their blood. I write to you because I know that our opponents cannot refute our doctrine. By the Confession we clearly show that we have not taught erroneously and falsely." * On the ground that the doctrine contained in the Confes- sion and held by the Lutherans is true and Scriptural, Luther pleads with the Archbishop to exert himself to the end that the Lutherans be not further persecuted, but be let alone. He does not seek doctrinal nor practical union with the Catholics — for of this he sees no hope — but peace in separation. He points to the Confession as evidence that the Lutheran doctrine is not heretical. July 9th Luther wrote the Elector of Saxony as follows :- "The enemy thought they had accomplished something when, bj^ command of the Emperor, they had the preaching suppressed. But the miserable people did not perceive that by the written Confession, which was delivered, there was more preaching than ten preachers could probably have done. Isn't it a fine piece of wisdom and a good joke that when Master Eisleben and ours were silenced, the Elector of Saxony rose up with the Confes- sion and preached under the very noses of the Emperor and of the whole Empire, so that they had to hear, and could not reply ? . . . ■Christ was not silenced in that Diet, and in their mad- ness they had to hear from the Confession more than they could have heard in a year from the preachers. ' ' f July 9th Luther wrote thus to Justus Jonas : ' ' The first and greatest thing is that Christ was proclaimed by a public and glorious confession, and set forth openly in their presence, so that thej' cannot boast that we fled, or w-ere frightened, or *De Wette, IV., 72 et seqq. tDe Wette, IV., 82. 206 luthee's relations to the adgsburg confession. concealed our faith. It grieves me that I am not present at this beautiful confession. ' ' * July 20th he wrote to Melanchthon: "I am deeply grieved that I cannot be with you personally in this most beautiful and most holy confession. ' ' f An examination of these letters in the original makes it evident, at once, that by "public and glorious confession," "beautiful confession," "most beautiful and most holy confes- sion," Luther refers not to the written Confession, but to the heroic act of confessing Christ in the midst of those whom Luther regarded as the enemies of Christ. And in support of this interpretation we refer to the editors of Luther's Letters, both De Wette and Enders, who have the word written thus : confession, that is, they begin the word with a small, and not with a capital, letter. Yet that Luther regarded the written Confession with high favor, that he joyfully confessed that it contained the teaching of the Scriptures, that he is said in later years to have called it his Confession | — all this is abund- antly evident. But that he regarded the Confession as too mild, as having conceded too much to the enemy, as lacking at least three important articles, and that he called it Apologia Leisetre- terin — and he is not known to have revoked any of these stric- tures — all this is documentarily certain. But it is a misfortune, as it is also a fact, that many of the older, and even some modern, historians fixed their eyes too exclusively on Luther's letter of May 15th to the Elector — "I have read over Master Philip's Apology. It pleases me very well" § — without knowing or car- ing to know that that letter had reference to the first crude draft of the Confession, yet far from being finished, and have quoted from Luther's letter to the Elector of July 9th, || and have overlooked, or have glozed, the "plus satis cessum in ista . Apologia, ' ' Tf and the Scilicet Satan adhuc vivit et bene sensit apologiam vestram Leisetreterin dissimulasse articulos de purga- * DeWette, IV., 85. t De Wette, IV., 103. t This is reported in Luther's table-talk, and consequently has no author- itative value. It did not come from Luther's pen. Very properly has Kolde said: "And he (Luther) could one? say — in a wholly casual way^ Cateehismus, tahellae, Confessio mea, which can be regarded only as a strong agreement with the substance of the Confession." He also says that this speech has been unduly emphasized, and that "Luther's direct participation in the composition of the Confession was very small." Ein- leitung in die Symbolischen Bucher, pp. xx., xxi. 5 De Wette, IV., 17. ||De Wette, TV., 82. H De Wette, IV., 52. Luther's relations to the augsburg confession. 207 torio, de Sanctorum cultu et maxime de Antichristo Papa. ' ' * The full purview, which can be obtained only when we have before us all that Luther wrote in regard to the Confession, shows indisputably that Luther's approbation of the Confes- sion was not unqualified. His approbation is expressed in general terms, but in several instances it is accompanied by strictures more or less severe. Hence, the evidence is conclusive that he did not regard it as a law for the conscience, and that he did not think that it had spoken the last word on any article of the Christian faith, and that he did not think of binding him- self to the letter or to the form of the Confession. Otherwise he would not have accepted Melanchthon 's printed editions of the Confession — all of them Variatae — and would not have coun- selled the revision of 1540, and would not have approved it and called it "the dear Confession. " f Luther found in the Con- fession, in all of its editions, the substance of his faith. He knew that it was evangelical and anti-papistical. Hence, he could call it "our Confession which our Philip hath prepared," and could join his brethren at Sehmalkald in 1537 in employing Melanchthon 's German Variata of 1533. J Thus have we exhibited all the known facts touching Luther's relation to the Augsburg Confession. It is surprising to learn how little he had to do with it during its composition. His letter of Jlay 15th to the Elector is very brief. It does not express any great interest in the Confession, nor any surprise that Melanchthon has changed the Apology into a Confession, nor does he write to Melanchthon a single word about the Con- fession, nor answer his letter of May 22d, though Melanchthon in that letter had requested a judgment on the Confession. And when he writes to Lazarus Spongier that he has the affair well in hand, and that a new conflict has been begun, it is now August 28th, or more than two months after the Confession has passed into history. Luther had far more to do with affairs at Augsburg after the delivery of the Confession, than he had before that great transaction. And it was not until September 15th that he wrote to Melanchthon: "You have confessed Christ, you have offered peace, you have obeyed the Emperor, you have borne injuries, you have been drenched with re- proaches, you have not rendered evil for evil, in a word, you * De Wette, IV., 109, 110. t See The Lutheran Quarterly for October, 1898, pp. 569 et seqq. t See The Lutheran Quarterly for October, 1907, p. 493. 208 Luther's relations to the augsbcrg coxfessiox. have worthily done the holy work of God, as beeometh saints. Rejoice in the Lord and be glad, j'e righteous: long enough have ye been sad in the world. Look up and lift up your heads. Your redemption draweth nigh. I will canonize you as faithful members of Christ, and what greater glory do ye seek? Is it a small thing to have rendered a faithful service to Christ ? to have conducted yourself as a member worthy of Him? Far be it from you that the favor of Christ should seem so small to you."* Luther was not inappreeiative of the great work that had been done at Augsburg. But had he written the Augsburg Confession, he would have made it stronger and sharper in its protest against Rome. He would have put into it something of the fire and energj' that appear in every line of the Schmal- kald Articles. He then already knew that reconciliation with Rome was impossible, and that the hour for conciliation had past. But as it is, the Augsburg Confession is Lutheran and not un-Lutheran, and both in form and in content it deserves to be known, and will be always kno^\'n as the Fundamental Confes- sion of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. He who subscribes it as his own confession of faith, by such act of subscription defines and identifies himself as a Lutheran. He may subscribe it according to the letter, or with reference to the system of teaching that it exhibits. The result is essentially the same. In either case the subscriber has his center in the doctrine of justification by faith alone. On the one hand he differentiates himself from the Roman Catholic, who has his center in the Church, with its priesthood culminating in the Pope. On the other hand he differentiates himself from the Calvinist, who has his center in the absolute decree of God, according to which some are elected to eternal life and all others are reprobated to eternal death. It is the center, or the central principle, that determines the system, and regulates the life and the Christian experience of all who intelligently, and from the heart, embrace the system. And the Lutheran interpretation of the Augsburg Confession must be learned from the Christian life and from the theology of the Lutheran Church, from the consensus of Lutheran teaching for almost four hundred j-ears, and not ivom an accidental explanation made at any particular time, or by anj' individual, or by any company' of individuals. * De Wette, IV., 165. CHAPTER XIY. THE MELANCHTHON EDITIONS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. In Chapter VI. we learned that both copies of the Confession' were delivered to the Emperor immediately after the German copy had been read, that the Emperor handed the German copy to the Elector of Mayence to be deposited in the Imperial Archives, which were kept in that city, and that he kept the Latin copy by him. It is regarded as documentarily * certain, that in the year 1540 the Mayence Original was sent to Dr. John Eek, who wished to compare it with the- edition of the Confession issued by Melanehthon in that same year. It is regarded as highly probable that Eek did not return it, and that its loss dates from that time, for, according to the researches of Weber, when in 1545 it was sought at Mayence in order to be sent to the Council of Trent, it was not found.f The Latin Original, in Melanehthon 's own hand- writing, eventually found its way into the Imperial Archives at Brus- sels, for in the year 1562 it was seen there by William Lindanus, Bishop of Roermund, and by him and Joachim Hopper it was compared with the edition of 1531. In 1569 it was still in Brus- sels under the care of Viglius Zeiehem, a member of the civil council. February 18, 1569, Philip II. of Spain ordered Duke Alva to obtain "the book of the Confession," "in order that they (the damned) might not hold it as a Koran," and to bring it with him to Spain when he returned thither, ' ' and to be care- ful that the Original be given him, and not a copy, and that no other, not even a trace of it, be left, so that so pernicious a book may be forever destroyed." That the Confession was given to Alva is shown by a letter from Viglius Zeiehem to Joachim Hopper. J Hence, there can be no doubt that when * See von Ranke, 3: 176, note; The Lutheran Quarterly, Oct., 1898, p. 565; Kolde, Neue Augustanastudien (Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrift, 1906), p. 139; Einleitung, XXX. t Kritische Gesdhichte, II. Bd., Vorrede. t Illustrissimus Dux a me hisce diebus nomine Regis petit, Originalem Confessionem Augustanam Anno CICICXXX Caesari oblatam, quae meae eustodiae ac Archivo tradita erat, dignaque omnino est, iit seruetur, quo haeretici, qui postea multa ei asperserunt, malitiae suae convincantur. Given by Kolde, Neite Augustanastudien, ut supra, p. 744. Weber, Geschichte, 14 ' (209) 210 Till-: MICLANCIITIION EDITIONS OK THE ATOSIil fio CON SESSION. Alva returned to Spain, in 1573, lie took the hated document with him, and that it was destroj'ed as a sacrifice to the fanati- cism of Philip.* But whatever may be the minutiae touching the history of the two Originals of the Augburg Confession, it is certain that the most thorough searches in the Imperial Archives at Slaj'^ence, in the Imperial Archives at Brussels, in the Vatican Library at Rome, and in several archival libraries in Spain, have failed to brinjr either of them to light.t They are not known to exist anywhere in the irorld, and are believed to have been destroyed. Neither did the Protestants make an official and certified copy of the Confession as it was read and delivered. Hence there is no such document in use, nor even known to exist, as the original and unaltered Augsburg Confession, a distinction that should be applied only to the Confession in that form in which it was read and delivered, though the words are scarcely applicable in view of the fact that the Confession was revised and changed up till the last hour before its delivery. But the words original and unaltered may be allowed in an official and diplomatic sense, provided thej' be applied (as they were intended to be applied when employed bj' the authors of the Formula of Con- cord in this relation) to the Confession in the form in which it Avas officially read aud delivered. Any other use of the words in this relation, or the application of them to any printed edition . of the Confession, is a falsification of fact and of history, since every known printed edition of the Augsburg Confession is known to be, and can be shown to be, materi.vlly different from the Augsburg Confession as it was officially read and delivered, June 25, 1530; if we except Die unverdnderte Augshurgische Konfession deutsch unci lateinisch nach den besten Handschriften aus dcni Besitze der Unterzeichner, Kritische Ausgahe (1901), constructed by Professor Tschaekert, and accepted by all Augs- burg Confession scholars as reproducing "the original and un- altered Augsburg Confession" with a high degree of accuracy, and consequently as discrediting utterly the Text us Beceptus, German and Latin, of the Book of Concord, and all the Melanch- thon, and all other printed editions ; though this Critical Edition of Tschaekert has received no ecclesiastical authorization or sanction, aud has not been made the symbol of any eeelesias- I., 77. See also Zdiachviff fiir Kircheiir/eschirhtc. XXTX. Band, I. Heft, pp. 81 et .teqq. * See Kokle, Knie Atu/nstanashtdien, ut supra, pp. 74.3 et seqq. t KirchenlcriliOn, I., 1645. THE MELA-NCHTHON EUITIOjNS OF THE Al'CKBlIHC CONFESSION. 211 tieal bod}'. ]iut it has great historical and critical value, as it shows, if not verbally and literally, yet certainly, to a high degree of accuracj', the Augsburg Confession as it was read and delivered, June 25, 1530 ; and it enables us to settle for- ever, in its essential aspects, the hitherto hazy and uncertain contention over the Confessio Invariata. It shows, further, that no edition of the Augsburg Confession in official use in the Lutheran Church to-day can be claimed by its subscribers as "that first and unaltered Augsburg Confession," not even in a technical sense as over against the Latin Variata of 1540, since the designation, "that first and unaltered Augsburg Con- fession" was coined to stand for and to represent the Augs- burg Confession as it was read and delivered at Augsburg, June 25, 1530 — a form of the Augsburg Confession which is not known to have been seen by Protestant eyes since it was officially read and delivered, and is not known to exist any- where in the world, except, to repeat, in so far as it has been restored by Professor Tsehackert from what has been called "authentic codices." From which it must follow, of course, that there is no such document in ecclesiastical use to-day, and never has been, as "that first and unaltered Augsbiirg Con- fession," for if the document intended by that designation is not known to exist and has not been seen by Protestant eyes since it was read and delivered, it could not have been, and cannot now be, in ecclesiastical use. Hence it is not only invidious, but it is untrue, as a matter of fact, when any ecclesiastical body says: "We accept the Unaltered Augsburg Confession," etc.* We find the phrase unveranderte Augsburgische Konfes- * The word uiiallered ^Yith siK-h meaning is emploj'ed in the Liclitenberg Bcdenken, Feb. 16, 1576, where it appears thus: Augspurgische erste ungeen- dcrtc Confession. Hutter, Concordia Concors, Wittebcrgae, 1614, p. 786. In the Compendious Form of Doctrine in (Miiller, p. 569) the Formula of Con- cord, Solid Declaration, we have, in the German: Ersie ungeenderte Augs- purgische Confession; in the Latin: Augustana prima ilia et non mutata Coiife.ve find exactly that condition of things which we have described aliove — not a different doctrine, but the same doctrine elabor- ated in certain most important articles, clarified and strength- ened, rendered more pronouncedly Lutheran, and more decidedly ■antithetical to the then current teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Of this no one can be in doubt for a moment who will compare these Variatae with the editio princeps, to say nothing about the German Textns Tteceptus and the "Invariata." Hence, from the standpoint of doctrinal clearness and of Lutheran dis- tinctiveness, it cannot but be regarded as a great misfortune that these German Variatae, doctrinally identical, which for nearly * See Weber, ut supra, 11., 74, 7.5. Also C. E. XXVT., 717-719. + Vt supra, II., 77. tC. R. XXVI., fi9.5-722. g C. R. XXVI., 723 et seqq. Compare 538 et seqq. 224 TIIK MKLANCHTIIOX EDITIONS OF THE AUGSBUECi C0XrE,S.SION. fifty years had supplanted the editio princeps, were themselves supplanted by the Textus Eeceptus, which was taken from a manuscript "without authentic value," and which "is through and through inaccurate." * In the qualities named above it cannot be denied that these German Variatae greatly surpass the editio princeps, to say nothing about the Textus Receptus of the Formula of Concord and the "Invariata." And it may be safely opined that had the authors of the Formula of Concord and the Elector August had as much critical acumen, and as much historical knowledge of the "Invariata" and of the different Melanchthon editions of the Augsburg Confession as they had desire to conciliate the Flacianists, they would not have made the blunder they did when they wrote the words : "That first and unaltered Augsburg Confession," and then took an unauthentic and thoroughly in- accurate text into the Book of Concord, f Moreover, these Variatae show that in the twenty-six years that intervened between 1532, when he prepared the first German Variata, and the year 1558, when he published the second author- ized edition (see "7" above), Melanchthon made no changes in the doctrine of the Confession, which is prima facie evidence that he was not conscious of any doctrinal change in himself. Nor even when engaged in preparing the edition of 1533 does he indicate or intimate that he wishes to introduce any new views of doctrine. He only wishes to throw more light on the Confession, and to make the article on Justification more accu- rate, and to make that article and that on Sin "profitable to pious consciences. ' ' % 4. The Latin Variata of 1540. There is evidence that leads to the conclusion that when in 1535 Melanchthon revised the Loci, he was at the same time engaged in revising the Confession in Latin. § Bindseil is of * Tschackert, p. 61. t For reasons not fully known the Elector August of Saxony, in the year 1576, sent to Mayence and requested the Archbishop of Mayence to send him a copy of "the original Augsburg Confession as it had been delivered in German in the year 1.530." A copy of the Confession was sent under the seal of the Secretary of the Archbishop. But it was not a copy of "the written original Confession," but a copy of a manuscript which had been made before the Confession had been signed, and which, consequently, has no authentic value. "The officials of the Mayence Archives had deceived the Archbishop of Mayence and the Elector of Saxony." Tschackert, ut supra, p. 60, and Weber, ut supra, I., pp. 122 et seqq.; Goschel, p. 48. A copy of an unauthentic manuscript was put in the Book of Concord ± C. R. XXVI., 698. Weber, II., p. 103. § C. K. XXVI., 340-2. THE MELANCHTHON EDITIO.VS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. 225 the opinion that the revised Latin Confession was also printed in 1535.* Caspar Peueer, Melanehthon 's son-in-law, says that it was written in the year 1538, shortly before the Diets of Worms and Ratisbon, and that it "was ordered, revised and approved by Luther, and that it was necessary that it be written on account of the adversaries, who had found fault with many things that needed to be explained in order that the occasions and the reasons for such cavils might be removed. ' ' f Nicholas Selneccer, one of the authors of the Formula of Concord, says: "The later Confession was revised in 1538, and was read over and approved by Luther, as witnesses still living affirm. ' ' t The object of the revisions, as stated by Melanehthon himself, was "to throw more light on numerous discussions," and "to make it better in the article on justification," and to bring iato clearer distinctness the proposition that "We are justified by faith alone." § But as no copy of this varied Wittenberg edition, bearing date 1535, or 1538, is known to exist, it may be fairly concluded that it was not published in either of these years. This varied edition, quarto in form, was published at Witten- berg under the following title : CONFESSIO FIDEI EXHIBITA INVICTISS. IMP. CAROLO V. Caefari Aug. in Comicijs AVGVSTAE. ANNO. M. D. XX X. Addita eft Apologia C<)nfeffi= onis diligenter recognita. PSALMO. CXIX. Et loquebar de teftimonijs tuis in confpecla Regum, et non con- fundebar. VITEBERGAE. 1540. * C. R. :}CXVI., 341. See The Luth. Quarterly, 1898, 560. t Epistola Dedicatoria, Witt. Edition of Melanehthon 's Opera. t Catalogus Brevis, fol. 97. § C. E. XXV., 340-34'J. 226 THE MKLANCHTHON KDITIONS OK THK AlKJHBl'Rc; ((INKHSSION. The Confession is followed by the Apology, at the end of which we read: IMPRESSUM VITEBERGAB per Georgium Rhau. M. D. XL. And though it is said in the main title that the Apology "has been carefully revised," yet, as a matter of fact, jMelanchthon never carefully revised the Apology after 1531, and the Apologj^ printed with this edition of the Confes- sion is the same as that printed with the octavo edition of 1531,* a very few things excepted. This Latin edition of the year 1540 is known via eminentiae as the Confessio Augustana Variata. In form it differs greatly from the Latin editio princeps, but Melanchthon himself declared oflfieially at the Diet of Worms, January, 1541, that "the mean- ing of the things is the same, though in the later edition some things have been either more mildly expressed or have been better explained. " f Bindseil has well stated the case as follows : "Very many Articles of Faith, especially IV., V., VI., XVIII., XX., XXI., have been more copiously treated. Articles XI., XII., have been transposed, and Article X. has been changed. Also: The first five articles on the Abuses that have been cor- rected, have been not only changed, but have been arranged in a different order. In the earlier Melanchthon editions they are arranged as follows: I. Of both Species; II. Of the Marriage of Priests; III. Of the Mass; IV. Of Confession; V. Of the Difference of Meats. In this edition of 1540 their order is as follows: I. Of the Mass; II. Of Both Kinds of the Sacrament; III. Of Confession; IV. Of the Distinction of Meats and of like Papal Traditions ; V. Of the Marriage of Priests. ' ' t The change in Article X. can be best shown by a parallel ex- hibition : "Invariata," emtio pkinoeps and | variata of 1540 : EDITIO OCTAVAE FOKMAE of 1531 : { Dg Coena Domini docent, quod De Coena Domini docent, quod cor- , cum pane et vino exhibeantur cor- pus et sanguis Christ! verc adsint, et distribuantur veseentibus in coena Domini, et improbant secus docentes. pus et sanguis Christi, veseentibus in Coena Domini. Here is change in form, indeed, but there is not the slightest * G. R. XXVI., 345. Weber, II., 103-8. Francke says: "Sed pauea tantum secus habent atque in ed. 1531, 8. Quaj'e. cum Hose nou dubitavcrim, quin Mel. confessionem Intellexit, quum a. 1533.' Ant. Corvino scripsit: 'Latinam apologiam totam retexam. ' " P. xxxvi., note 15. ■fC. E. IV.,-43,'47. See The Luth. Quarterly, 1898, p. 565. + C. R. XXyi., 345. In Article XVIIL, instead of: Per verbum spiritus sanctus concipitur, we have: Sanctum spiritum concipimus, cum verbo Dei assentimur. THE MEl.A.NCilTHON EDITIONS OF THE AUr,8BUR(i (VliNIi-ESHIOX. 227 reason to believe that Melanehthon meant to present a new doctrine of the Lord's Supper, or that he meant to favor or to allure the Saeramentarians. In the Confession as read before the Emperor, and in the two earlier Latin editions, it was neces- sary to repel Eck's charge of sacramentarianism. Hence the "et improbant secus docentes. " * In the "Invariata" and in the older editions the tenth Article had not, either expressly, or by implication, rejected the doctrine of Transubstantiation, nor had it expressed any dissent therefrom, and the Catholics had inter- preted it, as they still do, in the sense of Transubstantiation. Were they to be left forever under the impression that the Luth- eran fundamental Confession favored, or at least did not diifer from, the Roman Catholic Church in regard to the doctrine of the Lord's Supper? f And as regards the Zwinglians and their theological confreres it must be recalled that in the year 1536 the Wittenbergers and the theologians of South Germany had come to an agreement on the Lord's Supper and had together sub- scribed the Wittenberg Concord,t in which in the Article on the Lord's Supper we have the same pivotal words, exhiberi and cum pane et vino^ which particularly distinguish the Variata from the "Invariata," and from the older Latin editions; and sacramentarianism was no longer in the purview. Hence there was absolutely no call for the "et improbant secus docentes." More- over, by exchanging the word distribuantur for exliiheantur, Melanehthon brought the Confession, as it regards the admin- istration of the sacraments, into harmony with itself, for in Article VIIL, we have this very same identical word exliiheantur in all the Latin editions, where it is said : ' ' The sacraments and the Word on account of the appointment and command of Christ are effective although administered {exliiheantur) by evil men," and in Article XIII.: "Which are presented {exliiheantur) by the sacraments." Again and again is the same word employed in Article VII., Of the Lord's Supper, in the Formula of Con- cord, in all which places, as well as in Article X. of the Variata, * "They disapproTe those who teach otherwise." , ' t Salig is undeniably correct when he says: "The papists believed that the Lutherans were entirely at one with them on this point and taught transubstantiation." Eistorie Augs. Conf., III., p. 471. And von Bezold, an Erlangen professor, has written : "In the doctrine of the Lord 's Supper a form was selected that is so ambiguous that the Catholic theologians could only regret the lack of an express recognition of transubstantiation." Ge- schichte der deutschen He formation, 1890, p. 620. For confirmation from the Catholic side that the Catholics approved Article X. of the "Invariata" and rejected and condemned Article X. of the Variata. see Faljricius's Harmonia Conf. Augustana-e, second edition (1587), pp. 188-9. + C. E. in., 75 et seqq. Von Eanke, vol. 5, p. 323. 228 THE MELANCHTHON EDITIONS OF THE AUGSBURCi CONFESSION. the word means administered. It is also used in the same sense in the Wiirtemberg Confession of Faith. "^ And this same word is used by the Lutheran dogmaticians jnore frequently than all other words taken together to set forth the doctrine that in the Lord's Supper, "the body and blood of Christ, that is, the Lord Jesus himself, " t " are administered to those who eat in the Lord's Supper." Also: In the Variata we have the words "bread and wine." This makes it impossible to construe the article in favor of Transubstantiation, as had been all along done by the Roman Catholics. Hence the Catholics have never accepted or approved Article X. of the Variata, and it was exactly this article which Eck instanced at Worms in 1541, when he alleged that the Confession had been changed. Also the use of the words, bread and wine, are fully in accord with the Lutheran teaching that in the Lord's Supper the bread remains bread, and the wine remains wine, and that with and by these media the body and blood of Christ are administered to those who eat in the supper. The word vescentihus is distinctively Lutheran as over against the Zwinglio-Calvinistic view — credentibus.% And as further evidence that Melanchthon did not mean to introduce a new doctrine into the Variata, we point to the fact that he changed not a single word in Article X. in any of the German Variatae, in all of which the article stands as it was read before the Emperor. And it must never be forgotten that the German Confession, since it was chosen by the Princes to be read, and was read, before the Emperor, must ever take preced- ence of the Latin as the Augsburg Confession. Rather must the Latin be regarded as the Augsburg Confession of the theo- logians, and the German as the Augsburg Confession of the Lutheran Church. Hence, all things considered, it is not only gratuitous, but * Pfaff, Acta et Scripta, pp. 340, 341. The word distribuere does not properly suit the subject in hand, and does not convey the proper Lutheran conception of the Communion. Hence Ernesti, in his Praeleetiones in Libros Symbolicos Ecdesiae Lutheranae, anno 1752 et 1777, edited by J. M. Red- ling, 1877, very appropriately says: "Vocabulum distribuere h. 1. non sensu ordinario nee proprio, sed crasiori aceipi. Nam proprle est: per partes dividere, quod h. 1. non convenit. Nam in s. coena quisque totum corpus accipit. P. 71. t Wittenberg Concord, ut supra, p. 78. + For a strong and positive vindication of Melanchthon 's Lutheran sound- ness see Melanchthon, the Theologian. By Dr. H. E. Jacobs in The Lutheran the official organ of the Oeneral Council, February 18, 1897, pp. 4, 5. Among other things, Dr. Jacobs says: "On the doctrine of the Lord's Supper there is no evidence that he ever abandoned the explanation of Luther." ' THE M?:LAjNCHTHON editions of the Al'(«BUEG CONFESSION. 22!> absolutely unhistorical, even anti-historical, to saj-, or to inti- mate, that Melaiichthon changed Article X. in the Latin Con- fession on account of the Sacramentarians, or on account of their reputed successors, the Calvin ists, in the later edition. And if the Calvinists chose to accept this article, the responsibilit}' is with themselves, and they are to be commended for their agreement with the Lutherans in their repudiation of all am- biguity in regard to transubstantiation. The facts are simply these : The Romanists had found their doctrine of the Lord 's Supper in the " Invariata." The Calvinists found their doc- trine in the Variata. But in those days the cry of the Gnesio- lAitherans was: "Rather the Catholics than the Calvinists." Consequently, in the absence of any contemporary evidence and testimony to the contrary, we must hold as Peucer and Sel- neccer testify, that "the meaning of the subjects is the same, although here and there in the later edition some things are rendered more explicit on account of the adversaries, or have been softened. ' ' * And in corroboration of such a conclusion we note the fact that this Variata went out accompanied by the Apology exactly in the form in which it had appeared in the octavo edition of 1531, in which Apology we read: "In the Lord's Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and sub- stantially present and are truly administered (exhibeantur), etc. ' ' t Surely, Melanehthon could not be guilty of such a glaring inconsistency as to betray the Lutheran doctrine of the Lord's Supper in the Confession, and side by side to maintain it in the Apology in one of its most rigid and extreme forms of statement. This Variata soon so far supplanted the Latin editions of 1531 that they became for a long time almost forgotten books. Immediately it was officially employed and defended at the Diet of Worms (1540-1), and again at the Diets of Ratisbon, 1541 and 1546. At the Colloquy of Worms in 1557 the Variata was not only presented to the Catholics as the Confession of the Lutherans, but it was made the basis of a Lutheran agreement that was signed by Lutheran theologians representing churches extending from Pomerania to Wiirtemberg. Luther called it "the dear Confession." John Brentz praised it highly. Chem- * Selneeeer, ut supra, fol. 97, who wrote in the year 1571. Peucer wrote in 1562. t The Apology that accompanied the editio princeps and that which aeeompanied the octavo edition are absolutely identical in the use of these words. Even the abbreviations and the punctuation are absolutely identical. 230 THK MIOLANCHTHOX EDITIONS OK THK AUCiSBUKG CON FUSS ION. nitz declared that "it was in everybody's hands," and both he and Selneccer valiantly defended it, and declared that it was used with the knowledge and approbation of Luther.* But at the Colloquy in Weimar, Flacius, hard pressed in ar- gument, and unable to refute his opponent, who had quoted from this Variata, said that Balthaser Winter had told him that George Rorer had told him that Luther was not pleased with Melaneh- thon's course in changing the Confession. It is almost super- fluous to say that such an allegation is utterly without support. It is unhesitatingly denounced by historians as "an anti-Philip- pistic fabrication," invented by Flacius to cover the shame of defeat in argument. But, the fabrication now launched, in that day of suspicion and of theological jealousy and political ani- mosity, the Variata became discredited. To satisfy the Flacianists, the authors of the Form of Concord decided to exclude every- thing' that had been brought under the suspicion of being Phil- ippistic. They proposed to return to "that first and unaltered Augsburg Confession" j — which, however, they did not do, and which has not yet been done, and which cannot now be done, for as we have said above, so we say here again, such a document as "that first and unaltered Augsburg Confession" is not known to exist anywhere in the world. The German Textus Beceptus in the Formula of Concord is a faulty copy of an unsigned manu- script, and the Latin editio princeps is "a private work of Mel- anchthon," and is already a varied Augsburg Confession. 5. The Latin Variata of 1541-2. Melanchthon was still not satisfied with the form which he * See The Lutheran Quarterly for 1898, pp. 570-1. Weber, ut supra, II., pp. 333, 341, 343. Heppe, Geschichte d. deutschen Protestantismus, I., 208. Heppe, Die Confessionelle Entwicklung, p. 118. SehaflE, Creeds of Christendom, I., p. 241. KoUner's Symholih, I., 233-4. Anton, Geschichte der Concordiaformel, pp. 79, 80. Weber, after an exhaustive inquiry into the history and text of the Variata^, writes: "And now what conclusion must we draw from all these historical facts? This and nothing else: In the Variatae Melanchthon has changed nothing in doctrine. „ Because Luther and the other co- re forme is raised no objection, but, as the°evidence shows, approved and sanctioned them, and because the Evangelical Chiirch by pre senting them in religious colloquies, and by authorizing them at conventions, introduced them into schools and took them into corpora doctrinae, they received symbolical authority." Vol. II., pp. 241-2. Long ago Strobel challenged the learned world to show any instance in which an evangelical theologian took exception to Melanchthon 's changes in the Augsburg Con- ifession prior to lijGO. Apolorjie ilehuichflwits, p. 94. After prolonged re- searches we repeat Strobel's challenge. See Weber, ut supra, II., 508-3. The Lutheran Quarterly, Oct., 1898, p. 568. ■,.. f Lichtcnberi) Bedenlcu; Hutter. Concordia Conoora. p. 78& ,- FoniiHla 'of Concord: The Compendiouf: Form of Doctrine. THE iMKLANCHTlKIX KDITtONS OF TllK AIC'^BIKC CO.NFKSSION. 231 had given the Confession of 154:0. In the yeai- 1541 he began, and in the year 1542 he finished and published another edition in octavo. The Apology is added. The title is word for word the same as that of the Variata of 1540, except that the place and date of publication appear after the Apology : lilPRESSUM VITEBERGAE per Georgimn Rhau. if. D. XLII., and not at the bottom of the title-page. In matter this Variata differs from that of 1540 very slightly in Articles IV., V., XL, XX., but considerably in Article XXI. In the Articles on Abuses there is considerable difference in Articles IV., V., ^^I.* Of the Latin Variatae of the Augsburg Confession (1531, 1540, 1541-2), described above, we may speak in general, as we have spoken of the German Variatae: Each declares on the title-page that it is the Confession of Faith that was delivered to the Emperor Charles V. at Augsburg in the year 1530, and each is accompanied by the Apology, which is universally recog- nized as the best and most authoritative explanation of the (Jon- fession. The Lutheran doctrine has not been corrupted in the Variatae, but it has been clarified, amplified in statement, forti- fied by argument, rendered more decidedly Protestant, and more distinctively Lutheran. The "Invariata" did not x)roperly repre- sent the Lutheran doctrine in opposition to the Roman Catholic dogmatic tradition, as is clearly shown by the different confuta- tions, by the agreements reached in the celebrated Committee of Fourteen, t by the exclamation of Christopher von Stadion, Bishop of Augsburg: Quae recitata sunt, vera sunt, pura sunt ■Veritas, non possumus inficiari,% and bj^ that of the Emperor him- self : Protestantes in fidei articnlis non errare.^ Such a confession could not have formed the fundamentuni of a great Protestant Church, but rather a convenient bridge for crossing to the right bank of the Tiber. Thanks to Melanch- thonl The deficiencies and ambiguities that every theologian encounters in the editio princeps, to say nothing about the "In- variata," are removed bj^ the later Variatae. which, for almost fifty years, supplanted the editto princeps. and helped to deter- mine the meaning of the Augsburg Confession and to distinguish the Lutheran doctrine. Consistency would require that in aban- * See Weber, ut supra, XL, 109-111. C, R. XXVI., 34.5-347. Tacots, r.ool: of Concord. II., 14 7 et seqg. t The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1907, pp. 374 et seqq. X Walch, Introductio, p. 176. § Coelestin, IV., p. 109. See also Wieclenmnn's Dr. .Tohanii JCd:, p. 270. 232 THE MELANCHTHOiN EDITIONS OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. doning these bj' a backward step, we should go clear back to "that first and unaltered Augsburg Confession, delivered to the Emperor Charles V. at Augsburg in the year 1530," which they thought they were doing who authorized and introduced the change. But had they not deceived themselves by allowing them- selves to be deceived, it is hard to believe that they themselves could have thought of subscribing the Confession in the form in which" it was delivered to the Emperor, June 25, 1530, and we cannot conceive that it would be possible to find a Lutheran body to-day which could be induced to subscribe the Augsburg Confession in that form, were it made possible to do so. Hence the thanks of the entire Lutheran Church are due to Melanchthon for his Variatae. He represents progress and adap- tation in the Lutheran Church; and in the fact that Luther and his co-reformers approved and endorsed his changes and adapta- tions, and made them their own, we have the positive proof that the authority of the Confession, in their estimation, was not to be sought in the letter, or in any particular form of words, but in the content and in the conception of doctrine. The man who wrote the Augsburg Confession and the men, his contemporaries, Avho endorsed and approved it, did not think that it was perfect.* Much rather did they hold that it was capable of being improved, and they acted accordingly. In the editio princeps they gave us an improved Augsburg Confession, a confession that can stand, and that for nearly four hundred years has stood, as the distinctive fundamentum of a great Church. In this form the Augsburg Confession has had its widest recognition, but in this form it is not the Confessio Augus- tana Invariata, and no intelligent theologian, not blinded by prejudice, would claim for it any such distinction, or would exhibit it as the proper and intended antithesis to the Variata of 1540, since it is itself a variata, and since it was not in the pur- view when the authors of the Formula of Concord invented their distinction: "That first and unaltered Augsiurg Confes- sion, which," they say, "was most carefuUy collated by trust- worthy persons with the genuine Original which was delivered * After speaking of the Augsburg Confession as the purest and the most genuinely Christian manifestation of the Latin Church, Von Banke writes: "It need scarcely be added that it -was not meant to be set forth as a norm for all time. It was only a statement of a fact. ' Our churches teach ; it is taught; it is unanimously taught; we are falsely accused.' These are the expressions used by Melanchthon. He wishes only to express the con- viction which had been already developed." Deutsche Geschichte, 7th Ed vol. 3, p. 175. ' THE MELANCHTHON EDITIONS OB' THE AUGSEUR<; CONFESSION. 233 to the Emperor, and ■which remains in the keeping of the Holy Empire ; and since the Latin and German copies were both found everywhere to be of the same meaning, we will confess to no other, ' ' * and then took into their ' ' Christian Book of Con- cord," for the German, a text "without authentic value" and "through and through inaccurate," and for the Latin, first, Mel- anchthon's octavo edition, and then the editio princeps, "a private work of Melanehthon, " f a variata. ' Preface to the Book of Concord, Dresden, 1580. t Von Ranke, 7th Ed., vol. 3, p. 175, note. Tsehackert, ut supra, p. 61. CHAPTER XV. THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION FROM 1530 TO 1555. It must never be forgotten that the Imperial Proclamation which summoned the Diet of Augsburg, anno 1530, declared that one object of said Diet was to consult and to. decide on certain dissensions and disturbances in regard to the Holy Faith. There is no reason to believe that Charles was insincere in his declaration that "both parties" should be heard in love, and that every effort should be made to effect reconciliation and to promote unity in doctrine and in Christian living. To what extent either party was animated by love in the discvTssions that ensued will always be a subject of dispute. Neither will Prot- estants and Catholics ever agree in locating the responsibility for the failure of the Diet in attaining its main purpose, 1. The Recess of the Diet. But there is every reason to believe that the Lutherans took Charles at his word, and that they did all that their consciences would allow them to do in order to come to a perfect agreement •with their religious opponents. Indeed, it is now conceded by all fair-minded historians, competent to judge, that/the Lutheran concessions at Augsburg imperiled the evangelical cause.' Still, peace was not made, though only two or three points, and those appertaining to ceremonies rather than to doctrine — communion under both forms, the marriage of priests, the Canon of the Mass — separated the two parties.* The Papists would be satis- fied with nothing short of absolute submission to the papal see, and of the restoration by the Protestants of the entire papal system of doctrines and ceremonies. The Lutherans, inspired by Luther at the moment of supreme peril, refused compliance with such unjust and unreasonable demands, and withdrew- from further negotiations. This action of the Lutherans only intensi- fied the determination of the papal and imperial party to sup- press the Lutheran and other heresies, and to restore unity to Western Christendom. What friendly negotiations had failed to * Gieaeler, Church llisloiy, IV., 14o-fi. Plitt, Apolociie der Augustaua, p. 51. The Lutheran Quarterly, July, 1900. THK AU(isBiK<; toNFKssiox FKOM 1530 TO looo. 235 accomplish was now to be aceouiplislied by political methods, by a general council of the Church, and, if need be, bj- the cruel expedient of war. Finally, on the nineteenth of November, 1530, the Imperial Recess, or Deci-ee, of the Diet was issued. This famous docu- ment begins by reciting that the Diet had been called for the purpose of procuring and promoting harmony "in the one Christ- ian religion, so that all might live together in fellowship and unity in the one Christian Church;" and that six Princes, namely, the Elector of Saxony, the Margrave of Brandenburg, Ernest and Francis Dukes of Brunswick-Liineburg, Philip, Land- grave of Hesse, Wolfgang Prince of Anhalt, and the legates of six cities, namely, Niirnberg, Reutlingen, Kempten, Heilbronn, Windsheim and Weissenburg in Nordgau, had presented their Confession of Faith; that said Confession of Faith had been thoroughly confuted out of the Gospel and Holy Scriptures, and yet the aforesaid Princes had not allied themselves with the other Princes and Estates, and "agreed with us in all the articles." "Therefore consulting for the welfare, peace and harmony of • the Holy Empire and of the German Nation, out of special im- perial goodness and clemency we have made known to the afore- said Elector, Princes and cities the following decree, and have clemently entreated that it be accepted by them: Namely, that between this day and the fifteenth of next April, they should consider whether or not tliej^ will unanimously hold and profess identically concerning the disputed articles {dc articulis non conciliatis; German : Der unvergleichenden Ai-tikel halben) with the Catholic Church, the Papal Holiness, and with the other Electors, Princes and Estates of the Holj^ Empire, and with the other heads and members of the Christian world until the deci- sion of the Council, and inform us under their seals of their in- tention before the date above-named; — meanwhile we will con- sider what duty requires of us, and will in turn report to them our purpose. During the period of deliberation some very just articles and conditions are to be observed, viz. : We earnestly will and enjoin that the Elector of Saxony and his allies in this matter of religion, in the interval, shall take care that nothing new be printed and sold on the subject of religion in their domin- ions and, territories, and that during this interval the Electors, Princes and Estates of the Holy Empire, preserve peace and harmony, and that the Elector of Saxony, these five Princes, and the six cities, and their subjects, shall not invite nor force our 236 THE AUGf^BURG OONFEvSSION FROM 1530 TO 1555. subjects of the Holy Empire, or of other Electors, Princes and Orders, as has heretofore been done, into their own fellowship and that of their sect. ^Moreover, should any subjects of the Elector of Saxony, of the five Princes and six cities, of whateA'er rank or condition, still adhere or wish to adhere to the ancient Catholic Faith and Religion, it is to be free and safe for all such in their churches and chapels to observe their worship and cere- monies; and they shall not be forced to make any further inno- vations. Likewise monks and nuns in Classes, in saying and hearing confession, in administering and receiving the Lord's Supper, are not to be interfered with. Also the said Elector of Saxony, the five Princes and six cities, are to ally themselves with us and the other Electors, Princes and Estates against the Sacramentarians and Anabaptists, and are not to separate them- selves from us and the other Electors and Princes, but by counsel, work and assistance are to promote whatever is to be done against them, as all our Electors, Princes and Estates, as far as in them lies, have promised us that they will do in this matter. ' ' * Analyzing that portion of the Imperial Recess quoted above, we discover that it is directed against the signers of the Augs- burg Confession ; that it offers the signers of that Confession five months in which to submit themselves to papal jurisdiction, with the clearly implied threat that if at the end of that time they still persist in their opposition, the powers of the Empire will be - turned against them ; that nothing new on the subject of religion is to be printed or circulated ; that no efforts are to be made to increase the number of the Protestants ; that the adherents of the old faith are to enjoy the full privilege of worshiping according to the old forms, and that these signers of the Confession are to assist in the suppression of the Sacramentarians and Anabaptists. The Recess then proceeds to promise that a general council shall be summoned within the next six months, or at the longest within one year after the close of the Diet, for the purpose of considering the spiritual and temporal affairs of the Christian world, and for restoring peace and unity. Next follows a discussion of the Confessio Tetrapolitana, which declares that that document has been thoroughly refuted out of the Scriptures, and commands the four cities, Strassburg, Constance, Memmingen and Lindau, which had presented it, to submit to the Catholic Church. This is succeeded by a lengthy * Latin in Cljytraeus's Eistoria Augustanae Confessionis, pp. 389-408. German in Waloh, XVI., 1924 et seqq. THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION FROM 1-530 TO 1555. 237 review of the entire ecclesiastical situation. We give the excel- lent summary made by Sleidan : ' ' The Decree was read in the assembly of all the States, the Emperor being present ; wherein, after a recapitulation of all the proceedings, the Emperor en- acted and decreed, that thej^ should not be tolerated for the future, who taught otherwise of the Lord's Supper, than had hitherto been observed ; that nothing should be changed in public or private Mass ; that children should be confirmed with Chrism, and sick people anointed with consecrated oil ; that pictures and images should not be removed, and where they had been taken away should be restored; that the opinion of those who denied man's free-will should not be received, because it was brutish, and reproachful to God; that nothing should be taught, which might in any manner or way lessen the authority and dignity of the magistrate ; that that doctrine of man 's justification by faith alone should not be admitted ; that the sacraments of the Church should be the same in number, and have the same veneration, as anciently; that all the rites and ceremonies of the Church, the offices for the dead, and the like, should be observed ; that vacant benefices should be conferred on fit persons; that priests and churchmen, who were married, should be turned out of their liv- ings, which immediately after this Diet should be given to others ; but that such as forsaking their wives, should return to their former state, and desire to be absolved, might be restored by their Bishops, with consent of the Pope or his Legate ; that as for the rest they should have no refuge or sanctuary, but be banished, or otherwise condignly punished; that the priests should lead honest lives, wear decent apparel, and avoid giving scandal ; that all unreasonable compacts and agreements that priests have been anywhere forced to make, and that all unjust sale also of church- good, or the application of the same to profane uses, should be void and null; that no man should be admitted to preach, but he that had an authentic testimony from a Bishop of the sound- ness of his doctrine and conversation ; that all should observe the rule here prescribed in preaching, and not venture upon that ex- pression in sermons, that some were endeavoring to stifle the light of the Gospel; that they should also forbear flouting and reviling; that they should exhort the people to hear Mass, be diligent in praj^er, to invoke the Virgin Mary, and the rest of the saints, keep holidays, fast, abstain -from meats prohibited, and relieve the poor ; that they should put it home to monks and other religious, that it was not lawful to forsake their order and pi'ofes- 238 THE AUfif^BllKt; CdXFK.SSION FHOM 1630 TO 1555 sion; in short, that nothing should be changed in those things that concerned the faith and Avorship of God; that they who acted otherwise should forfeit lives and goods; that what had been taken from the clergy should be restored; that in those places where monasteries and other religious houses had been de- molished, they should be rebuilt, and the usual rites and cere- monies performed in them ; that thej"^ who within the territories of the adversaries, followed the ancient faith and religion, and submitted to this decree, should be taken into the protection of the Empire, and have liberty to depart whithersoever they pleased without any prejudice; that application should be made to the Pope about a council, and that within six months he would call one to meet in a convenient place, there to begin with the first opportunity, and within a j^ear at the farthest. That all these things should be firm and stable, notwithstanding any exceptions or appeals made or to be made to the contrary ; that to the end this decree might be observed and put into execution, in as far as it concerns faith and religion, all men should be obliged to employ whatever fortune God hath been pleased to bestow upon . them, and their blood and lives besides ; and that if any man should attempt anything against another by force, that the Im- perial Chamber, upon complaint thereof made, should warn the party that used force, or offered hostility, to desist, and sue his adversary at law ; that if he obeyed not, he should be prosecuted criminally, and to an outlawry, which being published, the neigh- boring Princes arid cities should be charged and commanded forthwith to give aid or assistance to him that was in fear of being assaulted; but that no man should be admitted into the judicature of the chamber, unless he approved this Decree made about religion, and that they who refused to do it should be turned out." * The language of the Recess is mild and respectful; but its tone is firm and decided. It leaves no room for doubt as to the 1-esult in case of disobedience. Forcible measures are clearly intimated. And as to contents, it is virtually a confession of faith. At the opening of the Diet the Cathdlid Prinbfes had declined to present a confession, or a statement of their faith, alleging that they adhered to the faith of the Church. This Eecess, which in its spirit and matter is the work of the Catholic Princes and theologians, inspired largely by the papal legates, rather than the w6rk of the Emperor, furnished the positive "* be iSUilii Hr-ligionix, eic, pp. 114, 115; Bohun's Tran<:lation, pp. 139, 140. THK AlKiSBt'RG CONFESSION KKOM 1530 TO 1555. 239 proof that no concessions would be made by the Catholic party, and that in doctrine, worship and jurisdiction, the Papacy was determined to permit no changes and no reformation in Germany. It also exhibited a programme for future action. In a word, it was the Catholic manifesto, and it set up a clear line of demarca- tion between the two parties. 2. 27ie Protestant Alliance. The signers of the two confessions had the choice, simply, between submission and resistance. What were they to do? Their consciences were doubly bound. They could not renounce God's Word, and repudiate the good confession they had wit- nessed at Augsburg. And hitherto it had been held that it Was not lawful to form a league against the Emperor and to defend their faith with arms. But necessity knows no law. Besides, the jurists at Wittenberg had decided that the Emperor had tran- scended his jurisdiction. "To obey the Emperor in his man- dates and commands against the Word of God would be an un- pardonable and irreparable offense. Hence, in matters of faith and of evangelical truth, we must obey God rather than man. Moreover, the Emperor has no jurisdiction in matters of faith. But he has the power to proclaim and assemble a council if the Pope be slow and negligent. ITe has not the power and authority to ordain anything. What a coimcil has decreed and ordained, that he may administer and execute." The jurists also had decided that as the Protestants had kp- pealed to a council, execution of a process was unlawful. This principle holds in civil matters. "Much more does it have place in matters of faith that involve the salvation of souls, and also in matters of marriage. Hence in the matter of our Christian faith the Emperor is not a judge, but only a private ^ersoti, to whom belongs cognition and the maintenance of the law. That is,"he had no right to judge and to ordain what men shall believe and hold. He has no right of execution where the matter has not first been heard, discussed, and determined in a council. A judge who has jurisdiction and power to decide a cause may be resisted when he proceeds contrary to law, or after an appeal has been taken. How much more then a judge who has ho juris- diction in a cause? And when he has jurisdiction, that is suspended by an appeal. A judge who has gone beyond the lirriits of his jurisdiction may be disobeyed without punishment. ' ' This Opinion of the jurists was made the basis of an official 240 THE AUGSBUKG CONFESSION FROM 1530 TO 1555. Opinion by Luther, Jonas, Bugenhagen, Amsdorf and Melauch- thon: "We conclude that it is the duty of every Prince to protect Christians, and the proper external worship of God, against all unlawful violence just as in civil matters it is the duty of a Prince to protect a pious subject against unjust violence. Much more is this duty incumbent upon Princes, since the' Scriptures often enjoin upon Princes the protection of law- ful preachers and teachers. . . . Therefore it is without doubt the duty of Princes to protect and guard Christian subjects, Christian doctrine and the lawful public worship. ' ' They f urther deelare that should the Emperor apply force while the appeal is pending, it is the duty of Princes to resist such manifest illegality, for all intelligent persons know that the Emperor ought to sustain the appeal. This Opinion is a strong and positive declaration of the right and duty of the Princes to resist the Recess of the Diet and all that it implied. The judgment is based upon the most funda- mental principles of the common law, upon Scripture and upon the dictates of reason, and is supported by appeals to history. A little later they issue another Opinion in a similar spirit, and use very vigorous language in the support of their position : ' ' There is no doubt that it is the duty of every father to protect his wife and child against open murder. And there is no difference be- tween a secret murderer and the Emperor, when the latter pro- poses unlawful violence beyond his jurisdiction, and especially unlawful violence in public matters. For violence in public mat- ters removes all obligations between subject and ruler jure naturae. Likewise in this case, if the ruler wishes to drive the subject to blasphemy and idolatry." * The case was now clear to the mind of the Elector. It was legally and morally right for him to protect his subjects from unjust violence and to save them from the horrors of religious persecution. Consequently, when on November 28th he received a letter from the Emperor commanding him to appear at Cologne by December 21st, "about difficult and weighty affairs, relating to the public," and on the same day a letter from the Archbishop of Mayenee informing him that the Emperor desired him to come to Cologne for the purpose of taking part in electing a King of the Romans, he forthwith despatched letters to the Landgrave of Hesse and to the rest of the Evangelical Princes and cities, praying them to assemble at Schmalkald, December * Walch, X., 660 et seqq. ErI. Ed., 64 : 269 et seqq. THT. AUCSIUPJ; rO.NKKS.'^iO.N FROM 1-330 TO lo55. 241 22d. Aleanwhile he despatched his son, John Frederick, to Co- logne to protest against the election of Ferdinand as King of the Komans. He charged his son to represent that the citation by the Archbishop of Mayence had not been legally made, and that the creation of a King of the Romans was a signal violation of the rights of the Empire, and of the statute of Charles V. December 22d, the Elector in person, the Landgrave of Hesse, Ernest Duke of Brunswick, Wolfgang Prince of Anhalt, sI()^• kko.m looO to 155-"). '245 those were to be admitted "who hold by the Word of God and the Gospel, and the pure doctrine of our Confession that was delivered to the Emperor and to all the estates, and who have the same taught and preached in their lands. ' ' * 2. When Heni-y the Eighth of England was aspiring to be placed at the. head of the Schmalkald League, the Leaguers ex- pressly require "that the ]\Iost Serene King shall promote the Gospel of Christ and the pure doctrine of faith in the manner in which the Princes and Confederate Estates confessed it in the Diet at Augsburg, and have guarded it in the published Apology, unless perhaps with the common consent of the Most Serene King and the Princes themselves, some things should seem to need change in accordance with the Word of God. "Also that the Most Serene King shall guard and defend the said doctrine of the Gospel and ceremonies as conformed to the Gospel in a future General Council, provided it (the Council) be pious, catholic, free and trulj^ Christian." f And at the Saalfeld (October 24, 1531) and Schweinfurt (April 2-5, 1532) conventions, which grew out of the Schmalkald League, and in The Niirnherg Religious Peace (July 23, 1532), the Lutherans made no deviation from the basis agreed upon at Schmalkald, except that they added the Apology "as a defense and explanation of the Confession." %, 6. 37/ e Eeligious Colloquies. 1. In the Colloquy held at Wittenberg in the year 1536, be- tween the Wittenberg theologians and the theologians of Upper Germany, it was solemnly declared. May 29th: "But since they all (the subscribers) profess that in all the articles they wish to hold and to teach according to the Confession and Apology of the Princes who profess the Gospel, we especially desire that concord be ordained and established." § 2. At Schmalkald, February, 1537, thirty-three doctors and preachers declare: "We have re-read the articles of the Con- fession presented to the Emperor at the Diet of Augsburg, || and by the blessing of God all the preachers who have been present in this Schmalkald Convention do unanimously declare that in • Hortleder, I., 1503. •^ C R II 1032. t Winekelmann, Der Schmallcaldisclie Bund, pp. 192 et seqq., and 305; Sleidan, p. 128ft ; Eng. Translation, pp. 159, 160. § C. E. II., 75, 76. II The German Variola of 1533 was employed at Schmalkald. Weber, II., 71 et seqq. C. R. XXATI., 699. '246 THK AUGSBURG CONKKStilOX FROM 1530 TO 15oo. their churches they hold and teach according to the articles of the Confession and Apology. They also declare that they ap- prove the article on the primacy of the Pope and his power, and on the power and jurisdiction of the Bishops which here at Schmalkald has been presented to the Princes in this conven- tion."* 3. At a convention held in Schmalkald in March, 1540, at- tended by the representatives of Princes and cities, and by theologians, proposals were received for the admission of Henry VIII. of England to the Schmalkald League, and a large sum of money was suggested for the support of the League in ease of agreement in doctrine. After a few days the Lutheran theolo- gians gave a written response to the ambassadors: "The sura of it all was this : That they ought not to depart from the contents of the Augsburg Confession nor of the Apology which was after.- wards annexed to it. This Opinion all the divines who were ab- sent afterwards approved by their letters to the convention." t 4. June 25, 1540, a colloquy between the Catholics and the Lutherans was opened atTlagenau. The former demanded of the latter that they present in brief form the heads of the con- troverted doctrines. The latter replied as follows: "That the Confession of their faith and Apology had been presented at Augsburg ten years before, to which they still adhered, being ready to satisfy any that found fault with it; and since they knew not what it was that their adversaries chiefly censured in that book, they had nothing to propound, but rather were to demand of them what the doctrines were that they taught con- trary to the "Word of God." J 5. The Colloquy of Worms, which was but the adjourned Colloquy of Ilagenau, was opened November 25th. § It had been decreed at Hagenau that the doctrines of the Augsburg Confes- sion should be made the subjects of discussion. The Lutherans insisted upon the execution of this Decree, and accordingly laid down their Confession, the Variata of 1540, and declared them- selves prepared to defend it. When Eck complained of the * Muller, Die Symb. Bucher, 10th Ed., p. 345. The Tractate on the Power and Primacy of the Pope was written at Schmalkald by Melanchthon. tSleidan, p. 1976; Eng. Tr., p. 255. Seekendorf, Lib. III., 258. See C. B. III., 961, 973. Lindsay, A History of the Beformation, II., p. 341. See Die Wittenherger Artikel von 1536, edited by Mentz, Leipzig, 1905, which Seekendorf called a "Bepetitio et exegesis quaeda/m Augustanae Confessionis." Lib. HI., p. 111. t Sleidan, p. 206 ; Eng. Tr., p. 267. See Seekendorf, XAh. II T., 265. § November 25, 1540; .Taniiary 14-18, 1541. THE Ari.;.-3iu;K(; confkssiox from 1o30 to 1-355. 247 changes that had been made in the Confession, ^lelauchthou at once replied : "The meaning of the subjects is the same, though in the later edition some things have been more mildly expressed or have been better explained." * The Variata was then used as the basis of the discussion that followed. Of the thirty-two evangelical legates present at Worms, not one raised objection to the use of the Variata. Hence it was at this Worms Colloquy- that the Variata of 1540 first received official and formal recog- nition as the Augsburg Confession. 6. On January 18th, the Worms Colloquy was adjourned to meet at Regensburg (Ratisbou) in the following Spring. In official documents presented to the Emperor the Lutherans de- clared their adherence to the Augsburg Confession in clear and unqualified language, as: "This entire kind of doctrine, which is set forth in our churches, and which exists in our Con- fession and Apology, is the doctrine which is handed down in the Gospel and in the consensus of the Catholic Church of Christ." "Again we testify that we embrace the Confession which was delivered to his Imperial Majesty at Augsburg and the Apology which was added. " " We, the legates of the Elector, the Princes, and estates, and the counsellors and legates of those absent, who follow the Augsburg Confession and tlie religion therein contained. ' ' f (The Augsburg Confession presented at Regensburg was the yariata,t which is recognized as the Confession that was pre- sented to the Emperor at Augsburg, and that, too, with the knowledge and consent of Luther, and it was while this Diet was in session that Luther wrote to the Elector that the Lutheran legates at the Diet "are standing by the dear Confession." § 'These six instances (and others could be adduced) show that the Lutherans stood by their Augsburg Confession with all fidelity. They were firmly convinced that that Confession con- tained the doctrine delivered in the Gospel. But they did not * 0. E, IV., 34. The Elector of Saxony charged his commissioners to the Worms Colloquy: "That they were to stand by the Confession and Apology in word and in sense, as they had been recently approved again a^ Schmalkald by all the Estates and their allies in religion." Weber, II., p. 318. Realencyclopadie," V., 587. The German copy presented at Worms was substantially a reprint of the German Variata of 1533. See Weber, II 318 320, 321, and The Lutheran Quarterly, Oct., 1897, pp. 562 et seqq. 'tSee C. K. IV., pp. 413-431, especially p. 431 and p. 434; pp. 478, 483: Bucer Acta Colloquii in Com. Imp. Eatishonae, k. iiii. and 1. iiii. Coehlaeua says of the Lutherans at this Diet : "Ad suaiii Conf essiouem Aua:ustanam ei'usque Apologiam alligabant fidem suam." Commentnria. p. .302. t Schmidt, Philipp Velaiichthon, pp. 373-4, note. 5 Pe Wette, V., 357. 248 THK AUC^SBUKG Cd.NI'KSSION KROM 1530 TO 1555. tie themselves to the letter of the Confession. They had not brought with them from Augsburg a certified or engrossed copy of their Confession. They had delivered the Augsburg Confes- sion to the Emperor, and it was not now accessible to them. In strictness of speech, they did not have an Augsburg Confession. They had only uncertified copies of the said Confession. But Melanchthon's editio princeps was at once accepted as the Augs- burg Confession. This was soon supplanted in use by the Latin octavo edition of 1531, and by the German Variata of 1533 ; and these again by the Variatae of 1540.* All these editions alike bore the superscription : "Delivered to his Imperial Majesty at Augsburg in the year 1530." Theologians and Princes accepted them and defended them, as from time to time they were pub- lished, as the Augsburg Confession. They laid no stress on the letter, but on the substance and content of doctrine. In the later editions they found a better explanation of the evangelical doc- trine than had been put in the earlier forms. 7. (In the Spring of 1551 Melanehthon, under instruction from the Elector ]\Iauriee, wrote the Repetition of the Augsburg Confession for presentation at the Council of Treny in case it should be deemed expedient to send commissioners to the coun- cil; In the. first paragraph of the Preface it is declared: "We mean simply and faithfully to reiterate the sum of the doctrine which is preached in all the churches that embrace the Confession of the Reverend Dr. Luther, and we repeat the doctrine of the Confession which was presented to the Emperor Charles at the Diet of Augisburg in the year 1530, although some things are here more fully recited, "f This Repetition, known also as Confessio Saxonica, was endorsed and approved by synods, uni- versities, superintendents and theologians from Pomerania to Strassburg, and was incorporated in several Corpora Doctrinae.X 8. In May, 1554, a convention of Lutherans was held at Nanmburg for the purpose of formulating Articles of Faith to be presented to the next Imperial Diet, and to oppose a common declaration to the errors of Osiander and Schwenckfeld. Here, on the 24th, a declaration, written by Melanehthon, was pre- sented and signed. In the first paragraph it is said: "We appeal to the published and well-known Confession which was delivered to his Imperial Majesty at Augsburg in the year 1580, * Schmidt, Philipp Melanehthon, pp. 373-4, note. t C. R. XXVITI., 327 et seqq. t C. R. XXVITI., 4.57-468. Tin-; AucsRi'iu; confession from 1530 to 15-55. 249 and by \\'hich oiu- churches through the grace of God still stand, because they know that this is the sole, eternal consensus of the Holy -Scriptures and of the true Catholic Church of Christ." The subscribers declare tliat they will not depart from this Con- fession, and that either it, or the Confession of Brentz, or the Saxon, may be delivered to the Emperor.* 9. The next j'ear, in ]\Iareh, sixteen liutheran Princes as- sembled at Naumburg and resolved: "That as to religion they would not exceed the terms and limits of the Augsburg Confes- sion; but because . those heads of the Christian religion, which were contained -in it, had not in the least any seditious or im- pious doctrines, by the blessing of God they would persevere in it." They also insisted on the execution of the Article in the Passau Treaty, which provides "that those of the Aiigsburg Confession shall also be admitted into the Imperial Chamber." y 7. The Auysburg lieligious Peace. We come now to the year 1555. In the twenty-five years that stretch back to the first Diet of Augsburg the Lutheran Church had passed through trying vicissitudes. It had suffered the loss of Luther, had experienced the desolations of the Schmalkaldic War, had been distracted by the two interims, had been racked hy internal feuds, had been wounded and weakened by the polit- ical animosities of the Weimar Dukes and the Elector of Saxony. Yet, with all, and notwithstanding all, in this first quarter cen- tury of its existence it had so lengthened its cords and strength- ened its stakes that by the year 1555 Protestantism embraced nine-tenths of the peoples of Germany and twenty-nine-thirtieths of the population of the Archduchy of Austria. Or, more par- ticularly: In Germany the Lutherans composed seven-tenths of the population: the sects, two-tenths; the Roman Catholics, one- ten th.+ !;But here at Augsburg, in 1555, the Lutheran Church failed to secure the full fruition of her victory. The Lutheran, or so- called Liitheran, Princes of Germany had become religiously degenerate. They were not animated by the spirit that had ani- mated their fathers at Augsburg in 1530, and they did not have * C. R. VIII., 284; Salig, I., 682-3. t Sleidan, p. 4316; Eng. Translation, p. 572; Ihid., p. 614. Von Ranke, 5 : 263. MoUer-Kawerau, 2cl Ed., III., p. 147. Lindsay, II., 396. T Von Kanke, The Popes, Eng. Tr., I.,- p. 19.5.. Kahnis Der Tnitere Gang des Deutscheii Protestantismus, p. 61. Sealencyclopddie,' II., p. 253; fbid., XIV., p. 322. Neues Archiv fnr Siichsische GescMcMe, X., p. 221. 250 THE AL(;sBL'Kt; t;OXFE.S.'. XXVt. Gieseler^ IV., 207. Lindsav, I., 397. K. Th. Hergang, Das Augsburger Interim, pp. 272-276. 252 Tine AicsiUKc CON I -loss ION FHOM 1530 TO 1555. "others who do not belong to the known sects condemned by the Imperial Recess" were to be admitted into the peace. That is, the scope of the peace as determined by the Protestants them- selves excluded only Zwinglians, Anabaptists, etc.* And as re- gards the Augsburg Confession, the "Invariata" and the "Var- iata" were placed on the same level. f And as the text of this Imperial Recess has not been officially changed, it is exactly on this basis that the Protestants of Germany vindicate their relig- ious rights to this day. The Peace of Westphalia (1648) harks back to the Religions Peace of Augsburg and makes no mention of the different editions of the Augsburg Confession."]: "And jt is evident, at least in regard to the commissioners of Electoral Saxony, that they meant actually to include the Upper German adherents of the Calvinistic doctrine of the Lord's Supper among those who were to be protected by the law."§ And the reason given b3^ the Saxon commissioners for this broader conception is that they were not constructing articles of faith, but concluding a common peace, and that they did not wish to arouse further distrust. 1 1 Nevertheless, this decree of absolute religious independence in favor of all adherents of the Augsburg Confession was coupled with the pernicious principle of the cujtis regio ejus religio, that is, the religion of the civil ruler determines the religion of his subjects; so that, should inclination or interest lead a civil ruler to remain a Catholic, or to become' a Catholic, the people living in his dominions should be Catholics, though a subject professing a different religion from his Prince might depart the country without molestation. This enactment opened a wider door to the Jesuits, and quick- ened their energies in entering the houses of Princes and in in- sinuating themselves as the tutors and instructors of the future rulers of the different territories. From this time on the counter- Reformation made rapid progress, and the Jesuits and the Ger- man Catholic Princes became the strongest and the most aggres- sive supporters of Rome.f Inquisitions were begun, as in Ba- * The language of the excluding article is as follows : ' ' Doch sollen alle andere/ so obgemeldten beyden Religioncn nit anhangig/ in disem Frie- den nit gemeynt/ sender ganzlich aussgeschlossen seyn." •fVon Ranke, 5, 262; 6, p. 305 et seqq.; Karl MiJUer, Kirchengesohichte, II., 448; Neues Arcliiv fiir Sijchsisclie Gescliichte, X. Band, 225; G. Wolf, Der Augsburger Religioiufriede, p. 61; Realencyclopadie,' II., 252. t Friedberg, Kirchenrecht, Anhang, III., 320. § Ludwig Schwabe in Neues Arcliiv, ttt supra, p. 226. II Von Ranke, 6, 308. if Giespler, Church History, TV., 223 et seqq. Til]'; A^G^iBl,'K(Ji CONFESSION KKOM looO TO l-500. 25'd varia, and colleges M'ere established for training the most sub- servient agents for all kinds of service in opposition to the Reformation, so that in the course of time, instead of having one- tenth of the people of Germany, the Roman Catholic Church now has more than one-third of the people of Germany and nearly .all the people of Austria. But besides the cuj^is regio ejus religio, the Diet embodied in the Recess the famous Ecclesiastical Reservation, which provided that a Bishop, Prelate or other Catholic clergyman leaving the Catholic Church, should forfeit all the revenues attached to his station ; and the Chapter, or those who by law or custom had the right of choosing a successor, could proceed to fill the vacancy bj^ electing one of the old faith, and could reserve to him the peaceable enjoyment of all the goods that belonged to his posi- tion. To this the Protestants objected, and thej' demanded as a counter-concession toleration for all Lutherans living in terri- tories ruled over by Catholic Princes. This demand was not embodied in the Recess, but Ferdinand promised that it should be carried out in practice, which was not done. These were the two questions which were not settled at Augs- burg in 1555. As they involved fundamental principles, they, joined with the cujus regio ejus religio, became active among the causes that brought on The Thirty Years' War, so that we may say with von Bezold, that. the Augshurg Religious Peace "was in reality an Interim which was to bring upon the nation far worse injuries and miseries than had been brought by the Reformation effected by the Emperor in 1548." * Not only did it cut off from the Lutheran Church the possibility of gaining addi- tional territory ; not only did it open wider scope to the Catholic activities ; ' ' but by it, at least as regards Lutheranism, the Refor- mation, which had been scarcely begun, was broken off, and was never again taken up. They (the Lutherans) thought that, be- cause they could no longer expand themselves externally, they were also perfect internally, and were content to hold fast to the little that had been acquired. The result was doctrinal controversies and a Church of officials."! The fact is, the personnel of leadership among the Protestants had greatly changed. John the Steadfast, John Frederick, Margrave George, had passed away. George of Anhalt was still living, but he had never been influential. Philip of Hesse, by reason of his j^outh- * Geschichte der Deutsclien Eeforination, p. 866. See Pastor, p. 476. t Kolde ill Eealencyclopodiei' vol. TI., p. 253. 254 THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION FROM 1580 TO 1555. fill excesses and in consequence of his long imprisonment, had grown prematurely old, and as a result of his bigamy he had lost his influence. The Lutheran Princes reigning at that time were, the best of them, only epigoni. For the most part they were such as had been influenced by Maurice, the traitor; such as were now more or less under the influence of August and of "fat old Interim," as the wits of the time nicknamed Joachim of Brandenburg, whose Macchiavellian politics have been already described. Also, as compa;red with their predecessors, they were indolent, selfish, jealous of each other. They had received their religion as an inheritance. It had not come to them as a con- viction, and as the result of a great internal and external con- flict. It was something that might be profitably employed for themselves and for their people to promote personal aggrandise- ment and public tranquillity. As a consequence of this lack of religious conviction and of religious discrimination, their views were too narrow and their sympathies were too contracted to provide for the world-wide interests of Protestantism. They were content to rest in present attainments, or rather, in the achievements of their predecessors. As the result of narrow- ness, selfishness, Macehiavellianisni on the part of Protestant Princes at Augsburg in 1555, the historian must record the limitation of Protestantism throughout Europe, and the horrors of The Thirty Tears' War in Germany. Principles may slumber, but they never die. Nevertheless, The Augsburg Religious Peace, even such as it was, was a great boon to Protestantism, and through Protestantism a great boon to the entire Christian world. For more than three hundred and fifty years it has stood as the Magna Charta for freedom of conscience in religion, and it has stimulated "the adherents of the old religion" in the direc- tion of higher spiritual ideals. But neither Charles V. nor the Pope approved the Peace. The former, who was on the point of abdication, saw in it the defeat of his many efforts to re-unite the Church, and the Pope could not concede to an Imperial Diet the right- to reform the Church.* * In addition to the literature noted in the margins of the immediately preceding pages, see Compositio Pads. "By some distinguished lawyers of the Catholic Keligion," Frankfort, 1629, p. 445; Appendix, p. 46. Con- tains the Passau Treaty and the Augsburg Recess in the Appendix. Also: Der Augsbnrger Religionsfriede. Osnabriick, 1855, p. 59. Der Augsiurger Keligionsfriede. Leipzig, 1855, p. 140. Both of these contain the text of the Augsburg (1555) Reeess. CHAPTER XVI. IHE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. By the words that stand at the head of this chapter, we mean Liither's two Catechisms, the Apology of the Confession and the Schmalkald Articles, all of which were taken into the Book of Concord, published in the j^ear 1580. 1. Luther's Two Catechisms. From the latter part of July, 1516, to and including the Lenten Season in 1517, Luther preached on the Ten Command- ments and on the Lord's Prayer. March 13, 1519, he wrote Spalatin: I'l am engaged every evening expounding the Com- mandments and the Lord's Prayer to the children and to the uneducated. ' ' * In the Lenten Season of 1522, he preached on the .Ten Com- mandments. In the year 1523 he preached on "the Ten Com- mandments, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer and the Ave Maria." f In the years 1523, '24, '25, '26, '27, '28, he preached on the Sacrament and on Confession. In the years 1526, '27, '28, he preached on different points connected with Baptism. In 1527 he preached a series of sermons on the Ten Commandments. J feuch of the material in these sermons is catechetical, and the end kept in view, in many instances, was to prepare the simple people for the worthy reception of the Lord's Supper. Some of his publications in these years bear the following titles: "An Explanation of the Lord's Prayer for the Plain Laity" (1518); "A Short Explanation as to how one should Confess" (1519) ; "A Short Form of the Ten Commandments, of the Creed and of the Lord's Prayer" (1520). Of this last. Dr. Inmischer, the editor of Luther's Homiletical and Catecheti- cal Writings for the Erlangen Edition, says: "These three parts: Of the Ten Commandments, Of the Creed, and Of the Lord's Prayer, held an important place during the Middle Ages up to the times of the Reformation, as the foundation of popu- * De Wette, I., 239. t Buehwald, Die Entstehung der Catechismen Luthers. Y. i Erl. Ed., -36: 1-144. Buehwald, p. viii. a, note 1. (265) 250 THK OTHIOH 01. 1) l.liTHKKAN (XINFIOSSION.S. lar instruction in the Church, and Luther esteemed them so highly that he declared that in these three parts is contained, fundamentally and abundantly, all that exists in the Holy Scriptures, that is preached and that is necessary for flic Chris- tian to know. Hence, he not only exi)lained them in the i)resent writing, but made them the basis of his Small Calechism of 1529."* In the introduction to this Skorl Form, Ijuther comjjlains of the existence of many books of high-sounding title — Iforiulus Animae, Paradisum Aniinac — by which Christians are deceived. He also condemns the Passionary and the Legend Book as con- taining contributions from the devil. He .shows how the Com- mandments are kept and how they are transgressed. He ex- pounds the Creed undei- three gcuieral heads and makes a most frequent vise of "I believe." Then, after a brief introduction, he explains the seven petitions of the Lord's Prayer, with a fair degree of fulness. It has been well said that this little book is the most important forei'unner of the Catechisms. In The (Icriaan Mass and Order of Divine Service (1526), t Luther wrote: "Well, in God's name! The first thing, a good, simple, plain, easy catechism is necessary in German worship. But catechism means the instruction with which the heathen, who wished to become Christians, were taught and directed what they .should believe, do, abstain from, and know in Chris- tianity; hence the learners, who were received for .such instruc- tion and learned the faith before they wer(' baptized, were called catechumens. The instruction or teaching I do not know how to arrange more simply or better than it has been arranged from the beginning of Christianity, and continued up to the present time; nttmely, the three parts: The Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer^ In these three parts is found simply and briefly almost all that a Christian needs to know." He then proceeds to say that Christian instruction must be preached from the pulpit, and that the children and servants must be questioned from article to article, and he actually shows how it is to be done, by propounding and answering questions on the Lord's Prayer and on the Creed. But it was the Visitation of the Saxon churches in 1527-9, that gave the real occasion for the composition of the Catechisms in the form in which wc now know tluMii, for in the Preface to the Small Catechism, Luther writes as follows: "The dcplor- • Erl. Ed., 22: 1. y E.-l. Erl.,. 22: 22(1 rl sn/q. THE OTHBK OLD LUTHERAN tiONFEaSIONfi. 257 ' able destitution which I observed, during a visitation of the- churches, has impelled and constrained me to prepare this' Catechism or Christian Doctrine in such a small and simple form. Alas, what manifold misery I beheld! The common people, especially in the villages, know nothing at all of Chris- tian doctrine ; and many pastors are quite unfit and incompetent to teach. Yet all are Christians, have been baptized, and enjoy the use of the sacraments, although they know neither the Lord's Prayer, nor the Creed, nor the Ten Commandments, and live like the poor brutes and swine. Still they have, now that the Gospel has come, learned to abuse all liberty in a masterly manner. ' ' It was also, doubtless, the discovery of this deplorable destitu- tion that led Luther to preach, in the year 1528, three courses of catechetical sermons at Wittenberg, one in May, one in Sep- tember and one in December. But by this time he was ready to begin the work of writing the Catechisms, or rather of changing these sermons into catechisms.* January 15, 1529, we find him at work on the Catechism, for on that day he writes to Pastor Martin Gorlitz of Brunswick : "I am now engaged in preparing a Catechism for the rude pagans. ""T* And on January 20tli, George Rorer writes to Stephen Roth: "I think at the time of the next Frankfort Fair the Catechism preached by D. M. will be published for the rude and simple. ' ' % This was the Large Catechism, which was finished and published on or before April 23d, for on that day Rorer sent three copies of the printed Catechism to Zwickau. § The Large Catechism was now complete in its first form. It bore the simple title: German Catechism, Mart. Luther. A second edition appeared the same year with the addition of A Brief Admonition to Confession. A third edition appeared in the year 1530, to which Luther prefixed the large pi-eface em- phasizing the value of catechetical instruction, and giving second place to tlie shorter preface which had appeared with the earlier edition.] | According to the shorter preface Luther "pre- pared this little book with no other view than to adapt it to the instruction of the young and illiterate," but in the longer pref- * Eealencyclo}}ddie' X., p. 132. tEnder's Luther's Sriefwechsel, 7: 43 and note Ck t Wittenberg Stadt-u. Vmv.-Geschichte, p. 51. § Ut supra, p. 59. BiichwaUl, ut supra, ji. xvi. b. II Kolde, Einleitung, pp. lix., Ix. 258 THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. ace he urges "pastors and preachers to exercise themselves and others assiduously evei-y day in the Catechism, as a synop- sis and comprehensive epitome of the whole Sacred Scripture, fiaithfuUy and continually proclaiming it to the Church." But while Luther was engaged in the preparation of the Large Catechism, he prepared and published an epitome of it, that is, the Small Catechism, though not in book form, but in the form of two series of tables, or tablets, which, as intended chiefly for use in the family and in schools, could be hung against the wall. This is evident from a passage in the letter written, January 20th, by George Rorer to Stephen Roth: "While I am writing this I look at the wall of my aestuary.* I see hanging on the wall tablets (tabulas) containing in very brief and compact form Luther's Catechism for children and for the family. ' ' t The first series, that to which Rorer refers, appeared not later than January 20th, and contained the Ten Command- ments, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and other prayers. The second series appeared before the middle of March, or about the time that the people were accustomed to go to Confession and to Communion. This we learn from a letter written by Rorer, March 16th, to Roth, in which he says that it has been recently printed, and he calls it "tablets (tabulae) of Confession and tables on the sacraments of Baptism and of the Body and Blood of Christ. "J By May 16th, the Small Catechism had appeared in book form, and very soon thereafter a second edition was printed, ^either of these editions is now extant. But we have reprints of the first Wittenberg edition, two of them done in Erfurt, and one in Marburg. § These reprints, made independ- ently of each other, show us to a high degree of certainty what the original Wittenberg edition was. Turning now to one of the Erfurt reprints, and to the Marburg reprint, we find that they contain the Ten Commandments, the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, the Sacrament of Holy Baptism and the Sacrament of the Altar, that is, the five principal parts. These ar.e followed by the Morning and Evening Prayers, The Benedicite and * Acstuaiiiim : Defined in Du Cange by Eypocaustum, Gall. Poele, Etnve, Stove. t Buehwald, Arch, fiir Gesch. d. dtsch. Buohh., XVI., p. 84. -t Bealencyclopadie, X., p. 133. Tabulae is defined as writing tablets, and as tablets written upon. § By Theodosius Harnack, in his Der Eleine KatecMsmus, Stuttgart, IS.'ifi. The other Erfurt reprint has been reproduced in fae-simile by Har- tung in Leipzig. This we have not seen. THE OTHEK OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. 269 Gratias, The Table of Duties (Haustafel), The Marriage Cere- mony for Plain Pastors (Ein Trawhuchlin) . Harnack repro- duces one of the Erfurt editions as a reprint of the editio princeps, with textual variants of the JMarburg reprint in the margin. By June 13, 1529, a third edition of the Small Catechism had appeared at Wittenberg, which, in addition to the five chief parts, contains the following as an appendix (Anhang) : Morn- ing and Evening Prayers, The Benedicite and. Gratias, The Table of Duties (Haustafel), A Marriage Ceremony for Plain Pastors (Ein Trawhuchlin,) The Order for Infant Baptism (Das Tauffbuehlin verdeudschet, und auffs neu zugerieht, durch Mart. Luther) of 1526, The German Litany, with notes and three closing collects.* Now placing side by side the title-pages of the Erfurt and Marburg reprints, and that of the third Wittenberg edition, we have the following interesting exhibit: Der kleine CatechiemuB fur die gemeine Pfar- herr vnd Pre- diger. Mart. Luther. Wittemberg. At the end : Gedruckt zu Erf- furd durch Conrad Treffer. Der Kleine Catechismus , Fur die gemeyne Pfar- herr vnd Pre- diger. Mart. Luther Marburg. 1529. At the end : Gedruckt zu Mar- burg vm Jahr m,D. vnd XXTX. ENCHIRIDION. Der kleine Catechismus fiir die gemeine Pfarher vnd Prediger, Gemehret vnd gebessert, durch Mart. Luther. AVittemberg. At the end : Gedruckt zu Wit- temberg, durch Nickel Schirlentz. m. D. XXIX. These title-pages all show that the Small Catechism was intended for the use of pastors and preachers, whether for their own personal instruction , and spiritual benefit, or for use in their congregations, or for both uses, is not indicated; but more probably, as indicated by the Preface, it was intended, in this book form, both to be studied by the pastors and to be taught to the people in order to prepare them for a worthy approach to the sacrament and for discharging the duties of Christians. * Erl. Ed., 21, p. 3 ; 22 ; pp. 290 et seqq. Harnack, pp. xxii., xxiii., 72, 82, 83. Kolde, Einleititng, pp. Ix., Ixi. Buehwakl, Eiitstehung, p. xiv. Sealencyclopodie,^ X.. p. 134. 260 THE OTHEK OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. It is partieularlj' to be noted that the third Wittenberg edition was "enlarged and improved." The Large Catechism was translated into Latin by John. Lonicer, a Marburg Professor. The dedication to L. P. Rosellus of Padua, is dated May 15, 1529. The title is : Lutheri Cateehismus Latina donatus eivitate, per Joannem Lonicerum. Marpurgi 1529. At the end: Ex Typographia Marpurgensi, Anno Millesimo,. Quingentesimo XXIX. IIII. Nonas Septenibres. Meanwhile Vineentius Obsopous, a learned school rector of Anspach, had executed a translation and had dedicated it to Margrave Albert of Brandenburg, July 1, 1529, and added to it a translation of the two Catechisms of John Brentz. The whole was published under the following title: D. Martini Lutheri Theologi, Cate- ehismus lectu dignissimus, latinus factus per Vincentium Obso- paeiiin. Huic adieeti sunt alij quoque gemini Catechismi, Joan- nis Brentij Eeclesiastae Hallensis eodem interprete. Hagenoae, An. MDXXTX.* The Small Catechism was also twice translated into Latin in the year 1529 ; the first time under the title : Simplieissiraa et brevissima Catechismi expositio, as an appendix to a transla- tion, by an unknown hand, of Luther's little book entitled:. Enchiridion piarum preeationum, printed at Wittenberg in 1529. The second translation appeared with a dedication to Hermann CrotUs Rubeanus, dated September 29, 1529, and was executed by John Sauermann. The title runs thus: Parvus Cateehismus pro pueris in schola : Parve puer, parvum tu ne contemne libellum, continet hie summi dogmata summa Dei. Mart. Luther. M. D. XXIX. At the end : Wittenbergae apud Georgium Rhau. Anno M. D. XXIX. Beginning with the year 1531, "original editions" of the Small Catechism appeared in the following years during the lifetime of Luther: In 1531, 1535 and 1536 (known only biblio- graphically) ; 1537, 1539, 1542.t 2. The Apology. No sooner was the Catholic Confutation read, August 3d, than the Lutheran Princes requested a copy of the same that they might examine it and make good the points to which ex- * Kolde, Einleitung, p. Ixi. liealencyclopiidie, X.. p. 133. t Eealeneyclopadie,' X., p. 134. For a more comprehensive and minute account of the genesis and history of Luther's Catechisms, consult Erl. Ed. of t/uther's Works, vols. 21, 22; Harnack, ut supra; Buchwald, ut suprit; KoMe, lit aupra; Bealencyclopiidie,' Art. Katechumen Luther's. THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. 261 ception had been taken.* The Emperor promised that he would take the matter under consideration. The next day he called a council of the Catholic Princes, who on August 5th presented him with an Opinion, in which he was advised that "it would be better to give the Elector and Princes a copy than to refuse it. "But not with the intention that they make a reply to it, but that the Princes and cities may learn and understand from it the articles in which they differ from the Catholic Church, and may again unite themselves with it," but with the express declaration added that they were not to let it pass out of their hands, nor allow it to be printed. f These conditions, which Melanchthon in the Preface to the Apology calls "most peril- ous," the Princes were imable to accept. But feeling that they miist defend their Confession they resolved to make reply to the Confutation. t Hence Melanchthon says: "They (the Princes) commanded me and certain others to prepare the Apology of the Confession, in which the reasons were to be presented to the Emperor why we could not accept the Confuta- tion, and in which these first things to which the adversaries ob- jected were to be refuted. " § But as about this same time the Reconciliation Efforts were begun, the resolution to make reply to the Confutation was held in abeyance — was probably forgotten until after August 30th, when the Reconciliation Efforts suddenly collapsed, and when the Lutheran consciousness came to itself again. At least, it was between this time and September 20th that the Apology in its first form {Prima Delineatio) was written, as we learn from Melanchthon 's letter of that date to Camerarius: "I am now staying at home on account of the speeches of the malevolent, and in these days I have written an apology to our Confession, which, if it shall be necessarj^, will be presented. It will be set over against the Confutation of the adversaries, which you heard read. I have written carefully and energetically." j| And from a letter written about the same time to Egidius, one of the Emperor 's chaplains : "I have not been able to reply * Sleidan, p. 108; Eng. Tr;, p. 131. t Original in Zeitschrift f. Kircheng., XII. (1891), pp. 156-8. t Original in Forstemann, II., p. 180 et seqq. 5 It is not documentarily certain that the command ivas issued to Mel- anchthon and others immediately after the resolution of the Princes to make reply. But see Sleidan, p. Ill, Eng. Tr. 13.5. C. R. XXVII., p. 247. Francke, p. xxxiv. Hase, p. Ixxxvi. 11 C. R. II., 383. 2()2 THK OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. with sufficient fulness to your Most Reverend Paternity, for we have been occupied in preparing an apology to be delivered to the Emperor. It will be somewhat severer than the Confession was, if we are not able to obtain justice." * These two letters make it fairly certain that the Apology was completed by September 20th, and that it had been in course of preparation for some time — perhaps from about the first of September. The data in hand will not allow us to determine the chronology more accurately. As Melanchthon had not heard the Confutation read, and as he could not obtain a copy of it, he had to depend on the notes made by Camerarivis and others for his materials, t Perhaps he had also learned from some of the Catholics, who served on the Reconciliation Committees, the points raised in objection to the Confession. Inadequate as these materials were, Melanch- thon and his associates were enabled to reply with a fair degree of fulness and success to the Confutation. But under what circumstances the Princes approved the Apology in this, its first form, or whether they took any formal action in regard to it, has not been reported. We know, however, when, September 22d, the preliminary Recess of the Diet was read and the de- claration was made in it, that the Lutheran Confession, on "the good foundation of the Holy Gospels and of writings, had been refuted and rejected," J Chancellor Briick took occasion to hand the Apology, prepared both in Latin and in German, to Frederick Count Palatine, the Emperor's spokesman, who reached it toward the Emperor, who was in the act of receiving it when his brother, Ferdinand, whispered in his ear; whereupon he waved it from his presence, and Count Frederick returned it to Briick. § The Apology of the Augsburg Confession was thus offered to the Emperor, but was rejected by him. This prima delineatio of the Apology has no confessional significance? It was published in the Latin text by Chytraeus in his Historia of the Augsburg Confession, 1578, and more accurately by Forstemann in 1835, and the Latin and German * C. B. II., 381. In this letter to Egidius, Melanchthon defends himself against the accusation that by his haughtiness and stubborness he had irri- tated the Catholic Princes. He says that he desired peace for "no reason except that he saw that if peace should not be established it would come to pass that ours would be united with the Zwinglians. " t See C. E. XXVII., 227 et seqq. t Forstemann, II., 475. § Salig, I., 340. Spalatin, Annales, p. 197. Sleidau, p. Ill; Eng. Tr., p. 135. Kollner, SymboUl-, I., 421.' THE OTHEK OLD [,UTHERAN CONFESSIONS. 263 texts are both given by Biudseil in Vol. XXVII. of tlie.C-'or- 2ms lieformatoruni, pp. 275 ei seqq. The next daj^, September 23d, the Elector of Saxony, and some other Princes, with their suites, left Augsburg and turned their faces homeward. The defense of their Confession had been rejected. The Recess finally gave them till April 15th of the following year to acquiesce in the doctrines of the Pope, which the Emperor himself and all the rest of the Christian world professed. A copy of the Recess had been refused them, and the Emperor had become impatient with their appeals to their Confession and to their consciences.* Further negotia- tions could have accomplished nothing. Indeed the minds of the Lutheran Princes had become irritated by the unfairness shown by the Emperor and the Catholic Princes, and they were resolved now more than ever to stand by their Confession. Melanchthon especially was quickened in the defense of the Con- fession. In Spalatin's house at Altenburg, he wrought at it on Sunday until Luther took the pen out of his hand and told him that on that day he should not engage in such work.y Soon after reaching Wittenberg he received a copy of the Confuta- tion that had been made, probably by a son of Jerome Ebner, who, with his brother, had made the recension of the Augs- burg Confession that had been sent to Niirnberg, June 3d, and who stood in close relation with Melanchthon at Augsburg, t When now he read the Confutation he became more than ever excited, when he saw "how. insiduously it had been written, so that in some places it might deceive even the cautious," as he afterwards declares in the Preface. During the Autumn of 1530 and the Winter that followed, he seems to have labored assiduously on it; and it seems to have cost him more time and toil than he had expected at the beginning. November 11th he wrote to Veit Dietrich: "I will transcribe (the Greek Masses) for Osiander when I shall have finished the Apology, which I am now revising and trying to put in shape. I will there ex- plain all the principal controversies. I hope this will be use- ful. ' ' § On November 13th he wrote to Camerarius : " I am wholly engaged in revising the Apology. I will elaborate it carefully, so far as shall seem proper. I will include in it our controversies, and expound them all. This, as I hope, will be profitable." || In Pebruarj' he wrote to Brentz: "I am re- *Sleidan, p. Ill; Eug. Tr., 13-^-6. t Salig, I., 375. tKolde, ninleihmg, p. xx.xvii. 5 C. R. II., 43S. || C. R. II., 440. :264 THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN <»JJFESSIONS. vising the Apology. It will appear much enlarged and better fortified. At the present time the article by which we teach that men are justified by faith, not by love, is being copiously treated, because on account of the propitiation of Christ it is necessary to understand that we are justified by faith, and that justification by love is justification according to, the law and not according to the Gospel. The Gospel sets forth one kind of righteousness, the law another kind. When I shall have finished it I will send it. " * Early in March he wrote to Hieronj-^mus Baumgartner : "I have not yet finished the Apology. I am impeded not only by poor health, but also by many other en- gagements. ' ' t -^ocl on IMarch 7th again to Camerarius : ' ' My Apology is not yet completed. The work grows while I am writing. ' ' t March 17th he wrote to Camerarius : ' ' jMy Apology- proceeds more tardily than it ought. ' ' § And a little later to Baumgartner: "The Apology is still in press, for the whole of it is being revised and will be amplified bj'' me," || April 8th to Brentz again: "I have almost completed the Apology." ^ April 11th to Camerarius: "My Apology is now being published. I will see that you get it." ** About the middle of April he wrote to Bucer: "My Apology is published. In it I think I have treated the articles on justification, on repentance (penitence), and some others, in such a way that the opponents will under- stand that the biirden is placed upon them." ff From these and from other letters that might be quoted, we are informed of the progress made by Melanehthon in writing and in publishing the Apology. He was especially solicitous about the article of justification. While the work was passing through the press he actually took out some five and a half or six printed sheets on which he had discussed that subject, and replaced them by an entirely new treatment of the subject, in which he sets forth especially the essential nature of justification and the relation of faith and good work.lJ But while Melanehthon was writing the Apology he was also revising and editing the Augsburg Confession. Both ap- peared together in print during the latter half of April or early in May, 1531, in what is known as the Latin editio princeps. Some time later in the same year, appeared the German editio K. II., 492. K. II., 494. C. R. II., 495. tt C. R. II., 498. et scqq. Kclde, Einleitiing, p. xxxviii. *c. R. TL, 484. tf. R. II., 485. tc. R. II., 48(1. §c. R. II., 488. «c. R. XXVII.. 385. 460 Miiller, Einleitiing, y. Ixxx iv. \%. THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIOKS. 265 princeps of the Confession, accompanied by the German editio princeps of the Apology. The Gei-man translation of the Apol- ogy is credited to Justus Jonas on the title-page, though he was to such an extent assisted by ]\Ielanchthon, who niade so many additions, omissions and alterations in the text, that this Ger- man editio princeps of the Apology has an independent signifi- cance. Hence the Apology in German must also be regarded as a work of Melanehthon 's, and as containing his teaching on the subjects discussed.* In the Autumn of 1531, Melanehthon published a revised edition of the Latin Apology and had it accompany the second (octavo) Latin edition of the Confession. In this revised edition he made some important changes. For instance, the citations in Article X., in which he quotes from the Greek Canon of the Mass, and from Theophilact of Bulgaria, are omitted, and nothing is put in their places.f These citations are also omitted from the German edition. It is probable that they had given offense, as they have often since done, and were omitted to avoid the imputation of transubstantiation that is implied, especially in the words: "Vere in carnem mutari." In sub- sequent editions no important changes were made either in the Latin or in the German text, though there are a good many various readings.? The Apology in its first form was an official writing, and had been prepared under command. But it appears now, in 1531, under the name of ]\Ielanchthon, who in the Preface tells the - reader why it was written, and why he attaches his name to it. But at once it received recognition. Brentz prized it so highly that he thought it worth}' of canonization. § At Schweinfurt, in 1532, it was placed along side the Confession as a symbolical book. 1 1 On the 19th of November the Archbishop of Mayence sent a copy to the Emperor in order to show him how the Christian religion was being brought to destruction. Coehlaeus * Muller 's Einleiiung in die Symh. Bucher, p. btxxviii. Kolde, Ein- ■ ieitung, p. xxxix. For the probable date of the publication of the Ger- man Apology, see Kolde, ut supra, text and note. t The citations omitted are as follows: In quo (C'anone) aperte orat sacerdos, ut mutato pane ipsuni corpus Christi fiat. Et Vulgarius, scriptor ut nobis videtur non stultus, diserte inquit, panem iwn lantum figuram esse, scd vere in carnem mutari. Miiller, p. 164. t See Kolde, Einleiiung, p. xli. Hase, lxxx%-iii. et tcqq. C. E. XXVII., 422 et seqq., 376-7. § C. R. II., 512. II Winckeimann, Der Schmalkaldische Bund, p. 305. Plitt, Apologie der Augu-stana, 246 et seqq. 266 THE OTHKR OLD LUTHERAN CONFKSSIONS. reports that many at Rome were pleased with it, and that he himself had been asked to write against it.* The Apology, looked at in itself and considered with refer- ence to its influence, must be regarded, next to the Confession, as Melanchthon 's greatest achievement. No other work, except the Confession, gave him so much anxiety as did the Apology. For more than six months he was engaged at it almost to the exclusion of everything else. We do not wonder, therefore, that it ranks as the most learned of the Lutheran symbols. But the learning that it exhibits is not pedantry. The author's skill in the Scriptures and his profound acquaintance with the teach- ing of the early Church were employed to amplify, to illustrate, to vindicate, and to express, with a revived Lutheran con- sciousness, the, doctrines which he had stated, all too mildly, in the Confession as it had been read and delivered to the Emperor. Hence the tone of the Apology, while dignified and respectful, is also polemical and aggressive. And yet upon the whole it is so practical, that it may be profitably read as a book of devo- tion. Its occasional errors in exegesis and in patristic quota- tions are due to the age in which it was written rather than to the man who wrote it — an age in which the science of exegesis and the study of the Fathers were in their infancy.f But not- withstanding the deficiencies of the Apology in secondary matters, and its objectionable features in a few points,^ it has always ranked as a theological treatise of great value, and will always be highly esteemed, as it has been hitherto, because it is the first and the most authoritative interpretation of the Augsburg Confession. If now we turn to the contents of the Apology, we may say with the Estates § at Schweinfurt in 1532, that it is the cor- relate of the Confession, for in general it follows the Confession throughout, article by article, and defends and expounds the articles as they have need and also with reference to the Con- futation, which had approved some articles and had rejected others. Articles I. and III. are treated very briefly, because both these articles are approved in the Confutation. In Article" III. original sin is declared to be an "active hereditary con- *Kolde, Einleitung, p. xl.; Zeitschrift f. Kircheng.. vol. XVII. (1898), p. 236; Miiller, liinleitimg , p. Ixxxiii.-v.; Salig, I., 376-7. t Miiller, Einleitung, p. Ixxxv. t We refer more particularly to the citations from the Greek Canon of the Mass and from Theophilact, noted above, and to the declaration that Absolution is truly a sacrament. De XJsu et Numero Sacramentorum. 5 Winckelmann, p. 30.'5. THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CO^'FK33IONS. 26.7 tagion by which our whole nature is corrupted, by which we inherit such hearts, minds and thoughts from Adam, as are im- mediately opposed to God and to his first and greatest com- mandment." Article IV. teaches that men are justified before God by faith alone, and faith is defined as a firm confidence of heart and reliance on the promises of God. ' ' The Creed says : 'I believe the remission of sin.' " Articles V. and VI., on the J\Ieans of Grace and on the Fruits of Faith, are passed over in silence, since he had discussed these subjects in the preceding article. Articles VII. and VIII. are taken together, because they belong together. The Church is not only an organization having external rites and ceremonies, "but it is fundamentally a society possessing faith and the Holy Spirit in hearts," though there are wicked men and hypocrites in the Church. The Creed commands to believe "that there is a Holy Catholic Church. But the wicked are not the Holy Church. ' ' In Article IX. it- is declared that ' ' Baptism is necessary to salvation, ' ' and that "as salvation i§ offered to all, so Baptism is offered to all, to men, women and children." Article X. declares that "in the Lord's Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly ad- ministered (exhibeantur) with those things which are seen, * with the bread and wine, to those who receive the sacrament." By Article XI. Absolution is retained, but it is declared "that the enumeration of sins is not necessary according to the divine law." Article XII. rejects the papal doctrine of merits and satisfactions, and teaches that those who fall into sin after Baptism can obtain pardon when they repent of their sins and truly believe on Christ. According to Article XIII., "sacra- ments are rites, which have the command of God, and to which is added a promise of grace." "Therefore Baptism, the Lord's Supper, Absolution, which is the sacrament of repent- ance (poenitentiae), are truly sacraments." Confirmation, Ex- treme Unction, the Priesthood and Marriage are not sacraments. In Article XIV. it is declared that the administration of the sacraments and of the Word in the Church, must be granted to no one, unless he be properly called. Grades in the Church are of human authority. Article XV. favors good ordinances in the Church, but denies that human ordinances justify us before God or are necessary to salvation. Article XVI. denies that the Gospel abrogates civil government and domestic regula- seem. '• The words Qiia-e videntw are ambiguous and may be translated Which 268 THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. tjons, ' ' but much rather approves them, and, not only on account of punishment, but for the sake of conscience, commands to obey them as the appointments of God." Article XVII. briefly notices that the Confutation accepts this Article. Article XVIII. has for its substance that "hiunan hearts without the Holj' Spirit are without the fear of God, without confidence in God, do not believe that they are heard, that they are pardoned, that they are assisted and preserved by God. Therefore they are impious." Article XIX. briefly rehearses the statement of the corresponding article of the Confession in regard to the cause of sin. Article XX., on the relation of faith and works, has as its central thought that we are justified, that is, ' ' acquire the remission of sins, not for the sake of our works, but by faith freely for the sake of Christ," and that "works follow the remission of sins." Article XXI., on the invocation of the saints, which article in the Confession was wholly rejected in the Con- futation, denies that the saints are mediators of salvation, and denies also that there is any command or example, either in the Old or in the New Testament, that enjoins or establishes the invocation of the saints. But "the saints should be honored." Of the seven Articles on Abuses, all of which had been rejected in the Confutation, five are defended with great vigor, viz., XXII., The Abuses with reference to both elements in the Lord's Supper; Article XXIII., The Abuses connected with the refusal of marriage to the priests; Article XXIV., The Abuses connected with the Mass; Article XXVII., The Abuses con- nected with Monastic Vows; Article XXVIII., The Abuses con- nected with Ecclesiastical Power. Article XXV., on the Abuses of Confession, and Article XXVI., on the distinction of foods, are not specifically treated, inasmuch as they had been incident- ally discussed in connection with the articles, respectively, on Confession and Human Traditions. The author closes the Apology with these significant words: "Such is the answer we at present make to the Confutation. Now we permit all pious persons to judge whether the oppon- ents rightly boast that they have really confuted our Confession out of the Scriptiires. " 3. The Schnialkald Articles. June 4. 1536, Pope Paul III. yielding to the demands of public sentiment and to the insistence of the Emperor, pro- claimed a general council to assemble at ]Mantua in Italy, May THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. 269 8, 1537.* Through his Nuiitio, Peter Paul Vergerius, he ex- tended an invitation to the Lutherans to be present. The proc-. lamation of a general council excited much interest among the , Lutherans. Consequently the Elector of Saxony came to Wit- tenberg, July 24th, and demanded an Opinion from his theolo-. gians and jurists as to the manner in which he should treat the summons to attend the proposed General Council. At the. same time Chancellor Briick laid before the theologians and jurists four questions to be answered, the substance of which were, shall the Papal Nuncio be heard by the Elector? If heard, shall a protest be made that the Pope has proclaimed the Council on his o^vn authority? If the Nuncio should not invite (vociren) the Elector of Saxon}^ as other Princes were invited, but should cite him to appear, should a protest be made? If the Pope and the Bishops shall decide things according to their own will and pleasure, what shall be done ? f An answer to these questions was to be sent to the Elector within fourteen days. But anticipating the action of his theolo- gians and jurists, the Elector, July 26th, with his own hand, wrote an Opinion on Briick 's questions and sent it to the theolo- gians and jurists, in which he counseled against heeding the invitation or citation to the proposed Diet, chiefly because ac- ceptance of the invitation or citation would involve the recogni- tion of the Pope, as head of the Church and of the Council, t August 6th Melanchthon, assisted by Luther and Jerome- Schurf , prepared an Opinion in answer to Briick 's questions and to the Elector's Opinion,% in substance as follows: A distinction is to be made between citation and invitation (vocation) ; the legate should be heard so as to learn whether the Lutheran Princes had been cited, or had been invited the same as other Princes. If it appears that the Elector has been invited (vocirt) as other Princes, "then the Pope shows that he does yet regard these Princes (the Protestants) as heretics." Should the Prot- estant Princes not give the Nuncio a hearing, "the Pope and the other Estates would have cause to proceed against us as * See Sleidan, p. 161 ; Eng. Tr., p. 204. We have followed the datea furnished by Virek, Zeitschrift f. Kirclieng., vol. XITI. 1S92, p. 487, and by Kolde in Einleitung, p. Ixii, and in the EeaJencydopddie,' XVII., p. 640. The Kostlin-Kawerau Martin Luther gives the respective dates, June 2, 1536, and May 23, 1537; II., p. 376. The same dates in Kirchen^ gescUcUe (Kawerau), III, p. 132. See C. K. III., 99, 314. t Virck, ut supra, p. 507. t Given in C. E. III., 99 et seqq. % Kostlin-Kawerau, Martin Lutlier, II., 377, 669. Yirck, vt supra, p. 491. Jtealencyclopadie,' XVII., p. 640. 270 THE OTHER OU) LUTHERAN CONFESKIONS. contumacious." The Council will be held whether the Protest- ants heed the invitation or not. The Pope has the right to call a Council, but the decision belongs to the Council. It is better to attend the Council, and if affairs are not impartially con- ducted, the Princes can withdraw and make complaint.* This Opinion, though manifestly wise and prudent, and based on the Canon Law, did not please the Elector. He did not regard the proposed Council as lawfully called, nor did he think it would be free from prejudice. Through Chancellor Briick he held a council with the Wittenberg theologians, August 30th, and had Melanchthon translate into Latin a Protest in which it was declared that should the Elector and his allies in religion accept the invitation it would be on the condition that it is to be "a free, pious. Christian and impartial Council," and that they "will approve nothing contrary to the pure doctrine of the Gospel, which they profess and which they believe is the doc- trine of the Catholic Christian Church, "f At the same tiniL' Luther received a commission from the Elector, in regard to which Briick could report, September 3d: "He has complied most obediently. I think he is already hard at work to show your Electoral Grace his own heart in the matter of religion, as if it were his last Avill. ' ' J There is scarcely room for doubt that this commission has reference to the composition of articles of faith. But the matter was delayed on account of Melanchthon 's absence in the Palatinate. On December 1st the Elector was again in Witten- berg deliberating with his theologians in regard to the Council.§ He demanded another Opinion, and to that end he left with his learned men at Wittenberg a memorandum in which he in- sisted on the rejection of the proposed Council, and in which he absolutely demanded their opinion in regard to the calling of an Evangelical Council. || At this time also he renewed, his commission to Luther to prepare articles of faith ; Tj and as the matter was still delayed, on December 11th the Elector wrote Luther and instructed him to prepare articles and to submit the same to him bj' January 25th, following. In these articles Luther was to show "what or how much, Ijefore God, and with * Original given in C. R. III., 119 et seqq. t C. E. III., 157. j Kcistlin-Kawerau, Martin Luther, II., 378-9. I C. K. III., 195. II Virck, ut supra, 495 et seqq. Healencyclopddie,' XVII., p. 641. 11 See references just given, and Kostlin-Kawerau, Martin Luther, II., 379. THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. 271 h ^'ood conscience can be conceded or changed, out of Christian love, for the maintenance of peace and unity in the Christian Church." He was also commanded to invite Amsdorf and Agricola and other theologians to come, at the Elector's expense, to Wittenberg, and to assist in the preparation of the proposed articles; and should any of the theologians dissent from what was written, he should report to the Elector and give the rea- sons for his dissent.* - The composition of the articles now went forward so rapidly that by the end of December, or at the very beginning of Janu- arj'', Luther could lay them before Jonas, Crueiger, Bugenhagen, Amsdorf, J\Ielanchthon, Agricola and Spalatin, who read them and discussed them, "one after the other," "and all subscribed the twenty-one chief articles of the Christian doctrine which the Reverend, Highly-learned Sir, Doctor Martin Luther, had most purely and in a Christian manner composed."! Spalatin made a copy of the Articles (which is now in the Weimar Archives). This copy, subscribed by the theologians present, was sent, January 3d, by Luther through Spalatin to the Elector, together with a letter in which he says that the Articles were discussed several days by the theologians and sub- scribed by their own hands. He declares in this letter: "We have not intended to burden anybody with these Articles, but ourselves alone. We leave it free to everyone to burden him- self with them or not to do so." On the 7th of January the Elector, in a letter to Luther, aclmowledged the receipt of the Articles and expresses his joy that the theologians still persevere so unanimously in the Christian Articles "which you have al- waj's taught, preached and written. ' ' He declares that they are in harmony with the Augsburg Confession, and says: "After reading them through twice, we accept them as pious, Christian and correct, and will freely and publicly confess them before a council and before the whole world." He then expresses him- self as opposed to Melanchthon 's view in regard to the reten- tion of the Pope, jure humano, that having escaped his Baby- lonian captivity, they will not again surrender themselves to such jeopardJ^t * See" the Elector's Letter in Burkhardt's Dr. Martin Luther's Brief - wechsel, pp. 271-2. Sealencydopadie," XVII., p. 641. t Spalatin 's Annates, p. 307. Spalatin says that the theologians met "immediately at the beginning of the year in Weyhnachten. " We may say between Christmas and January 3d. See Zaagemeister, Die SclimaVkald- ischen Artikel, p. xiv. J Original in Kolde's Analecta LutTierana, p. 285. 272 THE OTHER 0L[) LUTHKKAN CONFESSIONS. Two days later the Elector commissioned Chancellor Briiek to lay the Articles before the chief pastors of his dominion, and to obtain their subscription to the same. "We are of the opinion," says he, "that the subscription of the pastors and preachers, should God Almighty take Dr. Martin out of the world, will serve to keep the pastors and preachers, who have subscribed, steadfast by the Articles, and will prevent their setting up doctrines and opinions of their own. ' ' * It was the purpose of the Elector to raise these Articles to the authority of a confession of faith. Hence the Lutheran Princes and Estates were to bring with them to Sehmalkald one or two theologians that "a unanimous agreement may be made." The Elector and Luther reached Sehmalkald February 7th. The first session of the Convention took place on the lOtli. Chan- cellor Briiek counselled the theologians to confer with each other about doctrine, so that should they attend the Council they \\'ould know what to propose or what to concede. The next day the Estates decided "with best reasons to decline" the Saxon proposal. They gave as their principal reasons that the Council would not be held in the near future; that they had not been summoned to bring their theologians for that purpose ; ' ' also they had the confessions which had been delivered to the Einperor. In these they were united. Care should be taken to avoid schism. Should any concessions be made, this could not be conceded from the Papists. Should the Elector wish to present articles in addition to the Confession, he should submit them for inspection." The Elector and Princes also resolved that "the theologians should consider whether any concessions were to be made or whether there was anything to be disputed in the Confession, or in the Concordia, which had been recently made, but they should examine only the Confes- sion and should change nothing pertaining to its content or substance, or to that of the Concordia, but they should strike out the Papacy, which at the Diet at Augsburg, out of regard for the Emperor, had been omitted, "f And at the same time * Original in Virck, ut supra, p. 512. Realencyclopiidie,' XVII., pp. 641-2. t Aus dem Bericht der Strassburger Gesandten uher den Tag von Schmalkalden, given by Kolde in Analecta Lutheraiia, p. 296. Tlie Con- cordia mentioned here is the Wittenberg Concord of 1536 (see p'. 245), which at this Sehmalkald convention was now endorsed by the Princes and was thus made confessional. Says Melanchthon: Ac Prineipes diserte tes- tati sunt, se fornuilam concordiae conservaturos esse. C. K. III., 292. And Kostlin-Kawerau : "The Princes also declare that they wish to maintain the Concordia." Martin Luther, II., 394. Veit Dietrich reports that when everything was done, Biigenhagen called the theologians together again and THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONKESSIONS. 273 they instructed their theologians to examine the Confession and the Apology, and to fortify them with new arguments drawn from the Scriptures, from the Fathers, from the coun- cils and from the decrees of the Popes.* Melanchthon was instructed to write articles on the Primacj' of the Roman Pontiff and on the Power and Jurisdiction of the Bishops.f These he finished February ITth.i Both articles were presented to the Princes, and both were signed by thirty- five theologians and pastors, § among whom was JMartin Bucer, who, in a colloquy on the Lord's Supper, "afiirmed the presence of Christ and satisfied all, even those who are rather hard to please." || This Tractate on the Power and Primacy of the Pope and on The Power and Jurisdiction of the Bishops, was the only con- fessional document promulgated by the Schmalkald Conven- tion.T[ It was regarded by the theologians as in harmony with the Confession and Apology, and has been treated as an appen- dix to the Schmalkald Articles and has been published with these articles in Luther's works and in the Lutheran Symboli- cal Books. Luther's Articles, which, as we have learned, were not ac- cepted by the Lutheran Princes assembled at Schmalkald, were published in 1538 by their author, with a long Preface and with many changes, under the title: Articuli, So da h'dlten sollen aufs Concilium zu Mantua, oder ivo es wilrde sein, iiberant- wortet werden; ** that is, Articles which were to have teen de- proposecl ut qui velint subscribant articulos quos Lutherus secum attulerat. In the interest of peace, the matter was dropped. Dietrich adds: "When I saw these things, it pleased me also that those articles of Luther should be omitted and that all should simply subscribe to the Confession and to the Concord. This was done without any objection. ' ' C. E. III., 372. * C. K. III., 267. The edition of the Augsburg Confession used by the theologians at this Schmalkald Convention was the German Variata of 1533, which was accompanied with the Apology mit vleis emendirt. Weber, Ge- schichte, II., 59 et seqq.; C. E. XXVI., 699. The article on the Lord's Supper in the Schmalkald Articles was originally composed by Luther in the wording of the Wittenberg Concord, but was changed at the instance of Bugenhagen to its present wording. Kawerau, IQ., p. 133. Also Hausleiter, Luther's Leben, II., 370. t C. E. III., 292. ± C. E. III., 267. § C. E. in., 286-7. II C. E. TIL., 292, 371. ^1 Bealencyclopadie,' XVII., 644. ** Erlangen Ed. (first), 25, p. 109; (second) p. 163. Luther's original manuscript as it was brought to Schmalkald in 1537 is preserved in the library of the University of Heidelberg. In 1817 it was published in types by Marheineke, with prolegomena. In 1886 it was published in facsimile by Dr. Karl Zangenieister. The original is without Preface. Both IS 274 THE OTHER OJ,D LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. livered by our Party to the Council at Mantua, or wherever it ivas to be. .In 1541 the Articles appeared in a Latin transla- tion under the title Articuli a Reuerendo D. Doctore Martino Luthero seripti, Anno 1538 ut Synodo Mantuanae, quae tune in- dicta erat, proponerentur, qui recens in Latinum sermonem translati sunt a Petro Generano 1541. Turning now from the history of the Articles to their eon- tents as the same are given in the Book of Concord, we find that in addition to the Preface they consist of three distinct parts : "The First Part is of the High Articles of the Divine Majesty; The Second Part is of the Articles Which Concern the Office and Work of Jesus Christ or Our Redemption; The Third Part of the Articles." The First Part consists of four brief articles on the Trinity, in which it is said "there is no dispute nor contention about these articles." Part Second likewise contains four, articles. (1) The Chief Article treats of Christ and of justification by faith alone. "Nothing in this article can be yielded or sur- rendered." (2) Of The Mass, "which must be the greatest and most terrible abomination." "It is not commanded of God"; "It is an unnecessary thing." ""We can, according to the insti- tution of Christ, obtain the sacrament in a far better and more acceptable way." (3) Of Canonries and Monasteries: "These like all other human inventions are neither commanded, nor neces- sary, nor useful, but dangerous and productive of vain labor and trouble." (4) Of the Papacy: The Pope is not jure divine the head of all Christendom, but only the pastor of the Church of Rome. The papacy is a human figment and has been erected by the devil. The Pope is the true antichrist, who has elevated himself above Christ. The Pope acts as the devil himself when he "urges and disseminates his falsehoods concerning Masses, purgatory, monastic life, works and services, and condemns, kills and tortures all Christians who do not prize and honor such abominations above everything. ' ' ' ' In these four articles they will have enough to condemn, for they cannot and will not leave us the least particle of one of these articles." these works are in the hands of the writer, and have been used in prepar- ing this article. In the article on the Lord's Supper, as it was originally written, it was said : Halten wir das unter brot und wein sey der warhaftige leib und blut Christi im Abendmal. The words unter and im Abendmal were subsequently stricken out at the dictation of Bugenhagen, ein heftiger man und ein grober Pommer, says Melanchthon. Siudien u. Kritiken 67 (1894), p. 158. THE OTHER OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. 275 The Third Part of the Articles: "The following points or articles we may discuss with learned and reasonable men or among ourselves. The Pope and his Kingdom do not concern himself much about such, for conscience with them is nothing. It is only gold, honor and power. ' ' , Then follow fifteen articles, the majority of which treat of doctrines, and the names of forty- three subscribers, some of whom also subscribed in the name of others. Melanchthon appends the following caveat to his sub- scription: "I, Philip ilelanchthon, hold that the foregoing articles are true and Christian. But in regard to the Pope I hold that if he would allow the Gospel, even we, for the sake of peace and for the sake of the common unity of those Christians who are now and may hereafter be under him, might allow him, jure humano, the superiority over the Bishops which in some sense he has." And Dionysius Melander writes: "I subscribe to the Confession, to the Apology and to the Concord on the subject of the Eucharist." These Sehmalkald Articles are the most positive and aggres- sive of all the confessional statements of the Lutheran Church. They represent the mind of the author in a state of strong conviction, and in a state of intense feeling against "opponents" and "false brethren," who had turned his writings against him and had slandered the Evangelical cause in Germany. Hence they sound the tocsin of war, and set forth Luther's ultimatum, ' ' on which he must stand and will stand till his death. ' ' The two points that are brought into the greatest prominence are: (1) •The doctrine of Justification by faith alone, since "upon this Article depends all that we teach and testify against the Pope, devil and world," and (2) its attack on the Pope, who is called "true antichrist," and whose doctrine, "even in its best feat- ures, is taken from civil, imperial and pagan law. ' ' CHAPTER XVII. THE OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS AS ECCLESIASTICAL SYMBOLS TO 1555. By the words, Old Lutheran Confessions, in this chapter, we mean the Augsburg Confession, the Apology, the SchmaLkald Articles and Luther's two Catechisms. We have seen that again and again the Princes and the theologians testified that the Confession and the Apology contained the doctrines that were held and taught among them. They maintained and insisted that the Confession, delivered at Augsburg, June 25, 1530, had not been confuted, and that the Apology, as its correlate, more fully explained the evangelical teaching. But their affirma- tions are couched in general terms. They do not state specifi- cally the sense in which they understand these witnesses of their faith, nor do they take upon themselves, nor allow others to ad- minister to them, an authoritative form of confessional obliga- tion. The preachers say, in general, as at Sehmalkald, that "they hold and teach in their churches according to the articles of the Confession and Apology. ' ' The Princes say that the Con- fession and Apology contain the kind of doctrine that is set forth in their churches. This doctrine they believe to be the universal teaching of the Catholic Church of Christ. 1. General Principles. The Reformers enunciated principles and dropped incidental thoughts by which we are enabled to determine their attitude towards confessions as symbols of the faith. We begin with Luther. In the Preface to the Visitation Articles, which have been called the first Protestant Confession of Faith, it is de- clared: "We do not send this forth as a rigid command, lest we set up new papal decrees, but as a history, as a witness of our faith," and -he expresses the hope that all who hold to the Gospel wiU thankfully accept it until God shall bring something better. In 1538 and in 1545 Luther published new editions of these Articles, still under the old Preface, adding each time a new one.* In the little work on The Three Symbols (1538) * Erl. Ed., 23 : 1 et seqq. (276) THE OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS. 277 Luther says : "I have observed in all histories of the Universal Christian Church that all those who hold to the cardinal doc- trines of Jesus Christ have remained sure and steadfast in the Christian faith, and even if they have erred and come short in other respects, they are still preserved. For whoever stands fast in this, that Jesus Christ is true God and man, that he died for us and rose again, he has and holds all Articles." * In 1541, in some reflections on propositions for union between the Protest- ants and the Catholics, he declares "that it is a blessing of our Confession that it tells how it went and stood formerly in otir churches, as when we listen to a narration and not to a treatise or command. . . . Agreement does not depend upon ceremonies, but upon the substantial and the principal Articles" (Haupt- stiicke).t Equally free was Melanchthon from all inclination to make a law out of the Confession which he composed, or to consider it a final statement of the Lutheran teaching on the articles which it embraces. We have already learned that he declared that he would have made greater changes in it had he been allowed his own way. He also inquired of Luther whether additional changes should be made in certain important parts. In the copy of the printed Confession which he sent to Luther he wrote : "Bead and correct," and in his numerous editions of the Confession he intro- duced many changes ; some of which, as compared with the Con- fession as delivered to the Emperor, are material. At first Mel- anchthon called his work an Apology, and even after it had been delivered he called it "our defense," as by it the Lutherans de- signed to show what was believed and taught at that time in their churches, and to defend themselves from the calumnies of their enemies. And that at the first, and during the life-time of the reformers, the Confession was regarded in that light, the most competent Lutheran historians unhesitatingly declare. Von Ranke, whose learning, penetration and impartiality have become almost proverbial, declares: "I do not venture to assert that the Augsburg Confession dogmatically determines the con- tents and import of the Scripture. It does no more than bring back the system, which had grown up in the Latin Church to a union with Scripture, or interpret Scripture in the original spirit of the Latin Church. But that spirit had wrought so imper- ceptibly that no one could have bound himself to any one mani- festation of it. Our Confession is its purest, its most genuinely * Erl. Ed., 23 : 258. t De Wette, VI., 280. 278 THE OLD LUTHERAN CONKESSIONS Christian manifestation, and comes most directly from its source, It need scarcely be added that no one thought by it to set forth an abiding norm. It is only a statement of a fact : ' Our churches teach ; it is taught, it is unanimously taught ; ours are falsely ac- cused.' These are the declarations employed by Melanchthon. He meant only to express the conviction that had been already developed. And in the same sense he also wrote the Second Part, in which he treated the abuses which had been abolished. ' ' * J. T. Miiller, in his Introduction to The Symbolical Books, says : "At that time (1530-1540) this Confession and Apology were always regarded as the general Confession, and by no means as symbolical writings in our sense of that term." Matthes, in his standard work on Symbolics, says : ' ' Naturally new confessional writings arose in both Protestant Churches (as in 1530 the Au- gustana and the Tetrapolitana), but it is clear from the docu- mentary history of all these writings that originally they were to be only public witnesses and defenses of the evangelical faith, and such only did they remain for a long time. Some of them were not, indeed, composed by official authorization, and the sole one composed in the name of the entire Evangelical Lutheran party, the Augsburg Confession, was, according to its preface, de- livered with the declaration : ' ' Therefore we present and deliver the confession of our pastors and our own faith, as upon the foundation of the Holy Scripture it has been preached, taught and held in our principalities and cities. Not only did Mel- anchthon entertain the view that this Confession, after its de- livery, might be changed and improved in particular parts, but the Evangelical Estates of his time thought the same. For not only did they not reject the changes already in the edition of 1531 and then in that of 1540, they even commissioned their theologians at Schmalkald, in 1537, to examine the Confession again with care, and if they found anything in it which was not in harmony with the Holy Scripture, to change it. Likewise at Naumburg, in 1561, they declared that by their subscription of the unaltered Confession (but this was already the altered of 1531) they did not mean to postpone and to reject Melanchthon 's varied edition of 1540, 'because this has been repeated in a some- what more stately and elaborate manner, also explained and en- larged on the foundation of the Holy Scripture. ' And with this agrees also its position in the Augsburg Religious Peace, at which they stipulated that 'the Emperor and the Estates of the Etii- * Deutsche Gesehichte, ITI., Cai). IX. AS ECCLESIASTICAL SYMBOLS TO 155o. 279 pire should oppress no Estate of the Empire on aceouat of the religion, the faith, Church usages, ordinances and ceremonies of the Augsburg Confession, in so far as the same have been estab- lished or may yet be established in their principalities and do- minions;' all which shows plainly that they did not see in their Confession an unchangeable doctrinal standard. But had Luther, as has been related, thought differently in regard to ilelanch- thon's changes and improvements, then we must remember that they did not have in the editio princeps the verj^ text subscribed by the Estates; that Melanchthon, even in this edition, had made improvements, and that Luther had allowed himself to do the same in the publication of the Schmalkald Articles in 1538, after they had been subscribed by the theologians. ' ' * Rudelbach, a rigid confessionalist, in trj'ing to explain the reasons for the reception of the Variata of 1540, says: "It must not be supposed that all the facts here presented must be judged according to a later diplomatic standard. While people lived more in the clear oral word of the Confession, rather than prej^ed on the written word; while they were not ashamed to receive on trust and faith that which was supposed to have sprung from a believing heart and confession ; while still standing in a period of doctrinal development, which in many points had not yet been decided, it was not to be expected_ that the letters should be weighed and the syllables counted as in an epigraph. ' ' f These declarations of eminent Lutheran historians are not the expressions of opinions or of predilections. They are the state- ment of demonstrable facts. The Reformers based their faith solely on the Word of God. They regarded their confessions as witnesses of their faith, as testimonies of their personal convic- tion as to the teaching of the Word of God. Thej^ were willing, indeed, to give up all their writings, if their opponents would only consent to be ruled by the writing-s of the Prophets and Apostles. They resisted and resented all human authority in matters of the Christian faith; and they were too conscientious to violate their own fundamental principle. It would have been glaringly inconsistent for them to renounce the tyranny of the Pope for the pleasure of asserting their own lordship over the consciences of their brethren. Even the decrees of councils and the teaching of the Fathers had no authority for them in view of * Comparative Symbolil; alter christlichcn Confessionen vom Standpunkte der evangeliscli-lutherischen Confession, pp. 12, 13. Tlie italics are Mat- thes 's. t EinleHung, p. 107. 280 THE OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS the one final authority, notwithstanding the fact that they always desired to be in harmony with the Primitive Church. Luther's principle, which, ex necessitate rei, was the principle of the Reformation, is admirably stated by Kostlin: "In the Church the divine life exists by the operation of the Spirit and of the means of grace. Even under the Papacy there are pious persons who inwardly hold fast to the pure grace of Christ re- vealed in the Word. Hence the Church, illumined by the Spirit through the Word, is the infallible ground of the truth; and it is highly dangerous, yea, dreadful, to teach anything contrary to the unanimous testimony of the Universal Church. But in this temporal development it is certain that the Church also errs and sins ('else, what need of the article of the forgiveness of sins.' Brl. Ed., 25:59). Only that which is based on the Word can endure. Because of the hidden essence of the Church, and the fallibility of the ministry, nothing can be decisive to the individual in a matter of faith that is contested, so that he should confidently rest on the declarations or on the Scripture explana- tions of the ministry. Decisive foi; every believer must be the Word of Scripture, which is immediately accessible to him, and- which is never doubtful; and every layman, by virtue of the Spirit which is given him, as a spiritual man, must judge all things and must be judged by none (against Erasmus, Jen. 3:177/). If thus no decisive external authority is to exist, the door seems to be open to strife and sects. Luther knows that the devil wants to make tired again of the Scriptures. If now men want to build on the councils, the Father, and human decrees, the Scripture is completely lost, and they remain the devil's alto- gether. Only God can save and help iis (Erl. Ed., 30 : 16-20) . "In reference to the ceremonies of worship, as the external, changeable dress of the Word and sacraments, Luther remained throughout by his original fundamental principles: He recog- nized the beauties of the rich old service (Erl. Ed., 64: 301 f.), though it lacked exactly the chief thing, the pure Word. He paid no attention to general theories and ideals, but he joined himself to the present need, and indeed, to that of the weak, out of regard to this and also out of regard to the slanders of his enemies (Br. 4:525), he recommended a definite, uniform order; yet he saw the greatest danger always in the too great estimation of the same, in a new legalism. Hence he continued his very strong declarations against all insistence on conformity, against laying stress on externals in general, yea, against all ceremonialism AS ECCLESIASTICAL SYMBOLS TO 1555. 281 (Br. 6: 379, in the year 1545: 'I confess that I am nnfavorabh; to ceremonies even when they are necessary, but I am hostile to them when not necessary')."* The facts and the learned opinions exhibited in the foregoing paragraphs make it perfectly clear that the Reformers did not lay stress on adherence to the letter of their confessional state- ments of doctrine. They concerned themselves with the sub- stance of the revealed truth. AVhat they were most deeply con- cerned about was that the Gospel be purely preached and that the sacraments be properly administered, as over against the "howl" and "the abomination of the Mass" in the Catholic Church. The center of the Gospel they found in the promise of the forgiveness of sins for the sake of Christ. This was the supreme thought, and this thought permeated the Confession and the Apology from center to circumference. For subordinate mat- ters and for formal statements they had little or no concern. Hence they simply name the Confession and the Apology, and declare that they hold and teach according to the Articles con- tained in these writings. There is nothing like adherence to the letter. This is shown by the fact that the Elector of Saxony, in 1536, ordered new Articles for the council that was expected to be held at Mantua, and again in the Confessio Saxonica, which in 1551 was prepared for presentation at Trent. But because the Augsburg Confession was both a political and an ecclesiastical document, it constantly came to the front, and the Lutherans were called adherents of the Augsburg Confession. It was made the basis of the Schmalkald League, and of the Niirnberg Religious Peace. Here it appears more particularly on its political side. In 1540-1 it was made the basis of negotia- tions with the Catholics at Worms and Ratisbon. Here it ap- pears more particularly in a religious aspect. But these uses have reference to its external, rather than to its internal rela- tions. Hence in these uses the Confession cannot be considered as a symbol in our sense of the word. We must turn our eyes to the internal operations of the Lutheran Church in order to -see whether, and how far, and in what sense, it is used as a symbol, that is, as an authoritative and official statement of Christian doctrine imposed upon or voluntarily accepted by those who teach and preach in the Church. 2. hi Promotions and Ordinations. 1. Already in the year 1530, at the command of Duke Albert, * Herzog, Healencyclopadie, Art., Luther, pp. 611-12. 282 THE OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS an episcopal decree was issued to the effect "that if anyone, shall teach anything contrary to the Augsburg Confession, he shall be excommunicated, and if he does not recant, he shall be east out of the Church absolutely. ' ' * This action determined the ecclesiastical relations of the Duchy. It had introduced an evangelical order of worship, and now it stands in doctrine rela- tively on the Augsburg Confession. But inasmuch as the decree does not specify the sense in which the Confession is to be re- ceived, except in a negative way, it cannot be said that it had been made a symbol of the Prussian Church. The ministry was prohibited from teaching contrary to the Confession. They were not commanded to teach its contents. But the decree undoubtedly gave the Confession high moral standing and rendered it in- fluential in reforming the Duchy. 2. The Saxon Visitation Articles of 1533 ordered the officials of ever}- parish to introduce the following books: The Latin Bible, the German Bible complete, Postils of the Time, all of Dr. IMartin Luther's Postils of the Festivals, Melanehthoia 's Loci Communes, The Instruction of the Visitors, Luther's Two Cate- chisms, The Small Hymn Book, The Confession and Apology (German and Latin), Luther's German Psalter and Summaries.! But the ministers are not pledged to any of these books as sym- bols, though undoubtedly it was intended that the teaching and the preaching should express the consensus of all the books named, inasmuch as they were supposed to teach one and the same evangelical doctrine, as against the teaching of the Papacy. 3. In the Statutes of the "Wittenberg Theological Faculty, written by Melanchthon in 1533, we have the follomng as the first article: "As in the churches of our dominion and in the juvenile schools, so in the University, in which there ought al- ways to be distinct government and oversight m doctrine, we will that the pure doctrine of the Gospel be piously and faithfully set forth, conserved and promulgated in harmony with the Con- fession we delivered to the Emperor Charles at Augsburg in the year 1530, which doctrine we firmly believe to be the pure and uninterrupted consensus of the Catholic Church of God. "Also, we do most strictly forbid the propagation and defense of the heresies that were condemned in the Nicene, the Con- stantinopolitan, the Ephesian and the Chaleedonic Councils. For * Vrlcundenhuoh sur HeformationsgeschicMe des Bersogthums Preussen. Paul Tschackert, I., p. 172. t Eichter, Kirchenord nwigen, I., 228. AS ECCLESIASTICAL SYMBOLS TO 1555. 283 to the decrees of these synods in the explanation of the doctrine of God, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, and of the two natures in Christ born of the Virgin Mary, we assent, and we hold that they are truly handed down in the Apostolic Scriptures. From the Confession it is sufficiently clear as to which decrees of the later councils we approve. ' ' * The "We" who speaks in these Statutes is John Frederick, Elector of Saxony, and there can be no doubt that both he and the "Wittenberg Theological Faculty believed heartily that the Confession contains the pure doctrine of the Gospel ; and as little can we doubt that the Wittenberg professors taught in harmony with the Confession. But this Statute does not bind the professors to the letter of the Confession, nor state the sense in which the doctrine of the Gospel is in harmonj^ with the Confession. To say the most, it i.s a very mild form of confessional obligation, as the Confession itself is the mildest possible statement of the Wittenberg teaching. And we know that the Wittenberg pro- fessors did not hesitate to make additional statements of doc- trine; as the Wittenberg Concord in 1536, the Schmalkald Ar- ticles in 1537, and the Wittenberg Reformation in 1545. 4. In the year 1533 the custom was introduced at Wittenberg to require those who took theological degrees (the Promotions) ''to affirm that they embrace the pure doctrine of the Gospel, and that they understand it as it is stated in the Apostles ', the Nicene, and Athanasian Creed, and as it is recited in the Confession which our .Churches delivered to the Emperor Charles in the Diet at Augsburg in the year 1530. And they promise that, by the help of God, they will steadfastly persevere in that view and will faithfully do their duty in the Church. ' ' Melanchthon, who reports and defends this custom, denies that its object was "to institute tyranny. ' ' He regards it a prudential measure, having for its object the protection of the Church against such as scatter dangerous errors, and as having precedents in the early Church-t But the affirmation is general in its character. Melanchthon himself calls it a "promise." and "a repetition of the Confes- sion." It cannot be regarded as a confessional subscription in the modern sense of that phrase. It does not characterize the Con- fession in its relation to the Scripture, on which the Wittenberg Reformers always laid the supreme stress. Moreover, it was so purely local that Osiander knew nothing about it until nearly twenty yeai-s after it had been inaugurated. In very words this * Forstemanu, Liber Decoiiorum, p. 1-52. t C. R. Xll., 5 et seqq. 284 THK OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS promise runs as follows: "I promise the Eternal God, Creator of the human race and Founder of his Church, his Son our Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost that by the help of God I will faithfully serve the Church with the doctrine of the Gospel, without any corruption, and that I will constantly defend the three Symbols, namely, the Apostles', the Nicene and the Atha- nasian, and I will abide steadfastly in the consensus of the doe- trine contained in the Augsburg Confession, which was delivered by this Church to the Emperor in the year 1530. And when dark and difficult controversies arise, I will not say anything on them alone, but will first counsel with some of the elders who instruct the Church and hold by the doctrine of the Augsburg Confes- sion. ' ' * The promise itself and Melanchthon 's argument make it per- fectly clear that this formula was not to be considered an un- conditional obligation to human authority, and was not meant to make the impression on the subscriber that he must regard the Confession as an unchangeable norm of doctrine. It binds unconditionally to the Scriptures, but not unconditionally to the Creeds. It binds to the type of doctrine, not to the form of statement, as is shown by the transaction at Schmalkald in 1537, and by the Confessio Saxonica of 1551. 5. In the years 1537-1555 some seventeen hundred ministers were ordained at Wittenberg. For this service, at least from 1539 on, Luther's Ordination Formula, either German or Latin, was used. But neither formula contains even the shadow of a pledge to any creed or confession, nor is any pledge belonging to that time and place known to exist. But Rietschel thinks that a form similar to that employed in the promotions was employed,! but he admits that he does not know of any such formula of subscription or pledge. It may be regarded as certain, however, that in the examination that preceded the ordination, the candi- date's doctrine was proved, and that none were ordained who did not understand the evangelical doctrine, and who did not give assurance that he would preach and teach it. Of this, indeed, we have documentary evidence in certain cer- tificates that have survived to the present time. In 1540 Luther gave a certificate to Fischer of Rudolstadt, in which it is said : "Having examined him in doctrine, we know that he holds the pure Catholic doctrine of the Gospel, as taught and professed by * Salig, II., 984. Eietschel, Luther mid (lie Ordination, p. 82. t Vt supra, p. 83. AS ECCLESIASTICAL SYMBOLS OF 1555. 285 our Church, and he rejects all fanatical opinions which have been condemned by the judgment of the Catholic Church of Christ. He has also promised that he will faithfully deliver to the people the pure doctrine which we profess." In harmony with this brief certificate is another much fuller and more specific, given in the year 1553 by Bugenhagen and Forster, and witnessed by Melanchthon, Hostilius and Hetzer. It reads as follows : ' ' We, the pastor and preachers of the Church at Wittenberg, testify: The bearer of this certificate produces evidence that he has been called to the ministry at N., and that he bears a Christian character. We have been asked to examine and ordain him publicly. We have examined him carefully and find him well versed in the pure Christian doctrine of the Gospel. He has also promised to exercise his office with diligence and to remain steadfast in the Christian doctrine of the Gospel as it is confessed and taught in our churches by. the grace of God in harmony with the true Catholic Church of Christ. Therefore is this N. N. here publicly, according to the command of the Holy Scripture, ordained in the Church, and is enjoined to preach the Holy Gospel, and to administer the holy Sacraments where he has been called. And we heartily pray that the eternal God, the Father of our Saviour Jesus Christ, will give able teachers to his Church as he has commanded us to pray and has graciously prom- ised to give. May he also grant to this N. N. his grace and Holy Spirit that he may serve the Saviour Christ with honor and praise, and the Church unto salvation. We exhort and admonish N. N. and his Church faithfully to maintain and propagate purity of the Christian doctrine and to transmit it to their successors. For this service the eternal God requires of all, as Christ says in John 15 : Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit -, so shall ye .be my disciples. And where this light is kept, there abides the true Church of God. In this Church God is, and will give eternal life, and in all the troubles and anxiety of this transitory life he will give help and deliverance to those who call upon him. For where the true doctrine of the Gospel is, there, he will be and will hear, as Christ says in John 15 : If ye abide in me and my words abide in you ye shall ask what ye ^vill and it shall be done unto you. Given at Wittenberg Anno 1553, on the day celebrated in memory of St. Luke, the writer of the evangelical history. ' ' * This, like the other, makes no mention of the Confession. It * Quoted with italics from Johannsen, pp. 469, 470. 286 THE OLD LUTHERAN CONFESSIONS obligates simply to the Gospel, as the Church at Wittenberg be- lieved itself to hold it in harmony with the universal Church of Christ. Such, then, was the practice at ^Yittenberg, where from 1537 to 1557 nearly two thousand ministers were ordained, and whence thej' were sent into all parts of Germany and beyond. In the Consistorial Order of Wittenberg, or Constitution and Articles ofificially established by the Elector for the Wittenberg Consistory (1542), it is made the duty of the superintendents "to see that the pastors and ministers of the Gospel preach and teach in harmony and conformity with the holy Word of God, and to that end they are diligently to study the Holy Scripture in order that they may faithfully present the Christian doctrine to the people, and keep aloof from all fanatics, sects, suspicious books and doctrines. ' ' * This Order defined the ecclesiastical practice of the three dioceses of Wittenberg, Zeitz and Zwickau. Emphasis was laid on the Word of God, but no mention is made of the Confession. In other lands the practice was the same, or essentially the same, as we learn from the Kirchenordnungen, which give the most perfect representations extant of all the internal and external operations of the churches of the sixteenth century. A few .quo- tations from representative Orders, exihibiting the usage of im- portant cities and countries, will serve to illustrate the correct custom of the age — an age of faith and of godly sincerity on the part of ministers, superintendents and theologians — an age of reformers and martyrs, who were neither afraid nor ashamed to confess the truth. The Goslar Order, composed by Bugenhagen and Amsdorf in 1531, requires ministers to promise "to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ purely, without any additions and fanaticism, ' ' and "to confess, publicly, and hold that Zwingli, Caspar Sehwenk- feld, Jacob Cantius and all their followers are heretics in the Article of the Sacrament and of the external Word and sign." t The Brandenburg-Niirnberg Order, 1533, and the Saxon Order of 1539 were the most widely used and influential Orders of the sixteenth century. The former was composed by Osiander and Brentz, and the latter by a part of the Wittenberg Faculty and others. They insist on the preaching of the pure Word of God, and declare, the former especially, that the Bible is plain and simple; but neither mentions the Confession as a guide or di- "Richter's Kirchenordmtngen. T., 369. t Eichter, I., p. 154. Al^ E