F. Bente - Historical Introductions. Pacific Overtures of Flacius

Flacius

268. Pacific Overtures of Flacius.

Soon after the convention in Weimar, Gottschalk Praetorius, rector of

the school in Magdeburg, and Hubertus Languet from Burgundy (an intimate

friend of Melanchthon and a guest at his table, who later on maliciously

slandered Flacius) had an interview with Flacius, in which the latter

submitted the conditions on which peace might be established. However, a

letter written in this matter by Praetorius, in April, 1556, was not

answered by Melanchthon, who, moreover, insinuated that Flacius's object

merely was to kindle hatred. (_C. R._ 8, 794.)

In May, 1556, Flacius, continuing his peace efforts, forwarded to Paul

Eber his "Mild Proposals, _Linde Vorschlaege_, dadurch man gottselige

und notwendige friedliche Vergleichung machen koennte zwischen den

Wittenbergischen und Leipzigischen Theologen in causa Adiaphoristica und

den andern, so wider sie geschrieben haben." According to these

_Proposals_, Flacius demanded that, in a publication signed by the

theologians of both parties, the Pope be denounced as the true

Antichrist, the Augsburg Interim be rejected, the proposition: "Good

works are necessary to salvation," be condemned, also the errors of

Zwingli and Osiander. "The good Lord knows," said Flacius, "that every

day and hour I consider and plan earnestly how the affair of the

Adiaphorists might be settled in a Christian manner." But he added that

he could not be satisfied until, by repentance, "they wipe out their

sin, denial, apostasy, and persecution, instead of increasing them by

their excuses." But Flacius received an answer neither from Eber nor

from Melanchthon. Instead, the Wittenbergers, with the silent consent

of Melanchthon, circulated a caricature in which Flacius was accorded

the role of a braying ass being crowned by other asses with a soiled

crown. (Preger 2, 11. 13.)

Another offer of Flacius to meet Melanchthon in Wittenberg and discuss

the matter personally was also declined. July 15, 1556, Melanchthon

wrote: "I enjoyed a sweet friendship and familiarity with Illyricus, and

I would gladly confer with him on the entire doctrine. But before this

he has spread things which I had neither said nor thought, wherefore

now, too, I fear treachery (_insidias metuo_)." Timid as he was,

Melanchthon really feared for his life at the contemplated colloquy,

because the statement of Chytraeus: "As long as Flacius and Melanchthon

are alive, unity will not be restored," had been reported to him in the

form: unless Philip were put out of the way, unity would not be

possible. "None of my friends," he wrote, "is willing to attend the

colloquy, and they believe that it is not safe for me to confer with him

[Flacius] alone." (_C. R._ 8, 798.) Considering Melanchthon's answer as

insincere and sophistical, Flacius declared that, after having earnestly

sought peace in a private way, he would now appeal to the Church. He did

so by publishing "_Von der Einigkeit_, Concerning Unity," a book which

he had written before he made his pacific overtures to Melanchthon.

(Preger 2, 17. 22.)

However, induced by a letter of Fabricius of Meissen (August 24, 1556),

Flacius made a further effort, addressing Melanchthon in a letter of

September 1, 1556, in which he implored him to make his peace with God

and the Church by an unequivocal disavowal of Adiaphorism. As a result,

Melanchthon wrote his famous letter of September 5, 1556, referred to in

our chapter on the Adiaphoristic Controversy, in which he admitted in a

qualified way that he had sinned in the matter. In his reply of

September 16, 1556, Flacius again declared that his object was not any

triumph or glory for himself, but "only the maintenance of truth and the

rooting out of error," and that nothing was able to remove the offense

given by Melanchthon and the Adiaphorists but a clear confession of the

truth and an unequivocal rejection of error. Melanchthon, however, broke

off the correspondence and continued to nurse his animosity against

Flacius. (Preger 2, 29f.)

269. Lower Saxons Endeavoring to Mediate between Melanchthon and

Flacius.

Despite his experiences with Melanchthon, Flacius did not allow himself

to be discouraged in his efforts to bring about unity and peace.

Embracing an opportunity which a correspondence with the clergy of Lower

Saxony concerning Schwenckfeldt offered him, he requested the Lower

Saxons to mediate between himself and Melanchthon, submitting for this

purpose articles, differing from the _Mild Proposals_ only in expressly

mentioning also the Leipzig Interim. The request was granted, and four

superintendents, accompanied by four ministers, were delegated for the

purpose to Wittenberg. The delegates were: from Luebeck: Valentin

Curtius and Dionysius Schunemann; from Hamburg: Paul von Eitzen and

Westphal; from Lueneburg: F. Henning and Antonius Wippermann; from

Brunswick: Moerlin and Chemnitz. After agreeing, at Brunswick, January

14, 1557, on theses based on those of Flacius, and after conferring with

Flacius in Magdeburg, January 17, 1557 they unexpectedly, January 19,

arrived in Wlttenberg, offering their services as mediators.

Melanchthon received them in a friendly manner, but when, on the

following day, Moerlin read the articles of agreement, he denounced

Flacius and Gallus as having slandered him, and declined to treat with

the Lower Saxons on the basis of the "Flacian theses." On January 21 the

delegation submitted eight new articles. Of these the third read: "All

corruptions which militate against the pure apostolic doctrine and that

of the _Augsburg Confession_ shall be eliminated from the article of

justification, in particular the corruption concerning the necessity of

good works to salvation." Article VII requested Melanchthon to make a

public statement concerning the adiaphora and the necessity of good

works, declaring his agreement with the confession of our Church.

(Preger 2, 37.)

The presentation of these articles had a most unfavorable effect on

Melanchthon. The Saxon mediators report that he was excited to such an

extent that they feared he would be taken seriously ill. In a most

violent manner Melanchthon charged the delegation with treacherously

conspiring with Flacius to ensnare him. However, appeased by Paul Eber,

he finally consented to reply in writing on the morrow, January 22. In

his answer Melanchthon declared: For thirty years he had borne the heavy

burdens of the Church and encountered most insidious conflicts; they

therefore ought now to have had compassion with him instead of

assaulting him alone; it was being fulfilled what Sturm had once told

him on leaving: We shall meet again to crucify you. Sparing Flacius,

they had presented articles with the sole purpose of forcing him and

others to cut their own throats. As to the articles themselves,

Melanchthon objected to the third, because, he said, it falsely charged

him and others with having taught and defended errors regarding

justification. He declined Article VII because the publication there

required was unnecessary, since it might easily be learned from his many

writings what he had taught in the matter there referred to. (Preger 2,

38. 40.)

Fearing that the Lower Saxon mediators might yield and make concessions

detrimental to the truth, Flacius and his adherents (Wigand,

Baumgartner, Judex, Albert Christiani, P. Arbiter, H. Brenz, Antonius

Otto) assembled in Coswig, a place not very far from Wittenberg. In a

letter, dated January 21, 1557, they admonished the Saxon mediators not

to yield anything contrary to the divine truth but firmly to insist on

the elimination of the errors connected with the Interim (_ut id iugulum

recte iuguletis_). Flacius also requested Count of Ungnad first to meet

them in Coswig, and then go to Wittenberg in order to assist in winning

Melanchthon for his peace proposals. In the letter to the Count, Flacius

remarked: he feared that the mediators were administering to Melanchthon

"sweet rather than wholesome and strong medicine." (Preger 2, 42.) In a

similar manner Pastor Michael Stiefel was urged to go to Wittenberg to

influence Melanchthon. At the same time Judex was sent to implore the

Saxon delegates not to discontinue their efforts, and adopt no

resolution before submitting it also to them [the Magdeburgers] for

consideration. No news having arrived by Saturday, January 23, an

additional letter was dispatched to Wittenberg, written in the same

spirit of anxiety, and urging the mediators to stand firm, not to yield,

and to continue their efforts until successful, since failure, they said

would not only expose them to ridicule, but greatly damage the Church.

(2, 42f.)

On the evening of the same day Moerlin Hennig, and Westphal arrived in

Coswig. Moerlin reported on their discussions, and submitted the

articles presented to Melanchthon together with the latter's answer. At

the same time he requested the Flacians to overlook the harsh language

of Philip, telling also of the animosity and general opposition they had

met with in Wittenberg, where the students, he said, had even threatened

to stone them. Having heard the report the Flacians withdrew for a brief

consultation. Their impression was (which they neither made any efforts

to hide) that in deference to Melanchthon the Saxons had not been

sufficiently careful in seeking only the honor of God, the welfare of

the Church, and the true conversion of sinners. In a meeting held on

Sunday, January 24, Wigand and Flacius declared their dissatisfaction

with the proceedings in Wittenberg. Referring particularly to the

shocking stubbornness of Melanchthon, the former urged the Saxon

delegates to regard God higher than men, and earnestly and openly to

call the Wittenbergers to repentance. He thereupon handed the delegates,

besides a list of Adiaphoristic errors and of offensive statements

culled from Major's homilies, two sealed letters, which contained their

strictures on the eight articles presented to Melanchthon, their answer

to Melanchthon's charges, etc. Flacius said in the meeting: This matter

troubled him day and night; hope for the conversion of the Adiaphorists

who had despised the admonition, not of men but of the Holy Spirit, was

constantly decreasing; having already yielded more than he should have

done, he now must insist that, in a publication signed by both parties,

the Leipzig Interim be condemned by name, and that also in the future

the people be warned against such sins and be called to repentance.

Flacius furthermore declared that his theses should have been either

retained or refuted. In this he was supported by Otto of Nordhausen.

Moerlin answered, irritated: They had presented other articles because

Melanchthon had declined the first; if any one was able to frame better

theses, he was at liberty to do so. Discouraged and ill-humored, the

delegation returned to Wittenberg, where, too, animosity had reached its

climax. For in his sermon, delivered Sunday in Bugenhagen's pulpit, and

in the presence of Melanchthon and the other professors, John Curio had

spoken of Flacius as "the rascal and knave (_Schalk und Bube_)," and

even referred to the Lower Saxon delegates in unfriendly terms. Also a

filthy and insulting pasquil, perhaps composed by Paul Crell, in which

Flacius and the Saxon delegates were reviled, was circulated in

Wittenberg and even sent to Coswig. (Preger 2, 49.) The first lines of

the pasquil ran thus; "_Qui huc venistis legati Illyrici permerdati, Ab

illo concacati, Polypragmones inflati, Illius natibus nati, Quae

communio veritati, Mendacio et vanitati?_" (_C. R._ 9, 50. 235.)

Having read the sealed letters and convinced themselves that Melanchthon

could never be induced to accede to the demands of the Magdeburgers, the

delegation (with the exception of Chemnitz) immediately returned to

Coswig, January 25. Here they declared: They had not delivered the list

of errors to Melanchthon; if they had done so, deliberations would have

been broken off immediately; only the charges with respect to

justification had been transmitted; they therefore requested the

Magdeburgers to declare their agreement with the articles already

submitted to Melanchthon. Seeing no other course, the Magdeburgers

finally yielded, though reluctantly, and not without protests and some

changes in the articles. Flacius, too, consented, but "only with a

wounded conscience," as he declared. Having returned to Wittenberg, the

delegates transmitted the modified articles together with the additions

of the Magdeburgers to Melanchthon.

In his answer of January 27 to the Lower Saxon pastors, Melanchthon said

in part: "You know that in the last thirty years a great confusion of

opinions obtained in which it was difficult not to stumble somewhere.

And many hypocrites have been, and still are, hostile in particular to

me. I was also drawn into the insidious deliberations of the princes.

If, therefore, I have either stumbled anywhere or been too lukewarm in

any matter, I ask God and the churches to forgive me and shall submit to

the verdict of the Church.... As to the Flacian quarrels, however,

concerning which you are now treating with me so eagerly, and into which

Flacius has injected many foreign matters, you yourselves know that this

affair pertains also to many others, and that, without offending them, I

cannot decide and settle anything (_me aliquid statuere posse_).... This

now I desire to be my last answer (_hanc volo nunc meam postremam

responsionem esse_); if it does not satisfy you, I appeal to the verdict

of the Church in which you, too, will be judges. May the Son of God

govern all of us, and grant that we be one in Him!" As to the articles

submitted by the delegates, Melanchthon rejected all the changes and

additions suggested by the Magdeburgers. He declared that he was not

willing to enter into a discussion of the adiaphora, nor in any way to

censure the honorable men who had participated in the deliberations

concerning the Leipzig Interim. (_C. R._ 9, 62.)

Toward evening Flacius received Melanchthon's answer, together with the

information that the Saxon delegates would depart on the morrow, and

that now the Magdeburgers might do what seemed best to them. Early next

morning they dispatched another letter written by Flacius, in which they

modified their demands, and urged the Saxon delegates to continues their

efforts to induce the Wittenbergers to reject the Adiaphoristic errors.

"We call upon God as our witness," they said, "that we most earnestly

desire a godly peace, and that, if it is not brought about, the fault

lies not with us, but with them, who expressly say and confess

concerning themselves that they absolutely refuse to condemn the

Adiaphoristic errors--the real issue of the entire controversy." (_C.

R._ 9, 67.) But the messenger arrived too late; he met the delegation

when they were about to leave the gates of Wittenberg. Increased

animosity on both sides was the only result of the mediation-efforts of

the Lower Saxon theologians.

270. Futile Efforts of Duke John Albrecht.

Four weeks later Duke John Albrecht of Mecklenburg sent messengers to

Wittenberg for the same purpose, _viz._, of mediating between

Melanchthon and Flacius, Melanchthon in particular having previously

requested him to frame articles which might serve as a basis of peace.

The articles, composed by the theologians and counselors of the Duke,

were more severe than those of the Lower Saxons. George Venetus,

professor at Rostock, and Counselor Andrew Mylius were commissioned to

present them, first at Wittenberg, then at Magdeburg. When the articles

were submitted to Melanchthon, he again fell into a state of violent

agitation. The report says: "As soon as he noticed that Adiaphorism was

criticized, and that he was requested to reject it even if only in a

mild form, he instantly sprang up with great impatience and would not

permit them [the delegates] to finish their speech (although they most

earnestly, in the name of their prince, requested to be heard), but

burst forth into invectives and denunciations of Illyricus and others,

and finally also declaimed against the prince himself and his delegates,

vociferating that Illyricus secretly entertained many repulsive errors,

etc." On February 27, Melanchthon delivered his answer to the delegates.

When these urged him to give a more favorable reply, he again

interrupted them, exclaiming: "Oppress me, if you so desire; such is the

lot of the peaceful.... I commend myself to God." After Melanchthon had

left, Peucer, who had accompanied him, harshly told the delegates:

"Don't trouble my father-in-law any more with such matters. _Ihr sollt

forthin meinen Schwaeher zufrieden lassen mit solchen Haendeln_." (9,

106f.)

Regarding the last (8) of the articles submitted by the delegates of

Duke Albrecht which dealt with the Adiaphora, Melanchthon declared in

his answer of February 27: "I should not be astonished to have these two

conditions [to confess the Adiaphoristic errors, etc.] imposed on me if

I had been an enemy. The action of the Saxon pastors was milder. I may

have been lukewarm in some transactions, but I certainly have never been

an enemy.... Therefore I clearly state that I do not assent to these

presentations [of Duke Albrecht], which are cunningly framed so that, if

I accept them, I myself may cut my throat (_ut me, si eas recepero, ipse

iugulem_)." (_C. R._ 9, 104.)

The Magdeburgers refused to participate in these efforts of Count

Albrecht, chiefly because, as they said, there was no hope for peace as

long as Melanchthon remained under the influence of his Wittenberg

friends. But even now Flacius did not entirely abandon his attempts to

bring about a godly peace. In 1557 he asked Paul Vergerius, who passed

Jena on his way to Wittenberg, to treat with Melanchthon on the

Adiaphoristic question. Melanchthon, however is reported to have said:

"Omit that; let us treat of other things." Flacius also wrote to King

Christian III of Denmark to influence Elector August to abolish the

Adiaphoristic errors, but apparently without any result.

271. Clash at Colloquy in Worms, 1557.

The Diet at Regensburg, which adjourned in March of 1557, resolved that

a colloquy be held at Worms to bring about an agreement between the

Lutheran and Roman parties of the Empire. In order to prepare for the

colloquy, a convention was held by the Lutherans in June, 1557, at

Frankfort-on-the-Main. June 30 a resolution was adopted to the effect

that all controversies among the Lutherans be suspended, and the

Romanists be told at the prospective colloquy that the Lutherans were

all agreed in the chief points of doctrine. Against this resolution

Nicholas Gallus and several others entered their protest.

Self-evidently, also Flacius and his adherents who had always held that

the controverted issues involved essential points of doctrine, could not

assent to the resolution without violating their conscience, and denying

their convictions and the truth as they saw it. Such being the

situation, the wise thing for the Lutherans to do would have been to

decline the colloquy. For, since also Ducal Saxony with its stanch

Lutherans was held to attend it, a public humiliating clash of the

Lutherans was unavoidable.

Before the formal opening of the colloquy, the Thuringian delegates at

Worms received a letter from Flacius, dated August 9, 1557 in which he

admonished them to make a determined confession, and to induce the other

Lutheran theologians to reject the Interim, Adiaphorism, Majorism,

Osiandrism and Zwinglianism. This was necessary, said Flacius, because

the Romanists would, no doubt exploit the concessions made in the

Leipzig Interim and the dissensions existing among the Lutherans. (_C.

R._ 9, l99ff.). Flacius expressed the same views in an opinion to the

dukes of Saxony, who, in turn, gave corresponding instructions to their

delegates in Worms. In a letter dated August 20, 1557 Duke John

Frederick said it was impossible that, in defending the _Augsburg

Confession_ against the Romanists, the Lutherans could stand as one man

and speak as with one mouth (_fuer einen Mann und also ex uno ore_), if

they had not previously come to an agreement among themselves and

condemned the errors. For otherwise the Papists would be able to defeat

the Lutherans with their own sword, _i.e._, their own polemical

publications. (231.) On the same day, August 20, 1557, Flacius repeated

his sentiments and admonitions in letters to Schnepf, Moerlin, and

Sarcerius. (232ff.)

In a meeting of the Lutheran theologians at Worms, held September 5, Dr.

Basilius Monner, professor of jurisprudence at Jena made a motion in

keeping with his instructions and the admonitions of Flacius, whereupon

Erhard Schnepf, professor in Jena, read a list of the errors that ought

to be rejected. But the majority, led by Melanchthon, opposed the

motion. A breach seemed unavoidable. For Duke John Frederick had decided

that his theologians could not participate in the colloquy with

Lutherans who refused to reject errors conflicting with the _Augsburg

Confession_, nor recognize them as pure, faithful, loyal, and true

members and adherents of the _Augsburg Confession_, the _Apology_, and

the _Smalcald Articles_. (Preger 2, 67.) The imminent clash was

temporarily warded off by the concession on the part of the

Melanchthonians that the Thuringian theologians should be allowed freely

to express their opinion on any article discussed at the colloquy. At

the session held September 11, 1667, however, Bishop Michael Helding

demanded to know whether the Lutherans excluded the Zwinglians,

Calvinists, Osiandrists and Flacians (in the doctrine _de servo

arbitrio_) from the _Augsburg Confession_. The Jesuit Canisius plied the

Lutherans with similar questions: Whether they considered Osiander,

Major, and others adherents of the _Augustana_. Melanchthon declared

evasively that all evangelical delegates and pastors present were agreed

in the _Augsburg Confession_. As a result the Thuringians decided to

enter their protest. In a special meeting of the Lutherans the majority

threatened to exclude the Thuringians from all following sessions if

they dared to express their protest [containing the list of errors which

they rejected] before the Papists. The consequence was that the

Thuringians presented their protest in writing to the President, Julius

Pflug, and departed from Worms. The Romanists, who from the beginning

had been opposed to the colloquy, refused to treat with the remaining

Lutheran theologians, because they said, it was impossible to know who

the true adherents of the _Augsburg Confession_ were with whom,

according to the Regensburg Resolution, they were to deal.

272. Efforts of Princes to Restore Unity: Frankfort Recess.

The Colloquy of Worms had increased the enmity and animosity among the

Lutherans. It had brought their quarrels to a climax, and given official

publicity to the dissensions existing among them,--a situation which was

unscrupulously exploited by the Romanists also politically, their

sinister object being to rob the Lutherans of the privileges guaranteed

by the Augsburg Peace, and to compel them to return to the Roman fold.

In particular the Jesuits stressed the point that the dissensions among

the Lutherans proved conclusively that they had abandoned the _Augsburg

Confession_ to the adherents of which alone the provisions of the

Augsburg Peace of 1555 applied. At the same time they embraced the

opportunity to spread false reports concerning all manner of heresies

that were tolerated in the Lutheran churches. This roused the Lutheran

princes, who according to the Augsburg Peace Treaty were responsible to

the Empire for the religious conditions within their territories, to

bend all their energies toward healing the breach and restoring

religious unity within their churches. Efforts to this effect were made

especially at Frankfort-on-the-Main, 1558, and at Naumburg, 1561. But

instead of promoting peace among the Lutherans also these conventions of

the princes merely poured oil into the flames by adding new subjects of

dissension, increasing the general distrust, and confirming the

conviction that Luther's doctrine of the Lord's Supper was in danger

indeed. For, instead of insisting on a clear confession of the truth and

an unequivocal rejection of error, the princes endeavored to establish

peace by ignoring, veiling, and compromising the differences.

At Frankfort, Otto Henry of the Palatinate, Augustus of Saxony, Joachim

of Brandenburg, Wolfgang of Zweibruecken, Christopher of Wuerttemberg,

and Philip of Hesse discussed the religious situation and, on March 18,

1558, signed the so-called _Frankfort Recess_ (Agreement), in which they

again solemnly pledged their adherence to the Holy Scriptures, the

Ecumenical Symbols, the _Augsburg Confession_ of 1530, and its

_Apology_. (_C. R._ 9, 494.) In the _Recess_ the princes stated that the

existing dissensions encouraged the Romanists to proceed against the

Lutherans, who, the princes declared, were not disagreed in their

confession. In four articles the controverted questions concerning

justification, good works, the Lord's Supper, and the adiaphora were

dealt with, but in vague and ambiguous terms, the articles being based

on Melanchthon's anti-Flacian opinion of March 4, 1558. (499ff.; 462ff.)

When the _Frankfort Recess_ was submitted for subscription to the

estates who had not been present at Frankfort, it failed to receive the

expected approval. It was criticized by the theologians of Anhalt,

Henneberg, Mecklenburg, Pomerania, the Lower Saxon cities, and

Regensburg. The strongest opposition, however, came from Ducal Saxony,

where Flacius attacked the _Recess_ in two books. The first was

entitled: "_Refutatio Samaritani Interim_, in quo vera religio cum

sectis et corruptelis scelerate et perniciose confunditur--Refutation of

the Samaritan Interim, in which the true religion is criminally and

perniciously confounded with the sects." The other: "_Grund und Ursach',

warum das Frankfurtisch Interim in keinem Wege anzunehmen sei_--Reason

and Cause why the Frankfort Interim must Not be Adopted." The chief

objections of Flacius were: 1. The _Smalcald Articles_ should have been

included in the confessions subscribed to. 2. The differences within the

Lutheran Church should not have been treated as questions of minor

import. 3. Major's statement should have been rejected as simply false,

and not merely when falsely interpreted. 4. The statements concerning

the Lord's Supper are "dark, general, and ambiguous," hence

Crypto-Calvinistic. 5. The article on the adiaphora is ambiguous and

altogether unsatisfactory. 6. The measures adopted to suppress

theological discussions and controversies would lead to suppression of

the truth ("binding the mouth of the Holy Ghost") and tyrannizing of the

churches by the princes. (Preger 2, 74.)

In his attitude Flacius was supported by his colleagues in Jena and by

Duke John Frederick. When a delegation appeared requesting him to sign

the _Recess_, he declined and ordered his theologians to set forth his

objection in a special book. Elector August, in turn, charged

Melanchthon to write an apology of the _Recess_ against the ducal

theologians; which, again, was answered by Flacius. In order to unite

the opponents of the _Recess_, John Frederick invited the Lower Saxons

to attend a convention in Magdeburg. When this failed, Flacius induced

the Duke to publish a book treating particularly the doctrinal

differences within the Lutheran Church. In the drafting and revision of

this _Book of Confutation_, as it was called, the following theologians

participated: Strigel, Schnepf, Andrew Huegel, John Stoessel, Simon

Musaeus, Joachim Moerlin, Sarcerius, Aurifaber, and Flacius. November

28, 1558, it received the sanction of the dukes. Among the

Melanchthonians the _Book of Confutation_, which had made it a special

point to refute and reject the errors of the Wittenberg Philippists,

caused consternation and bitter resentment. For evidently its

theological attitude was incompatible with the _Recess_, and hence the

breach now seemed incurable and permanent. By order of Elector August,

Melanchthon, in the name of the Wittenberg faculty, wrote an opinion of

the _Book of Confutation_. (_C. R._ 9, 763.) But contents as well as

form of this opinion merely served to confirm the ducal theologians in

their position. The Philippists also fortified themselves by publishing

the _Corpus Doctrinae_ (_Corpus Philippicum_ or _Misnicum_), which

contained writings only of Melanchthon. The _Frankfort Recess_,

therefore, instead of bringing relief to the Lutherans, only increased

their mutual enmity and distrust. In order to reconcile John Frederick,

the Duke of Wuerttemberg suggested a convention of princes at Fulda, on

January 20, 1559. But when Elector August heard that besides the Duke of

Saxony also other opponents of the _Frankfort Recess_ were invited, he

foiled the plan by declining to attend.

273. General Lutheran Council advocated by Flacianists.

To heal the breach and end the public scandal, Flacius and his adherents

fervently advocated the convocation of a General Lutheran Synod. In 1559

they published "_Supplicatio Quorundam Theologorum ... pro Libera

Christiana et Legitima Synodo_, Supplication of Some Theologians ... for

a Free, Christian and Lawful Synod." The document was signed by 51

superintendents, professors, and pastors, "who after Luther's death," as

they emphasized, "had contended orally and in writing against the

corruptions and sects." The signatures represented theologians from

Ducal Saxony, Hamburg, Bremen, Luebeck, Rostock, Wismar, Brunswick,

Magdeburg, Halberstadt, Koethen, Nordhausen, Schweinfurt, Regensburg,

Lindau, Upper Palatinate, Hesse, Brandenburg, Electoral Saxony,

Nuernberg, Augsburg, Baden, etc. Some of the first were: Amsdorf,

Musaeus, Joachim Moerlin, Hesshusius, Max Moerlin, Gallus, Wigand,

Judex, Westphal, John Freder of Wismar, Anton Otto of Nordhausen,

Flacius. The _Supplication_ showed why a General Synod was necessary and

how it was to be conducted. Its chief object, the _Supplication_ said,

would be to pass on adiaphorism, Majorism, and synergism, all

participants in the Synod having previously been pledged on the

_Augsburg Confession_, the _Apology_, and the _Smalcald Articles_,

according to which all questions were to be decided. (Preger 2, 86f.)

The most violent opponent of this plan was Melanchthon. Fearing that the

Flacianists might get control of the prospective general council, he, in

advance, denounced and branded it as a "Robber Synod (_Raeubersynode_),

advocated by the ignorant Flacian rabble." Three weeks before his death,

March 28, 1560 he wrote: "Since they [the Flacians] cannot kill me, the

object of these hypocrites is to expel me. For long ago they have said

that they would not leave a foot of ground for me in Germany. _Hoc agunt

isti hypocritae, ut me pellant, cum sanguinem meum haurire non possint;

et quidem oratio istorum vetus est, qua dixerunt, se mihi non relicturos

esse in Germania vestigium pedis_." (_C. R._ 9, 1079.) Philip of Hesse

consented to attend the general synod with the proviso that the power of

the Jena theologians be curbed and also the Swiss be admitted. (Preger

2, 93.) That the plan of the Flacianists failed was chiefly due to

Elector August, who declined to attend the synod.

274. Futile Efforts of Princes at Naumburg.

In lieu of the General Lutheran Council advocated by the Flacians,

Christopher of Wuerttemberg, in March, 1559, recommended as the best

means to heal the breach a convention of all the Lutheran princes and

estates to be held at Naumburg, deliberations to begin January 20, 1561.

The object of this assembly, he said, was neither to discuss the

differences among the Lutherans, nor to formulate any condemnations, but

only to renew the subscription to the _Augsburg Confession_ and to

consider how the Lutherans might present a united front and a unanimous

confession at the next diet and at the prospective papal council. All

finally consented to attend, including Duke John Frederick, Elector

August (who, instigated by Melanchthon, first had declined

participation), and the Crypto-Calvinist, Elector Frederick of the

Palatinate. Expecting no results favorable to genuine Lutheranism from

this assembly, the Jena theologians renewed their request for a general

synod and sent their _Supplication_ to Naumburg with an additional

writing, dated January 23, 1561, in which they admonished the princes

not to enter into an ungodly and unionistic agreement, rather to

eliminate the errors of Major, Osiander, etc. But the princes, whose

object was to settle matters without the theologians, declined to

consider their petition, and, on February 8, the last day of the

convention, returned the documents to their authors in Jena.

After comparing the various editions of the _Augsburg Confession_, the

Naumburg Assembly decided to subscribe to the _Confession_ as delivered

1530 in Augsburg and published 1531 in German and Latin at Wittenberg.

But when, in the interest of Calvinism, whither he at that time already

was openly tending, Elector Frederick, supported by Elector August,

demanded that the edition of 1540 be recognized as the correct

explanation of the original _Augustana_, the majority of the princes

yielded, and, as a result, the Variata of 1540 alone was mentioned in

the Preface (_Praefatio_), in which the princes stated the reasons for

renewing their subscription to the _Augsburg Confession_ at Naumburg.

This Preface, prepared by Elector Frederick and the Wittenberg

Crypto-Calvinist Cracow, also asserted that hitherto no doctrinal

corruptions or deviations from the _Augsburg Confession_ had been

tolerated among the Lutherans. It mentioned neither the controversies

within the Lutheran Church nor the _Smalcald Articles_.

Evidently, to subscribe to this Preface was impossible for genuine

Lutherans. Duke John Frederick was told by his theologians Moerlin and

Stoessel that, if he signed it, they would resign and leave. The duke

replied that he, too, would mount his horse and depart rather than put

his signature to a document in which the errors introduced by the

Philippists, etc., were not rejected. Ulrich of Mecklenburg took the

same stand. And failing in his efforts to have the Preface changed in

accordance with his convictions, the Duke entered his protest and left

Naumburg without any further conference with the princes. When hereupon

the latter sent messengers to Weimar, John Frederick remained firm. As

conditions of his subscription the Duke demanded that in the Preface the

apostasy during the Interim be confessed, the distinctive features of

the Lutheran doctrine concerning the Lord's Supper be brought out

clearly, the recognition of the Variata of 1540 as a doctrinal norm be

eliminated, and the _Smalcald Articles_ be recognized with the rest of

the Lutheran symbols. Unwilling to accede to these demands, the princes

closed the discussions at Naumburg without the Duke,--hence also without

having attained their goal: peace among the Lutherans.

The Preface containing the objectionable features was signed by the

Electors of the Palatinate, Saxony, and Brandenburg, by Christopher of

Wuerttemberg, Philip of Hesse, Carl of Baden, and quite a number of

other princes and cities. However, Duke John Frederick did not by any

means stand alone in his opposition to the ambiguous, unionistic

Naumburg document. He was supported by Ulrich of Mecklenburg (who also

left Naumburg before the close of the convention), Ernest and Philip of

Brunswick, Albrecht of Mecklenburg, Adolf of Holstein, Francis of

Saxon-Lauenburg, the counts of Schwartzburg, Mansfeld, Stolberg, Barby,

and a number of other princes and cities, among the latter Regensburg,

Augsburg, Strassburg, Nuernberg and Windsheim. Besides, the loyal

Lutherans were represented also in the territories of almost all the

princes who had signed the Preface. Margrave John of Brandenburg

emphatically declared his dissatisfaction with the subscription of his

delegate at Naumburg. Before long also August of Saxony, Wolfgang of the

Palatinate, Christopher of Wuerttemberg, and Joachim of Brandenburg

signified their willingness to alter the Preface in accordance with the

views and wishes of John Frederick, especially regarding the doctrine

of the Lord's Supper. Indeed, the princes declared that from the

beginning they had understood the Preface in the strict Lutheran sense.

In the Preface of the _Book of Concord_ signed by the Lutheran princes,

we read: "Now, our conferences and those of our illustrious

predecessors, which were undertaken with a godly and sincere intention,

first at Frankfort-on-the-Main and afterwards at Naumburg, and were

recorded in writing, not only did not accomplish that end and peaceful

settlement which was desired, but from them even a defense for errors

and false doctrines was sought by some, while it had never entered our

mind, by this writing of ours, either to introduce, furnish a cover for,

and establish any false doctrine, or in the least even to recede from

the Confession presented in the year 1530 at Augsburg, but rather, as

many of us as participated in the transactions at Naumburg, wholly

reserved it to ourselves, and promised besides that if in the course of

time, anything would be desired with respect to the _Augsburg

Confession_, or as often as necessity would seem to demand it, we would

further declare all things thoroughly and at length." (CONC. TRIGL. 15.)

Even Philip of Hesse finally consented to the changes demanded by Duke

John Frederick. Elector Frederick of the Palatinate, however, who had

misled and, as it were, hypnotized the Lutheran princes at Naumburg,

openly embraced the Reformed confession and expelled all consistent

Lutherans. For the cause of Lutheranism the loss of the Palatinate

proved a great gain internally, and helped to pave the way for true

unity and the formulation and adoption of the _Formula of Concord_. And

more than any other individual it was Flacius who had helped to bring

about this result. (Preger 2, 102.)

275. Andreae and Chemnitz.

The theologians who were first in adopting effective methods and

measures to satisfy the general yearning for a real peace in the divine

truth were Jacob Andreae and Martin Chemnitz. Andreae was born 1528 in

Weiblingen, Wuerttemberg. He studied at Stuttgart and Tuebingen. In 1546

he became pastor in Stuttgart, where, two years later, he was deposed

because of his refusal to consent to the Interim. In 1549 he became

pastor and later on superintendent in Tuebingen. Since 1562 he was also

professor and chancellor of the university. He died 1590. Andreae has

been called "the spiritual heir of John Brenz." Hoping against hope, he

incessantly labored for the unity and peace of the Lutheran Church.

Being a man of great energy and diplomatic skill, he served her at

numerous occasions and in various capacities. In his pacification

efforts he made more than 120 journeys, visiting nearly all evangelical

courts, cities, and universities in Northern and Southern Germany. With

the consent of the Duke of Wuerttemberg, Andreae entered the service of

Elector August, April 9, 1567, and lived with his family in Saxony till

his dismissal in December, 1580. Here he was engaged in directing the

affairs of the churches and universities, and in promoting the work of

Lutheran pacification and concord at large. During his efforts to unite

the Lutherans he was maligned by the Philippists, and severely

criticized also by the strict Lutherans. The latter was largely due to

the fact that in his first attempts at pacification he allowed himself

to be duped by the Wittenberg Philippists, being even blind enough to

defend them against the charges of Calvinism in the doctrine of the

Lord's Supper made by their opponents in Jena and in Lower Saxony. While

thus Andreae was the able and enthusiastic promoter of the pacification

which culminated in the adoption of the _Formula of Concord_, he lacked

the theological insight, acumen, and consistency which characterized

Martin Chemnitz.

Martin Chemnitz was born November 9, 1522, at Treuenbritzen in

Brandenburg. As a boy he attended, for a brief period, the school in

Wittenberg, where he "rejoiced to see the renowned men of whom he had

heard so much at home, and to hear Luther preach." From 1539 to 1542 he

attended the Gymnasium at Magdeburg; from 1543 to 1545 he studied in

Frankfort-on-the-Oder; in 1545 he went to Wittenberg, where Melanchthon

directed his studies. In 1548 he became rector of the school in

Koenigsberg, and 1550 librarian of Duke Albrecht, with a good salary.

Owing to his participation in the Osiandrian controversy, Chemnitz lost

the favor of Albrecht, and in 1553 he removed to Wittenberg. On June 9,

1554, he began his lectures on Melanchthon's _Loci Communes_ before a

large and enthusiastic audience, Melanchthon himself being one of his

hearers. In November, 1554, he accepted a position as pastor, and in

1567 as superintendent, in the city of Brunswick. He died April 8, 1586.

Chemnitz was the prince of the Lutheran divines of his age and, next to

Luther, the greatest theologian of our Church. Referring to Luther and

Chemnitz, the Romanists said: "You Lutherans have two Martins; if the

second had not appeared, the first would have disappeared (_si posterior

non fuisset, prior non stetisset_)." Besides the two Lutheran classics:

_Examen Concilii Tridentini_, published 1565--1573, and _De Duabus

Naturis in Christo_, 1570, Chemnitz wrote, among other books: _Harmonia

Evangelica_, continued and published 1593 by Leyser and completed by

John Gerhard, and _Foundations_ (_Die Fundamente_) _of the Sound

Doctrine concerning the Substantial Presence, Tendering, and Eating and

Drinking of the Body and Blood of the Lord in the Supper_, 1569.

Andreae and Chemnitz became acquainted with each other in 1568, when

Duke Julius invited the former to conduct the visitation in Brunswick

together with Chemnitz. They jointly also composed the Brunswick Church

Order of 1569, which was preceded by the _Corpus Doctrinae Iulium_,

compiled by Chemnitz and containing the _Augsburg Confession_, the

_Apology_, the _Smalcald Articles_, the Catechisms of Luther, and a

"short [rather long], simple, and necessary treatise on the prevalent

corruptions." Andreae and Chemnitz are the theologians to whom more than

any other two men our Church owes the _Formula of Concord_ and the

unification of our Church in the one true Christian faith as taught by

Luther. However, it is Chemnitz who, more than Andreae or any other

theologian, must be credited with the theological clarity and the

correctness which characterizes the _Formula_.

276. First Peace Efforts of Andreae Fail.

In his first attempts to unify the Lutheran Church, Andreae endeavored

to reconcile all parties, including the Wittenberg Philippists, who then

were contemplating an agreement with the Calvinists. In 1567, at the

instance of Landgrave William of Hesse-Cassel and Duke Christopher of

Wuerttemberg, Andreae composed his "_Confession and Brief Explanation of

Several Controverted Articles_, according to which a Christian unity

might be effected in the churches adhering to the _Augsburg Confession_,

and the offensive and wearisome dissension might be settled." In five

articles he treated: 1. Justification, 2. Good Works, 3. Free Will, 4.

The Adiaphora, 5. The Lord's Supper. The second article maintains that

we are neither justified nor saved by good works, since Christ has

earned for us both salvation and righteousness by His innocent

obedience, suffering, and death alone, which is imputed as righteousness

to all believers solely by faith. It rejects all those who teach

otherwise, but not directly and expressly the statement: Good works are

necessary to salvation. The third article maintains that, also after the

Fall, man is not a block, but a rational creature having a free, though

weak, will in external things; but that in divine and spiritual matters

his intellect is utterly blind and his will is dead; and that hence,

unless God creates a new volition in him, man is unable of himself, of

his own powers, to accept the grace of God offered in Christ. It rejects

all who teach otherwise. The fourth article states that ceremonies are

no longer free, but must be abandoned, when their adoption is connected

with a denial of the Christian religion, doctrine, and confession. It

rejects all those who teach otherwise. The fifth article emphasizes that

also the wicked when they partake of the Lord's Supper, receive the body

of Christ, but to their damnation. It furthermore declares: Since it is

objected that the body and blood cannot be present in the Holy Supper

because Christ ascended to heaven with His body, it is necessary "to

explain the article of the incarnation of the Son of God, and to

indicate, in as simple a way as possible, the manner in which both

natures, divine and human, are united in Christ, wherefrom it appears to

what height the human nature in Christ has been exalted by the personal

union." (Hutter, _Concordia Concors_, 110ff.)

In 1568, at the Brunswick Visitation, referred to above, Andreae

submitted, his five articles to Duke Julius, and succeeded in winning

him for his plan. In the same interest he came to Wittenberg, January 9,

1569. Furnished with letters of commendation from Duke Julius and

Landgrave William of Hesse, he obtained an interview also with Elector

August, who referred him to his theologians. On August 18, 1569, Andreae

held a conference with the Wittenbergers. They insisted that the basis

of the contemplated agreement must be the _Corpus Misnicum_

(_Philippicum_). When Andreae, unsophisticated as he still was with

respect to the real character of Philippism, publicly declared that the

Wittenbergers were orthodox teachers, and that the _Corpus Misnicum_

contained no false doctrine he was supplied with a testimonial in which

the Wittenbergers refer to their _Corpus_, but not to Andreae's

articles, to which also they had not fully consented. The result was

that the Jena theologians, in particular Tilemann Hesshusius, denounced

Andreae's efforts as a unionistic scheme and a betrayal of true

Lutheranism in the interest of Crypto-Calvinism. They rejected Andreae's

articles because they were incomplete, and contained no specific

rejection of the errors of the Philippists.

At the instance of Andreae, May 7, 1570, a conference met at Zerbst in

Anhalt, at which twenty theologians represented Electoral Saxony,

Brunswick, Hesse, Brandenburg, Anhalt, and Lower Saxony (the Ducal Saxon

theologians declining to participate). The conference decided that a new

confession was not needed, and unanimously recognized the _Augsburg

Confession_, its _Apology_, the _Smalcald Articles_, and the Catechisms

of Luther. Andreae was elated. In his "Report" to the Emperor and the

princes he gloried in "the Christian unity" attained at Zerbst. But also

this apparent victory for peace and true Lutheranism was illusory rather

than real, for the Wittenberg theologians qualified their subscription

by formally declaring that they interpreted and received the confessions

enumerated only in as far as they agreed with the _Corpus Philippicum_.

And before long the Crypto-Calvinistic publications, referred to in the

chapter on the Crypto-Calvinistic Controversy, began to make their

appearance. The only result of these first peace efforts of Andreae,

which lacked in single-minded devotion to the truth, and did not

sufficiently exclude every form of indifferentism and unionism, was that

he himself was regarded with increasing suspicion by the opponents of

the Philippists. As for Andreae, however, the dealings which he had with

the dishonest Wittenbergers opened his eyes and convinced him that it

was impossible to win Electoral Saxony for a truly Lutheran union as

long as the Crypto-Calvinists were firmly seated in the saddle.

277. Andreae's Sermons and the Swabian Concordia.

Abandoning his original scheme, which had merely served to increase the

animosity among the Lutherans and to discredit himself, Andreae resolved

henceforth to confine his peace efforts to true Lutherans, especially

those of Swabia and Lower Saxony, and to unite them in opposition to the

Zwinglians, Calvinists, and Philippists, who, outside of Electoral

Saxony, were by this time generally regarded as traitors to the cause of

Lutheranism. In 1573 he made his first move to carry out this new plan

of his by publishing sermons which he had delivered 1572 on the

doctrines controverted within the Lutheran Church. The title ran: "_Six

Christian Sermons_ concerning the dissensions which from the year 1548

to this 1573d year have gradually arisen among the theologians of the

_Augsburg Confession_, as to what attitude a plain pastor and a common

Christian layman who may have been offended thereby should assume toward

them according to his Catechism." These sermons treat of justification,

good works, original sin, free will, the adiaphora, Law and Gospel, and

the person of Christ. As the title indicates, Andreae appealed not so

much to the theologians as to the pastors and the people of the Lutheran

Church, concerning whom he was convinced that, adhering as they did, to

Luther's Catechism, they in reality, at least in their hearts, were even

then, and always had been, agreed. Andreae sent these sermons to

Chemnitz, Chytraeus, Hesshusius, Wigand, and other theologians with the

request that they be accepted as a basis of agreement. In the preface,

dated February 17, 1573, he dedicated them to Duke Julius of Brunswick

whose good will and consent in the matter he had won in 1568, when he

assisted in introducing the Reformation in his territories. Before this

Nicholas Selneccer, then superintendent of Wolfenbuettel, in order to

cultivate the friendly relations between Swabia and Lower Saxony, had

dedicated his _Instruction in the Christian Religion_ (_Institutio

Religionis Christianae_) to the Duke of Wuerttemberg, praising the

writings of Brenz, and lauding the services rendered by Andreae to the

duchy of Brunswick.

The sermons of Andreae were welcomed by Chemnitz, Westphal in Hamburg,

David Chytraeus in Rostock, and others. They also endeavored to obtain

recognition for them from various ecclesiastical ministries of Lower

Saxony. But having convinced themselves that the sermonic form was not

adapted for a confession, they, led by Chemnitz, advised that their

contents be reduced to articles in "thesis and antithesis," and that

this be done "with the assistance of other theologians." Andreae

immediately acted on this suggestion and the result was what is known as

the _Swabian Concordia_ (_Schwaebische Konkordie_)--the first draft of

the _Formula of Concord_. This document, also called the Tuebingen Book,

was submitted to, and approved by, the theologians of Tuebingen and by

the Stuttgart Consistory. In substance it was an elaboration of the _Six

Sermons_ with the addition of the last two articles. It contains eleven

articles, treating 1. Original Sin; 2. Free Will; 3. The Righteousness

of Faith before God; 4. Good Works; 5. Law and Gospel; 6. The Third Use

of the Law; 7. The Church Usages Called Adiaphora; 8. The Lord's Supper;

9. The Person of Christ: 10. Eternal Election; 11. Other Factions and

Sects. In the introduction Andreae also emphasizes the necessity of

adopting those symbols which were afterwards received into the _Book of

Concord_.

278. The Swabian-Saxon Concordia.

On March 22, 1574, Andreae sent the _Swabian Concordia_ to Duke Julius

and Chemnitz with the request to examine it and to have it discussed in

the churches of Lower Saxony. On the twelfth of May the Duke ordered

Chemnitz to prepare an opinion on the book and to present it to the

clergy for their examination and approval. Under the leadership of

Chemnitz numerous conferences were held, and the various criticisms

offered led to a revision of the document. This work was begun in April,

1575, by the theological faculty of Rostock. Apart from numerous changes

and additions everywhere, the articles on Free Will and on the Lord's

Supper were completely remodeled by Chytraeus and Chemnitz.

The new confession, known as the _Swabian [Lower] Saxon Concordia_, was

subscribed by the theologians and pastors of the duchies of Brunswick,

Mecklenburg, Mansfeld, Hoya, and Oldenburg. It acknowledges as its

doctrinal basis the Holy Scriptures, the three Ecumenical Creeds, the

_Augsburg Confession_, its _Apology_, the _Smalcald Articles_, and

Luther's two Catechisms. It discusses the following articles in the

following order: 1. Of Original Sin; 2. Of the Person of Christ; 3. Of

the Righteousness of Faith before God; 4. Of Good Works, 5. Of the Law

and the Gospel; 6. Of the Third Use of the Law of God; 7. Of the Holy

Supper; 8. Of God's Eternal Providence and Election; 9. Of Church Usages

which are Called Adiaphora or Things Indifferent; 10. Of Free Will or

Human Powers; 11. Of Other Factions and Sects which have Never

Acknowledged the _Augsburg Confession_.

While this new _Concordia_ was adopted in Lower Saxony, the Swabians, to

whom it was forwarded, September 5, 1575, were not quite satisfied with

its form, but did not object to its doctrinal contents. They criticized

the unevenness of its style, its frequent use of Latin technical terms,

its quotations (now approved, now rejected) from Melanchthon, etc.

Particularly regarding the last mentioned point they feared that the

references to Melanchthon might lead to new dissensions; hence they

preferred that citations be taken from Luther's writings only, which was

done in the _Formula of Concord_ as finally adopted.

279. The Maulbronn Formula.

The movement for a general unity within the Lutheran Church received a

powerful impetus by the sudden and ignominious collapse of

Crypto-Calvinism in Electoral Saxony, 1574. By unmasking the

Philippists, God had removed the chief obstacle of a godly and general

peace among the Lutherans. Now the clouds of dissension began to

disappear rapidly. As long as the eyes of Elector August were closed to

the dishonesty of his theologians, there was no hope for a peace

embracing the entire Lutheran Church in Germany. Even before the public

exposure of the Philippists, August had been told as much by Count

Henneberg and other princes, _viz._, that the Wittenberg theologians

were universally suspected, and that peace could not be established

until their Calvinistic errors had been condemned. For in the doctrines

of the Lord's Supper and of the person of Christ, as has been shown in

the chapter on the Crypto-Calvinistic Controversy, the Philippists of

Electoral Saxony and of other sections of Germany were Calvinists rather

than Lutherans. It was the appearance of the Calvinistic _Exegesis

Perspicua_ of 1574 which left no doubt in the mind of the Elector that

for years he had been surrounded by a clique of dishonest theologians

and unscrupulous schemers, who, though claiming to be Lutherans, were

secret adherents of Calvinism. And after the Elector, as Chemnitz

remarks, had discovered the deception of his theologians in the article

on the Lord's Supper, he began to doubt their entire contention.

(Richard, 426.)

Among Lutherans generally the humiliating events in Saxony increased the

feeling of shame at the conditions prevailing within their Church as

well as the earnest desire for a genuine and lasting peace in the old

Lutheran truths. And now Elector August, who, despite his continued

animosity against Flacius, always wished to be a true Lutheran, but up

to 1574 had not realized that the Philippistic type of doctrine dominant

in his country departed from Luther's teaching, was determined to

satisfy this universal longing for unity and peace. Immediately after

the unmasking of the Philippists he took measures to secure the

restoration of orthodox Lutheranism in his own lands. At the same time

he placed himself at the head of the larger movement for the

establishment of religious peace among the Lutherans generally by the

elaboration and adoption of a doctrinal formula settling the pending

controversies. To restore unity and peace to the Lutheran Church, which

his own theologians had done so much to disturb, was now his uppermost

desire. He prosecuted the plan of pacification with great zeal and

perseverance. He also paid the heavy expenses (80,000 gulden), incurred

by the numerous conventions, etc. And when, in the interest of such

peace and unity, the theologians were engaged in conferences the pious

Elector and his wife were on their knees, asking God that He would crown

their labor with success.

The specific plan of the Elector was as appears from his rescript of

November 21, 1575, to his counselors, that pacific theologians,

appointed by the various Lutheran princes "meet in order to deliberate

how, by the grace of God, all [the existing various _corpora doctrinae_]

might be reduced to one _corpus_ which we all could adopt, and that this

book or _corpus doctrinae_ be printed anew and the ministers in the

lands of each ruler be required to be guided thereby." Before this

Elector August had requested Count George Ernest of Henneberg to take

the initiative in the matter. Accordingly, in November, 1575 Henneberg,

Duke Ludwig of Wuerttemberg and Margrave Carl of Baden agreed to ask a

number of theologians to give their opinion concerning the question as

to how a document might be prepared which would serve as a beginning to

bring about true Christian concord among the churches of the _Augsburg

Confession_. The theologians appointed were the Wuerttemberg

court-preacher Lucas Osiander (born 1534; died 1604), the Stuttgart

provost Balthasar Bidembach (born 1533; died 1578) and several

theologians of Henneberg and Baden. Their opinion, delivered November

14, 1575, was approved by the princes, and Osiander and Bidembach were

ordered to prepare a formula of agreement in accordance with it. The

document which they submitted was discussed with theologians from

Henneberg and Baden at Cloister Maulbronn, Wuerttemberg and subscribed

January 19, 1576.

The _Maulbronn Formula_, as the document was called, differs from the

_Swabian-Saxon Concordia_ in being much briefer (about half as

voluminous), in avoiding technical Latin terms, in making no reference

whatever to Melanchthon, in quoting from Luther's works only, and in

omitting such doctrinal points (Anabaptism, Schwenckfeldianism,

Antitrinitarianism, etc.) as had not been controverted among the

Lutherans. Following the order of the _Augustana_, this _Formula_ treats

the following articles. 1. Of Original Sin; 2. Of the Person of Christ;

3. Of Justification of Faith 4. Of the Law and Gospel; 5. Of Good Works;

6. Of the Holy Supper of Our Lord Christ; 7. Of Church Usages, Called

Adiaphora or Things Indifferent; 8. Of Free Will; 9. Of the Third Use of

God's Law.

280. The Torgau Book.

On February 9, 1576, the _Maulbronn Formula_, approved by Count Ludwig

of Wuerttemberg, Margrave Carl of Baden, and Count George Ernest of

Henneberg, was transmitted to Elector August, who had already received a

copy of the Swabian-Saxon Concordia from Duke Julius of Brunswick. The

Elector submitted both to Andreae for an opinion, whom formal reasons

induced to decide in favor of the _Maulbronn Formula_. At the same time

Andreae advised the Elector to arrange a general conference of prominent

theologians to act and decide in this matter, suggesting as two of its

members Chemnitz and Chytraeus of Rostock. This being in agreement with

his own plans, the Elector, at the convention at Lichtenberg, February

15, 1576 submitted the suggestions of Andreae to twelve of his own

theologians, headed by Nicholas Selneccer, then professor in Leipzig.

[Selneccer was born December 6, 1530. In 1550 he took up his studies in

Wittenberg, where he was much impressed and influenced by Melanchthon.

In 1557 he was appointed court-preacher in Dresden. Beginning with 1565

after the banishment of Flacius and his colleagues, he was professor in

Jena. He returned to Leipzig in 1568. In 1570 he accepted a call from

Duke Julius as court-preacher and superintendent in Brunswick, but

returned to Leipzig in 1574. Before the unmasking of the

Crypto-Calvinists his theological attitude lacked clearness and

determination. Ever after, however, he was the leader of the Lutheran

forces in Electoral Saxony. At the Lichtenberg Convention, convoked

February 16, 1576, by Elector August, Selneccer successfully advocated

the removal of the Wittenberg Catechism, the _Consensus Dresdensis_, and

the _Corpus Philippicum_. In their place he recommended the adoption of

a new _corpus doctrinae_ containing the three Ecumenical Creeds, the

_Unaltered Augsburg Confession_, the _Apology_, the _Smalcald Articles_,

the Catechisms of Luther, and, if desired, Luther's _Commentary on

Galatians_. Finally he advised that the electors and princes arrange a

convention of such representative theologians as, _e.g._, Chytraeus,

Chemnitz, Andreae, and Marbach, to discuss the doctrinal differences.

Selneccer's recommendations were adopted by the convention and

transmitted to Elector August. Though contributing little to the

contents of the _Formula of Concord_, Selneccer heartily cooperated in

its preparation, revision, and adoption. In 1580, of his own accord, he

published the Latin _Book of Concord_, which was followed in 1584 by an

edition authorized by the princes. Selneccer also participated in

preparing the _Apology of the Book of Concord_, first published 1582 in

Magdeburg. In May, 1589, after the Crypto-Calvinistic reaction under

Christian I, Selneccer, whom the Calvinists hated more than others of

the theologians who had participated in the promulgation of the _Formula

of Concord_, was deposed, harassed, and reduced to poverty because of

his testimony against Chancellor Crell and his earnest and continued

warnings against the Calvinists. After the death of Christian I,

Selneccer was recalled to Leipzig, where he arrived May 19, 1592, five

days before his death, May 24, 1592.]

Having through the influence of Selneccer, at Lichtenberg, obtained the

consent of his clergy to his plans of unification, and, also in

accordance with their desire, called Andreae to Saxony, Elector August

immediately made arrangements for the contemplated general convention of

theologians. It was held at Torgau, from May 28 to June 7, 1576, and

attended by Selneccer, the Saxon ministers who had participated in the

Lichtenberg convention, Andreae, Chemnitz, Andrew Musculus [General

Superintendent of Brandenburg], Christopher Cornerus [professor in

Frankfurt-on-the-Oder; born 1518; died 1549], and David Chytraeus [born

February 26, 1530, in Wuerttemberg; awarded degree of magister in

Tuebingen when only fourteen years old; began his studies 1544 in

Wittenberg, where he also heard Luther; was professor in Rostock from

1551 till his death, June 25, 1600]. The result of the Torgau

deliberations, in which much time was spent on the articles of Original

Sin and Free Will, was the so-called _Torgau Book_. On the seventh of

June the theologians informed the Elector that, on the basis of the

Swabian-Saxon and the Maulbronn documents, they, as desired by him, had

agreed on a _corpus doctrinae_.

The _Torgau Book_ was essentially the _Swabian-Saxon Concordia_, recast

and revised, as urged by Andreae, with special reference to the

desirable features (enumerated above) of the _Maulbronn Formula_. The

majority decided, says Chemnitz, that the Saxon Concordia should be

retained, but in such a manner as to incorporate also the quotations

from Luther, and whatever else might be regarded as useful in the

_Maulbronn Formula_. The _Torgau Book_ contained the twelve articles of

the later _Formula of Concord_ and in the same sequence; Article IX, "Of

the Descent of Christ into Hell," had been added at Torgau. The Book was

entitled: "_Opinion_ as to how the dissensions prevailing among the

theologians of the _Augsburg Confession_ may, according to the Word of

God, be agreed upon and settled in a Christian manner." It was signed as

"their faith, doctrine, and confession" by the six men who were chiefly

responsible for its form and contents: Jacob Andreae, Martin Chemnitz,

Nicholas Selneccer, David Chytraeus, Andrew Musculus, and Christopher

Cornerus. The convention was closed with a service of thanksgiving to

Almighty God for the blessed results of their labors and the happy

termination and favorable issue of their discussions, Selneccer

delivering the sermon. Similar services were held at other places,

notably in Mecklenburg and Lower Saxony.

In a letter to Hesshusius, Chemnitz says concerning the Torgau

Convention: "Everything in this entire transaction occurred aside from,

beyond, above, and contrary to the hope, expectation, and thought of

all. I was utterly astounded, and could scarcely believe that these

things were done when they were done. It seemed like a dream to me.

certainly a good happy and desired beginning has been made toward the

restoration of purity of doctrine, toward the elimination of

corruptions, toward the establishment of a godly confession." In a

letter of July 24, 1576, to Hesshusius and Wigand, Andreae wrote in a

similar vein, saying: "Often were they [Chemnitz and Chytraeus] almost

overwhelmed with rejoicing and wonder that we were there [at Torgau]

brought to such deliberation. Truly, this is the change of the right

hand of the Most High, which ought also to remind us that since the

truth no longer suffers, we should do everything that may contribute to

the restoration of good feeling." (Richard, 428. 430.)