F. Bente - Historical Introductions. The Bergic Book or the Formula of Concord

Musculus helped with the Confessions.

281. The Bergic Book or the Formula of Concord.

In accordance with the recommendation of the Torgau convention the

Elector of Saxony examined the _Torgau Book_ himself and had copies of

it sent to the various Lutheran princes and estates in Germany with the

request to have it tested by their theologians, and to return their

opinions and censures to Dresden. Of these (about 25) the majority were

favorable. The churches in Pomerania and Holstein desired that

Melanchthon's authority be recognized alongside of Luther's. On the

other hand, Hesshusius and Wigand demanded that Flacius, Osiander,

Major, Melanchthon, and other "originators and patrons of corruptions"

be referred to by name and condemned as errorists. Quite a number of

theologians objected to the _Torgau Book_ because it was too bulky. To

meet this objection the _Epitome_, a summary of the contents of the

_Torgau Book_, was prepared by Andreae with the consent of the Elector.

Originally its title read: "_Brief Summary_ of the articles which,

controverted among the theologians of the _Augsburg Confession_ for many

years, were settled in a Christian manner at Torgau in the month of

June, 1576, by the theologians which there met and subscribed."

After most of the censures had arrived, the "triumvirate" of the

_Formula of Concord_ (as Chytraeus called them 1581), Andreae,

Selneccer, and Chemnitz, by order of the Elector met on March 1, 1577,

at Cloister Bergen, near Magdeburg, for the consideration of the

criticisms and final editing of the new confession. They finished their

work on March 14. Later when other criticisms arrived and a further

revision took place (also at Bergen, in May 1577), Musculus, Cornerus,

and Chytraeus were added to their number. Though numerous changes,

additions, and omissions were made at Bergen, and in Article IX the

present form was substituted for the sermon of Luther, the doctrinal

substance of the _Torgau Book_ remained unchanged. The chief object of

the revisers was to eliminate misunderstandings and to replace ambiguous

and dark terms with clear ones. At the last meeting of the six revisers

(at Bergen, in May) the _Solid Declaration_ was quickly and finally

agreed upon, only a few changes of a purely verbal and formal nature

being made. On May 28, 1577, the revised form of the _Torgau Book_ was

submitted to Elector August. It is known as the _Bergic Book_, or the

_Solid Declaration_, or the _Formula of Concord_, also as the _Book of

Concord_ (a title which was afterwards reserved for the collection of

all the Lutheran symbols). Of course, the _Epitome_, prepared by

Andreae, was also examined and approved by the revisers at Cloister

Bergen.

In order to remove a number of misunderstandings appearing after the

completion of the _Bergic Book_, a "Preface" (Introduction to the _Book

of Concord_) was prepared by the theologians and signed by the princes.

The _Catalog of Testimonies_, added first with the caption "Appendix"

and later without the same, or omitted entirely, is a private work of

Andreae and Chemnitz, and not a part of the confession. Its special

purpose is to prove that the Lutheran doctrine concerning the person of

Christ and the majesty of His human nature as set forth in Article VII

of the _Formula of Concord_, is clearly taught by the Scriptures as well

as by the Fathers of the ancient Church. The _Formula of Concord_

(German) was first published at Dresden, 1580, as a part of the _Book of

Concord_. The first authentic Latin edition appeared in Leipzig, 1584.

(Compare chapter on "The Book of Concord.")

282. Subscription to the Formula of Concord.

Originally Elector August planned to submit the _Bergic Book_ to a

general convention of the evangelical estates for approval. But fearing

that this might lead to new discussions and dissensions, the six

theologians, in their report (May 28, 1577) on the final revision of the

_Bergic Book_, submitted and recommended a plan of immediate

subscription instead of an adoption at a general convention. Consenting

to their views, the Electors of Saxony and Brandenburg forthwith sent

copies of the _Bergic Book_ to such princes and estates as were expected

to consent. These were requested to multiply the copies, and everywhere

to circulate and submit them for discussion and subscription. As a

result the _Formula of Concord_ was signed by the electors of Saxony, of

Brandenburg, and of the Palatinate; furthermore by 20 dukes and princes,

24 counts, 4 barons, 35 imperial cities, and about 8,000 pastors and

teachers embracing about two-thirds of the Lutheran territories of

Germany.

The first signatures were those of Andreae, Selneccer, Musculus,

Cornerus, Chytraeus, and Chemnitz, who on May 29, 1577, signed both the

_Epitome_ and the _Thorough Declaration_ the latter with the following

solemn protestation: "Since now, in the sight of God and of all

Christendom, we wish to testify to those now living and those who shall

come after us that this declaration herewith presented concerning all

the controverted articles aforementioned and explained, and no other, is

our faith, doctrine, and confession, in which we are also willing, by

God's grace, to appear with intrepid hearts before the judgment-seat of

Jesus Christ, and give an account of it and that we will neither

privately nor publicly speak or write anything contrary to it but, by

the help of God's grace, intend to abide thereby: therefore, after

mature deliberation we have, in God's fear and with the invocation of

His name, attached our signatures with our own hands." (1103, 40 CONC.

TRIGL. 1103, 40; 842, 31.)

Kolde remarks: "Wherever the civil authorities were in favor of the

_Bergic Book_, the pastors and teachers also were won for its

subscription. That the wish of the ruler contributed to this result

cannot be denied and is confirmed by the Crypto-Calvinistic troubles

reappearing later on in Saxony. But that the influence of the rulers

must not be overestimated, appears, apart from other things from the

frequent additions to the signatures 'With mouth and heart (_cum ore et

corde_).'" Self-evidently the Crypto-Calvinists as well as other

errorists had to face the alternative of either subscribing or being

suspended from the ministry. The very object of the _Formula of Concord_

was to purge the Lutheran Church from Calvinists and others who were not

in sympathy and agreement with the Lutheran Confessions and constituted

a foreign and disturbing element in the Lutheran Church.

As to the manner in which the _Formula_ was submitted for subscription,

it was certainly not indifferentistic, but most solemn and serious, and

perhaps, in some instances, even severe. Coercion, however, was nowhere

employed for obtaining the signatures. At any rate, no instance is

recorded in which compulsion was used to secure its adoption. Moreover,

the campaign of public subscription, for which about two years were

allowed, was everywhere conducted on the principle that such only were

to be admitted to subscription as had read the _Formula_ and were in

complete agreement with its doctrinal contents. Yet it was probably true

that some, as Hutter assumes, signed with a bad conscience [Hutter:

"_Deinde esto: subscripserunt aliqui mala conscientia Formulae

Concordiae";_ Mueller, _Einleitung_, 115]; for among those who affixed

their names are quite a few of former Crypto-Calvinists--men who had

always found a way of escaping martyrdom, and, also in this instance,

may have preferred the retaining of their livings to following their

conviction. The fact is that no other confession can be mentioned in the

elaboration of which so much time, labor, and care was expended to bring

out clearly the divine truth, to convince every one of its complete

harmony with the Bible and the Lutheran symbols, and to hear and meet

all objections, as was the case with respect to the _Formula of

Concord_.

"In reply to the criticism [of the Calvinists in the _Neustadt

Admonition_, etc.] that it was unjust for only six theologians to write

a Confession for the whole Church, and that a General Synod should have

been held before the signing of the Confession, the Convention of

Quedlinburg, in 1583, declared it untrue that the _Formula of Concord_

had been composed by only six theologians, and reminded the critics how,

on the contrary, the articles had first been sent, a number of times, to

all the Lutheran churches in Germany; how, in order to consider them,

synods and conferences had been held on every side, and the articles had

been thoroughly tested, how criticisms had been made upon them; and how

the criticisms had been conscientiously taken in hand by a special

commission. The Quedlinburg Convention therefore declared in its minutes

that, indeed, 'such a frequent revision and testing of the _Christian

Book of Concord_, many times repeated, is a much greater work than if a

General Synod had been assembled respecting it to which every province

would have commissioned two or three theologians, who in the name of all

the rest would have helped to test and approve the book. For in that way

only one synod would have been held for the comparing and testing of

this work, but, as it was, many synods were held; and it was sent to

many provinces, which had it tested by the weighty and mature judgment

of their theologians, in such manner as has never occurred in the case

of any book or any matter of religion since the beginning of

Christianity, as is evident from the history of the Church,'... We are

solemnly told [by Andreae, Selneccer, etc.] that no one was forced by

threats to sign the _Formula of Concord_, and that no one was tempted to

do so by promises. We know that no one was taken suddenly by surprise.

Every one was given time to think. As the work of composition extended

through years, so several years were given for the work of signing. We

very much doubt whether the Lutheran Church to-day could secure any

democratic subscription so clean, so conscientious, so united, or so

large as that which was given to the _Book of Concord_." (Schmauk,

663f.)

283. Subscription in Electoral Saxony, Brandenburg, etc.

In Electoral Saxony, where Crypto-Calvinism had reigned supreme for many

years, prevailing conditions naturally called for a strict procedure.

For Calvinists could certainly not be tolerated as preachers in Lutheran

churches or as teachers in Lutheran schools. Such was also the settled

conviction and determination of Elector August. When he learned that the

Wittenberg professors were trying to evade an unqualified subscription,

he declared: By the help of God I am determined, as long as I live to

keep my churches and schools pure and in agreement with the _Formula of

Concord_. Whoever does not want to cooperate with me may go, I have no

desire for him. God protect me, and those belonging to me, from Papists

and Calvinists--I have experienced it. (Richard, 529.)

The Elector demanded that every pastor affix his own signature to the

_Formula_. Accordingly, in every place, beginning with Wittenberg, the

commissioners addressed the ministers and schoolteachers, who had been

summoned from the smaller towns and villages, read the _Formula_ to

them, exhorted them to examine it and to express their doubts or

scruples, if they had any, and finally demanded subscription of all

those who could not bring any charge of false doctrine against it.

According to Planck only one pastor, one superintendent (Kolditz, who

later on subscribed), and one schoolteacher refused to subscribe. (6,

560.) Several professors in Leipzig and Wittenberg who declined to

acknowledge the _Formula_ were dismissed.

However, as stated, also in Electoral Saxony coercion was not employed.

Moreover, objections were listened to with patience, and time was

allowed for consideration. Indeed, in the name of the Elector every one

was admonished not to subscribe against his conscience. I. F. Mueller

says in his _Historico-Theological Introduction to the Lutheran

Symbols_: "At the Herzberg Convention, 1578, Andreae felt justified in

stating: 'I can truthfully say that no one was coerced to subscribe or

banished on that account. If this is not true, the Son of God has not

redeemed me with His blood; for otherwise I do not want to become a

partaker of the blood of Christ.' Pursuant to this declaration the

opponents were publicly challenged to mention a single person who had

subscribed by compulsion, but they were unable to do so. Moreover, even

the Nuernbergers, who did not adopt the _Formula of Concord_,

acknowledged that the signatures had been affixed without employment of

force." (115.) True, October 8, 1578, Andreae wrote to Chemnitz: "We

treated the pastors with such severity that a certain truly good man and

sincere minister of the church afterwards said to us in the lodging

that, when the matter was proposed so severely, his mind was seized with

a great consternation which caused him to think that he, being near

Mount Sinai, was hearing the promulgation of the Mosaic Law (_se animo

adeo consternato fuisse, cum negotium tam severiter proponeretur, ut

existimaret, se monti Sinai proximum legis Mosaicae promulgationem

audire_).... I do not believe that anywhere a similar severity has been

employed." (116.) But the term "severity" here employed does not mean

force or compulsion, but merely signifies religious seriousness and

moral determination to eliminate Crypto-Calvinism from the Lutheran

Church in Electoral Saxony. The spirit in which also Andreae desired

this matter to be conducted appears from his letter of November 20,

1579, to Count Wolfgang, in which he says: Although as yet some

ministers in his country had not subscribed to the _Formula_, he should

not make too much of that, much less press or persuade them; for whoever

did not subscribe spontaneously and with a good conscience should

abstain from subscribing altogether much rather than pledge himself with

word and hand when his heart did not concur--_denn wer es nicht mit

seinem Geist und gutem Gewissen tue, bleibe viel besser davon, als dass

er sich mit Worten und mit der Hand dazu bekenne und das Herz nicht

daran waere_. (115.)

Also Selneccer testifies to the general willingness with which the

ministers in Saxony affixed their signatures. With respect to the

universities of Wittenberg and Leipzig, however, he remarks that there

some were found who, while willing to acknowledge the first part of the

_Book of Concord_, begged to be excused from signing the _Formula_, but

that they had been told by the Elector: If they agreed with the first

part, there was no reason why they should refuse to sign the second,

since it was based on the first. (Carpzov, _Isagoge_ 20.) While thus in

Electoral Saxony subscription to the _Formula_ was indeed demanded of

all professors and ministers, there is not a single case on record in

which compulsion was employed to obtain it.

In Brandenburg the clergy subscribed unconditionally, spontaneously, and

with thankfulness toward God and to their "faithful, pious ruler for his

fatherly care of the Church." Nor was any opposition met with in

Wuerttemberg, where the subscription was completed in October, 1577. In

Mecklenburg the ministers were kindly invited to subscribe. Such as

refused were suspended and given time for deliberation, with the proviso

that they abstain from criticizing the _Formula_ before the people. When

the superintendent of Wismar and several pastors declined finally to

adopt the _Formula_, they were deposed.

Accordingly, it was in keeping with the facts when the Lutheran electors

and princes declared in the Preface to the _Formula of Concord_ "that

their theologians, ministers, and schoolteachers" "did with glad heart

and heartfelt thanks to God the Almighty voluntarily and with

well-considered courage adopt, approve, and subscribe this _Book of

Concord_ [_Formula of Concord_] as the true and Christian sense of the

_Augsburg Confession_, and did publicly testify thereto with heart,

mouth and hand. Wherefore also this Christian Agreement is not the

confession of some few of our theologians only, but is called, and is in

general, the unanimous confession of each and every one of the ministers

and schoolteachers of our lands and provinces." (CONC. TRIGL. 12f.)

284. Where and Why Formula of Concord was Rejected.

Apart from the territories which were really Calvinistic (Anhalt, Lower

Hesse, the Palatinate, etc.), comparatively few of the German princes

and estates considered adherents of the _Augsburg Confession_ declined

to accept the _Formula of Concord_ because of any doctrinal

disagreement. Some refused to append their names for political reasons;

others, because they were opposed on principle to a new symbol. With

still others, notably some of the imperial cities, it was a case of

religious particularism, which would not brook any disturbance of its

own mode of church-life. Also injured pride, for not having been

consulted in the matter, nor called upon to participate in the

preparation and revision of the _Formula_, was not altogether lacking as

a motive for withholding one's signature. In some instances personal

spite figured as a reason. Because Andreae had given offense to Paul von

Eitzen, Holstein rejected the _Formula_, stating that all the articles

it treated were clearly set forth in the existing symbols. Duke Julius

of Brunswick, though at first most zealous in promoting the work of

pacification and the adoption of the _Book of Concord_, withdrew in

1583, because Chemnitz had rebuked him for allowing his son to be

consecrated Bishop of Halberstadt. (Kolde, 73f.) However, despite the

unfriendly attitude of Duke Julius, some of the Brunswick theologians

openly declared their agreement with the _Formula_ as well as their

determination by the help of God, to adhere to its doctrine. No doubt

but that much more pressure was exercised in hindering than in urging

Lutherans to subscribe to the _Formula_. For the reasons enumerated the

_Formula of Concord_ was not adopted in Brunswick, Wolfenbuettel,

Holstein, Hesse, Pomerania (where however, the _Formula_ was received

later), Anhalt, the Palatinate (which, after a short Lutheran

interregnum, readopted the Heidelberg Catechism under John Casimir,

1583), Zweibruecken, Nassau, Bentheim, Tecklenburg, Solms, Ortenburg,

Liegnitz, Brieg, Wohlau, Bremen, Danzig, Magdeburg, Nuernberg,

Weissenburg, Windsheim, Frankfort-on-the-Main, Worms, Speyer,

Strassburg.

In Sweden and Denmark, Frederick II issued an edict, July 24, 1580,

forbidding (for political reasons) the importation and publication of

the _Formula of Concord_ on penalty of execution and confiscation of

property. He is said to have cast the two elegantly bound copies of the

_Formula_ sent him by his sister, the wife of Elector August of Saxony,

into the fireplace. Later on, however, the _Formula_ came to be esteemed

also in the Danish Church and to be regarded as a symbol, at least in

fact, if not in form.

While some of the original signatories subsequently withdrew from the

_Formula of Concord_ a larger number acceded to it. Among the latter

were Holstein, Pomerania, Krain, Kaernthen, Steiermark, etc. In Sweden

the _Formula_ was adopted 1593 by the Council of Upsala; in Hungary, in

1597. With few exceptions the Lutheran synods in America and Australia

all subscribed also to the _Formula of Concord_.

285. Formula Not a New Confession Doctrinally.

The _Formula of Concord_ purified the Lutheran Church from Romanism,

Calvinism, indifferentism, unionism, synergism, and other errors and

unsound tendencies. It did so, not by proclaiming new exclusive laws and

doctrines, but by showing that these corruptions were already excluded

by the spirit and letter of the existing Lutheran symbols. Doctrinally

the _Formula of Concord_ is not a new confession, but merely a

repetition and explanation of the old Lutheran confessions. It does not

set forth or formulate a new faith or tenets hitherto unknown to the

Lutheran Church. Nor does it correct, change, or in any way modify any

of her doctrines. On the contrary its very object was to defend and

maintain the teaching of her old symbols against all manner of attacks

coming from without as well as from within the Lutheran Church. The

_Formula_ merely presents, repeats, reaffirms explains, defends, clearly

defines, and consistently applies the truths directly or indirectly,

explicitly or implicitly confessed and taught in the antecedent Lutheran

confessions. The _Augsburg Confession_ concludes its last paragraph: "If

there is anything that any one might desire in this Confession, we are

ready God willing, to present ampler information (_latiorem

informationem_) according to the Scriptures." (94, 7.) Close scrutiny

will reveal the fact that in every detail the _Formula_ must be regarded

as just such an "ampler information, according to the Scriptures." The

Lutheran Church, therefore, has always held that whoever candidly adopts

the _Augsburg Confession_ cannot and will not reject the _Formula of

Concord_ either.

As for the _Formula_ itself, it most emphatically disclaims to be

anything really new. In their Preface to the _Book of Concord_ the

Lutheran princes declared: "We indeed (to repeat in conclusion what we

have mentioned several times above) have wished, in this work of

concord, _in no way to devise anything new_, or to depart from the truth

of the heavenly doctrine, which our ancestors (renowned for their piety)

as well as we ourselves have acknowledged and professed. We mean that

doctrine, which, having been derived from the prophetic and apostolic

Scriptures, is contained in the three ancient Creeds, in the _Augsburg

Confession_, presented in the year 1530 to Emperor Charles V, of

excellent memory, then in the _Apology_, which was added to this, in the

_Smalcald Articles_, and lastly in both the Catechisms of that excellent

man, Dr. Luther. _Therefore we also have determined not to depart even a

finger's breadth either from the subjects themselves, or from the

phrases which are found in them_, but, the Spirit of the Lord aiding us,

to persevere constantly, with the greatest harmony, in this godly

agreement, and we intend to examine all controversies according to this

true norm and declaration of the pure doctrine." (CONC. TRIGL. 23.) In

the Comprehensive Summary we read: "We [the framers and signers of the

_Formula of Concord_] have declared to one another with heart and mouth

that we will not make or receive _a separate or new confession of our

faith_, but confess the public common writings which always and

everywhere were held and used as such symbols or common confessions in

all the churches of the _Augsburg Confession_ before the dissensions

arose among those who accept the _Augsburg Confession_, and as long as

in all articles there was on all sides a unanimous adherence to the pure

doctrine of the divine Word, as the sainted Dr. Luther explained it."

(851, 2. 9.) The _Formula of Concord_ therefore did not wish to offer

anything that was new doctrinally. It merely expressed the consensus of

all loyal Lutherans, and applied the truths contained in the existing

symbols to the questions raised in the various controversies.

286. Formula a Reaffirmation of Genuine Lutheranism.

To restore Luther's doctrine, such was the declared purpose of the

promoters and authors of the _Formula of Concord_. And in deciding the

controverted questions, they certainly did most faithfully adhere to

Luther's teaching. The _Formula_ is an exact, clear, consistent, and

guarded statement of original Lutheranism purified of all foreign

elements later on injected into it by the Philippists and other

errorists. It embodies the old Lutheran doctrine, as distinguished not

merely from Romanism and Calvinism, but also from Melanchthonianism and

other innovations after the death of Luther. Surely Luther would not

have hesitated to endorse each and all of its articles or doctrinal

statements. Even Planck, who poured contempt and sarcasm on the loyal

Lutherans, admits: "It was almost beyond controversy that the _Formula_,

in every controverted article, established and authorized precisely the

view which was most clearly sanctioned by the _Unaltered Augsburg

Confession_, by its _Apology_ according to the edition of the year 1531,

by the _Smalcald Articles_, and by the Catechisms of Luther." (6, 697.)

This complete agreement with Luther also accounts for the fact that the

_Formula_ was immediately acknowledged by two-thirds of the Protestants

in Germany.

As for Luther, the _Formula of Concord_ regards him as the God-given

Reformer and teacher of the Church. We read: "By the special grace and

mercy of the Almighty the doctrine concerning the chief articles of our

Christian religion (which under the Papacy had been horribly obscured by

human teachings and ordinances) _were explained and purified again from

God's Word by Dr. Luther, of blessed and holy memory_." (847, 1.) Again:

"In these last times God, out of special grace has brought the truth of

His Word to light again from the darkness of the Papacy _through the

faithful service of the precious man of God, Dr. Luther_." (851, 5.)

Luther is spoken of as "this highly illumined man," "the hero illumined

with unparalleled and most excellent gifts of the Holy Ghost," "the

leading teacher of the _Augsburg Confession_." (980, 28; 983, 34.) "Dr.

Luther," says the _Formula_, "is to be regarded as the most

distinguished (_vornehmste, praecipuus_) teacher of the Churches which

confess the _Augsburg Confession_, whose entire doctrine as to sum and

substance is comprised in the articles of the _Augsburg Confession_."

(985, 41.) Again: "Dr. Luther, who, above others, certainly understood

the true and proper meaning of the _Augsburg Confession_, and who

constantly remained steadfast thereto till his end, and defended it,

shortly before his death repeated his faith concerning this article [of

the Lord's Supper] with great zeal in his last Confession." (983, 33.)

Accordingly, only from Luther's writings quotations are introduced by

the _Formula_ to prove the truly Lutheran character of a doctrine. In

this respect Luther was considered the highest authority, outweighing by

far that of Melanchthon or any other Lutheran divine. Everywhere

Luther's books are referred and appealed to, _e.g._, his "beautiful and

glorious exposition of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians," his

book concerning Councils, his _Large Confession_, his _De Servo

Arbitrio_, his _Commentary on Genesis_, his sermon of 1533 at Torgau,

etc. (925, 28; 937, 67; 823, 21; 897, 43; 827, 2; 1051, 1; cf. 1213ff.)

Luther's doctrine, according to the _Formula of Concord_, is embodied in

the old Lutheran symbols, and was "collected into the articles and

chapters of the _Augsburg Confession_." (851, 5.) The _Augsburg

Confession_, the _Apology_, the _Smalcald Articles_, and the _Small_ and

the _Large Catechism_, says the _Formula_, "have always been regarded as

the norm and model of the doctrine which Dr. Luther, of blessed memory,

has admirably deduced from God's Word, and firmly established against

the Papacy and other sects; and to his full explanations in his

doctrinal and polemical writings we wish to appeal, in the manner and as

far as Dr. Luther himself in the Latin preface to his published works

has given necessary and Christian admonition concerning his writings."

(853, 9.) According to the _Formula_ there were no dissensions among the

Lutherans "as long as in all articles there was on all sides a unanimous

adherence to the pure doctrine of the divine Word _as the sainted Dr.

Luther explained it_." (851, 2.) Melanchthon, Agricola, Osiander, Major,

and the Philippists, departing from Luther, struck out on paths of their

own, and thus gave rise to the controversies finally settled by the

_Formula of Concord_.

As for the _Formula of Concord_ itself, the distinct object also of its

promoters and authors was to restore, reaffirm, and vindicate the

doctrine of Luther. In a letter of July 24, 1576, to Hesshusius and

Wigand, Andreae giving an account of the results of the Torgau

Convention, remarks: "For this I dare affirm and promise sacredly that

the illustrious Elector of Saxony is bent on this alone that the

doctrine of Luther, which has been partly obscured, partly corrupted,

partly condemned openly or secretly, shall again be restored pure and

unadulterated in the schools and churches, and accordingly Luther shall

live, _i.e._, Christ, whose faithful servant Luther was--_adeoque

Lutherus, hoc est, Christus, cuius fidelis minister Lutherus fuit,

vivat_. What more do you desire? Here [in the _Torgau Book_] nothing is

colored, nothing is dressed up, nothing is concealed, but everything is

in keeping with the spirit of Luther which is Christ's. _Nihil hic

fucatum, nihil palliatum, nihil tectum est, sed iuxta spiritum Lutheri,

qui Christi est_." (Schaff 1, 339.) Also the _Formula of Concord_,

therefore, contains Luther's theology.

It has been asserted that the _Formula of Concord_ is a compromise

between Luther and Melanchthon, a "synthesis or combination of the two

antagonistic forces of the Reformation, a balance of mutually

destructive principles," etc. The _Formula_, says also Seeberg

represents a "Melanchthonian Lutheranism." But the plain truth is that

the _Formula_ is a complete victory of Luther over the later Melanchthon

as well as the other errorists who had raised their heads within the

Lutheran Church. It gave the floor, not to Philip, but to Martin. True,

it was the avowed object of the _Formula_ to restore peace to the

Lutheran Church, but not by compromising in any shape or form the

doctrine of Luther, which, its authors were convinced, is nothing but

divine truth itself. In thesis and antithesis, moreover, the _Formula_

takes a clearly defined stand against all the errorists of those days:

Anabaptists, Schwenckfeldians, Antitrinitarians, Romanists, Zwinglians,

Calvinists, Crypto-Calvinists, Adiaphorists, Antinomians, Synergists,

Majorists, the later Flacianists, etc. It did not acknowledge, or leave

room for, any doctrines or doctrinal tendencies deviating in the least

from original genuine Scriptural Lutheranism. At every point it occupied

the old Lutheran ground. Everywhere it observed a correct balance

between two errors (_e.g._, Romanism and Zwinglianism, Calvinism and

synergism, Majorism and antinomianism); it steered clear of Scylla as

well as Charybdis avoiding errors to the right as well as pitfalls to

the left. The golden highway of truth on which it travels was not

Melanchthon nor a middle ground between Luther and Melanchthon, but

simply Luther and the truths which he had brought to light again.

Melanchthonianism may be defined as an effort to inoculate Lutheranism

with a unionistic and Calvinistic virus. The distinct object of the

_Formula_, however, was not merely to reduce, but to purge the Lutheran

Church entirely from, this as well as other leaven. The _Formula's_

theology is not Lutheranism modified by, but thoroughly cleansed from,

antinomianism, Osiandrianism, and particularly from Philippism.

Accordingly, while in the _Formula_ Luther is celebrated and quoted as

the true and reliable exponent of Lutheranism, Melanchthon is nowhere

appealed to as an authority in this respect. It is only in the _Preface

of the Book of Concord_ that his writings are referred to as not to be

"rejected and condemned", but the proviso is added, "in as far as

(_quatenus_) they agree throughout with the norm laid down in the _Book

of Concord_." (16.)

287. Scripture Sole Standard and Rule.

From the high estimation in which Luther was held by the _Formula of

Concord_ it has falsely been inferred that this Confession accords

Luther the "highest authority" as Hase says, or considers him "the

regulative and almost infallible expounder" of the Bible, as Schaff

asserts. (_Creeds_ 1, 313.) But according to the _Formula_ the supreme

arbiter and only final rule in all matters of religion is the inspired

Word of God; and absolutely all human teachers and books, including

Luther and the Lutheran symbols, are subject to its verdict. When, after

Luther's death, God permitted doctrinal controversies to distract the

Church, His purpose, no doubt, being also to have her fully realize not

only that Luther's doctrine is in complete harmony with Scripture, but,

in addition, that in matters of faith and doctrine not Luther, not the

Church, not the symbols, nor any other human authority but His Word

alone is the sole rule and norm. The _Formula_ certainly learned this

lesson well. In its opening paragraph we read: "We believe, teach, and

confess that the sole rule and standard according to which both all

doctrines and all teachers should be estimated and judged are the

prophetic and apostolic Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament

alone.... Other writings, however, of ancient or modern teachers,

whatever name they bear must not be regarded as equal to the Holy

Scriptures, but all of them together be subjected to them." (777, 1.)

And in this, too, the _Formula_ was conscious of being in agreement with

Luther. Luther himself, it declares, "has expressly drawn this

distinction namely, that the Word of God alone should be and remain the

only standard and rule of doctrine, to which the writings of no man

should be regarded as equal, but to which everything should be

subjected." (853, 9.) Scripture is, and always must remain, the only

_norma normans_, the standard that rules everything,--such was the

attitude of the _Formula of Concord_.

Accordingly, the proof proper for the truth of any doctrinal statement

is taken by the _Formula_ neither from the Lutheran symbols nor the

writings of Luther, but from the Word of God. And the only reason why

the promoters and framers of the _Formula_ were determined to restore

the unadulterated teaching of Luther was because, in the controversies

following his death, they had thoroughly convinced themselves that, on

the one hand, the doctrines proclaimed by Luther were nothing but the

purest gold mined from the shafts of God's Word, and that, on the other

hand, the various deviations from Luther's teaching, which had caused

the dissensions, were aberrations not only from the original Lutheran

Confessions, but also from Holy Scripture. The thirty years of

theological discussion had satisfied the Lutherans that to adhere to the

Bible was tantamount to adhering to the teaching of Luther, and _vice

versa_. Accordingly, the _Formula_ also declared it as its object to

prove that the doctrines it presented were in harmony with the Bible, as

well as with the teaching of Luther and the _Augsburg Confession_. (856,

19.) This agreement with the Word of God and the preceding Lutheran

symbols constitutes the _Formula_ a Lutheran confession, which no one

who is a true Lutheran can reject or, for doctrinal reasons, refuse to

accept.

288. Formula Benefited Lutheran Church.

It has frequently been asserted that the _Formula of Concord_ greatly

damaged Lutheranism, causing bitter controversies, and driving many

Lutherans into the fold of Calvinism, _e.g._, in the Palatinate (1583),

in Anhalt, in Hesse, and in Brandenburg (1613). Richard says: "The

_Formula of Concord_ was the cause of the most bitter controversies,

dissensions, and alienations. The position taken by the adherents of the

_Formula of Concord_ that this document is the true historical and

logical explanation of the older confessions and is therefore the test

and touchstone of Lutheranism, had the effect, as one extreme generates

a counter-extreme, of driving many individual Lutherans and many

Lutheran churches into the Calvinistic fold, as that fold was

represented in Germany by the Heidelberg Catechism as the chief

confession of faith." (516.)

But this entire view is founded on indifferentism and unionism flowing

from the false principle that quality must be sacrificed to quantity,

eternal truth to temporal peace and unity to external progress and

temporary success. Viewed in the light of God's Word, error is the

centrifugal force and the real cause of dissension and separations among

Christians, while divine truth always acts as a centripetal or a truly

unifying power. The _Formula_ therefore, standing clearly as it does for

divine truth only, cannot be charged with causing dissension and

breeding trouble among Christians. It settled many controversies and

healed dissensions, but produced none. True, the _Formula_ was condemned

by many, but with no greater justice and for no other reasons than those

for which the truths of God's Word have always been assailed by their

enemies.

Nor is the statement correct that the _Formula of Concord_ drove loyal

Lutherans out of their own churches into Calvinistic folds. It clearly

stated what, according to God's Word and their old confessions,

Lutherans always will believe, teach, and confess, as also what they

always must reject as false and detrimental to the cause of the Church

of Christ; however, in so doing, it did not drive Lutherans into the

ranks of the Calvinists, but drove masked Calvinists out of the ranks of

loyal Lutherans into those folds to which they really belonged. Indeed,

the _Formula_ failed to make true Lutherans of all the errorists; but

neither did the _Augsburg Confession_ succeed in making friends and

Lutherans of all Papists, nor the Bible, in making Christians of all

unbelievers. However, by clearly stating its position in thesis and

antithesis, the _Formula_ did succeed in bringing about a wholesome

separation, ridding the Lutheran Church of antagonistic spirits, unsound

tendencies, and false doctrines. In fact, it saved the Church from slow,

but sure poisoning at the hands of the Crypto-Calvinists; it restored

purity, unity, morale, courage, and hope when she was demoralized,

distracted, and disfigured by many dissensions and corruptions.

Whatever, by adopting the _Formula of Concord_ the Lutheran Church

therefore may have lost in extension, it won in intention; what it lost

in numbers, it won in unity, solidity, and firmness in the truth.

True, the _Formula of Concord_ completely foiled Melanchthon's plan of a

union between the Lutheran and Reformed churches on the basis of the

Variata of 1540,--a fact which more than anything else roused the ire of

Philippists and Calvinists. But that was an ungodly union, contrary to

the Word of God; a union involving a denial of essential Christian

truths; a union incompatible with the spirit of Lutheranism, which

cannot survive where faith is gagged and open confession of the truth is

smothered; a union in which Calvinism, engrafted on Lutheranism, would

have reduced the latter to a mere feeder of a foreign life. However,

though it shattered the ungodly plans of the Philippists and Calvinists,

the _Formula_ did not in the least destroy the hope of, or block the way

for, a truly Christian agreement. On the contrary, it formulated the

only true basis for such a union, which it also realized among the

Lutherans. And if the Lutheran and Reformed churches will ever unite in

a true and godly manner it must be done on the basis of the truths set

forth by the _Formula_.

289. Necessity of Formula of Concord.

Several Lutheran states, as related above, declined to accept the

_Formula of Concord_, giving as their reason for such action that there

was no need of a new confession. The fact, however, that the _Formula_

was adopted by the great majority of Lutheran princes, professors,

preachers, and congregations proves conclusively that they were of a

different opinion. A new confession was necessary, not indeed because

new truths had been discovered which called for confessional coining or

formulation, but because the old doctrines, assailed by errorists, were

in need of vindication, and the Lutheran Church, distracted by prolonged

theological warfare, was sorely in need of being restored to unity,

peace, and stability. The question-marks suspended everywhere in Germany

after Luther's death were: Is Lutheranism to die or live? Are its old

standards and doctrines to be scrapped or vindicated? Is the Church of

Luther to remain, or to be transformed into a unionistic or Reformed

body? Is it to retain its unity, or will it become a house divided

against itself and infested with all manner of sects?

Evidently, then, if the Lutheran Church was not to go down ingloriously,

a new confession was needed which would not only clear the religious and

theological atmosphere, but restore confidence, hope, and normalcy. A

confession was needed which would bring out clearly the truths for which

Lutherans must firmly stand if they would be true to God, true to His

Word, true to their Church, true to themselves, and true to their

traditions. A confession was needed which would draw exactly, clearly,

and unmistakably the lines which separate Lutherans, not only from

Romanists, but also from Zwinglians, Calvinists, Crypto-Calvinists,

unionists, and the advocates of other errors and unsound tendencies.

Being essentially the Church of the pure Word and Sacrament, the only

way for the Lutheran Church to maintain her identity and independence

was to settle her controversies not by evading or compromising the

doctrinal issues involved, but by honestly facing and definitely

deciding them in accordance with her principles: the Word of God and the

old confessions. Particularly with respect to the doctrine of the Lord's

Supper, Melanchthon by constantly altering the _Augsburg Confession_,

had muddied the water to such an extent that the adoption of the

_Augustana_ was no longer a clear test of Lutheran orthodoxy and

loyalty. Even Calvin, and the German Reformed generally subscribed to

it, "in the sense," they said, "in which Melanchthon has explained it."

The result was a corruption of Lutheranism and a pernicious Calvinistic

propaganda in Lutheran territories. A new confession was the only means

of ending the confusion and checking the invasion.

290. Formula Fully Met Requirements.

The _Formula of Concord_ was just such a confession as the situation

called for. The Preface to the _Apology of the Book of Concord_, signed

by Kirchner, Selneccer, and Chemnitz, remarks that the purpose of the

_Formula_ was "to establish and propagate unity in the Lutheran churches

and schools, and to check the Sacramentarian leaven and other

corruptions and sects." This purpose was fully attained by the

_Formula_. It maintained and vindicated the old Lutheran symbols. It

cleared our Church from all manner of foreign spirits which threatened

to transform its very character. It settled the controversies by

rendering a clear and correct decision on all doctrinal questions

involved. It unified our Church when she was threatened with hopeless

division, anarchy, and utter ruin. It surrounded her with a wall of fire

against all her enemies. It made her a most uncomfortable place for such

opponents of Lutheranism as Crypto-Calvinists, unionists, etc. It

infused her with confidence, self-consciousness, conviction, a clear

knowledge of her own position over against the errors of other churches

and sects, and last, but not least, with a most remarkable vitality.

Wherever and whenever, in the course of time, the _Formula of Concord_

was ignored, despised, or rejected, the Lutheran Church fell an easy

prey to unionism and sectarianism; but wherever and whenever the

_Formula_ was held in high esteem, Lutheranism flourished and its

enemies were confounded. Says Schaff: "Outside of Germany the Lutheran

Church is stunted in its normal growth, or undergoes with the change of

language and nationality, an ecclesiastical transformation. This is the

case with the great majority of Anglicized and Americanized Lutherans,

who adopt Reformed views on the Sacraments, the observance of Sunday,

church discipline, and other points." But the fact is that, since Schaff

wrote the above, the Lutheran Church developed and flourished nowhere as

in America, owing chiefly to the return of American Lutherans to their

confessions, including the _Formula of Concord_. The _Formula of

Concord_ fully supplied the dire need created by the controversies after

Luther's death; and, despite many subsequent controversies, also in

America, down to the present day, no further confessional deliverances

have been necessary, and most likely such will not be needed in the

future either.

The _Formula of Concord_, therefore, must ever be regarded as a great

blessing of God. "But for the _Formula of Concord_," says Krauth, "it

may be questioned whether Protestantism could have been saved to the

world. It staunched the wounds at which Lutheranism was bleeding to

death; and crises were at hand in history in which Lutheranism was

essential to the salvation of the Reformatory interest in Europe. The

Thirty Years' War, the war of martyrs, which saved our modern world, lay

indeed in the future of another century, yet it was fought and settled

in the Cloister of Bergen. But for the pen of the peaceful triumvirate,

the sword of Gustavus had not been drawn. Intestine treachery and

division in the Church of the Reformation would have done what the arts

and arms of Rome failed to do. But the miracle of restoration was

wrought. From being the most distracted Church on earth, the Lutheran

Church had become the most stable. The blossom put forth at Augsburg,

despite the storm, the mildew, and the worm, had ripened into the full

round fruit of the amplest and clearest Confession in which the

Christian Church has ever embodied her faith." (Schmauk, 830.)

291. Formula Attacked and Defended.

Drawing accurately and deeply, as it did, the lines of demarcation

between Lutheranism, on the one hand, and Calvinism, Philippism, etc.,

on the other, and thus also putting an end to the Calvinistic propaganda

successfully carried on for decades within the Lutheran Church, the

_Formula of Concord_ was bound to become a rock of offense and to meet

with opposition on the part of all enemies of genuine Lutheranism within

as well as without the Lutheran Church. Both Romanists and Calvinists

had long ago accustomed themselves to viewing the Lutheran Church as

moribund and merely to be preyed upon by others. Accordingly, when,

contrary to all expectations, our Church, united by the _Formula_, rose

once more to her pristine power and glory, it roused the envy and

inflamed the ire and rage of her enemies. Numerous protests against the

_Formula_, emanating chiefly from Reformed and Crypto-Calvinistic

sources, were lodged with Elector August and other Lutheran princes.

Even Queen Elizabeth of England sent a deputation urging the Elector not

to allow the promulgation of the new confession. John Casimir of the

Palatinate, also at the instigation of the English queen, endeavored to

organize the Reformed in order to prevent its adoption. Also later on

the Calvinists insisted that a general council (of course, participated

in by Calvinists and Crypto-Calvinists) should have been held to decide

on its formal and final adoption!

Numerous attacks on the _Formula of Concord_ were published 1578, 1579,

1581, and later, some of them anonymously. They were directed chiefly

against its doctrine of the real presence in the Lord's Supper, the

majesty of the human nature of Christ, and eternal election,

particularly its refusal to solve, either in a synergistic or in a

Calvinistic manner, the mystery presented to human reason in the

teaching of the Bible that God alone is the cause of man's salvation,

while man alone is the cause of his damnation. In a letter to Beza,

Ursinus, the chief author of the Heidelberg Catechism, shrewdly advised

the Reformed to continue accepting the _Augsburg Confession_, but to

agitate against the _Formula_. He himself led the Reformed attacks by

publishing, 1581, "_Admonitio Christiana de Libro Concordiae_, Christian

Admonition Concerning the Book of Concord," also called "_Admonitio

Neostadiensis_, Neustadt Admonition." Its charges were refuted in the

"Apology or Defense of the Christian Book of Concord--_Apologia oder

Verantwortung des christlichen Konkordienbuchs_, in welcher die wahre

christliche Lehre, so im Konkordienbuch verfasst, mit gutem Grunde

heiliger, goettlicher Schrift verteidiget, die Verkehrung aber und

Kalumnien, so von unruhigen Leuten wider gedachtes christliche Buch

ausgesprenget, widerlegt worden," 1583 (1582). Having been prepared by

command of the Lutheran electors, and composed by Kirchner, Selneccer,

and Chemnitz, and before its publication also submitted to other

theologians for their approval, this guardedly written _Apology_, also

called the Erfurt Book, gained considerable authority and influence.

The Preface of this Erfurt Book enumerates, besides the Christian

Admonition of Ursinus and the Neustadt theologians, the following

writings published against the _Formula of Concord_: 1. _Opinion and

Apology_ (_Bedencken und Apologie_) of Some Anhalt Theologians; 2.

_Defense_ (_Verantwortung_) of the Bremen Preachers; Christian Irenaeus

on Original Sin; _Nova Novorum_ ("ein famos Libell"); other libelli,

satyrae et pasquilli; _Calumniae et Scurrilia Convitia of Brother Nass_

(_Bruder Nass_); and the history of the _Augsburg Confession_ by

Ambrosius Wolf, in which the author asserts that from the beginning the

doctrine of Zwingli and Calvin predominated in all Protestant churches.

The theologians of Neustadt, Bremen, and Anhalt replied to the Erfurt

Apology; which, in turn, called forth counter-replies from the

Lutherans. Beza wrote: _Refutation of the Dogma Concerning the

Fictitious Omnipresence of the Flesh of Christ_. In 1607 Hospinian

published his _Concordia Discors_," [tr. note: sic on punctuation] to

which Hutter replied in his _Concordia Concors_. The papal detractors of

the _Formula_ were led by the Jesuit Cardinal Bellarmin, who in 1589

published his _Judgment of the Book of Concord_.

292. Modern Strictures on Formula of Concord.

Down to the present day the _Formula of Concord_ has been assailed

particularly by unionistic and Reformed opponents of true Lutheranism.

Schaff criticizes: "Religion was confounded with theology, piety with

orthodoxy, and orthodoxy with an exclusive confessionalism." (1, 259.)

However, the subjects treated in the _Formula_ are the most vital

doctrines of the Christian religion: concerning sin and grace, the

person and work of Christ, justification and faith, the means of grace,

--truths without which neither Christian theology nor Christian religion

can remain; "Here, then," says Schmauk, "is the one symbol of the ages

which treats almost exclusively of Christ--of His work, His presence,

His person. Here is the Christ-symbol of the Lutheran Church. One might

almost say that the _Formula of Concord_ is a developed witness of

Luther's explanation of the Second and Third Articles of the Apostles'

Creed, meeting the modern errors of Protestantism, those cropping up

from the sixteenth to the twentieth century, in a really modern way."

(751.) Tschackert also designates the assertion that the authors of the

_Formula of Concord_ "abandoned Luther's idea of faith and established a

dead scholasticism" as an unjust charge. (478.) Indeed, it may be

questioned whether the doctrine of grace, the real heart of

Christianity, would have been saved to the Church without the _Formula_.

R. Seeberg speaks of the "ossification of Lutheran theology" caused by

the _Formula of Concord_, and Tschackert charges it with transforming

the Gospel into a "doctrine." (571.) But what else is the Gospel of

Christ than the divine doctrine or statement and proclamation of the

truth that we are saved, not by our own works, but by grace and faith

alone, for the sake of Christ and His merits? The _Formula of Concord_

truly says: "_The Gospel is properly a doctrine which teaches what man

should believe_, that he may obtain forgiveness of sins with God,

namely, that the Son of God, our Lord Christ, has taken upon Himself and

borne the curse of the Law, has expiated and paid for all our sins,

through whom alone we again enter into favor with God, obtain

forgiveness of sins by faith, are delivered from death and all the

punishments of sins, and eternally saved." (959, 20.) Says Schmauk: "The

_Formula of Concord_ was ... the very substance of the Gospel and of the

_Augsburg Confession_, kneaded through the experience of the first

generation of Protestantism, by incessant and agonizing conflict, and

coming forth from that experience as a true and tried teaching, a

standard recognized by many." (821.) The _Formula of Concord_ is truly

Scriptural, not only because all its doctrines are derived from the

Bible, but also because the burden of the Scriptures, the doctrine of

justification, is the burden also of all its expositions the living

breath, as it were, pervading all its articles.

Another modern objection to the _Formula_ is that it binds the future

generations to the _Book of Concord_. This charge is correct, for the

_Formula_ expressly states that its decisions are to be "a public,

definite testimony, not only for those now living, but also for our

posterity, what is and should remain (_sei und bleiben solle--esseque

perpetuo debeat_) the unanimous understanding and judgment of our

churches in reference to the articles in controversy." (857, 16.)

However, the criticism implied in the charge is unwarranted. For the

Lutheran Confessions, as promoters, authors, and signers of the

_Formula_ were fully persuaded, are in perfect agreement with the

eternal and unchangeable Word of God. As to their contents, therefore,

they must always remain the confession of every Church which really is

and would remain loyal to the Word of God.

293. Formula Unrefuted.

From the day of its birth down to the present time the _Formula of

Concord_ has always been in the limelight of theological discussion. But

what its framers said in praise of the _Augsburg Confession_, _viz._,

that, in spite of numerous enemies, it had remained unrefuted, may be

applied also to the _Formula_: it stood the test of centuries and

emerged unscathed from the fire of every controversy. It is true today

what Thomasius wrote 1848 with special reference to the _Formula_:

"Numerous as they may be who at present revile our Confession, not one

has ever appeared who has refuted its chief propositions from the

Bible." (_Bekenntnis der ev.-luth. Kirche_, 227.)

Nor can the _Formula_ ever be refuted, for its doctrinal contents are

unadulterated truths of the infallible Word of God. It confesses the

doctrine which Christians everywhere will finally admit as true and

divine indeed, which they all in their hearts believe even now, if not

explicitly and consciously, at least implicitly and in principle. The

doctrines of the _Formula_ are the ecumenical truths of Christendom; for

true Lutheranism is nothing but consistent Christianity. The _Formula_,

says Krauth, is "the completest and clearest confession in which the

Christian Church has ever embodied her faith." Such being the case, the

_Formula of Concord_ must be regarded also as the key to a godly peace

and true unity of entire Christendom.

The authors of the _Formula_ solemnly declare: "We entertain heartfelt

pleasure and love for, and are on our part sincerely inclined and

anxious to advance with our utmost power that unity [and peace] by which

His glory remains to God uninjured, nothing of the divine truth of the

Holy Gospel is surrendered, no room is given to the least error, poor

sinners are brought to true, genuine repentance, raised up by faith,

confirmed in new obedience, and thus justified and eternally saved alone

through the sole merit of Christ." (1095, 95.) Such was the godly peace

and true Christian unity restored by the _Formula of Concord_ to the

Lutheran Church. And what it did for _her_ it is able also to do for the

Church at large. Being in complete agreement with Scripture, it is well

qualified to become the regeneration center of the entire present-day

corrupted, disrupted, and demoralized Christendom.

Accordingly Lutherans, the natural advocates of a truly wholesome and

God-pleasing union based on unity in divine truth, will not only

themselves hold fast what they possess in their glorious Confession, but

strive to impart its blessings also to others, all the while praying

incessantly, fervently, and trustingly with the pious framers of the

_Formula_: "May Almighty God and the Father of our Lord Jesus grant the

grace of His Holy Ghost that we all may be one in Him, and constantly

abide in this Christian unity, which is well pleasing to Him! Amen."

(837, 23.)

SOLI DEO GLORIA!

[tr. note: original printed text ends with a 10 page index that is not

included in this transcription]

End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of Historical Introductions to the

Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, by Friedrich Bente