Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church Part 36

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 att.i.tude 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 Philippic.u.m_. In their place he recommended the adoption of a new _corpus doctrinae_ containing the three Ec.u.menical 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 partic.i.p.ated 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 partic.i.p.ated in the promulgation of the _Formula of Concord_, was deposed, hara.s.sed, 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 partic.i.p.ated 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 doc.u.ments, 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 h.e.l.l," had been added at Torgau. The Book was ent.i.tled: "_Opinion_ as to how the dissensions prevailing among the theologians of the _Augsburg Confession_ may, according to the Word of G.o.d, 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 G.o.d 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 G.o.dly 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.)

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 t.i.tle 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 subst.i.tuted 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 t.i.tle 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 G.o.d 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 G.o.d'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 G.o.d's grace, intend to abide thereby: therefore, after mature deliberation we have, in G.o.d'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 (_c.u.m 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 const.i.tuted 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 a.s.sumes, 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 a.s.sembled 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 G.o.d 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. G.o.d 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 G.o.d 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, c.u.m 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 da.s.s 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 G.o.d 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 G.o.d 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 partic.i.p.ate 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 att.i.tude of Duke Julius, some of the Brunswick theologians openly declared their agreement with the _Formula_ as well as their determination by the help of G.o.d, 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, Na.s.sau, Bentheim, Tecklenburg, Solms, Ortenburg, Liegnitz, Brieg, Wohlau, Bremen, Danzig, Magdeburg, Nuernberg, Weissenburg, Windsheim, Frankfort-on-the-Main, Worms, Speyer, Stra.s.sburg.

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 repet.i.tion and explanation of the old Lutheran confessions. It does not set forth or formulate a new faith or tenets. .h.i.therto 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 G.o.d 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 G.o.dly 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 G.o.d-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 G.o.d's Word by Dr. Luther, of blessed and holy memory_." (847, 1.) Again: "In these last times G.o.d, 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 G.o.d, 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 G.o.d'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 ill.u.s.trious 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 a.s.serted 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 ant.i.thesis, moreover, the _Formula_ takes a clearly defined stand against all the errorists of those days: Anabaptists, Schwenckfeldians, Ant.i.trinitarians, 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 a.s.serts. (_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 G.o.d; and absolutely all human teachers and books, including Luther and the Lutheran symbols, are subject to its verdict. When, after Luther's death, G.o.d 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 G.o.d 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 att.i.tude 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 G.o.d. 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 G.o.d'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 G.o.d and the preceding Lutheran symbols const.i.tutes 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 a.s.serted 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 doc.u.ment 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.)