Meanwhile, as Melancthon had advised the court preacher, Jacob Schenck, in Freiburg (at the beginning of 1537), to yield about receiving the Lord's Supper under one species,26 an attempt was made to bring him into suspicion with the Electoral Court and with Luther as to his general doctrine about this sacrament;27 but no abiding impression could be made. Luther, on the contrary, decidedly took Melancthon's part, when Agricola, doubtless en

lancthon afterward also avoided the expression, ad vitam aeternam, adhering to the statement: obedientia nostra necessario sequi debet reconciliationem, which formula is also found in the Loci of 1535; see Note 14.

26 Strobel's Literärgesch. von Mel. Locis Theol., s. 112. Matthes, s. 185.

27 In the Weimar archives there is a document professing to report inquiries addressed to Luther and Bugenhagen, by the Chancellor Brück, in the presence of the Elector, May 5, 1537 (C. R., iii. 365), and in which these two men are asked about the deviations of Melancthon and other irregularities, and at the same time are put under obligation to observe a strict silence about this inquiry. The document is doubtless genuine, so far as this, that such an examination was intended; but that it really took place, is only noted on the back of the document in another handwriting; and this is manifestly incorrect. For, 1. In the reported investigation mention is reproachfully made of the changes (up to that time most unimportant) made in the Augsburg Confession, in the new edition by Melancthon; and if this really took place, how can we explain the important changes in the edition of 1540, and Luther's agreement with them? 2. Brück's letter to the Elector, October, 1537, refers to another examination of Luther, which had to do only with the doctrine about the Lord's Supper, and which, as is very plain from the narrative, could not have been preceded by any similar conference. In this letter it is said (C. R., iii. 427): "Doctor Martinus sagt und bekennt, dass er nimmermehr gemeint hatte, dass Philippus noch in den Phantaseyen so steif steckte. Daraus ich verstunde, dass ihme Philippus das Schreiben Ew. Chf. G. (?) an Doctor Jacob (Schenk) verborgen gehabt. Er zeigte darneben an, er hätte wohl allerlei Vorsorge, und könnte nicht wissen, wie Philippus am Sacrament wäre. Denn er nennte es nicht anders, hielte es auch nur für eine schlechte Ceremonien, hätte ihn auch lange Zeit nicht sehen das heil. Abendmal empfahen. Er hätte auch Argumente gebracht nach der Zeit als er zu Cassel gewest, daraus er vernommen, wie er fast Zwinglischer Meinung wäre. Doch wie es in seinem Herzen stünde, wisse er noch nicht. Aber die heimlichen Schreiben und Räthe, dass unter den Tyrannen einer das Sacrament möge in einerlei Gestalt empfahen,' gäben ihm seltsame Gedanken. Aber er wollte sein Herz mit Philippo theilen, und wollte ganz gern, dass sich Philippus als ein hoher Mann nicht möchte von ihnen und von der Schul allhier thun; denn er thät ja grosse Arbeit. Würde er aber auf der Meinung verharren, wie er aus dem Schreiben an Dr. Jacob vermerkt, so müsste die Wahrheit Gottes vorgehen." Melancthon about this time expected an examination (ad Camerar., 11. Oct., C. R., iii. 420, ad Vitum Theod., 13. Oct., p. 429: Heri intellexi scriptos articulos mihi proponendos. Sed certi nihil habeo, est enim mirifica occultatio), which did not come off, since meanwhile Agricola had again come forward with his Antinomianism, and Schenck had joined him. Mel. ad Vitum Theod., 25. Nov., 1537, 1. c., p. 152: Post illas nuper de me deliberationes habitas etsi dies mihi dicta erat, tamen Lutheri morbus impediit, ne quid ageretur, deinde fuerunt induciae. Et Fribergensis ille anunyopos ita ruit, ut displiceat suo theatro. Vociferatur turpiter contra legem illa άτожα, quae somniabat Islebius, Christianis nullam legem praedicandam esse. De hac ipsa re jam litigat per literas Islebius cum Luthero. Vide, quale doctrinae genus isti inepti pariant, qui nostras in his materiis accuratas et μelodikas distributiones fastidiunt, et suas quasdam ȧkupoλoyías amant, quibus applaudunt indocti,

couraged by these circumstances, again tried to insist upon his Antinomian views in opposition to Melancthon.28 Melancthon remained in the position of collocutor of the Wittenbergers, 29 and was ever conscious of his essential agreement with Luther,30 which was also conceded by the latter, who always spoke with high veneration of his Philip.31 As to the new edition of the Augsburg Confession in 1540, the so-called Variata, afterward so much calumniated,32 no one at that time thought of taking of

28 See above, § 34, Note 27. But still the machinations of the opponents continued; Mel. ad Vitum Theod., 22. Mart., 1538, C. R., iii. 503: Amsdorfius Luthero scripsit, viperam eum in sinu alere, me significans: omitto alia multa. Ad Jo. Camerarium, 27. Nov., 1539, 1. c., p. 840: Me dolores animi, quos tuli toto triennio acerbissimos et continuos, et caeterae quotidianae aerumnae ita consumserunt, ut verear me diu vivere non posse. To this time of controversy also belong the recommendations of ecclesiastical unity in academical orations: De puritate doctrinae in Ecclesia conservanda, 1536, C. Ref., xi. 272; and De concordia et communicatione studiorum atque operarum, 1537, p. 329. 29 In Smalcald, Febr., 1540, Matthes, s. 197; in Worms, Nov., 1540, s. 207; in Ratisbon, Apr., 1541, s. 218.

30 Testamentum Melanchthonis, 1540, C. R., iii. 825. After he had here spoken of his faith and his labors for the new Church, he says: Nec meum consilium fuit, ullam novam opinionem serere, sed perspicue et proprie exponere doctrinam catholicam, quae traditur in nostris Ecclesiis, quam quidem judico singulari Dei beneficio patefactam esse his postremis temporibus per Dr. Martinum Lutherum, ut Ecclesia repurgaretur et instauraretur, quae alioqui funditus periisset.-Ago autem gratias Rev. D. Doctori M. Luthero, primum quia ab ipso Evangelium didici, deinde pro singulari erga me benevolentia, quam quidem plurimis beneficiis declaravit, eumque volo a meis non secus ac patrem coli. Ego, quia vidi et comperi praeditum esse excellenti et heroica vi ingenii et multis magnis virtutibus ac pietate, doctrina praecipua, semper eum magni feci, dilexi, et colendum esse sensi.

31 Luth. ad Mel., 18. Jun., 1540 (when Melancthon was staying in Weimar, on the journey to Hagenau), in de Wette, y. 293: Mirum est, quam desideramus te videre.Nos tecum, et tu nobiscum, et Christus hic et ibi nobiscum.-Nos, qui te sincere amamus, diligenter et efficaciter orabimus. When Luther immediately afterward found Melancthon sick unto death in Weimar, he exclaimed, when he first saw him, “God help! how the devil has reviled this organon to me!" and then he prayed mightily, and spoke to Melancthon words of the tenderest love. See Ratzeberger, by Neudecker, s. 102.

* Conf. Aug. a. 1540 a Mel. edita variata illa, accurate reddita et illustrata a Mich. Weber, Halis, 1830, 4. The most important change was in Article X. This originally read: De Coena Domini docent, quod corpus et sanguis Christi vere adsint et distribuantur vescentibus in Coena Domini, et improbant secus docentes. But in the Variata : De Coena Domini docent, quod cum pane et vino vere exhibeantur corpus et sanguis Christi vescentibus in Coena Domini. The first form was considered by the Catholics in Augsburg, 1530, as in agreement with their doctrine; and so the Philippists (Melancthonians) justified the necessity of a change. The second formula undoubtedly had respect to the Concordia with the Swiss, then existing; and the Calvinists could afterward find in it their own doctrine. Comp. Ueber das Verhältniss der veränderten Augsb. Conf. zur unveränderten, Rudelbach's und Guericke's Zeitschr. f. d. Luther. Theol. und Kirche, 1851, iv. 640.-The German Confession, subscribed by the princes in Augs burg, was changed by Melancthon in later editions only verbally, and thus has had ro editio variata.

fense at it.33 On the other hand, the Cologne project of a Reformation, which appeared in 1543, but which was not known in Wittenberg until 1544, aroused new divisions34 by its section on the Lord's Supper, which was drawn up by Bucer, but approved by Melancthon. The sharp censure of Amsdorf was more readily welcomed by Luther, because he at that time was suffering in his bodily health, and was in a bitter mood on account of the state of affairs in Wittenberg;35 and he had also been made very excitable by the controversy with the Swiss,36 then renewed, just upon this

33 It was considered as a revision, which made the Confession more plain; very much praised by Brenz (Brent. ad Vit. Theodor., 1541, C. R., iv. 737), and immediately used at the colloquy of Worms, January, 1541, without any heed being paid to Eck's exceptions on account of the alteration of the text (see Melancthon's Report, C. R., iv. 34) by the Elector (who yet in his Instructions had specially desired that the colloquists should abide by the Augsburg Confession) or by Luther (Weber's Gesch. d. Augsb. Conf., ii. 312). On the contrary, Luther wrote to the Elector, May 10, 1541 (de Wette, v. 357), as to the Ratisbon negotiations, which were a continuation of those at Worms: "Zuletzt bitten wir, E. K. F. G. wollten M. Philippus u. den Unsern ja nicht zu hart schreiben, damit er nicht abermal sich zu Tod grame. Denn sie haben ja die liebe Confession ihnen furbehalten, und darin noch rein und fest blieben, wenn gleich alles feylet." As long as Melancthon lived the Variata was universally used without objections, even by the most decided opponents of Melancthon, as Westphal, and in the Weimar Confutation-Book (Strobel's Apologie Melanchthon's, s. 131 ff.), until it was first rejected by Flacius in the Weimar disputation with Striegel, 1560 (Disp., p. 127), and then by the party of the Duke of Saxony, at the Naumburg Diet of the Princes, 1561 (Salig's Gesch. d. Augsb. Conf., iii. 669), and at the colloquy in Altenburg, 1569 (infra, § 38, Note 17), as being favorable to the Sacramentarians and Calvinists. Peucer declared, in Praef. in Ph. Mel. Opp., p. i., 1562: Fuit autem posterior (editio emendatior Aug. Conf.) scripta a Philippo, mandante, recognoscente et approbante Luthero, et necesse fuit, eam scribi propter adversarios, quod multa cavillarentur illi, quae oportuit explicari, ut occasiones et argumenta talium cavillationum-eis adimerentur. On the other hand, the divines of the Duke of Saxony maintained at Altenburg, 1569 (Acta, the Wittenberg edition, fol. 253, b): "Es wissen auch viel Christen, dass Lutherus selbst wider dieselbige Aenderung oftmals geredt, Beschwerung darüber gehabt, und gesaget, dasselbe Buch wäre auch nicht Philippi, sondern der christl. Kirchen Bekenntniss, darum gebühre es ihme als einem Privaten nicht, nach seinem Gutdünken und Wohlgefallen dasselbe zu verneuern oder zu verandern." But yet Peucer's allegation was repeated by men who were not at all on the side of the Philippists. Nic. Selneccer, Catalogus Brevis Praecipuorum Conciliorum, Francof. ad M. 1571. 8., p. 97: Recognita est Aug. Conf. posterior, relegente et approbante Luthero, ut vivi adhuc testes affirmant. Dav. Chytraus Hist. d. Augsb. Conf., 2te Ausg., 1577, and Mart. Chemnitius, Judicium de Controversiis quibusdam circa quosdam Aug. Conf. Articulos (ed. Polyc. Leyser., Viteberg, 1594), p. 7, say, at least, that it was brought forward at the conference at Worms with the approbation of Luther; comp. Strobel's Apologie Melanchthon's, s. 85. Weber's Gesch. der Augsb. Conf., ii. 291. 34 See Div. I., § 8, Note 18.

35 In many letters at this period Luther bewails his feeble state of health. On his controversy with the Wittenberg jurists, who declared private betrothals valid, see his letters to the Elector, Jan. 22, 1544 (de Wette, v. 615); to the consistory in Wittenberg (s. 618). His aversion to luxurious habits, especially in female dress, is expressed to his housekeeper, July, 1545 (s. 752).

36 See Div. I., § 8, Note 26; supra, § 35, Note 38.

VOL. IV. -28

matter of the Lord's Supper. The friendly relations between the two men seemed to be endangered;37 but Melancthon had most to undergo from the strict Lutherans. Luther regained his composure, and the attack upon Melancthon38, from which he shrunk, was not made. Soon afterward the latter drew up the proposals for union, which were to be handed in to the Emperor (the socalled Wittenberg Reformation) ;39 and Luther hesitated as little as did the other Wittenberg theologians to subscribe them (Jan. 14, 1545), though they breathed throughout the pacific spirit of Melancthon.

37 Mel. ad M. Bucerum, 28. Aug., 1544 (C. R., v. 474): (Lutherus) rursus tonare coepit vehementissime Tepi dɛíπvov Kuριakoυ, et scripsit atrocem librum, qui nondum editus est, in quo ego et tu sugillamur. Fuit his diebus hanc ipsam ob causam apud Amsdorfium, quem unum ad hujus consilii societatem adhibet, habetque unum laudatorem hujus impetus. Landgrave Philip besought Chancellor Brück to pacify Luther, and to prevent an open rupture between him and Melancthon, Oct. 12, 1544 (p. 501). .The Elector also commissioned Brück to endeavor to keep Luther from writing against Melancthon, April 26, 1645 (p. 746). To this period, and to the years 1536-39, Melancthon refers in his declaration-ad Chph. a Carlowiz, 28. Apr., 1548 (C. R., vi. 880): Tuli antea servitutem paene deformem, cum saepe Lutherus magis suae naturae, in qua piλoveikia erat non exigua, quam vel personae suae vel utilitati communi serviret. When this declaration became known, and excited great attention, he excused it in a letter to Th. a Malzan, 13. Sept., 1549 (C. R., vii. 462); Et fortasse quid significet piλóveikos non considerant. Non est crimen sed ráðos, usitatum heroicis naturis, quod nominatim Pericli, Lysandro, Agesilao tribuunt scriptores. Et omnino erant in Luthero heroici impetus. Nec mirum est, nos, quorum naturae sunt segniores, interdum mirari illam vehementiam. 38 He alluded to him with the highest honor in his Praef. ad Tom. i., Opp. Lutheri, 5. Mart., 1545: Nunc extant methodici libri quam plurimi, inter quos loci communes Philippi excellunt, quibus theologus et Episcopus pulchre et abunde formari potest, ut sit potens in sermone doctrinae pietatis.-Eodem anno (1518) jam M. Philippus Melanthon a Principe Friderico vocatus huc fuerat ad docendas literas graecas, haud dubie ut haberem socium laboris in theologia. Nam quid operatus sit Dominus per hoc organum, non in literis tantum, sed in theologia, satis testantur ejus opera, etiamsi irascatur Satan et omnes squamae ejus.

39 Corp. Ref., v. 578. Here, p. 584, it is proposed to establish confirmation: "Nämlich, so ein Kind zu seinen mündigen Jahren komme, öffentlich sein Bekenntniss zu hōren, und zu fragen, ob es bei dieser einigen göttlichen Lehre u. Kirchen bleiben wollt, und nach der Bekenntniss und Zusage mit Auflegung der Hande ein Gebet thuen.” To the Lord's Supper are to be admitted (s. 588) those who, "vorhin verhört und absolvirt sind, und nicht in öffentlichen Lastern verharren, welche auch rechten Verstand haben sollen, was dieses Sacrament sey, nämlich Niessung des wahren Leibes und Blutes Christi, und wozu diese Niessung zu thuen, nämlich dass der Glaub erwecket und gestärkt werde: dieweil uns Christus durch diese seine Ordnung seinen Leib und Blut gebe, dass er uns gewisslich zu Gliedmassen mache, vergebe uns unser Sund aus Gnaden um seines Todes willen, nicht von wegen dieses unsers Gehorsams, wolle uns gnadiglich erhören und regirn, etc. Item, dass wir für seinen Tod und Auferstehung u. alle Gaben hie danken. Item, dass wir hiebei auch erkennen, dass wir Eines Heilands Christi Gliedmass sind, und sollen gegen allen Gliedmassen Lieb u. Gutes erzeigen unserm Hailand Christo zu gefallen," etc. S. 598, a proposal again to recognize bishops and to obey them: "Wenn sie anfahen, zu pflanzen reine Lehre des Evangelii und christl. Reichung der Sacramente."

In the last months of Luther's life the friendly relations between the two men were wholly restored.10 But Luther saw long be forehand that the existing dissension, no longer reined in by him, would lead to an open rupture after his death."1

§ 37.

CONTROVERSY OF THE PHILIPPISTS AND THE STRICT LUTHERANS, TO THE DEATH OF MELANCTHON, 1560.

The unfortunate results of the Smalcald war were the occasion of the outbreak of this controversy. The Augsburg Interim, and the tyranny with which it was carried out in Southern Germany, aroused the wrath of all the adherents of the Reformation; and thus the strict disciples of Luther, who tried to imitate this man of genius in all respects with a slavish exactness,' received great applause for their violent opposition to the Interim. When Melancthon, on the other hand, in his despondency,2 allowed himself to be used by the Elector Maurice, who was generally considered as an apostate, in drawing up a second Interim,3 his friends complained of him, and his enemies began at once a most bitter warfare against him and his followers in Electoral Saxony (the Phil

40 Chancellor Brück reported to the Elector, Jan. 9, 1546 (C. Ref., vi. 10), that Luther advised not to send Melancthon to Ratisbon, and then said: "That Philip was a true man, neither shy of nor avoiding any body; but for this service he was weak and sick. -If we were to lose the man from the university, half the university would go off with him."

41 From the Weimar archives Seckendorf reports (Comm. de Lutheranismo, iii. 165) that Luther, in his severe illness at Smalcald, 1537, had said to the Elector, fore, ut post mortem suam discordia in Academia Wittenbergensi oriretur, et doctrinae suae mutatio fieret.

1 Postilla Melanthoniana, i. 319 : (Polypragmosyne) nonnunquam oritur ex kakoŽŋλía seu imitatione prava alieni exempli, ut multi nunc volunt similes esse Luthero: praetexunt zelum, qui est sine scientia, tumultuantur de rebus incognitis, non inquirunt fontes negotiorum. De talibus inquit Polybius: Multi volentes videri similes magnis viris, cum ipya imitari non possint, imitantur rápɛpya et producunt in theatrum stultitiam suam.-Calvini Secunda Defensio contra Westphalum, 1556 (Opp., viii. 679): O Luthere, quam paucos tuae praestantiae imitatores, quam multas vero sanctae tuae jactantiae simias reliquisti !

* His letter to Christoph v. Carlowitz, a councilor of the Elector Maurice, 28th Apr., 1548 (C. R., vi. 879), which soon became known, made a particularly unfavorable impression about him.

See Div. I., § 9, Notes 17, 18.

4 Brentius ad Mel. ineunte anno 1549, C. R., vii. 289. Ant. Corvinus ad Mel., 25. Sept., 1549, in Illgen's Zeitschr. f. d. Hist. Theol., ii. ii. 226. Calvin. ad Mel., 1550 (Calv. Epistt., ed. Genev., p. 89).