ferred to their external differences, even when these were conceded to be unessential. The political imbecility of the German Protestants was the inevitable consequence of this state of things. § 42. FINAL STATEMENTS OF THE LUTHERAN DOCTRINE. The two dogmas, that had not been completely settled even in the Formula Concordiae, soon received a more definite shape in the course of the controversial discussions. Since, as against the Calvinists, the universality of divine grace was always insisted upon with special emphasis,' Samuel Huber, professor in Witten it is preached to the people, fol. 235: "Welchs gottseliges Herz kann doch mit einem solchen Lästermaul, das mit so vielfältiger falscher Lehr beschmitzt ist, wie wir bisher von den Calvinisten gehort haben, Fried und Freundschaft halten? Es ware noch ja so bald mit den Papisten eine Einigkeit zu treffen, als mit den Calvinisten, dann dieselben kaum mehr Irrthumb wider unsern Catechismum haben, als die Calvinisten, wie solches in ander Wege geweiset worden." Dav. Parei (professor in Heidelberg) Irenicum, Heidelb., 1614. 4., p. 136: Tanta est quorundam adversae partis Theologorum, nescio kakońɛa dicam, an appworía et incogitantia hoc tempore, ut potius cum Papistis, capitalibus Evangelii hostibus, contra reformatas Ecclesias, quam cum his adversus Papistas syncretismum faciendum, familiariter conversandum, societatem colendam, plusque Papistis, quam Calvinistis, quos vocare solent, fidendum esse, palam scribere, suisque suadere non erubescant. He then cites sixteen articles in which the doctrine of the Calvinists is most grossly perverted by the Lutherans. Thus in the colloquy set on foot by Duke Frederick of Würtemberg, 1586, in Möm. pelgard, between Jac. Andreä and Theod. Beza, see Acta Colloquii Montisbelligartensis, Tubing., 1587, and Witteberg., 1613. 4. Here it was maintained by Andreae, p. 413: Quod Deus salvandos non modo praesciverit, sed etiam ab aeterno elegerit, et ad vitam aeternam praedestinaverit; and, quod salvandorum apud Deum certus sit numerus. On the other hand, he rejects as an error the doctrine, p. 414: Deum reprobos nondum natos nullo indignitatis respectu exitio destinasse, et quosdam ad justum judicium a Deo conditos esse. This is still the illogical stand-point of the Formula Concordiae, as is clearly shown by Beza ad Acta Colloquii Montisbelgardensis Tubingae edita Responsio (Partes ii., Genev., 1588), ii. 158. In the Electoral Visitation Articles of 1592, Art. 4 (comp. § 41, Note 11), the pure and true doctrine is thus set forth [1. Christ died for all; -2. God created no one to damnation,-commands all to hear Christ in the Gospel, and thus promises power and grace for salvation; 3. That many men are condemned by their own fault, who either will not hear Christ, or fall from grace through error as to what is fundamental, or by sin against conscience; 4. That all sinners who repent are accepted]: "1. Dass Christus vor alle Menschen gestorben;-2. Dass Gott niemand zur Verdammniss geschaffen,-befehliget allen, dass sie seinen Sohn Christum in dem Evangelio hören sollen, und verheisset dadurch Kraft und Würkung des heil. Geistes zur Bekehrung u. Seligkeit; 3. Dass viel Menschen durch ihre eigene Schuld verdammet werden, die entweder das Evangelium von Christo nicht hören wollen, oder aus der Gnade wieder ausfallen durch Irrthum wider das Fundament, oder durch Sünde wider das Gewissen; 4. Dass alle Sünder, so Busse thun, zu Gnaden angenommen werden." On the other hand, the false and erroneous doctrine of the Calvinists is thus given [1. Christ berg, 1592-94,2 thought that this position could be reconciled with the Augustinian doctrine of original sin only by the assumption that God had elected all men to salvation.3 Thus he gave the occasion, made use of by his colleague, Aegidius Hunnius, for that development of the doctrine, afterward generally accepted, according to which the decisive factor in election or rejection remained on the side of the unrenewed man." died only for the elect; 2. That God created the larger part of men for damnation, and will not that they be converted and saved; 3. That the elect can not lose faith and the Holy Ghost and be condemned, however many and great crimes they may commit; 4. That the non-elect must be damned, and can not be saved though they be baptized a thousand times, and daily go to the Supper, and live as holy as possible]: "1. Dass Christus nicht für alle Menschen, sondern allein vor die Auserwählten gestorben sey; 2. Dass Gott den meisten Theil derer Menschen zum ewigen Verdammniss geschaffen, und wolle nicht haben, dass sie bekehret und selig werden; 3. Dass die Auserwählten und Neugebohrnen nicht können den Glauben und heil. Geist verlieren und verdammt werden, wenn sie gleich allerlei grosse Sünde und Laster begehen; 4. Die, so nicht erwählet sind, müssen verdammet werden, und können nicht zur Seligkeit kommen, wenn sie gleich tausendmal getauft werden, u. täglich zum Abendmal gingen, auch so heilig u. unsträflich lebten, als es immer möglich." 2 Comp., on this controversy, J. A. Schmidii Diss. de Sam. Huberi Vita, Fatis et Doctrina, Helmst., 1708. 4.; J. G. Walch's Religionsstreitigkeiten der Evang. Luth. Kirche, i. 176. The literature is in Walchii Biblioth. Theol., ii. 645. Huber, when a preacher in the Canton of Berne, was already a decided opponent of Calvinism, and developed his peculiar views. He was deposed in Berne (1588) in consequence of a disputation with Beza, and then became a Lutheran preacher in Würtemberg, where he also aroused distrust, though he did not openly avow his opinions till he came to Wittemberg. After his deposal (1594) he lived in different places, and died in Osterwieck in 1624. 3 Beständige Bekandtnuss Dr. Sam. Huber's, Ursel, 1595. 4. [God, through his Son, not only elected some, but, as he is a common Saviour, he elected and ordained all men to salvation. When this general grace is offered to men they divide themselves into two classes. The one follow the call, and receive through faith that to which they were elected; the other and larger class will not hear the Gospel, or despise it. All impenitent sinners belong to this class, and they are all eternally condemned]: "So bekenne ich, dass Gott-durch diesen seinen Sohn-nicht nur einen Ausschuss auserlesen und erwählet habe, sondern wie Christus ein gemeiner Heiland ist,-also habe auch Gott alle Sünder, nämlich alle Menschen durch diesen seinen Sohn erwählet und verordnet zum Leben, Heil u. Seligkeit.-Derbei so glaube und bekenne ich, dass wenn nun solches allgemein Gnadenwerk Gottes uber alle Menschen an den Menschen kommt, gelehret, verkündiget und geprediget wird,—dass sich allda die Menschen durch Glaube und Unglaube theilen in zwen Haufen. Der eine Haufen folget,-und bekommt also durch den Glauben dasjenig, darzu er erwählet ist in Christo.-Der ander Hauf, u. leider der grösste Haufe, will das Evangelium nicht hören, oder wenn er es gleich höret, so verachtet er es.-Derhalben dieser Haufe, darunter alle unbussfertige Sünder stehen,-dieweil sie nicht annehmen, was ihnen durch Christum erworben und geordnet war, so werden sie alle zu Hauf mit einander verlohren und verdammt, und wie sie im Unglauben sterben, also werden sie auch ewiglich verdammt und verlohren." His error consisted in teaching universal election instead of universal grace. Comp. Bescheidentliche Antwort auf das kurze-Bekenntniss Dr. Sam. Huber's-gestellet durch die theol. Facultat zu Wittenberg, Frankf. a. M., 1595. 4.; Actorum Huberianorum P. i. ii., published by the Würtemberg divines, Tübingen, 1597. 4. * Aeg. Hunnii Tract. de Providentia Dei et aeterna Praedestinatione, s. Electione fili The theologians of Giessens adopted the view that there was in Christ, in his state of humiliation, and as to his human nature, a Kévwois idiomatum divinorum (an emptying of, or parting with the divine properties-the advocates of this doctrine were called Kenotists). The divines of Tübingen maintained, in opposition, orum Dei ad salutem, Francof., 1597 (Opp., i. 653). See his Opp., i. 809: Duplex est auditus, alter externus, alter internus. Prior potest esse cum studio cognoscendi, discendi et aliquo modo meditandi. Internus autem auditus definitur assensu cordis et obsequio voluntatis, ut audire idem sit quod assentiri in doctrina, quod obedire in vita.— Hic auditus internus-nequaquam in nostra potestate situs est, sed a Deo per exteriorem illum auditum in nobis exsuscitatur. Externus autem ille est adhuc in nostrarum virium arbitrio. Potest enim homo non renatus illam paedagogicam disciplinam seu ministerii obedientiam externam adhuc servare, i. e. accedere concionem verbi vel non accedere, audire vel non audire. Potest etiam cum quodam studio audire, meditari aliquo modo, potest ut contemnere ita etiam non contemnere, si actualem contemtum respicias. P. 812: Quis autem est hujus quaestionis—usus? Ut appareat manifeste, etsi conversio, fides, agnitio veritatis, aeterna salus, etc., ne minima quidem ex parte in nostro sunt arbitrio posita,-esse tamen in aliquibus nondum conversis hominibus longe plura obstacula, quae fructificationem verbi validius impediant, quam in aliis: esse quosdam etiam ex non conversis regno Dei propinquiores, sicut de scriba seu legisperito Christum pronunciantem audivimus (Marc. xii. 34. Other instances before adduced: Matth. xxi. 31, xix. 23, xi. 23, etc.): Non quod his quicquam insit facultatum aut virium applicandi se ad gratiam, aut in spiritualibus cooperandi Deo (haec enim omnia soli Deo et operationi ejus in solidum sunt adscribenda: converte me Domine, et convertar); sed quod in caeteris plura sint et fortiora impedimenta, quae aditum Spiritui sancto praecludunt, quo minus in eis perinde velit esse per praedicatum verbum efficax.-Idcirco et Scriptura hortatur homines etiam non conversos, ut obstacula illa removeant, et viam complanent, h. e. peccata et studia perversa, quorum pleraque etiam a non renatis (ut saniorum Ethnicorum exempla testantur) caveri aut abjici possunt, deponant et abjiciant; quae alias non submota obstent, quo minus Dominus apud illos ingrediatur. That they had come back to the Melancthonian theory (see § 36, Note 12, § 37, Note 39), although they rejected the word synergism, is shown at length by Chytraeus in a letter of the Rostock to the Wittenberg divines, dd. 20. Maji, 1595 (Dav. Chytr. Epistolae, Hanov., 1614, p. 1271): Scitis initio emendationis doctrinae ecclesiasticae in vestra illa Ecclesiarum et scholarum metropoli per Lutherum ante 70 annos institutae, dum liberum hominis arbitrium fortiter oppugnabatur, multa de hoc ipso doctrinae praedestinationis capite horridius disputata et asserta fuisse, videlicet, praedestinationem divinam omni voluntati humanae, tum in externis operibus tum internis cogitationibus, libertatem adimere, omnia necessario et quidem absoluta necessitate evenire.-Haec, inquam, et multa his similia horridiora (quae tunc in vestra cathedra velut oracula docebantur, nunc nusquam nisi in Calvinianorum scholis retinentur) Philippus, communis praeceptor noster, postea paulatim leniit ac sustulit, dum in omnibus libellis-has de necessitate Stoica et Manichaea, ut vocat, opiniones absurdas refutat, et de liberi arbitrii viribus quid possint solae, quid non possint nisi a Spiritu sancto conversae et adjutae, distinctius explicat, et Scripturae testimonia, pro divina praedestinatione seu necessitate Manichaea et Stoica stabilienda initio causae Lutheri allegata, longe aliter explicat, et argumenta praecipua ubique refutat, idque vivo adhuc Luthero, etc. The Giessen theologians were Balth. Mentzer and Just. Feurborn; the Tubingen, Matthias Hafenreffer († 1619), Luc. Osiander, Melch. Nicolai, and Theod. Thummius. The history of the dispute is given by Mentzer in his Necessaria et justa Defensio contra injustas Criminationes Luc. Osiandri, etc., Giess., 1624. 4. (Opp., ii. 1233). In reply: Theod. Thummii Acta Mentzeriana, Tübing., 1625. 4. The controversial works are in Walchii Bibl. Theol., ii. 654. [Bodemeyer, Die Lehre d. Kenosis. Gotting., 1860.] a hiding (kpus) of the divine attributes, and were called Kryp The points in controversy are given by the Saxon theologians, as follows, in the Solida Decisio (see Note 7): 1. Cum in Scriptura sacra de rapovoia Dei apud creaturas modificata agitur, an-nuda Dei adessentia, an vero simul efficax operatio innuatur? Adeoque num ad accuratam definitionem praesentiae Dei apud creaturas semper etiam operatio efficax divina, ceu pars essentialis, necessario requiratur? Ubi pars una (Giessen) affirmativam, altera (Tübingen) negativam magna contentione tuetur. 2. An praesentia Dei modificata apud creaturas, prout in sacris Bibliis describitur, a sola immensitate et infinitate Dei (Tübingen), an vero etiam a liberrima ejus voluntate (Giessen) oriatur.-Postea de hoc etiam controvertitur, quod sit omnipraesentiae Christi Jesu juxta carnem fundamentum proprium et proximum? An voluntas et beneplacitum Dei (Giessen)? an personalis unio (Tübingen)? an ad dexteram Dei sessio? 3. An commode de Christo Jesu dici possit, quod secundum carnem, in ipso statu humiliationis, quin et in ipsa morte semper et incessanter coelum ac terram, ut Rex, gubernarit, et potenter quidem, occulte tamen, dominatus sit. Ubi quidam in affirmativam (Tüb.), quidam in negativam sententiam (Giess.) descenderunt. 4. An Christus Jesus secundum utramque naturam (Tüb.), an vero tantum secundum humanam (Giess.) se exinaniverit? Adeoque an omne illud quod in statu exinanitionis fecit et sustinuit, juxta utramque naturam ille fecerit, et perpessus fuerit? Ita quidem, ut et recte affirmari queat, divinitatem esse passam, et humanitatem coelum et terram gubernasse et conservasse (Tüb.)? Deinde acerrima quoque est disceptatio, quid sit proprie exinanitio? an per eam innuatur, quod Christus Jesus secundum assumtam carnem, quoad plenarium et incessantem usum divinae majestatis, realiter et àλŋows, voluntarie tamen et tantum usque ad statum exaltationis, se exinaniverit (Giess.)? vel an exinanitio illa hoc solum intendat, Christum in statu kɛvwσεws aeque ac jam ad dexteram Dei, qua homo fuit, inhabitantem suam plenitudinem totam Deitatis plenarie ac incessanter, sed tamen occulte et latenter in regimine totius universi usurpasse et exercuisse (Tüb.)? Mentzer, in his Necessaria et justa Defensio (Opp., ii. 1319), presents the question in controversy, thus: An J. Chr. OxávOpwmos in statu exinanitionis juxta humanitatem fuerit omnipraesens creaturis, et totum universum gubernarit? Affirmat D. Osiander cum suis, nos negamus. Affirmationis suae rationem petit Osiander ex unione hypostatica. Quae cum semper eodem modo se habeat, et mutationem nullam admittat, putat, Christum, ut hominem, aeque in statu exinanitionis fuisse omnipraesentem creaturis, et coelum et terram gubernasse, uti jam in statu gloriae ad dextram Dei sedens est omnibus rebus praesens, et coelum et terram gubernat: hoc duntaxat discrimine, quod in statu exinanitionis omnipraesentiam illam et universalem gubernationem humanitas texerit et occultarit sub forma servili; nunc autem deposita servili illa conditione eandem gloriose et majestatice declaret et manifestet. Negationis nostrae rationem nos petimus ex statu exinanitionis: in quo J. Chr. Oεávoρwños, juxta naturam humanam, divinam omniscientiae, et omnipotentiae, et omnipraesentiae majestatem, per unionem personalem vere et realiter sibi communicatam, semper habuit, verum, ut peccatum protoplastorum atque adeo omnia nostra peccata expiaret, et pro nobis pati et mori posset, eam non semper et ubique, sed libere, ubi et quando et quomodo voluit, pro officii sui ratione, salva semper permanente unione personali, usurpavit. The Giessen divines maintained the constant σis (possession), but denied the uninterrupted xoñois (use of the attributes). During this dispute a work was published (chiefly devoted to showing the uselessness and recklessness of the dispute) under the title Ruperti Meldenii (G. Calixti?) Paraenesis Votiva pro Pace Ecclesiae ad theologos Augustanae Confessionis (also by F. Lücke, as a comment on the peaceful maxim: In necessariis unitas, etc., Göttingen, 1850, s. 87). See in Lücke, s. 108: Vides multos disputare de praesentia carnis Christi in profundissimo humilitatis statu, quos tamen ipsos Christum habere praesentem in cordibus suis per fidem habitantem, ego adduci vix possum ut credam, quia video illos de humilitate Christi multa garrire sine humilitate, de praesentia ejus, qui est charitas ipsa, sine charitate, etc. That other divines, especially the Saxon, lamented this controversy, is shown in Tholuck's Geist d. Luth. Theologen Wittenbergs im 17ten Jahrh. (Hamburg u. Gotha, 1852), s. 64. tists. This controversy, carried on from 1619, led, according to the declaration of the Saxon theologians, 1624,7 to the general abandonment of the absolute communicatio idiomatum realis. § 43. CALVINISM IN THE NETHERLANDS. ARMINIAN CONTROVERSY. Jo. Uytenbogaert kerckelijcke Historie, vervatende verscheyden gedenckwaerdige Saeck- [Brandt's History of the Reformation in Holland, 4 fol. 1720-23 and 1770; abridged, 2 In the Reformed churches of the Netherlands different types of doctrine were developed, according to the chief sources from which the opinions were derived, whether from the writings of Erasmus, or those of the Saxon or of the Swiss Reformers; but as 7 The Elector John George, in 1623, convened the Leipsic and Wittenberg divines in Dresden, under the presidency of the upper court preacher, Hoe von Hoenegg; and the latter drew up, in accordance with the results of this assemblage, the Solida Decisio quatuor nuperrime controversorum capitum, which was published in Leipsic, 1624, 4to, preceded by the Electoral order that public teaching should accord with it. In all essential points this was a decision in favor of the Giessen divines; and it was declared by the Landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt, Louis V., to be a binding formula in his possessions (Rommel's neuere Gesch. v. Hessen, ii. 192). The Tübingen divines, in reply, drew up the Amica Admonitio super Decisione, etc. (written by Thummius), Tübing., 1624, which was followed by the Saxons with their Necessaria et inevitabilis Apologia, s. adsertio decisionis solidae (drawn up by Hoe v. Hoenegg), Lips., 1625. 4. After this the controversy died out, in the midst of the distractions of the Thirty Years' War. see |