Chapter IV: Theology and Its Battles (22)

§ 141.9. =The Lutheran Doctrine of the Lord’s Supper.=--The
union effected by the Wittenberg Concord of A.D. 1536 (§ 133, 8)
with the South German cities, which originally favoured Zwinglian
views, had been in many cases threatening to dissolve again,
and the attacks of the men of Zürich obliged Luther in A.D. 1544
to compose his last “Confession of the Holy Sacrament against
the Fanatics.” The breach with the Zwinglians was now seen
to be irreparable, but it appeared as if it were yet possible
to come to an understanding with the more profound theory
of the Lord’s Supper set forth by Calvin. To carry out this
union was a thought very dear to the heart of Melanchthon. He
had the conviction, not indeed that the Lutheran doctrine of
the real presence of the body and blood in the bread and wine
is erroneous, but rather that by the Calvinistic doctrine of
a spiritual enjoyment of the body and blood of Christ in the
supper by means of faith no essential element of religious truth
was lost, and so he sought thereby to get over the difference
in confession and doctrine. But with this explanation the
strict Lutherans were by no means satisfied, and long continued
and extremely passionate discussions were carried on in the
various Lutheran countries, especially in Lower Saxony, in
the Palatinate, and in the electorate. But the controversy
was not restricted to the question of the supper; it rather
went back upon a deeper foundation. Luther, carrying out the
principles of the third and fourth œcumenical councils, had
taught that the personal connection of the two natures in Christ
implies a communication of the attributes of the one to the
other, _communicatio idiomatum_, that therefore Christ, since
He has by His ascension entered again upon the full exercise
of His attributes, is, as God-Man, even in respect of His body,
omnipresent, _ubiquitas corporis Christi_, and refused to allow
himself to be perplexed by the incomprehensibility for the human
understanding of an omnipresent body. It is here that we come
upon the radical distinction between Luther’s view and that of
Zwingli and Calvin, according to which the body of Christ cannot
be at one and the same time in heaven at God’s right hand and
on the earth in bread and wine. But Calvin, as well as Zwingli,
from his very intellectual constitution, could only regard
the Lutheran doctrine of the ubiquity of the glorified body
of Christ as an utter absurdity, and so, repudiating the
_communicatio idiomatum_, he taught that the glorification
of Christ’s body is restricted to its transfiguration, and
that now in heaven, as before upon the earth, it can be present
only in one place. A necessary consequence of this view was the
rejection of His corporeal presence in the supper, and at the
very most the admission of a communication in the sacrament to
believers of a spiritual influence from the glorified body of
Christ.--The ablest vindicator of the Lutheran doctrine of the
supper in this aspect of its development was the Württemberg
reformer John Brenz (§ 133, 3). In the _Syngramma Suevicum_
of A.D. 1525 (§ 131, 1), he has taken his place most decidedly
on the side of Luther, and this he had also done again,
in A.D. 1529, at the Marburg Conference (§ 132, 4). Then
in A.D. 1559, as provost in Stuttgart, in consequence of the
doubtful attitude of a Swabian pastor on the question of the
supper, he summoned a synod at Stuttgart, before which he laid
a confession which expressed the doctrine of the supper and the
ubiquity in strict accordance with Lutheran views. In defence
of the idea of ubiquity he quoted Ephesians iv. 10, as affording
sufficient Scripture support. The synod unanimously adopted
it, and the duke gave approval to this _Confessio et doctr.
theologor. et ministror. Verbi Dei in Ducatu Wirtb. de vera
præsentia Corp. et sang, J. Chr. in Cœna Domini_, by ordering
that all preachers should adopt it, and that it should
have symbolic authority throughout the Württemberg church.
Melanchthon, who had hitherto been on particularly intimate
terms with Brenz, was very indignant at this “unseasonable”
creed-making in “barbarous Latin.” Brenz, however, would not
be deterred from giving more adequate expression and development
to the objectionable dogma, and for this purpose published,
in A.D. 1560, his book, _De personali unione duarum natur.
in Christo_.

§ 141.10. =Cryptocalvinism in its First Stage,
A.D. 1552-1574.=--The struggle of the Gnesio-Lutherans
against Calvin’s doctrine of the supper, and the secret favour
shown toward it by several Lutheran theologians, was begun in
A.D. 1552 by Joachim Westphal, pastor in Hamburg. Calvin and
Bullinger were not slow in giving him a sharp rejoinder. In
a yet more violent form the dispute broke out in Bremen, where
the cathedral preacher Hardenberg, and in Heidelberg, where the
deacon Klebitz, entered the lists against the Lutheran dogma.
In both cases the struggle ended in the defeat of Lutheranism
(§ 144, 1, 2). In Wittenberg, too, the Philippists George Major,
Paul Eber, Paul Crell, etc., supported by the very influential
court physician of the electoral court of Saxony, Caspar Peucer,
Melanchthon’s son-in-law, from A.D. 1559 successfully advanced
the interests of Cryptocalvinism. Melanchthon himself, however,
was not to live to see the troubles that arose over this,
a truly gracious dispensation of Providence on behalf of a
man already sorely borne down and trembling with hypochondriac
fears, to have him thus delivered _a rabie theologicorum_.
He died on 19th April, A.D. 1560. While the Elector Augustus,
A.D. 1553-1586, intended that his Wittenberg should always be
the main stronghold of strict Lutheranism, the Philippists were
always coming forward with more and more boldness, and sought
to prepare the way for themselves by getting all places filled
with members of their party. They persuaded the elector to give
a nominative authority throughout Saxony to a collection of
Melanchthonian doctrinal and confessional documents compiled
by them, _Corpus doctrinæ Philippicum s. Misnicum,_ 1560.
The Wittenberg Catechism, _Catechesis, etc., ad usum scholar.
puerilium_, 1571, set forth a doctrine of the sacraments
and the person of Christ so manifestly Calvinistic, that
even the elector was obliged to give way on account of the
strong objections brought against it. The Philippists, however,
succeeded in satisfying him by the _Consensus Dresdensis_,
of 10th Oct., A.D. 1571, to this extent, that after the death
of Duke John William, in the exercise of his authority as regent,
he was induced to expel the Lutheran zealots Wigand and Hesshus
from Jena, and in A.D. 1573 had more than a hundred clergymen
of the duchy of Saxony deposed. In Breslau their interests were
also zealously advanced by the influential imperial physician,
John Krafft, to whom the Emperor Maximilian II. had granted
a patent of nobility in A.D. 1568, with the new name of Crato
von Crafftheim. Another Silesian physician, Joachim Curæus,
also a scholar of Melanchthon, published in A.D. 1574, without
any indication of author’s name, place of publication, or date
of issue, his _Exegesis perspicua controversiæ de cœna_, which
represented Melanchthon’s doctrine of the Lord’s Supper as the
only tenable one, controverted that of the Lutherans as popish,
eulogized that of the Reformed church as one most honouring to
God, and urgently counselled union with the Calvinists. The warm
recommendation of this treatise on the part of the Wittenberg
Philippists, however, rather contributed to its failure. For
now, at last, even the elector had become convinced of the
danger that threatened Lutheranism through hints given him by
the princes, and information obtained from intercepted letters.
The Philippists were banished, their chiefs thrown into prison,
Peucer being confined for twelve years, A.D. 1574-1586. A
thanksgiving service in all the churches and memorial medal
celebrated the rooting out in A.D. 1574 of Calvinism, and the
final victory of restored Lutheranism.--In Denmark, Nicholas
Hemming, pastor and professor at Copenhagen, distinguished
alike by adequate scholarship and rich literary activity,
and by mildness and temperateness of character, and hence
designated the Preceptor of Denmark, was the recognised
head of the Melanchthonian school. As a decided opponent
of the doctrine of ubiquity, though otherwise on all points,
and especially in his doctrine of the Lord’s Supper, a
good Lutheran, he fell under the suspicion of the German
Gnesio-Lutherans as a Cryptocalvinist, and was accordingly
opposed by them. In A.D. 1579, by order of the Elector Augustus,
his brother-in-law, the King of Denmark removed him from his
offices in Copenhagen, appointing him to a canonry in the
cathedral at Roeskilde, where in A.D. 1600 he died.

§ 141.11. =The Frankfort Compact, A.D. 1558, and the Naumburg
Assembly of Princes, A.D. 1561.=--After the disgraceful issue
of the Worms Conference of A.D. 1557 (§ 137, 6), the Protestant
princes, the electors Augustus of Saxony, Joachim of Brandenburg,
and Ottheinrich of the Palatinate, with Philip of Hesse,
Christopher of Württemberg, and the Count-palatine Wolfgang,
who were gathered together about the Emperor Ferdinand,
consulted as to the means which they should employ to insure
and confirm the threatened unity of the evangelical church
of Germany. The result of their deliberations was, that they
agreed to sign a statement drawn up by Melanchthon and known
by the name of the =Frankfort Compact=, in which they declared
anew their unanimous attachment to the doctrine set forth in
the _Augustana_, the _Variata_, and the _Saxonica_ (§ 136, 8),
and in regard to controversial questions that had been discussed
within the church expressed themselves in moderate terms as
inclined to the views of Melanchthon. The Flacian party in
Jena hastened to set forth their opposing sentiments in the
manifesto of A.D. 1559, already referred to, in which the strict
Gnesio-Lutheranism was laid down in the hardest and boldest
manner possible.--The divisions that arose within the Lutheran
church after Melanchthon’s death and the imminent reassembling
of the Tridentine Council led the evangelical princes of Germany,
who, with the exception of Philip of Hesse, all belonged to a
new generation, once more to put forth every effort to restore
unity by adoption of a common evangelical confession. At the
=Assembly of Princes= appointed to meet for this purpose at
=Naumburg= in A.D. 1561, most of them appeared personally.
There was no thought of preparing a new confession, because
it was feared that in those times of agitation it might be
impossible to draw up such a document, or that, even if they
succeeded in doing so, it might not close the breach, but
rather widen it. Thus the only alternative remaining was
to attempt the healing of the schism by reverting to the
standpoint of the Augsburg Confession. But then the question
arose whether the original form of statement of A.D. 1530,
or its later elaboration of A.D. 1540, should be taken as the
basis of union negotiations.--This at least was to be said in
favour of the latter, that it had been unanimously adopted as
the common confession of all the evangelicals of Germany at the
peace Conference of Worms in A.D. 1540, where even Calvin had
signed it, and at Regensburg in A.D. 1541 (§ 135, 2, 3); and
now Philip of Hesse and Frederick III. of the Palatinate came
forward decidedly in its favour. But all the more persistently
did the Duke John Frederick of Saxony oppose it, and make every
endeavour to get the rest of the princes to give their votes
in favour of the Augsburg Confession of A.D. 1530. But the
duke’s further wish to have added to it the Schmalcald Articles
found very little favour. Finally a compromise was effected, in
accordance with which, in a newly drawn up preface, the Apology
of the _Augustana_, as well as the edition of A.D. 1540, was
acknowledged, while the Schmalcald Articles, as well as the
_Confessio Saxonica_ (§ 136, 8) and the Frankfort Compact, were
passed over in silence. John Frederick now demanded the adoption
of an express condemnation of the Calvinising Sacramentarians.
This led to a hot discussion between him and his father-in-law,
the elector-palatine. He took his departure on the following
day without having received his dismissal, leaving behind him
a sharply worded protest. Ulrich of Mecklenburg also refused
to subscribe, but allowed himself at last to be persuaded into
doing so. At the sixteenth session two papal legates personally
delivered to the princes a brief inviting them to attend the
council. This latter, however, was returned unopened when they
discovered in the address the usual but artfully concealed
formula “_dilecto filio_.” Also the demand of the imperial
embassy accompanying the legates to take part in the council
was determinedly rejected, because that would mean not revision
but simply a continuation of the previous sessions of the
council, at which the evangelical doctrine had already been
definitely condemned.

§ 141.12. =The Formula of Concord, A.D. 1577.=--Already for
a long time had the learned chancellor Jac. Andreä of Tübingen
wrought unweariedly for the restoration of peace among the
theologians of the Lutheran church. In order also to win over
the general membership in favour of peace, he attempted in
six popular discourses, delivered in A.D. 1573, to instruct
them in reference to the points in dispute and proper means
for overcoming these differences. He was so successful in his
efforts, that he soon ventured to propose that these lectures
should be made the basis of further negotiations. But when
Martin Chemnitz, the most distinguished theologian of his
age, pronounced them unsuitable for that purpose, Andreä
wrought them up anew in accordance with Chemnitz’s critical
suggestions into the so called “Swabian Concord.” But even
in this form they did not satisfy the theologians of Lower
Saxony. The Swabian theologians, however, in their criticisms
and emendations, had answered various statements in it, and
in A.D. 1576 they produced a new union scheme, drafted by
Luc. Osiander, called the “_Maulbronn Formula_.” The Elector
Augustus of Saxony then summoned a theological convention
at Torgau, at which, besides Andreä and Chemnitz, there were
also present Chytræus from Rostock, as well as Körner and
Andr. Musculus from Frankfort-on-the-Oder. They wrought up
the material thus accumulated before them into the “Book
of Torgau,” of A.D. 1576. In regard to this book also the
evangelical princes delivered numerous opinions, and now
at last, in obedience to the order of the princes, Andreä,
Chemnitz, Selnecker (§ 142, 4), Chytræus, Musculus, and Körner
retired into the cloister of Berg at Magdeburg in order to make
a final revision of all that was before them. Thus originated,
in A.D. 1577, the Book of Berg or the =Formula of Concord=, in
two different forms, first in the most compressed style possible
in what is known as the _Epitome_, and then more completely
in the document known as the _Solida declaratio_. This document
dealt with all the controverted questions that had been agitated
since A.D. 1530 in twelve articles. It set forth the doctrine
of the Person of Christ, giving prominence to the theory of
ubiquity, as the basis of the doctrine of the supper, leaving
it, however, undetermined in accordance with the teaching of
Brenz, whether the ubiquity is to be regarded as an absolute
or as a relative one, if only it be maintained that Christ
in respect of His human nature, therefore in respect of His
body, is present “_ubicunque velit_,” more particularly in
the holy supper. An opportunity was also found in treating
of the synergistic questions to set forth the doctrine of
predestination, although within the Lutheran church no real
controversy on this subject had ever arisen. Luther, who at
first (§ 125, 3) had himself given expression to a particularist
doctrine of election, had gradually receded from that position.
It was so too with Melanchthon, only with this important
difference, that whereas Luther, afterwards as well as before,
excluded every sort of co-operation of man in conversion,
Melanchthon felt himself obliged to admit a certain degree
of co-operation, which even the censure of Calvin himself could
not lead him to repudiate. When now the Formula of Concord,
rejecting synergism in the most decided manner, affirmed that
since the fall there was in men not even a spark remaining,
_ne scintillula quidem_, of spiritual power for the independent
free appropriation of offered grace, it had gone over from the
platform of Melanchthon to that which Calvin, following the
course of hard, logical consistency, had been driven to adopt,
in the assertion of a doctrine of absolute predestination. The
formula was thus in the main in agreement with the speculation
of Calvin. But it declined to accept the conclusions arrived
at in Calvinism by declaring that while man indeed of himself
wanted the power to lay hold upon Divine grace and co-operate
with it in any way, he was yet able to withstand it and refuse
to accept it. In this way it was able to hold by the express
statements of Scripture which represent God as willing that
all men should be saved, and salvation as an absolute work of
grace, but condemnation as the consequence of man’s own guilt.
It regards the salvation of men as the only object of Divine
predestination, condemnation as merely an object of the Divine
foreknowledge.--At a later period an attempt was made to set
at rest the scruples that prevailed here and there by securing
at Berg, in February, A.D. 1580, the adoption of an addition
to it in the form of a _Præfatio_ drawn up by Andreä as a final
determination of the controversy. The character of this new
symbolical document, in accordance with its occasion and its
aim, was not so much that of a popular exposition for the church,
but rather that of a scientific theological treatise. For that
period of excitement and controversy it is quite remarkable
and worthy of high praise for its good sense, moderation, and
circumspection, as well as for the accuracy and clearness with
which it performed its task. The fact that nine thousand of the
teachers of the church subscribed it affords sufficient proof
of it having fulfilled the end contemplated. Denmark and Sweden,
Holstein, Pomerania, Hesse, and Anhalt, besides eight cities,
Magdeburg, Dantzig, Nuremberg, Strassburg, etc., refused to
sign from various and often conflicting motives. In A.D. 1581
Frederick II. of Denmark is said indeed to have thrown it
into the fire. Yet in later years it was adopted in not a
few of these regions, _e.g._ in Sweden, Holstein, Pommerania
[Pomerania], etc. The Elector Augustus of Saxony, in the Book
of Concord, brought out a collection of all general Lutheran
confessional writings which, signed by fifty-one princes and
thirty-five cities, was solemnly promulgated on the anniversary
of the Augsburg Confession, 25th June, A.D. 1580. By this means
the whole Lutheran church of Germany obtained a common _corpus
doctrinæ_, and the numerous collections of confessional and
doctrinal documents acknowledged by the church, which hitherto
separate national churches had drawn up for this purpose,
henceforth lost their authority.

§ 141.13. =Second Stage of Cryptocalvinism, A.D. 1586-1592.=--Yet
once more the Calvinising endeavours of the Philippists were
renewed in the electorate of Saxony under Augustus’ successor
Christian I., who had obtained this position in A.D. 1586,
through his relationship with the family of the count-palatine.
His chancellor Nicholas Crell filled the offices of pastors
and teachers with men of his own views, abolished exorcism at
baptism, and had even begun the publication of a Bible with
a Calvinising commentary when Christian died, in A.D. 1591.
The Duke Frederick William of Altenburg, as regent during the
minority, immediately re-introduced strict Lutheranism, and,
preparatory to a church visitation, had a new anti-Calvinistic
standard of doctrine compiled in the so called =Articles of
Visitation= of A.D. 1592, which all civil and ecclesiastical
officers in Saxony were required to accept. In short, clear,
and well defined theses and antitheses the doctrinal differences
on the supper, the Person of Christ, baptism, and election were
there set forth. In reference to baptism, the anti-Calvinistic
doctrine was promulgated, that regeneration takes place through
baptism, and that therefore every baptized person is regenerate.
The most important among the compilers of these Articles
of Visitation was Ægidius Hunnius, shortly before called to
Wittenberg, after having, from A.D. 1576 to 1592, as professor
at Marburg, laboured with all his might in opposition to
the Calvinising of Hesse. He had also, by his defence of the
doctrine of ubiquity, in his “Confession of the Doctrine of
the Person of Christ” in German, in A.D. 1577, and his Latin
treatise, “_Libelli IV. de pers. Chr. ejusque ad dexteram
sedentes divina majestate_,” in A.D. 1585, shown himself
an energetic champion of strict Lutheranism. He died in
A.D. 1603.--The unfortunate chancellor Crell, however, who
had made himself hateful to the Lutherans as the promoter and
chief instigator of all the Calvinising measures of the deceased
elector, and yet more so by his energetic interference with
the usurpations of the nobles, suffered an imprisonment of ten
years in the fortress of Königstein, and was then, after a trial
conducted in the most arbitrary manner, declared to be a traitor
and an enemy of the public peace, and executed in A.D. 1601.

§ 141.14. =The Huber Controversy, A.D. 1588-1595.=--Samuel
Huber, reformed pastor in the Canton Bern, became involved
in a controversy with Wolfgang Musculus over the doctrine of
election. Going even beyond the Lutheran doctrine, he affirmed
that all men are predestinated to salvation, although through
their own fault not all are saved. Banished from Bern in
A.D. 1588, after a disputation with Beza, he entered the
Lutheran church and became pastor at Württemberg. Here he
charged the Professor Gerlach with Cryptocalvinism, because
he taught that only believers are predestinated to salvation.
The controversy was broken off by his call to Wittenberg.
But even his Wittenberg colleagues, Polic. Leyser and Ægidius
Hunnius, fell under the suspicion of Cryptocalvinism, and were
accordingly opposed by him. When all disputation and conferences
had failed to get him to abandon his doctrine, and parties
began to be formed among the students, he was, in A.D. 1594,
removed from Wittenberg. With increasing rancour he continued
the controversy, and wandered about Germany for many years in
order to secure a following for his theory, but without success.
He died in A.D. 1624.

§ 141.15. =The Hofmann Controversy in Helmstadt,
A.D. 1598.=--The great influence which the study of the
Aristotelian philosophy in connection with that of humanism
obtained in the Julius University founded at Helmstadt in
A.D. 1576, seemed to its theological professor, Daniel Hofmann,
to threaten injury to theological study, and to be prejudicial
to pure Lutheran doctrine. He therefore attached himself to
the Romists (§ 143, 6), and took advantage of the occasion
of the conferring of doctor’s degrees to deliver a violent
invective against the incursions of reason and philosophy into
the region of religion and revelation. In consequence of this
his philosophical colleagues complained of him to the senate as
a reproacher of reason, and as one injurious to their faculty.
That court obliged him to retract and apologise, and then
deprived him of his office as professor of theology.

§ 142. CONSTITUTION, WORSHIP, LIFE, AND SCIENCE IN THE
LUTHERAN CHURCH.

In reference also to the ecclesiastical constitution, by holding firmly to the standpoint and to the working out of the system which it had sketched out in its confession and doctrinal teaching, the Lutheran church sought to mediate between extremes, although, amid the storms from without and from within by which it was threatened, it was just at this point that it was least successful. It reflected its character more clearly and decidedly in its order of worship than in its constitution.--The Reformation at last relaxed that hierarchical ban which for centuries had put an absolute restraint upon congregational singing, and had excluded the use of the vernacular in the services of the church. Even within the limits of the Reformation era, the German church song attained unto such a wonderful degree of excellence, as affords the most convincing evidence of the fulness, power, and spirituality, the genuine elevation and fresh enthusiasm, of the spiritual life of that age. The sacred poetry of the church is the confession of the Lutheran people, and has accomplished even more than preaching for extending and deepening the Christian life of the evangelical church. No sooner had a sacred song of this sort burst forth from the poet’s heart, than it was everywhere taken up by the Christian people of the land, and became familiar to every lip. It found entrance into all houses and churches, was sung before the doors, in the workshops, in the market-places, streets, and fields, and won at a single blow whole cities to the evangelical faith.--The Christian life of the people in the Lutheran church combined deep, penitential earnestness and a joyfully confident consciousness of justification by faith with the most nobly steadfast cheerfulness and heartiness natural to the German citizen. Faithful attention to the spiritual interests of their people, vigorous ethical preaching, and zealous efforts to promote the instruction of the young on the part of their pastors, created among them a healthy and hearty fear of God, without the application of any very severe system of church discipline, a thorough and genuine attachment to the church, strict morality in domestic life, and loyal submission to civil authority.--Theological science flourished especially at the universities of Wittenberg, Tübingen, Strassburg, Marburg, and Jena.

§ 142.1. =The Ecclesiastical Constitution.=--As a mean between
hierarchism and Cæsaro-papism, between the intrusion of the
State into the province of the church, and the intrusion of
the church into the province of the State, the ecclesiastical
constitution of the Lutheran church was theoretically right
in the main, though in practice and even in theory many defects
might be pointed out. It presented at least a protest against
all commingling or subordinating of one or the other in these
two spheres. Owing to the urgent needs of the church, the
princes and magistrates, in the character of emergency-bishops,
undertook the supreme administration and management of
ecclesiastical affairs, and transferred the exercise of these
rights and duties to special boards called consistories, made
up of lay and clerical members, which were to have jurisdiction
over the clergy, the administration of discipline, and the
arranging and enforcing of the marriage laws. What had been
introduced simply as a necessity in the troubled condition of
the church in those times came gradually to be claimed as a
prescriptive right. According to the _Episcopal System_, the
territorial lord as such claimed to rank and act as _summus
episcopus_. After introducing some cautious modifications that
were absolutely indispensable, the canon law actually left
the foundation of jurisprudence untouched. The restoration of
the biblical idea of a universal priesthood of all believers
would not tolerate the retaining of the theory of an essential
distinction between the clergy and the laity. The clergy were
properly designated the servants, _ministri_, of the church,
of the word, of the altar, and all restrictions that had been
imposed upon the clergy, and distinguished them as an order,
were removed. Hierarchical distinctions among the clergy
were renounced, as opposed to the spirit of Christianity;
but the advantage of a superordination and subordination
in respect of merely human rights, in the institution of
such offices as those of superintendents, provosts, etc.,
was recognised.--Ecclesiastical property was in many cases
diverted from the church and arbitrarily appropriated by the
greed and rapacity of princes and nobles, but still in great
part, especially in Germany, it continued in the possession
of the church, except in so far as it was applied to the
endowment of schools, universities, and charitable institutions.
The monasteries fell under a doom which by reason of their
corruptions they had richly deserved. A restoration of such
establishments in an evangelical spirit was not to be thought
of during a period of convulsion and revolution.--Continuation,
§ 165, 5.

§ 142.2. =Public Worship and Art.=--While the Roman Catholic
order of worship was dominated almost wholly by fancy and
feeling, and that of the reformed church chiefly by the reason,
the Lutheran church sought to combine these two features in
her services. In Romish worship all appealed to the senses,
and in that of the Calvinistic churches all appealed to the
understanding; but in the Lutheran worship both sides of human
nature were fully recognised, and a proportionate place assigned
to each. The unity of the church was not regarded as lying in
the rigid uniformity of forms of worship, but in the unity of
the confession. Altars ornamented with candles and crucifixes,
as well as all the images that might be in churches, were
allowed to remain, not as objects of worship, but rather to
aid in exciting and deepening devotion. The liturgy was closely
modelled upon the Romish ritual of the mass, with the exclusion
of all unevangelical elements. The preaching of the word was
made the central point of the whole public service. Luther’s
style of preaching, the noble and powerful popularity of
which has probably never since been equalled, certainly
never surpassed, was the model and pattern which the other
Lutheran preachers set before themselves. Among these,
the most celebrated were Ant. Corvin, Justus Jonas, George
Spalatin, Bugenhagen, Jerome Weller, John Brenz, Veit Dietrich,
J. Mathesius, Martin Chemnitz. It was laid down as absolutely
essential to the idea of public worship, that the congregation
should take part in it, and that the common language of the
people should be exclusively employed. The adoration of the
sacrament on the altar, as well as the Romish service of the
mass, were set aside as unevangelical, and the sacrament of
the supper was to be administered to the whole congregation in
both kinds. On the other hand, it was admitted that baptism was
necessary, and might and should be administered in case of need
by laymen. The customary formulary of exorcism in baptism was
at first continued without dispute, and though Luther himself
attached no great importance to it, yet every attempt to secure
its discontinuance was resisted by the later Gnesio-Lutherans as
savouring of Cryptocalvinism. Yet it should be remembered that
such orthodox representatives of Lutheranism as Hesshus, Ægidius
Hunnius, and Martin Chemnitz, as well as afterwards John Gerhard,
Quenstedt, and Hollaz, were only in favour of its being allowed,
but not of its being regarded as necessary. Spener again
declared himself decidedly in favour of its being removed,
and in the eighteenth century it passed without any serious
opposition into disuse throughout almost the whole of the
Lutheran church, until re-introduced in the nineteenth century
by the Old Lutherans (§ 176, 2).--The church festivals were
restricted to celebrations of the facts of redemption; only
such of the feasts of Mary and the saints were retained as had
legitimate ground in the Bible history; _e.g._ the days of the
apostles, the annunciation of Mary, Michael’s Day, St. John’s
Day, etc. Art was held by Luther in high esteem, especially
music. Lucas Cranach, who died in A.D. 1553, Hans Holbein,
father and son, and Albert Dürer, who died in A.D. 1528, placed
their art as painters at the service of the gospel, and adorned
the churches with beautiful and thoughtful pictures.

§ 142.3. =Church Song.=--The character common to the sacred
songs of the Lutheran church of the sixteenth century is
that they are thoroughly suited for congregational purposes,
and are truly popular. They are songs of faith and the creed,
with a clear impress of objectivity. The writers of them do
not describe their subjective feelings, nor their individual
experiences, but they let the church herself by their mouths
express her faith, her comfort, her thanksgiving, and adoration.
But they are also genuinely songs of the people; true, simple,
hearty, bright, and bold in expression, rapid in movement,
no standing still and looking back, no elaborate painting
and describing, no subtle demonstrating and teaching. Even in
outward form they closely resemble the old German epics and
the popular historical ballad, and were intended above all
not merely to be read, but to be sung, and that by the whole
congregation. The ecclesiastical authorities began to introduce
hymn-books into the several provinces toward the end of the
seventeenth century. Previously there had only been private
collections of sacred songs, and the hymns were distinguished
only by the words of the opening line; and so widely known were
they, that the mentioning of them was sufficient to secure the
hymn so designated being sung by the congregation present at the
public service.--The sacred songs of the Reformation age possess
all these characteristics in remarkable degree. Among all the
sacred poets of that time =Luther= stands forth pre-eminent.
His thirty-six hymns or sacred poems belong to five different
classes.

1. There are free translations of Latin hymns: “Praised be
Thou, O Jesus Christ;” “Thou who art Three in unity;”
“In our true God we all believe;” “Lord God, we praise
do Thee;” “In the midst of life we are aye in death’s
embraces;” “Come God, Creator, Holy Ghost,” etc.

2. There are reproductions of original German songs: “Death
held our Lord in prison;” “Now pray we to the Holy Ghost;”
“God the Father with us be;” “Let God be praised, blessed,
and uplifted.”

3. We have also paraphrastic renderings of certain psalms:
“Ah, God in heaven, look down anew” (Ps. xii.); “Although
the mouth say of the unwise” (Ps. xiv.); “Our God, He
is a castle strong” (Ps. xlvi.); “God, unto us right
gracious be” (Ps. lxvii.); “Had God not been with us
this time” (Ps. cxxiv.); “From trouble deep I cry to
Thee” (Ps. cxxx.), etc.

4. We have also songs composed on particular Scripture themes:
“There are the holy ten commands;” “To Isaiah the prophet
this was given” (Isa. vi.); “From heaven on high I come to
you” (Luke ii.); “To Jordan, where our Lord has gone,” etc.

5. There are, finally, poems original in form and contents:
“Dear Christians, let us now rejoice;” “Jesus Christ, our
Saviour true;” “Lord, keep us by Thy word in hope.”[405]

After Luther, the most celebrated hymn-writers in the Lutheran
church of the sixteenth century are =Paul Speratus=, reformer
in Prussia, who died in A.D. 1554; =Nicholas Decius=, first
a monk, then evangelical pastor at Stettin about A.D. 1524.
=Paul Eber=, professor and superintendent in Wittenberg, who
died in A.D. 1569, author of the hymns, “When in the hour of
utmost need;” “Lord Jesus Christ, true Man and God;” and one of
which our well-known “Jesus, Thy blood and righteousness,” is a
paraphrase.[406] Hans Sachs, shoemaker in Nuremberg, who died in
A.D. 1567, wrote during the famine in that city in A.D. 1552 the
hymn, “Why art thou thus cast down, my heart?” =John Schneesing=,
pastor in Gothaschen, who died in A.D. 1567, wrote “Lord Jesus
Christ, in Thee alone.” =John Mathesius=, rector and deacon
in Joachimsthal, who also delivered sermons on Luther’s life,
died in A.D. 1565, wrote a beautiful morning hymn, and other
sweet sacred pieces. =Nicholas Hermann=, who died in A.D. 1561,
precentor at Joachimsthal, wrote out Mathesius’ sermons in hymns,
“The happy sunshine all is gone,” the burial hymn, “Now hush
your cries, and shed no tear,” etc. =Michael Weisse= closes the
series of hymn-writers of the Reformation age. He was a German
pastor in Bohemia, translator and editor of the sacred songs of
the Bohemian Hussites, and died in A.D. 1540. He wrote “Christ
the Lord is risen again,” and the burial hymn to which Luther
added a verse, “Now lay we calmly in the grave.”[407]

§ 142.4. In the period immediately following, from A.D. 1560
to A.D. 1618, we meet with many poetasters who write on sacred
themes in doggerel rhymes. Even those who are poets by natural
endowment, and inspired with Divine grace, are much too prolific;
but they have bequeathed to us a genuine wealth of beautiful
church songs, characterized by healthful objectivity, childlike
simplicity, and a singular power of appealing to the hearts of
the great masses of the people. But a tendency already begins to
manifest itself in the direction of that excessive subjectivity
which was the vice of hymn-writers in the succeeding period;
the doctrinal element too becomes more and more prominent,
as well as application to particular circumstances and occasions
in life; but the objective confession of faith is always still
predominant. Among the sacred poets of this period the most
important are =Bartholmaus Ringwaldt=, pastor in Brandenburg,
who died in A.D. 1597, author of “’Tis sure that awful time will
come;” =Nicholas Selnecker=, at last superintendent in Leipzig,
who died in A.D. 1592, as Melanchthon’s scholar suspected at
one time of Cryptocalvinism, but, after he had taken part in
the composition of the Formula of Concord, the object of the
most bitter hatred and constant persecution on the part of the
Cryptocalvinists of Saxony: he wrote, “O Lord my God, I cry to
Thee;” =Martin Schalling=, pastor at Regensburg and Nuremberg,
who died in A.D. 1608, wrote, “Lord, all my heart is fixed on
Thee;” =Martin Böhme= or Behemb, pastor in Lusatia, who died in
A.D. 1621, author of “Lord Jesus Christ, my Life, my Light.” The
series closes with =Philip Nicolai=, a violent and determined
opponent of Calvinism, who was latterly pastor in Hamburg, and
died in A.D. 1608. His vigorous and rhythmical poetry, with its
deep undertone of sweetness, is to some extent modelled on the
Song of Songs. He wrote “Awake, awake, for night is flying;” the
chorale in Mendelssohn’s “St. Paul,” “Sleepers, wake, a voice is
calling,” is a rendering of the same piece.--Continuation,
§ 159, 3.

§ 142.5. =Chorale Singing.=--The congregational singing, which
the Reformation made an integral part of evangelical worship,
was essentially a reproduction of the Ambrosian mode (§ 59, 5)
in a purer form and with richer fulness. It was distinguished
from the Gregorian style preeminently by this, that it
was not the singing of a choir of priests, but the popular
singing of the whole congregation. The name chorale singing,
however, was still continued, and has come to be the
technical and appropriate designation of the new mode. It is
further distinguished from the Gregorian mode by this other
characteristic, that instead of singing in a uniform monotone
of simple notes of equal length, it introduces a richer rhythm
with more lively modulation. And, finally, it is characterized
by the introduction of harmony in place of the customary unison.
But, on the other hand, the chorale singing may be regarded as
a renewal of the old _cantus firmus_, while at the same time
it sets aside the secular music style and the artificialities
of counterpoint and the elaborate ornamentation with which the
false taste of the Middle Ages had overlaid it. The congregation
sang the _cantus firmus_ or melody in unison, the singers in the
choir gave it the accompaniment of a harmony. The organ during
the Reformation age was used for support, and accompanied only
in elaborate, high-class music. But the melody was pitched in
a medium key, which as the leading voice was called _Tenor_.
The melodies for the new church hymns were obtained, partly by
adaptation of the old tunes for the Latin hymns and sequences,
partly by appropriation of popular mediæval airs, especially
among the Bohemian Brethren, partly also and mainly by the
free use of the popular song tunes of the day, to which no one
made any objection, since indeed the spiritual songs were often
parodies of the popular songs whose airs were laid hold upon
for church use. The few original melodies of this age were for
the most part composed by the authors of the hymns themselves
or by the singers, and were the outflow of the same inspiration
as had called forth the poems. They have therefore been rarely
equalled in impressiveness, spiritual glow, and power by any
of the more artistic productions of later times. Acquaintance
with the new melodies was spread among the people by itinerant
singers, chorister boys in the streets, and the city cornet
players. From the singers or those who adapted the melodies are
to be distinguished the composers, who as technical musicians
arranged the harmony and set it in a form suitable for church
use. =George Rhaw=, precentor in Leipzig, afterwards printer in
Wittenberg, and =Hans Walter=, choirmaster to the elector, both
intimate friends of Luther, were amongst the most celebrated
composers of their day. The evangelical church music reaches
its highest point of excellence toward the end of the sixteenth
century. The great musical composer, =John Eccart=, who was
latterly choirmaster in Berlin, and died in A.D. 1611, was
the most active agent in securing this perfection of his art.
In order to make the melody clearer and more distinctly heard,
it was transferred from the middle voice, the tenor, to the
higher voice or treble. The other voices now came in as simple
concords alongside of the melody, and the organ, which had now
been almost perfected by the introduction of many important
improvements, now came into general use with its pure, rich,
and accurate full harmony, as a support and accompaniment of
the congregational singing. The distinction too between singers
and composers passed more and more out of view. The skilled
artistic singing was thus brought into closer relations with
the congregational singing, and the creative power, out of which
an abundant supply of original melodies was produced, grew and
developed from year to year.

§ 142.6. =Theological Science.=--Inasmuch as the Reformation had
its origin in the word of God, and supported itself upon that
foundation alone the theologians of the Reformation were obliged
to give special attention to biblical studies. John Förster, who
died in A.D. 1556, and John Avenarius, who died in A.D. 1576,
both of Wittenberg, compiled Hebrew lexicons, which embodied
the results of independent investigations. =Matthias Flacius=,
in his _Clavis Scr. s._, provided what for that time was a
very serviceable aid to the study of Scripture. The first part
gives in alphabetical order an explanation of Scripture words
and forms of speech, the second forms a system of biblical
hermeneutics. Exegesis proper found numerous representatives.
Luther himself beyond dispute holds the front rank in this
department. After him the most important Lutheran exegetes
of that age are for the New Testament, Melanchthon; Victorin
Strigel, who wrote _Hyponm. in Novum Testamentum_; Flacius,
with his _Glossa compendiaria in Novum Testamentum_; Joachim
Camerarius, with his _Notationes in Nov. Testamentum_; =Martin
Chemnitz=, with his _Harmonia IV. Evangeliorum_, continued by
Polic. Leyser, and completed at last by John Gerhard: for the
Old Testament, especially =John Brenz=, whose commentaries are
still worthy of being consulted. Of less consequence are the
numerous commentaries of the comprehensive order, compiled by
the once scarcely less influential David Chytræus of Rostock,
who died in A.D. 1600. The series of Lutheran dogmatists
opens with =Melanchthon=, who published his _Loci communes_
in A.D. 1521. =Martin Chemnitz=, in his _Loci theologici_,
contributed an admirable commentary to Melanchthon’s work,
and it soon became the recognised standard dogmatic treatise
in the Lutheran church. In A.D. 1562 he published his _Examen
Conc. Trident._, in which he combated the Romish doctrine
with as much learning and thoroughness as good sense, mildness,
and moderation. Polemical theology was engaged upon with
great vigour amid the many internal and external controversies,
conducted often with intense passion and bitterness. In the
department of church history we have the gigantic work of
the Magdeburg centuriators, the result of the bold scheme of
=Matthias Flacius=. By his _Catalogus testium veritatis_ he
had previously advanced evidence to show that at no point in
her history had the church been without enlightened and pious
heroes of faith, who had carried on the uninterrupted historical
continuity of evangelical truth, and so secured an unbroken
succession from the early apostolic church till that of the
sixteenth century.--Continuation, § 159, 4.

§ 142.7. =German National Literature.=--The Reformation occurred
at a time when the poetry and national literature of Germany was
in a condition of profound prostration, if not utter collapse.
But it brought with it a reawakening of creative powers in
the national and intellectual life of the people. Under the
influence and stimulus of Luther’s own example there arose
a new prose literature, inspired by a broad, liberal spirit,
as the expression of a new view of the world, which led the
Germans both to think and teach in German. It was mainly the
intellectual friction from the contact of one fresh mind with
another in regard to questions agitated in the Reformation
movement that gave to the satirical writings of the age that
brilliancy, point, and popularity which in the history of German
literature was not attained before and never has been reached
since. In innumerable fugitive sheets, in the most diverse forms
of style and language, in poetry and prose, in Latin and German,
these satires poured forth contempt and scorn against and in
favour of the Reformation. As we have on the Catholic side
Thomas Murner (§ 125, 4), and on the Reformed side Nicholas
Manuel (§ 130, 4), so we have on the Lutheran side =John
Fischart=, far excelling the former two, and indeed the greatest
satirist that Germany has yet produced. To him we are mainly
indebted for the almost incessant stream of anonymous satires
of the sixteenth century. He belonged, like Sebastian Brandt and
Thomas Murner, to Strassburg, was for a long time advocate at
the royal court of justice at Spires, and died in A.D. 1589. His
satirical vein was exercised first of all upon ecclesiastical
matters: “The Night Raven (_Rabe_) and the Hooded Crow,” against
a certain J. Rabe, who had become a Roman Catholic. “On the
Pretty Life of St. Dominic and St. Francis,” an abusive effusion
against the Dominicans and Francisans [Franciscan]. “The Beehive
of the Romish Swarm,” the best known of all his satires, an
independent and original working up of the theme of the book
bearing the same name by Philip von Marnix (§ 139, 12). “The
Four-horned Bat of the Jesuits,” in rhyme, the most stinging,
witty, and scathing satire which has ever been written against
the Jesuits. Then he turned his attention to secular subjects.
His “Beehive” may be regarded as a companion piece to Murner’s
“Lutheran Buffoon;” but excelling this passionately severe
production in spirit, wit, and bright, laughing sarcasm, it is
as certain to win the pre-eminence and be awarded the victory.
Among the secular poets of that century the shoemaker of
Nuremberg, =Hans Sachs=, who died in A.D. 1576, an admirable
specimen of the Lutheran burgher, holds the first rank.
As a minstrel he is almost as unimportant as any of his
contemporaries, but conspicuously excelling in the poetic
rendering of many tales, legends, and traditions by his naïve
drollery, honest good-heartedness, and fresh, lively vigour
and style. He left behind him 208 comedies and tragedies,
1,700 humorous tales, 4,200 lays and ballads. He gave a bright
and cheery greeting to the Reformation in A.D. 1523 in his poem,
“The Wittenberg Nightingale,” and by this he also contributed
very much to further and recommend the introduction of the
teachings of the Reformation among his fellow citizens.

§ 142.8. For =Missions to the Heathen= very little was done
during this period. The reason of this indeed is not far to
seek. The Lutheran church felt that home affairs had the first
and in the meantime an all-engrossing claim upon her attention
and energies. She had not the call which the Roman Catholic
church had, in consequence of political and mercantile relations
with distant countries, to prosecute missions in heathen
lands, nor had she the means for conducting such enterprises
as those on which the monkish orders were engaged. Yet we
find the beginnings of a Lutheran mission even in this early
period, for Gustavus Vasa of Sweden founded, in A.D. 1559,
an association for carrying the gospel to the neglected and
benighted Lapps.[408]

§ 143. THE INNER DEVELOPMENT OF THE REFORMED CHURCH.

The close connection which all Lutheran national churches had obtained in their possession of one common confession was wanting to the Reformed church, inasmuch as there each national church had drawn up its own confession. The victory of Calvinistic dogmatic over the Zwinglian in the Swiss mother church (§ 138, 7) was not without influence upon the other Reformed national churches; and Calvinism, partly in its entire stringency and severity, partly in a form more or less modified, without expressing itself in one common symbol, formed henceforth a bond of union and a common standard for attacks on Lutheran dogmatics. Quite similar was the origin of the divergence that arose between Zwinglianism and Calvinism in the department of the ecclesiastical constitution. In this case also the victory was with the Calvinistic organization. Its ideal embraced the restoration of the primitive apostolic presbyterial and synodal constitution, together with the church’s unconditional independence of the State. This proved much more acceptable than the theory which, under Zwingli’s auspices, had been adopted in German Switzerland, according to which church government and the administration of discipline were put in the hands of the Christian civil magistrates. A rigid system of ecclesiastical penitential discipline, however, was on all sides applied to the public and private lives of all church members. Under such discipline the community came generally to present a picture of singularly pure and correct morality, and not infrequently we see exhibited a remarkable development of high moral character. It fostered the noble confidence of the martyr spirit, which indeed only too often ran out into extremes and made an unjustifiable use of Old Testament precedents and patterns.--In reference to worship, the Reformed church, with its simplest possible form of service, stripped of all pomp and ceremony, presents the most thorough and marked contrast to the gorgeous and richly ceremonial worship of the Roman Catholic church.--Yet the episcopal Anglican national church (§ 139, 6), in almost all particulars relating to constitution, worship, discipline, and customs, completely severed its connection with the distinctive characteristics of the Reformed church, and allied itself to the traditional forms and ceremonies of the Roman Catholic church. On the other hand, in reference to dogma it approaches in its mediating attitude nearer in several respects to the view of the Lutheran church. But all the more rigidly and exclusively did the Puritans who separated themselves from the Anglican church, as well as the strict Presbyterian church of Scotland, appropriate, and even carry out to further extremes, the rigorism of the Genevan model in regard both to worship and to doctrine.

§ 143.1. =The Ecclesiastical Constitution.=--Just as in the
Lutheran church, the ecclesiastical leaders had been driven
by necessity to submit to the so-called _super-episcopate_
of the princes, it also happened here in German Switzerland
that, under pressure of circumstances, this power, as well as
church discipline and infliction of ecclesiastical censures,
was put in the hands of the magistrates. By order of Zwingli
and Œcolampadius there were founded in Zürich, in A.D. 1528,
and in Basel in A.D. 1530, synods to be held yearly for church
visitation. These were to be attended by all the pastors of
the city and district, and one or more honourable men should
be appointed from each congregation, in order to take up
and dispose of any complaints that might be made against the
life and doctrine of their pastors. But the intention of both
reformers to give this institution a controlling influence
in church government and ecclesiastical organization was
thwarted in consequence of the jealousy with which the ruling
magistrates clung to the authority that had been assigned
them in ecclesiastical matters. In Geneva, on the contrary,
Calvin’s unbending energy succeeded, after long and painful
contendings (§ 138, 3, 4), in transferring from the magistrates
the government of the church, together with church discipline
and the imposition of censures, to which here also they laid
claim, to a consistory founded by him, composed of six pastors
and twelve lay elders or presbyters, which was supreme in its
own domain, and free from all interference on the part of the
civil authorities, while the magistrates were bound to execute
civil penalties upon those excommunicated by the ecclesiastical
tribunal. The introduction of this presbyterial constitution
into Reformed national churches of large extent must have
contributed to their further extension and to the maintenance
of the national church unity. At the head of each congregation
now stood a presbytery, called in French _consistoire_, composed
of pastor and elders, the latter having been chosen either
directly by the congregation, or by the local magistrate in
accordance with the votes of the congregation, subsequently they
were also allowed to add to their own number. Then, again, the
presbyters of a particular circuit were grouped into so-called
_classes_, with a moderator chosen for the occasion; and then,
also, an annual classical synod, consisting of one pastor
and one lay elder chosen from each of the presbyteries. In a
similar way, at longer intervals, or just as necessity called
for it, provincial synods were convened, composed of deputies
from several classical synods; and from its members were
chosen representatives to the general or national synod, which
constituted the highest legislative authority for the whole
national church.[409]