Smalcald (1537, Feb.) The first German edition appeared at Wittenberg, 1538. They were republished from a MS. in the Library of Heidelberg, by Dr. Phil. Marheineke, Berl., 1817, 4°.-The work consists of three parts: 1. de summis articulis divinæ majestatis; 2. de summis articulis, qui officium et opus Jesu Christi s. redemtionem nostram concernunt; 3. articuli, de quibus agere potuerimus cum doctis et prudentibus viris vel etiam inter nos ipsos. (An appendix was afterwards added of Melancthon's treatise, De Potestate et Primatu Papæ.)-The relation of the polemic element to the irenic is here different from what it is in the Augsburg Confession. Here the polemical preponderates. On the question, whether those Articles had from the first symbolical authority, see Heppe, Dogmatik des deutschen Protestantimus, s. 106. [Heppe, Bekenntuisschriften, 317-337.]

On the distinction between those symbolical writings which have regard to external relations, and those which refer to internal relations, see Schleiermacher, über den eigenthümlichen Werth und das Anschen symbolischer Bücher, in the Reform. Almanach. Vol. ii. 1819, p. 235, ss. [For the Confessio Saxonica, Confessio Würtembergica, the Frankfort Recess, and the Naumburg Repetition of the Augsburg Confession, see Heppe, ubi supra.]

* In the year 1529, Luther wrote both the Catechismus major (for the use of the clergy and schoolmasters) and the Catechismus minor (for the use of the people and children), not in order to force a system of doctrines upon the church, but to supply a practical deficiency. Both were divided into five leading parts. On the different editions, appendices, etc., see Winer, 1. c. p. 16. *Augusti Einleitung in die beiden Hauptkatechismen der evangelischen Kirche. Elberfeld, 1824. Illgen, C. F., Memoria utriusque Catech. Lutheri. Lips., 1828-30. 4 Programmes 4to.

The most important of these controversies are the following:

a. The Antinomian Controversy; it originated with John Agricola of Eisleben (from the year 1536 he was professor in the university of Wittenberg), during Luther's lifetime. Comp. Elwert, de Antinomia J. Agricolæ Islebii. Tur., 1836.

b. The Adiaphoristic Controversy, which had its origin in the Interim of Leipsic (from the year 1548), and gave rise to a lasting difference between the more moderate views of Philip Melancthon, and the more rigid doctrines of the orthodox Lutherans. The former view was represented by the university of Wittenberg, the latter by that of Jena. [Gieseler, iv. 457, sq.] This difference manifested itself especially in

c. The Controversy between George Major and Nicolas Amsdorf, concerning the question, whether good works are necessary to salvation, or whether they rather possess a dangerous tendency (about the year 1559, ss.) This controversy was connected with the two fol lowing-viz.

d. The Synergistic Controversy respecting the relation in which human liberty stands to divine grace; it was called forth (A. D. 1555) by the treatise of John Pfeffinger: De libero Arbitrio, which was combated by Amsdorf. [Gieseler, iv. 444, 445.]

e. The Controversy respecting the nature of original sin, between Victorin Strigel (in Jena,) and Matthias Flacius. It commenced A. D. 1560, and led to the disputation of Weimar, A. D. 1561. Twesten, Matthias Flacius Illyricus, Berlin, 1844. [W. Preger, Matth. Flac. Illyricus und seine Zeit. Erlang., 1859. Gass, Prot. Dogm. i. 56, sq.] About the same time a controversy was carried on in Prussia-viz.

f. The Controversy between Andrew Osiamder (in Königsberg) and Joachim Mörlin, Francis Stancarus, etc.; it bore upon the relation in which justification stands to sanctification, and to the main point in the work of redemption. Comp. Tholuck, literarischer Anzeiger, 1833, No. 54, ss. [Comp. Gieseler, iv, 489. 4. Ritschl, Die Rechtfertigungslehre Osianders, in Jahrb. f. deutsche Theologie, 1857. Baur, Brevis Disquisitio de Andr. Osiandr., 1831. Heberle, in Stud. u. Kritik., 1844. Wilken, Osianders Leben, i. 1844. F. H. R. Frank, De Satisf. Christi....ex lite Osiandr. Erlang., 1858. B. F. Grau, De Andr. Osiandri Doctrina, 1860. Life of Osiander, by Lehnerdt, in the projected Leben d. Väter der lutherischen Kirche, Bd. v.] g. The (Cryptocalvinistic) Controversy concerning the Lord's Supper : First, In the Palatinate between W. Klebitz and Tileman Hesshus (A. D. 1559.) In consequence of it, not only were both these pastors dismissed, but Frederic III., Prince Elector of the Palatinate, also went over to the Reformed Church. [Gieseler, iv. 447-457.] Secondly, The controversy which took place in Bremen between Albrecht Hardenberg and the said Hesshus (A. D. 1561), together with its consequences. Thirdly, The controversy carried on in Saxony itself. There Casper Peucer, the son-in-law of Melancthon, succeeded in gaining over the Prince Elector Augustus, as well as Crell and others, to the Calvinistic doctrine (Consensus Dresdensis), until the former, having obtained a better knowledge of the real state of things by the Exegesis perspicua Controversiæ de Cœna Domini, in which the views of Peucer's party were more distinctly set forth, commenced a bloody persecution of the Cryptocalvinists, and adopted measures for the restoration of Lutheran orthodoxy.

On all these controversies compare the works on ecclesiastical history, and the history of the Reformation, as well as the well-known works of Walch, Planck, etc. They will be considered in the special history of doctrines. Gass, Gesch. d. Prot. Dogmatik, i. 56. [Gieseler, Church History, Vol. iv. § 37-42.]

8

The Formula Concordia was based upon the articles drawn up in Torgau (1576.-Torgauisches Buch), and composed in the monastery of Bergen. near Magdeburg (1577), by Jacob Andrea (Schmidlin), chancellor of Wirtemberg, on the one hand, and the Saxonian theologians, Martin Chemnitz, Nicolas Selnecker, David Chytraeus, Andrew Musculus, and Christopher Körner, on the other. It was called the "Bergisches Buch," and acquired symbolical authority, not only in Saxony, but also in other towns and countries, while it met with opposition in Hesse, Anhalt, Pomerania, and several of the free cities. In Brandenburg and upper Palatinate it was first adopted, but afterwards lost its reputation. [See Gieseler, iv. 487.]-The Formula

consists of two parts: 1. The shorter one, Epitome; 2. The longer one, Solida Declaratio. It was originally published in German, and translated into Latin by L. Osiander. Comp. Nicholas Anton, Geschichte der Concordienformel. Leipzig, 1779, ii. 8. Planck, vi. [K. F. Göschel, Die Concordienformel, Gesch., Lehre, etc., Leipsic, 1858. H. Heppe, Gesch. d. Conc. Form., 1857. F. H. R. Frank, Die Theologie der Concordienformel, 1858. J. G. Martens, (Rom. Cath.) Die Form. Concord., 1860. Köllner's Symbolik. Gieseler's Church Hist. iv. § 40.]

The German title of it is: "Concordia, christliche, wiederholte, einmüthige Bekenntniss nachgenannter Churfürsten, Fürsten und Stände Augsburgischer Confession und derselben zu Ende des Buchs unterschriebenen Theologen Lehre und Glaubens, mit angehefter, in Gottes Wort, als der einigen Richtschnur, wohlgegründeter Erklärung etlicher Artikel, bei welchen nach Dr. Martin Luthers seligen Absterben Disputation und Streit vorgefallen. Aus einhelliger Vergleichung und Befehl obgedachter Churfürsten, Fürsten und Stände derselben Landen, Kirchen, Schulen und Nachkommen zum Unterricht und Warnung in Druck verfertigt." 1580, fol. [Transl. by A. Henkel, New Market, Va., 1854.]

§ 216.

Dresden,

THE SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH.

Budder, Isagoge (Lips. 1727), i. p. 387, ss. Walchii Bibliotheca Theologica selecta, i. p. 33, ss. Semler, Einleitung in die dogmatische Gottesgelehrsamkeit (the introduction to Baumgarten's Glaubenslehre, vol. ii. iii.) Heinrich, Geschichte der Lehrarten der protestantischen Kirche, p. 271, ss. [Heinr. Schmid, Dogmatik der evang. Luther, Kirche 4te Aufl., 1858.] De Wette, Dogmatik der protestantischen Kirche edit. 3d, p. 17, ss. Hase, Hutterus Redivivus, oder Dogmatik der evangel. lutherischen Kirche [8th ed., 1855]. A. Tholuck, Der Geist der lutherischen Theologen Wittenbergs im Verlaufe des 17. Jahrhunderts, Hamb., 1852. [Tholuck, Das akadenische Leben d. 17, Jahrhund. 2te Abtheilung, 1854: Lebenzeugen, 1856.] *W. Gass, Gesch. d. Protest. Dogmatik, 2 Bde., Berl., 1854-7. Comp. § 212. [Heppe, Gesch. d. deutschen Protest. 4 Bde., 1853-9. Gieseler, Church Hist. iv. § 48. A. Schweizer, Die Protest. Centraldogmen, 2 Bde., Zurich, 1854, Ebrard, Dogmatik, i. 6, sq., translated in Mercersburg Review, April, 1857. Twesten Dogmatik, i. 228-273.]

4

3

1

6

Many works on systematic theology were published by different writers; some of whom, such as Martin Chemnitz, Victorin Strigel, and Nicholas Selnecker, followed Melancthon; while others, e. g. Leonhard Hutter, John Gerhard, Jacob Heerbrand, Matthias Haffenreffer," and others, adopted the strict Lutheran view, and closely adhered to the Formula Concordiæ. These works were, for the most part, called Loci Theologici, and arranged after the synthetic method.R But after George Calixt had separated ethics from systematic theology, and applied the analytic method of investigation to the latter," John Hülsemann," John Conrad Dann

hauer,12 Abraham Calov," John Fr. König,1 John Andrew Quenstedt,1 John William Baier," [David Hollaz,"] and others, followed more or less the course which he had adopted. These theologians may, in many respects, be compared to the scholastics of the preceding period; though in either case we may show a variety of modifications and transitions."

Chemnitz, born at Treuenbriezen, A. D. 1522, Nov. 9th, was the most. learned of the disciples of Melancthon, on whose Loci he delivered lectures in the University of Wittenberg. He took part in the composition of the Formula Concordiæ (comp. § 213), as well as in the reformation of Brunswick. He died 1586.-He wrote; Loci Theologici, edit. Op. et Stud. Polycarp. Lyseri (Leyser.) Francof. 1591, 4to., ibid. 1599, 1604, iii. 8vo., Viteb. 1615, 23, 90, fol.-" These commentaries are written with a great amount of learning...... Accuracy and clearness in the definition of doctrines, mature judgment, prudent choice of matter and proofs, and order in the arrangement, are everywhere apparent;" Heinrich, p. 274.-Examen Concilii Tridentini, Frankof., 1615, 1707. Concerning the other dogmatic works of Chemnitz, see Heinrich, p. 276. [Heppe, 119. Gass, 51, 70.] 2 Strigel was born at Kaufbeuren, A. D. 1524, and obtained a professorship of divinity in the University of Jena, A. D. 1548. On the controversy between him and Flacius see the preceding §. He died A. D. 1569, as an exile at Heidelberg. His Loci Theologici were edited, Lab. et Studio Christ. Pezelii, Neap. Nemet. (Neustadt on the Hardt), 1582-85, ii. 4. "In many points he is so profound and edifying, that I am not sure whether any other theologian of that period has surpassed him;" Semler, in his edition of Baumgarten's Glaubenslehre, ii. p. 158.-The work itself is scarce. Comp. Otto, De Victorino Strigelio, liberioris Mentis in Eccl. Luth. Vindice, Jena., 1843.

Selnecker was born A. D. 1530, at Hersbruck in Franconia, studied theology in the University of Wittenberg, was chaplain to the Prince Elector of Saxony, Professor of Divinity in the Universities of Jena and Leipsic, superintendent at Wolfenbüttel, etc., and died A. D. 1592. He also took part in the composition of the Formula Concordia. He wrote: Institutiones Christianæ Religionis. Partes iii. Frankof., 1573, 79, 8. This work was the first system of dogmatic theology in the Lutheran Church which contained the so-called Prolegomena (on the Scriptures, revelation, etc.) Comp. Gass, 51. Heppe, 96.

4

Hutter was born A. D. 1563, at Nellingen, in the district of Ulm. He was surnamed Lutherus redivivus, and defended the Formula Concordiæ (Concordia Concors. Witeb., 1614, fol.) in opposition to Hospinian (Concordia Discors. Tig., 1607, fol.) By order of Christian II., Prince Elector of Saxony, he wrote: Compendium Locorum Theol. ex Sacra Script. et Libro Concord. collat. Vit., 1610; new edition by Twesten, Berl., 1855.—Loci Communes Theol. ex. Sacris Litteris diligenter eruti, Veterum Patrum Testimoniis passim roborati, et conformati ad meth. locc. Mel. Viteb., 1619, 53, 61, ss. While he speaks of Melancthon with high regard, he still charges

him with defectio a puritate doctrinæ cœlestis. Comp. Gass, 251. Heppe, 155, sq.

5

Gerhard was born A. D. 1582, at Quedlinburg, occupied a chair of divinity in the University of Jena, and died 1637, Aug. 17th. He wrote: Loci Theol. cum pro adstruenda veritate, tum pro destruenda quorumvis contradicentium falsitate, per theses nervose, solide et copiose explicati. Jenæ, 1610-25, ix. Voll. 4. Denuo edid. variique gen. obss. adjec. J. Fr. Cotta. T. i.-xx. Tub., 1762-89, 4.-Exegesis s. uberior Explicatio Articulorum de Scriptura S. de Deo et de Persona Christi in Tomo I. Locorum (Cotta T. ii. iii.)-J. E. Gerhard, Isagoge Loc. Theol. in qua ea, quæ in ix. Tomis uberius sunt exposita, in Compendium redacta, Jen., 1658.-See Heinrich, p. 314, ss. Semler, p. 72, ss. Gass, 259, sq.

6

Heerbrand was Chancellor in Tübingen, died 1600. His Comp. Theol. Tüb., 1573 (ed. by Crus. Wittenb., 1582), had almost symbolical authority in Würtemberg. See Gass, 77, sq. Heppe, 124, sq.

7 Haffenreffer was born 1561, and died 1619, as Provost, in Stuttgard. His Loci Theologici (Tübingen, 1691, frequently republished), "obtained at once the widest currency in upper and lower Germany, because it gave in the most precise and intelligible manner the doctrinal points of the Formula Concordiæ, which was what they wanted to hear exclusively in the Lutheran lecture-rooms;" Heppe, i. 129. Gass, 78, sq.

-Besides these divines, may also be named, Nicolas Hemming, Abdias Prætorius, John Wigand; and later (in seventeenth century), Erasmus Brachmand (Universæ Theologiæ Systema, etc., Hafniæ, 1633, 2 Tom. 4to), Bircherod, Friedlieb, etc. See Semler, p. 71, 80. Heinrich, p. 283, 328. Gass and Heppe, ubi supra.-On the relation of this aftergrowth ('Eлíуovo) to Melancthon, see Heinrich, as above, p. 310, sq. Gass, 80. • The synthetic method starts from the highest principle, God, and proceeds to Man, to Christ, to Redemption, till it comes down to the end of all things.

Of his writings the following are of a doctrinal character: Apparatus in Theol. Stud., ed. F. U. Calixt. Helmst., 1656, 1661. Epitome Theol. Gosl., 1619, ed. Gerh. Titius, 66. Epit. Theol. Mor. Helmst., 1634. For further particulars see below, § 218. On his analytic method compare Heinrich, pp. 330, 331. Gass, 303, sq.*

10 The analytic method begins with the end or final cause (the “final method") of all theology, blessedness; and hence takes the opposite course from the synthetic. On other, complicated methods, see Hase, Hutterus Redivivus, p. 41, sq. Gass, p. 47.

11 Hülsemann was born A. D. 1602, at Esens in East Friesland; held several situations in Saxony, was superintendent at Meissen, and died A. D. 1661, -He wrote: Breviarium Thologicum. Viteb., 1640, 8. Extensio Breviarii Theol. Lips., 1648, 55.-Valent Alberti, Brev. Theol. Hülsemann, enucl. et auct. Lips., 1687, 4. His opponents called his style; stilum barbarum,

* Under the influence of Calixtus were the divines Joachim Hildebrand, and John Heinich (died 1671): see Gass, 311. [On Calixtus, see Gieseler, Church Hist. iv. § 52, pp. 584-593. Henke, Calixt. u. seine Zeit. 2, 8vo., 1853-60; Hundeshagen, in Stud. u. Krit., 1856; Christ. Remembrancer, Lond., 1855.]