_________________________________________________________________ Historical Introduction Chapter 2, THE DEFENSE OF THE CONFESSION From THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION, A Collection of Sources. J. M. Reu Concordia Theological Seminary Press, Fort Wayne, Indiana. Pages 114 - 141 ______________________________________________________________ SECOND CHAPTER THE DEFENSE OF THE CONFESSION The Confession of the Lutheran estates had been read and solemnly presented to the Emperor. The presentation was made with definite references to the terms of the imperial summons but at the same time they declared that they were only willing to enter a discussion if the Catholic estates would demand nothing more than an equal standing with them. Since, according to the summons 'everybody's opinion and ideas' were to be heard so that they could be compared and eventually brought into one by the Emperor, the Catholic confession should also have been submitted. But at the very beginning of the Diet the Roman adherents had declared, that they would never do this. They did not wish to appear as a separate party. They stated: "We have obeyed the Worms edict, we are in harmony with the established doctrines, so it is not necessary for us to present a confession nor enter into a discussion regarding such doctrine." What was to be done? We again are indebted to Theodor Brieger and Johannes Ficker 2 that we are able to say anything certain regarding the deliberations of the Emperor and the Catholic estates after the presentation of the Lutheran Confession as well as later on regarding the Confutation and the various important changes it underwent before it was read at the Diet. On the day following the reading of the Confession, the Catholic estates, following the imperial wish, met to confer regarding their subsequent action. 3 In harmony with their previous position, that it would not be necessary for them to formulate nor present a confession. they stated that their answer could consist only in a critique of the Lutheran Confession based on the norm of the ancient and accepted Defense of the Confession 115 doctrine. This they presented as their opinion on the following day (June 27). 4 In it they made a distinction between the two sections of the Confession. The Articles of Faith are to be handed by the Emperor to reliable scholars who are not malignant, who are to examine them, to stress those parts which agree with the established doctrine and condemn everything which is opposed to it. Regarding the abuses, however, to which they themselves have not been blind, the Emperor is to find means and ways to abolish them. Neither did they overlook the gravamina of their own clergy and laity. The Emperor is also to help regulate this matter. The papal Legate was to be consulted and his advise secured, for which purpose the Latin copy of the Confession was to be submitted to him. In closing they expressed the wish that the Lutheran estates be asked whether they expected to rest on this Confession or wished to present anything additional, so that everything could be settled at the same time. Charles immediately notified the Legate and asked his opinion. Campegius enthusiastically complied with the imperial request. His careful answer 5 dealt exclusively with the reply to be given to the Confession, only in opening he proposed in a few words that an effort was to be made to lead the Protestant estates back to the church. The Legate further only took up the Articles of Faith, the abuses and qravamina, which had been expressly noted by the estates, were only hastily mentioned in closing in a few vague proposals. All is written in the same sharp tone as his Memorandum which he had handed the Emperor in Innsbruck on May 9th and in which he had demanded that the most stringent measures be taken against the German heretics (Part II, document 23): These are nothing more than heresies, long ago condemned by the Church and cast with their followers into the fire. Any discussion of them is impossible 116 Historical Introduction and it is the duty of the Catholic majority and all true Christians to tear them up by the roots. He recommends that the scholars and theologians there present are to examine the different Lutheran Articles of faith, for which purpose they are to be distributed among them and by them are to be refuted. He offered to notify them of the task. He furthermore recommends how the work is to be done. The individual articles are to be treated separately. In the first place each article is to be examined to ascertain whether the form is suspicious and obscure in which case that which is veiled is to be made clear in all "humility, shrewdness, politeness and Christian love." Then that which the fathers have sanctioned is to be laudably acknowledged, but that which deviates from the pure religion is to be destroyed. With the latter it is important that it be shown as something that long ago was condemned as heretical. In case the Protestant princes should complain that errors were unjustly ascribed to their theologians they are to refer them to former statements of these men and show how they are contrary to the Confession. It would he most effective to contrast these heretical statements with positive and well founded ones of the Catholic Church. All of this was to be handed in German and Latin texts to the Emperor who was to discuss it with his Catholic princes and then have it read before the convened Diet. Its acknowledgment or rejection was to be decisive for the Lutheran estates. No third alternative was to be permitted. At the close the Emperor is emphatically reminded of Charlemagne's defeating and conquering of the Saxons so as to remind him of a possible use of arms against the Evangelicals (Second Part, 41). The Emperor handed the Legate's opinion to his council and then placed their deliberations before the Catholic estates on July 5th. 6 The imperial council, contrary to the Defense of the Confession 117 resolution of the Catholic estates of June 27, also considered the propositions made by the Lutheran estates regarding the equality of both parties, as well as their demand for a free council. The Emperor urged the Catholic estates to consider themselves a party, if only the opposing one. He was also willing, in opposition to the Legate, to call a free council if he was allowed the decisive voice and if the Evangelicals would submit to the Worms edict, until such a council was convened. Otherwise the opinion of the imperial council mainly follows that of the Catholic estates: The Legate was to propose a remedy for checking the abuses; the Confession was to be examined by competent men and the Evangelicals were to submit what they still wished to present. But they also met the Legate in requesting him to have the Confession examined and answered by men he thought competent and that a discussion of the Confession was under no circumstances to be allowed. They also demanded that a firm answer be given to bring back these people, yet they also stressed the necessity Ä far more than did the Legate Ä of justice and moderation so as not to make the opposition stubborn and altogether hopeless. Naturally, if they stubbornly rejected all better reasoning then only use of arms could be the final possibility. We must note that the Emperor did honestly try to abide by the terms of his summons: to judge all demands in an impartial way; that he himself acknowledged the existence of abuses and desired their abolition. But we also note that he in no wise intended to let the final decision be taken from his hands and that he was determined to defend the doctrines of the church, if necessary, with the power of arms. Melanchthon heard of this during a meeting with the imperial German secretary, Schepper. If on the 26th of June Ä the day after the presentation of the Confession, Ä he had 118 Historical Introduction written to Luther: "Now the point is, as I believe, how to reach a decision, before our antagonists answer it, as to what we are willing to yield in the matter of two forms, of marriage, of private mass. The whole transaction will probably turn upon these points. Answer concerning this, and particularly concerning the private mass, as it probably will not be allowed to drop out of sight," 8 he now adjures Luther not to be silent any longer but to assist him with his advice: "I pray for the sake of the honor of the gospel that you will interest yourself in us for the sake of the common good, which, unless you sit at the helm, apparently must endure very severe storms. Christ allowed himself to be awakened in the ship which was in danger. We are verily in much greater danger, in which nothing more painful could happen against us than if you would forsake us. I dare not complain about this to Dr. Brueck so as not to make him feel worse. Up to the present matters have been in such a state that we have spent much time in weeping." 9 In the following week Luther's mighty letters of June 27, 29 and 30 reached Melanchthon 10-11 (Second Part, 43). June 30th he wrote: "My thoughts rush and surge at your exceedingly wicked and perfectly useless cares, and I know that I am telling a story to one who is deaf. The reason for this is that the only one you have faith in is yourself . . . If we fall, Christ will fall with us and He is the great ruler of the world. And if it were possible for Him to fall, yes, I would rather fall with Christ than stand with the Emperor . . . You are killing yourself and utterly fail to see that the matter lies beyond the power of your hand and counsel, and that it will be carried on regardless of any concern which you may feel. And my prayer is that Christ may prevent it from coming into your hand or counsel, although you are too obstinate in desiring to control it." 12 Defense of the Confession 119 Neither was the papal Legate satisfied with the Emperor's answer to the Catholic estates of July 5th. That he himself was to undertake the abolishing of the abuses was very inconvenient and he absolutely did not care to hear of a council. He undertook to bring about a different decision, but in this he failed. l3 He was, however, all the more willing to take charge of the answering of the Confession and at once got in touch with the Catholic theologians present in Augsburg. There were more than twenty who had come to Augsburg in the retinue of the princes or following a special imperial command; among them the most important opponents of Luther, as Cochleus, Usinger, Wimpina, Messing, Fabri and Eck. l4 These, some of the most malignant individuals who ever opposed the Reformation, now joined hands to kill the Lutheran Confession and tear up every reformatory thought by the roots. We owe our thanks to Ficker that he has given us a very detailed picture of the feverish activities of these theologians as shown Ä aside from Eck Ä especially by Cochleus, since 1528 the theological guide of the Duke George of Saxony, and Fabri the vehement father confessor of King Ferdinand. Before, during and after the Diet, even before they were asked to answer the Confession, they were active in writing document after document in their effort to discredit Luther's character and his doctrines. Some of this has been published but the larger part is still in manuscript form in the Court Library at Vienna. 15 Compegius had already included in his "Memorandum" a summary of the "Fructus Lutherani evangelii in Anabaptistis apud Germanos" to create in the Emperor a feeling of disgust towards Lutheranism and prod him on to destroy it at any cost. In it he undertook to show the prevalence of the Anabaptists, the secrecy of their propaganda, their enmity against all government. He accused them of unchastity and even worse things; that they 120 Historical Introduction denied that Mary was the Mother of God, as well as the divinity of Christ, and that they had aided the Turk in the past and now were recalling him to their land. All of this was due to Luther: "Haec autem crudelissima instituta ac proposita perniciosissimaeque haereses tantum ex Lutheri libris ac suorum complicum ortae sunt." So now they could not be satisfied with a simple confutation of Lutheran doctrine. They expected to present a mass of documents which would ruthlessly open the Emperor's eyes to Luther and his activities which were not apparent from their Confession. So from the material at hand they gathered passages which were to show Luther's heresies, proving that they were merely revivals of discarded heresies, and that he continually contradicted himself. Fabri says: "One book contradicts the other, one statement, one word, yes even one letter the other, in a word, Luther has become a mad irrational being." They endeavored to paint the prevailing conditions in the darkest colors as due to the Lutheran innovations. But the time was at hand to draw up the answer to the Confession. Although it was to be their opinion addressed to the Emperor, it was to be written in such a way that it could be read at the Diet as his own answer to the Confession. At first, to save time, the separate articles, or groups of articles, had been given for refutation to the various theologians. The answers to the first four articles are still in existence. The one on the first three articles was written by Cochleus. It was so spiteful that even the more sensible of the Catholics rejected it. Then they changed their whole plan of procedure and placed the whole matter in the hands of one man, Eck. For him that was a great satisfaction. Since he was not permitted to defend his 404 Articles in open discussion before the Emperor and empire he was now offered something Defense of the Confession 121 far greater: The official refutation and final rout of the Lutheran doctrines! With enthusiasm he took up the task. His Enchiridion locorum communium adversus Lutheranos of 1525, his 404 Articles and the Monstra sectarum ex Luthero et Lutheranis enata furnished him the necessary material in which he simply had to add references from some of the Evangelical books which he had not considered in his other works. But there was also much new work to be done. He was to answer one specific document, the Confession of the Lutherans. And furthermore this was to be done according to a stated program formulated by the papal Legate in harmony with his previous recommendations and now again fixed for Eck's task. This was later on added to the document as a preface. 16 With every article of the Lutheran Confession this was to be the procedure: 1. What it contained that was correct was to be acknowledged, however, it was to be stressed that they had not come to this conclusion by themselves but owed it to the orthodox church; 2. It was to be shown how the Lutheran Confession was in disagreement with so much of what their own preachers had said so that the whole Confession was to be condemned as nothing else but a systematic concealment of their actual doctrine; 3. All of the points in the Confession which have already been condemned by the church should be pointed out; 4. All the many other condemned heresies are to be called to attention, which although not contained in the Confession itself, however, have been held far and wide by these people and can finally be traced back to Luther; and 5. It was to make clear that, aside from the Reformation, Luther is especially to be blamed for the eminently dangerous heresies of the Anabaptists and the Capernaites who reject the sacrament of the Eucharist. Eck again worked rapidly. On the 8th of July the work 122 Historical Introduction was not only finished but had already been discussed with the other Catholic theologians; in some places it had been made harsher and was furnished with an especially strong conclusion. Fabri was primarily responsible for these changes and the conclusion. His are the biting words of scorn against the Lutheran pastors who do not bring any sacrifices of the mass, who celebrate no mass for the dead, who do not observe the canonical hours and yet, at the expense of the poor, fatten on the church. He is also responsible for calling attention to Luther's words regarding the relics of St. James in Compostella and Tolosa in Spain (which was undoubtedly intended to arouse the Spanish nationalism of the Emperor against Luther) as also for connecting the danger of the Turk with Luther's utterances. 17 The conclusion adjures the Emperor not to listen to the demand for a Christian council since it would only lead to new quarrels and dissensions and make an annoying exposure of German Christianity to the eyes of the rest of the world. The renegades, on the other hand, are to be compelled to present a new, all-inclusive confession which will force them to an unequivocal return to the mother church. If this is without effect than the Edict of Worms is to be enforced with all the imperial severity. The title of this document is Catholica et quasi extemporalis responsio super nonnullis articulis Catholice Cesaree Maiestati Hispanice proximis diebus in dieta imperiali Augustensi per illustrissimos electorem Saxonie ac alios quosdam principes et duas civitates oblatis MDXXX. Together with the above mentioned supplement, meant for the Emperor, it filled 351 pages. l8 John Ficker published the text for the first time. In his edition the Responsio takes up 151 pages. We offer a section of it in Part II as Document 45. On the 12th the clean copy was finished and translated into German. Defense of the Confession 123 The papal Legate, as far as his gout permitted, read and approved it. On the same day he sent it through his brother to the Emperor with the fervent plea that he would remain so firm that the Reformation be brought to naught and every thing be returned to its former condition. What impression did the document make on the Emperor? He immediately realized its utter uselessness and was disgusted with it since it neither followed his instructions nor met with his expectations. l9a If he ordered it to be read publicly he would only call forth bitterness, opposition and even bitter scorn. If he accepted the conclusion he would face an immediate war. And at this time he could not afford a war. He was not sufficiently protected; against France only partly and against the Turk not at all. No dependence could be placed upon the Pope and the jealous and timid Catholic estates were not willing to make any sacrifices worth while. 20 King Ferdinand was weighed down with other cares, Charles' own financial and military affairs were in no way equal to the task suggested by the Catholica Responsio; and his wish, to crown Ferdinand Roman king would never come true if he definitely broke with the Evangelical estates. Moreover, opposition on the Protestant side was growing. The letter of the Lutheran estates of July 10th, in which they informed him that they had no further matter to present, although written respectfully, in no way betrayed a retreat from the presented Confessio (Part II, Document 46). Zwingli had his challenging Ratio fidei presented on July 8th, which was followed on the 11th by the individual confession of the cities Strassburg, Constance, Memmingen, and Lindau. 21 This all suggested to the Emperor the use of decided moderation rather than force. The question was at the time actually debated at the imperial court if it were not possible, by making far reaching concessions to keep at least the Lutheran 124 Historical Introduction estates Ä if not the Upper Germans and Swiss Ä in line. 22 Furthermore, to lead everything back in the old ways and give up the thought of a council, as Campegius had advised, was directly contrary to the Emperor's own information regarding the abuses which cried loudly for redress. It is refreshing to hear that in direct opposition to Campegius he wrote a letter in these days (July 14) to the Pope in which he demanded a free, Christian general council. 23 On July 15th he laid the Responsio Catholica before the Catholic estates since already on the 13th, in answer to his letter of the 10th, they had advised him not to let the answer to the Lutheran Confession be made "in the name of the Catholic scholars" but in the name of "his Imperial Majesty." 24 The whole document was read in the sessions of the Catholic estates which took from nine to ten hours. 25 But again it met the approval of only the few who were determined to use harsh measures. The majority rejected it as unsuitable because of its length and malicious tone. Preface and conclusion were discarded entirely and other purely objective matter proposed to take their place in which it is stated Ä in harmony with the request of July 13th Ä that the Emperor is making this answer to the Lutherans. The document itself was to be thoroughly revised. That which "is in harmony with the gospel and Holy Scriptures" is to remain; that which is "malicious, sullen and unnecessary" is to be removed and the whole is to be recast in a proper form. 26 In view of this position taken by the Emperor, as well as the majority of the Catholic estates, nothing remained for the papal Legate and his scholars Ä Eck still maintained his leadership Ä than to completely recast the whole Responsio Catholica. That was a tedious task of renunciation, since they were asked to strike just those passages which they had written in gleeful detail. And many other revisions were Defense of the Confession 125 necessary before the final form was reached. John Ficker's report, based on the documents, is very detailed. 27 If the birth of the Lutheran Confession was not easy this was all the more true of the Catholic answer. On August 3, it finally could be read in German to all the estates of the empire by the imperial secretary Alexander Schweiss. This was done in the same room where the Confession of the Lutherans had been read. 28 In history it is known, to distinguish it from the Responsio Catholica, as the Responsio pontificia or probably oftener as Confutatio Pontificia. The Latin text was first printed in 1573 while the German was not printed until 1808. 29 In the Confutatio Pontificia the Responsio Catholica a has lost about a third of its former size and would have lost more if the many Scripture passages had not been included. Articles IV, VI, XVIII, XX and XXI are nearly altogether made up of such passages so that the extensive use of Scripture as attempted proof of the Catholic doctrine makes up one of the differences between the Confutatio and the Responsio. They had learned something from the Evangelicals! However the main difference is that the Confutatio is not a theological opinion for the Emperor as the Responsio was, and intended to be, but an independent imperial decision which gives a direct answer to the Lutherans. It was not easy for Charles to accept this change as demanded by the Catholic estates, for with it he gave up the position of mediator between the two parties, a position he wished so much to retain. And he only did this after all of his attempts, to make the Lutheran estates retreat from the Confession they had presented, had failed. But since the Confutation was an imperial decision it must be in formal sequence and dignified objectivity. In matter of contents, however, according to the demands of the Catholic estates it was to be a continuous refutation of the Lutheran articles by Scriptures and the old, orthodox 126 Historical Introduction fathers. This time we must give Eck and his co-workers Ä Granvella, Valdes, and also the imperial chancellors, who had helped Ä credit that they were able to write so objectively and moderately. Of the former many personal slanders and the verbose jeremiads about the terrible conditions brought about by the Reformation, very little remained. The conclusion especially is pervaded by the spirit of moderation and brings vividly to mind the fundamental difference between the Responsio and the Confutatio. Nothing more is said of the edict of Worms and its enforcement. It is true that the closing sentence of the Confutatio is a reminder of the fact that Charles as Roman Christian Emperor and highest magistrate and defender of the holy Christian church, due to his office will know how to conduct himself if the Lutherans refuse to listen to reason, but this point is not stressed. The Emperor is far more happy that the Lutheran Confession agrees in so many points with the Catholic Church and that the Lutherans reject so many abuses which are now to be found in Germany. This leads the Emperor to hope that the Lutheran estates will come to agreement with the old church in the other disputed points. Of course a greater part of this friendly advance was again lost when the Emperor let Campegius persuade him to have the Confutation (which originally was to have been presented to the Lutheran estates) only read to them but not presented. The Legate called attention to the fact that such a presentation would only call up new disputes about the same matter which would be unworthy of both the Emperor and the Pope. At the same time he plainly betrayed that, due to the hasty writing of the Confutation, he feared the Protestant criticism. But since it certainly would have been an injustice to utterly refuse to submit it, on advice of the Catholic estates, it was decided to make the delivery subject to conditions which Defense of the Confession 127 they knew would not be accepted. So on August 5th the Emperor notified the Lutherans that the Confutation would be delivered to them only if they would not present an answer, would obey its dictates and would neither let it leave their hands nor publish it. 32 What was the position of the Lutherans during the month of July and now that they were confronted by these stringent demands? Their situation was a very difficult one. During this whole time the Emperor was solely guided by the advice given by Garcia in his letter of July 18. 22 There were, indeed, hours of weakness. Melanchthon believed a rumor that the papal Legate was willing to return to communion in both forms and the marriage of priests. He at once sought to get in touch with him, so on the 6th of July he wrote an unfortunate letter in which he said: "We have no dogma which is diverse from that of the Roman Church; we have also rebuked many who dared to spread dangerous dogmas for which public testimony is available. We are ready to obey the Roman Church if they, with the same charitableness which they have always shown to all people, either ignore or drop certain few things which we, even if we would, could not change . . . We venerate the authority of the Roman Pope and the whole church government, if only the Roman Pontifex does not cast us aside. But if harmony is so easily reestablished if your clemency yield in a few things and we obey in good faith then why should it be necessary to reject those who plead or to persecute them with fire and sword? For no other reason do we endure so much hatred in Germany than that we defend the dogmas of the Roman Church with so much firmness. We shall in future, until our end, also remain true to Christ and the Roman Church even if you should refuse to mercifully receive us." 32 Then on the 7th 128 Historical Introduction of July he again wrote to the Legate and stated the "few things" which would restore harmony, namely the communion in both forms and the marriage of priests. 33 On the 8th Melanchthon actually had a meeting with Campegius. He, however, declared that it would be impossible for him to make the desired concessions without the German princes. 34 Fortunately the Lutheran estates were more firm than the author of their Confession. Their answer of July 10th, to the inquiry whether they expected to present other articles, betrays a determination to stand by the Confession they had presented, a continued readiness to defend their faith, as also the courage to demand speedy action from the Emperor. 35 The letter is so clear and manly that we present it in Part II as document 46. Then the Emperor undertook to persuade the Elector John and the Margrave George separately to forsake the Confession. There were many things in which they needed the Emperor's good will. This was now brought forth. They now remembered that the Elector had not yet received an answer to his request which in the spring he had made of the Emperor through the Counts of Nassau and Neuenahr (page 78). So on the 16th the Emperor sent the Palsgrave Fredrick, the Count of Nassau and others to him with the information that his requests could not be granted, especially his enfeoffment, unless he returned to the mother church. 36 The Elector answered on July 21st. His letter was divided into three sections. 37 In the first he demonstrated his rights to the Electorate; in the third he denied that he had ever sought connections with the Sacramentarians or Swiss, while in the middle section he bravely gave an account of his faith. He stressed the fact that in matter of the Confession he had not merely repeated what his theologians had told him but he, himself, had come to the conclusion that Rome's doctrines are not based on the Word of God. Here Defense of the Confession 129 and now he once more confessed all the articles of the Confession, and entreated the Emperor to permit him and his own to be accountable to God alone in matters pertaining to the salvation of their souls. "Since we maintain that this (the Confession's) doctrine and order is God's Word and Command, even our enemies must admit and confess that it would not be possible for me and my (religious) associates to deviate from it in good conscience; and before God and all people it is our duty, as we also were pledged to accept God's Word, Doctrine, Command and Order, to accept and permit it in our land and realm unobstructed by what has been introduced by human rules or ancient deplorable customs." This brave answer, which again and again refers to the imperial summons as its legal foundation and the Word of God as its eternal basis, probably came from the pen of Chancellor Brueck. The rumor was already current that the Electorate would go to the Catholic Duke George of Saxony. On the 28th many princes were invested with their dignities, but the Elector was excluded. Everything to wear down the Elector! The Margrave George was beset by his relatives, especially the Elector Joachim, to persuade him to return. This was done several times (July 19 and 20), each time it was called to his mind that otherwise the Emperor would take his position and drive him from the land. 38 But the Margrave also remained firm. But what of the Lutheran estates? They thought little of the Confutation. Melanchthon, in his letter to Luther of Aug. 6th, called it "childish and silly" 39 claiming that its insignificance had made the Evangelical estates glad. But in the same letter he especially refers to the imperial declaration, in which the Confutation ended 40 and the conditions under which alone it would be given to them. These conditions were energetically rejected by the Lutheran estates while 130 Historical Introduction the Elector and the Landgrave took the opportunity to again voice their determination to continue in the Confession. The Landgrave's words are reported by the Frankfurter representatives: "I will and expect to continue in the opinion which we have presented unless convinced differently than has been done up to the present time, even if it costs my body and life." 50 The Lutherans also announced an answer to the Confutation "or at least as much as they remembered of it" and in advance asked pardon "if they (since they must depend upon the memory and a few notes) were not able to do this word for word." And since they could not think of yielding in their doctrine, they remembered only the last sentence of the Confutation. The Landgrave gave the bravest answer: On the evening of the 6th he left the Diet. It was not fear that prompted him to do this but indignation. Luther understood him rightly when he said upon hearing the news: "Such delay and indignity are enough to tire more than one Landgrave." 50a In the meeting of the Roman and Lutheran Commissioners on the following day Elector Joachim went so far as to threaten the Elector John that unless he gave up Luther's doctrine, the Emperor would use force, subjugate him, depose him from his position, despoil his possessions, lay waste his country, take his life, and force his subjects back to the old faith. The Elector John was so indignant that he could not answer. But on the next day he was the first to sign the courageous answer of the Lutheran estates to the Catholic commissioners and so also the Emperor. 51 Again written by Brueck, on the one hand, it again and again, called attention to their legal rights as based on the imperial summons and, on the other hand, on the promised and demanded free council. "It is impossible for us to retract with a good conscience and the peace of our hearts the Confession we have presented unless we receive a refutation which is so Defense of the Confession 131 well founded in God's Word and the truth that we can quiet our consciences and find peace for our hearts." "We hope that his Imperial Majesty, a just Emperor and our Gracious Lord, will not take this amiss or that we will incur his displeasure if we, for valid reasons cannot, give in and . . . that we use permissible legal methods which in any other simple secular matters are not denied, for Imp. Majesty . . . can well understand that these present matters are of far greater importance and that we cannot retract without seriously endangering our salvation and conscience." In the course of events it came to pass that, following a proposal of the Lutheran estates of the 13th of August, 52 the debated points, especially those of the second part of the Confession, were discussed in meetings of a small Catholic-Lutheran commission. It at first was made up of twice seven and then after the 24th of August, of twice three members. This was a decided victory for the Lutherans since they had obtained what from the very beginning they had demanded, and what, according to the imperial summons, they had a right to demand. But the Emperor and not the Evangelicals appointed the Lutheran commissioners and he had his reasons for appointing Melanchthon. The endless sessions, which now began, were to wear down him and the others so that they would finally agree in all the vital points; the rest could be left for the proposed council to settle. Luther knew why he had written as early as the 15th of July: "Sequentur minae et jactantiae usque in coelum et infernum" and why in the same letter he continually asked their return from Augsburg. 52a We cannot follow these long deliberations. 53 They present an extremely sad picture. The commissioners came to agreement on a number of articles of the Augsburg Confession as 1. 3. 7(?). 9-11. 13, and 16-19. The Catholics allowed the communion cup for the laity in 132 Historical Introduction Protestant domains Ä subject to the papal sanction Ä until the time of the council and with the stipulation that the Protestants would also teach the communio sub una. The mass was changed by the Catholic commissioners to a "sacrifice of remembrance in memory of the death of Christ" (Sacrificium repraesentativum). They would tolerate the married priests of the Evangelicals "for the sake of the misled women" but new marriages were not to be allowed; the confiscated convent properties were to be returned at once to the jurisdiction of the church. The Evangelicals, of course, did not accept these suicidal propositions but their counter propositions also made far reaching concessions and not only in matters of the second part of the Confession. 53a While the discussions were going on Luther's opinion was secured. His answer of August 26 54 (Second Part, 49) released them from a sinister ban and for a moment brought the Lutheran Commissioners, and other shaky ones, to their senses. Luther's main sentences read: "We will suffer everything and yield where it is in our power to do so. But what is not in our power we ask that it be not required of us. And what is God's Word is not in our power." This rule he applied to the Catholic propositions. Due to it the Lutherans rejected the propositions and Elector John asked for a leave of absence. This, of course, was not granted and the imperial court renewed peace negotiations in which the rejected statements of agreement again made their appearance and Melanchthon unfortunately again showed his former willingness to yield, perhaps to an even greater degree. We get the best possible insight into this willingness, which did not even leave the doctrine of justification intact, but also into the growing dissatisfaction of the laity who loved the gospel, through the confidential letter of Hieronymus Baumgaertner to the city clerk Spengler in Nuernberg (Sept. 13). 55 It shows a complete understanding of all the facts, a 133 Defense of the Confession remarkable knowledge of human nature and a heart which loved the gospel (Second Part, 50). It is well that we are not compelled to stop here, for the way of yielding by the leading theologians would finally, as Baumgaertner feared, have led to surrender of the Confession. This time it again was an attack of the opposition which roused the Lutherans. The Emperor decided, since the deliberations were dragging aimlessly along, to end the matter by a recess. On the 22nd of September the recess was read (Second Part, 51). 56 It declared the Augsburg Confession "for good reasons answered and rejected by the Holy Gospel and other writings," but gave the Lutheran estates until the 15th of April to accept the articles not yet settled; 57 by that tines he also would decide what is necessary to be done. Until then all innovations are to be prohibited. Finally, they are to unite with the Emperor and the Catholic estates to make common cause against the Anabaptists and against those who do not keep the most sacred Sacrament." The courts, however, are to punish any violation of this recess. As soon as the recess had been read the Lutheran estates withdrew for a conference. They returned to the assembly and protested against the statement that their Confession had been "satisfactorily answered and rejected by the Holy Gospel and the Word" in the Confutation. "On the other hand this party undoubtedly believes and holds that its Confession is so Christian and well founded in the Holy Word of God that it cannot and dare not be judged and rejected as unchristian." 58 At the same time Brueck offered an answer to the Confutation and an Apology of the Confession written by Melanchthon. Regarding the latter the matter is as follows: As stated above, the Lutheran estates had announced (Aug. 6) an answer to the Confutation as far as they were able to do so since they had heard it only once and a copy of the document had not been submitted 134 Historical Introduction to them. 59 Due to the peace negotiations, then undertaken, this thought was crowded into the background. Only the Nuernberg city council requested Ä as Kolde has shown Ä his theologians and lawyers to prepare a statement. This was to be done according to the notes made by Joachim Camerarius who had been present at the reading of the Confutation. On the 18th of August the theologians' opinion Ä that of the lawyers was not ready Ä was handed to Melanchthon. 60 The city council of Nuernberg believed that Melanchthon had been requested to prepare an answer to the Confutation, but was told by his representative that this was an error. 61 Then when the conferences to establish concord proved to be more and more a failure the Lutheran estates again took up the thought of answering the Confutation. The Nuernberg representatives reminded them of their own statements Ä that of the jurists had probably also been completed. "Chancellor Brueck and other Saxons" were on August 29th commissioned to undertake the preparation of the answer. 62 They still were dependent upon the notes made by Camerarius. The work was placed in Melanchthon's hands, although, according to his own statements, others, we know not who, had a part in it. 63 The peace negotiations, which were renewed in the first weeks of September probably prevented him from taking up the work. Only after the Elector had resolutely urged their departure and an unfavorable recess was threatening, probably about the 20th, do we find Melanchthon at work on the document. He finished it quickly although it was not yet certain that it would be presented. 64 They probably expected to let conditions decide that. Under what conditions they agreed on Melanchthon's document, or if any meetings were held for this purpose, is unfortunately nowhere recorded. 65 But when the imperial recess declared that the Augsburg Confession had been refuted the time had arrived for Brueck, after a short consultation with the Lutheran estates, to present Melanchthon's Apology. He did it not without excusing the incomplete form of the document since the author had been compelled to work from notes on the Confutation. The Emperor was about to receive it, through the Palsgrave Fredrick, when the Archduke Ferdinand whispered something whereupon the Emperor refused the documents. 66 This was the so-called Prima Delineatio Apologiae (Second Part, 52), which is not to be confused with the Apology found in the Symbolical Books. It has come down to us in both the Latin and German; the former in two different editions, the Helmstaedt (so-called because Defense of the Confession 135 it was formerly kept in Helmstaedt) and the other edition, for the first time published by Chytraeus in his Historia Augustanae Confessionis of 1578, under the title "Prima Delineatio Apologiae." The German manuscript is in the state archives at Cassel, contains 47 folio pages and bears the title: "Apologia adversus Confutationem Papistarum." In 1577 George Coelestin printed it for the first time in the first edition of his German Augsburg Confession but then it was practically forgotten for nearly two centuries. The Latin as well as the German text are made accessible in an accurate form by Foerstemann and also in the Corpus Reformatorum XXVII. 67 It is a joy to see that Melanchthon has again found himself. From the very first sentence, "Imperial Majesty will see in the very introduction how unwisely and unfriendly those acted who have written the Confutation and refutation of our Confession" nowhere in the whole document do we find a timid retreat, but a brave confessing of the truth, a fearless exposing of the mistakes of the opposition, a successful stand against their scholastic craftiness, a fearless holding up to public view the often obscure doctrines of the opposition, an emphatic, often satiric, rejection of their ignorance and the injustice of measuring the church fathers with a different rule than the one used for Luther and his friends. Melanchthon takes up Articles 2, 4-6, 7, 10-15 and 21 of the Augsburg Confession and successfully rejects all attacks of the Confutation against them. He also goes into detail in speaking of Articles 4, 6, 12 and 13. It is refreshing to note his reflections at the beginning of the Second Part in regard to the first half of the Confession. He states: "It cannot be denied that before this time the whole church has been weighted down because by the doctrine of works the honor and glory of the merits of Christ and justification by faith were completely obliterated and unknown. In their sermons some taught nothing but various queer human ordinances, some fast days, some festivals, ceremonies, indulgences, several new orders, praying to new saints, rosaries, brotherhoods and the like, 136 Historical Introduction while the best of them taught nothing but secular discipline. But what one is to believe in Christ, what is justification by faith and how it is obtained, of this they were as dumb as sticks, although this doctrine, how one becomes godly and is justified by faith, is and must remain the chief doctrine of the whole Christian church. The doctrine of repentance must also he counted among the chief articles of Christian faith. But it was so corrupted, not alone by those who sold indulgence, as merchants sell their wares, but also by other hypocrites and sanctimonious persons who, in derision of the faith and the death of Christ, taught the people that their sins are forgiven through their own merits and who by demanding enumeration of sins and blasphemous satisfactions drove the oppressed consciences to despair. Since this necessary portion of Christian doctrine, of repentance and faith, has been renewed by us, and the glory and merits of Christ have again been brought to light, we must confess without boasting, that God has given us many great gifts. We find continued help and consolation for the conscience. We now know the true and right faith. We understand which works God has commanded and which not. We know which estates please God and which do not. Recognizing these things has more than anything else prompted us to accept these doctrines which are taught by us. The opponents, themselves, accept many of these customs and doctrines although they illy thank those from whom they have received them." The introduction to the Second Part is also just as sound and reliable. Especially noteworthy are the words regarding the relation of the one part to the other. Here the Second Part is valued in a way Melanchthon did not always do in the preceding peace negotiations. We read: "This was followed by changes in several external church customs. Since these changes are the necessary consequences of the preceding Defense of the Confession 137 articles we were not able to withstand the Word of God. But we have been moderate in making such changes since we have retained the greater part of the common Christian usages. There at the Diet we have also, for the sake of peace and love, offered to retain such other common usages as far as we could and dared to do without sin. But this moderation and offer, which we hope, is pleasing and acceptable to God, helped us little with our enemies who, contrary to all fairness, have demanded that we, against our conscience, accept and retain all the former abuses. But since we could not agree to this we wish in a few words, to answer the things which Ä as far as we can remember them Ä have been read to us in the Confutation of our Confession. Now we most humbly pray his Imperial Majesty, our most gracious Emperor and Lord, not to have any ungracious doubts but to listen to the reasons which prompt us to regard this Confession as true, for we have at all times been obedient and are yet willing to live in humble submission to his Imperial Majesty in all things that are compatible with God and our conscience. But now we cannot, if we are not to deny Christ, go back to the old abuses. And if here something is said that is harsh or severe it has no reference to nor is meant for his Imperial Majesty, our most gracious Lord, for his Majesty's virtues and inherent grace are well known throughout the world; these remarks, however, are meant for those and are about those who have falsely accused us before his Imperial Majesty of acting contrary to the teachings of Christ." Melanchthon then did write many a sharp word, when he took up the two forms in the Sacrament, marriage of priests, the mass, vows and the church government, and successfully defended the Confession against the Confutation; at times even using the weapon of sarcasm and scorn in refuting the proofs which had been presented for the Catholic usages. The whole closed 138 Historical Introduction with these statements: "This is approximately our answer on these points which we remember, and we are willing to give further account of our Confession to anyone who demands it and if the Confutation . . . had been submitted to us we probably would have been able to give a better answer on this and other points." So the Confession had been maintained through great temptations and manfully defended in spite of many weaknesses. The great part that Luther played in this defense will be shown in my forthcoming "New Studies on the A. C."; in a measure it can be seen from the documents in Part II, 43, 44, 47 and 49. On the following day (Sept. 23) the Lutherans demanded a copy of the recess and time until April 15th of the following year to consider it. 68 The Elector John left the Diet on the same day, without being invested with the Electorship but with a clear conscience. When Luther heard it he thanked God "that our dear prince is now for once free from hell" ( Erlangen Ed. 54, 194). Still the Diet dragged along for another month. The poor Margrave George was again cornered; true, on the 13th of October the Emperor proclaimed a recess completely dominated by medievalism; 69 true, a gruff reply to their Tetrapolitana was read to the four cities by Faber, Eck and Cochleus on the 25th, but all of this did not change the fact that the Confession, rejected by Emperor and empire, had been successfully maintained. There remains only, for the sake of completeness, to show how the Prima Delineatio Apologiae grew into the Apology, found in our present Symbolical Books. Kolde 70 says very nicely: "From the very beginning Melanchthon must have had an expansion and correction in mind. For, as Matthesius reported, he was at work on it on the return to Wittenberg Ä he left there September 23 Ä while resting with Luther at Spalatin's home in Altenburg. Shortly after that he also saw the first copy of the Confutation. He probably received it from Nuemherg whose representatives in Augsburg was finally Defense of the Confession 139 able to send a copy home on the 28th of August. 72 The reading of the whole document only increased his impression that it was "adeo insidiose et calumniose scriptum, ut fallere etiam cautos in certis locis posset" Ä as he later wrote in the Preface Ä and strengthened his intention to rewrite his whole Apology and publish it together with the Augsburg Confession. He must have thought that the task could be quickly accomplished for on the 12th of November he promised Osiander in Nuernberg a letter as soon as he had finished the Apology. Yet on January first, as he then wrote, he was still deep in the article on justification. This was due to the fact that he recalled, as unsatisfactory, the 5 1/2 printed sheets which dealt with this subject. At first he had treated Articles 4-6 but later on included Article 20 and so found it necessary to rewrite the whole subject of justification and the relation of faith to good works. 73 Sickness and other duties, such as the debate with Bucer regarding the Sacrament, also delayed him. Furthermore he, at this time, thought it wise to write more in detail. So the task was not completed until the end of April or the beginning of May. It was published together with the Augsburg Confession and the first known copies, contrary to their title, contain only the Latin text. 74 The Apology was primarily to disprove the statement of the writers of the Confutation that the Augsburg Confession had been refuted. For this reason the main sequence of the article in both, the Confessio and Confutatio are retained but otherwise related matters are treated as a whole. The points conceded by the opposition are touched on only lightly but the articles that had been attached are thoroughly discussed. Then also other articles, which seemingly had been slighted in the Confession Ä as the worship of saints and the one on the sacraments where one could miss a rejection of the number seven Ä are given more space. So the answer to the Confutation had grown into a theological discussion of the Augsburg Confession. This, after all, is the Apology's greatest value. It is this Ä even if among other things the apostrophes to the Emperor remind us of the first draft Ä because Melanchthon, in closest possible harmony with the established terminology, 75 from the principal thought of the gospel Ä law and gospel, sin and justification Ä sheds light upon the opposing views and traces them back to their origin. The whole is a companion to the Loci Communes. In tone it is, as Melanchthon advised his friends in advance, much sharper than the Augsburg Confession. That is especially seen in his endeavor to 140 Historical Introduction expose the unreasonable and unscriptural later scholasticism and in proof of the authenticity and purity of the Evangelical doctrine by stressing its conformity with the conceptions of the ancient church, especially the Greek. This leads Melanchthon, as proof for the correctness and antiquity of the Evangelical doctrine of the Sacrament, not only to appeal to the canon missae of the Greek church but also to quote the Bulgarian Theophylact who speaks of a "mutare panem." This quotation, by the way, was dropped from the second edition. 76 The German translation, which was more of a devotional recast of the Latin, was prepared by Justus Jonas. Although probably engaged in the task while the Latin edition was on the press, the completion of the work was naturally not possible until the Latin was finished. It was delayed, however, until the fall of 1531, for on Sept. 26 Melanchthon was still busily engaged in making corrections in his text. 77 So where peculiarities and differences from the Latin text are to be found they probably are due to Melanchthon and not Jonas. 78 The long expected work was enthusiastically greeted by the Evangelicals. Lazarus Spengler of Nuernberg, who probably received one of the first copies, wrote to Veit Dietrich on May 17: "We have received the Apology with greatest joy and with the hope that it will accomplish much good and profit even among our children," and John Brenz of Swabian Halle, designated it as worthy of having a place in the canon. 79 Among the enemies there was great consternation. Albrecht of Mainz sent a copy to the Emperor on November 19 to show him how the Christian religion is being ruined and how necessary it is to publish the Confutation. The writers of the Confutation saw themselves defeated without a weapon available for their defense as long as their own work was not printed and circulated. Cochleus seemed to know that the Apology found favor in Rome and bitterly bewailed the fact that, what he and others had written against it, did not find a publisher. 80 What Melanchthon published under the title Apologia Confessionis was, in distinction to what was to have been presented in Augsburg on September 22, mererly a private matter and was specifically so designated by him. For he wrote in the preface: "Quamquam autem initio apologiam instituimus communicato cum aliis consilio, tamen ega inter Defense of the Confession 141 excudendum quaedam adieci. Quare meum nomen profiteor, ne quis quiri possit sine certo auctore librum editum esse." And so the first edition of the Apology bears his name while the Augsburg Confession, as an official document, was issued without the author's name, But although an official resolution was never passed in this matter it very soon was adopted by the Evangelicals as a public confession of their faith to be placed at the side of the Augsburg Confession. This happened for the first time in the spring of 1532 at the meeting at Schweinfurt which preceded the peace of Nuernberg, Spalatin reported that the enemies had used these words our 'confession' and 'assertion' and for a long time did not want to stand for the word 'Apology'; but the Evangelicals demanded the naming of the Apology as "a defense and explanation of the Confession," as Chancellor Brueck had called it. Then at the day of Schmalkalden, 1537, when, on demand of the Evangelical estates, it was officially signed with the Augsburg Confession by the theologians present, it was formally placed at the side of this Confession as a confessional document. 82 ____________________________________________________________________________ This text was converted to ascii format for Project Wittenberg by Karen Janssen and is in the public domain. You may freely distribute, copy or print this text. Please direct any comments or suggestions to: Rev. Robert E. Smith of the Walther Library at Concordia Theological Seminary. E-mail: cosmithb@ash.palni.edu Surface Mail: 6600 N. Clinton St., Ft. Wayne, IN 46825 USA Phone: (219) 452-2123 Fax:(219) 452-2126 _____________________________________________________________________________