Downloaded from Brill.Com10/02/2021 03:34:02AM Via Free Access Charles D
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
part i THE ARRIVAL OF THE REFORMED FAITH IN THE PALATINATE Charles D. Gunnoe - 9789004215061 Downloaded from Brill.com10/02/2021 03:34:02AM via free access Charles D. Gunnoe - 9789004215061 Downloaded from Brill.com10/02/2021 03:34:02AM via free access chapter two EARLY BATTLES: REFORMED PROTESTANTISM’S ARRIVAL IN THE PALATINATE “IwasfirstwithBoquininthechange of religion here.” Erastus to Johann Jakob Grynaeus, November , With increased attention now given to the confessionalization of the sec- ond half of the sixteenth century and especially the “Second Reforma- tion,” a study investigating the critical turn of Palatine history requires little justification. The Palatinate was the archetype for imperial territo- ries adopting a Reformed confession and played a fateful role that finally ran its course in the tragedy of the Thirty Years War.1 Thus any treat- ment of imperial politics or the nature of the Second Reformation must take the very important case of Heidelberg into account. Given the Palati- nate’s importance, the nature of its conversion to a Reformed confession remains a vital question. Political histories have generally focused on the personal religious decision of the monarch, Frederick III, the Pious (–). While the pioneering research in this field was done by August Kluckhohn more than a hundred years ago, in recent decades the late Volker Press enriched this discussion through his studies of the Pala- tine court and the influence of councilors like the Counts of Erbach. Press argued that the groundwork for the Reformation under Frederick III hadbeenlaidbynative,UpperGermanProtestantism2 and stressed 1 Henry J. Cohn, “Territorial Princes in Germany’s Second Reformation, –,” –; Meinrad Schaab, ed. Territorialstaat und Calvinismus (Stuttgart: W. Kolham- mer, ); Johannes Merz, “Calvinismus im Territorialstaat? Zur Begriffs- und Tradi- tionsbildung in der deutschen Historiographie,” Zeitschrift für Bayerische Landesgeschich- te (): –. See also Claus Peter Clasen, The Palatinate in European History – (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, ). 2 The expression “Upper German Protestantism” connotes the distinct Reformation tradition that emerged in cities such as Strasbourg and Augsburg—often at some vari- ance to Luther’s own teaching (especially regarding the Lord’s Supper). Representatives Charles D. Gunnoe - 9789004215061 Downloaded from Brill.com10/02/2021 03:34:02AM via free access chapter two continuity of the so-called “Calvinist” Reformation under Frederick III with the earlier reforms of Frederick II and Ottheinrich.3 Alternatively, theological studies have obsessively and sometimes rath- er ahistorically focused on the authorship and theological bent of the Heidelberg Catechism. Although a new consensus is emerging regard- ing the question of the authorship of the Catechism, the document itself can still bear divergent interpretations as to its theological character.4 The debate has largely centered on whether the Heidelberg Catechism is generally Melanchthonian or Calvinist in character. While not quarrel- ing with the aforementioned approaches, this chapter seeks to contribute to the understanding of the nature of the Heidelberg Reformed move- ment by investigating the role of one of the primary instigators of the confessional transformation. Erastus played a critical role as both rec- tor of the university and a member of the church council (Kirchenrat), as well as through writing and debating on behalf of the Reformed cause. When this late-Zwinglian’s role is fully appreciated, one can perceive how much the Reformation of the Palatinate was a pan-Reformed develop- ment, built on an Upper German foundation, and not simply a Calvinist or Melanchthonian achievement. of the Upper German Reformation included the signatories of the Tetrapolitan Confes- sion (). Martin Bucer (–) was perhaps the classic Upper German reformer. In Reformation scholarship, the description “Upper German” generally embraces the Zwinglians as well. 3 August Kluckhohn, “Wie ist Kurfürst Friedrich III. von der Pfalz Calvinist gewor- den?” Münchener Historisches Jahrbuch für (): –; Press, “Die ‘Zweite Reformation’ in der Kurpfalz,” –. In this essay, Press argued that the term “sec- ond Reformation” was not a fitting description of the Palatine Reformation, since there was a great deal of continuity between Frederick’s reform of the s and earlier Upper German trends. However, in an earlier article Press himself used the term “second refor- mation”todescribethe“Calvinist”turninPalatinehistory.SeeVolkerPress,“DieGrafen von Erbach und die Anfänge des reformierten Bekenntinisses in Deutschland,” in Aus Geschichte und ihren Hilfswissenschaften, ed. Hermann Bannasch and Hans-Peter Lach- man (Marburg: N.G. Elwert Verlag, ), –. 4 E.g., Fred H. Klooster, “The Priority of Ursinus in the Composition of the Heidel- berg Catechism,” Controversy and Conciliation: The Reformation of the Palatinate – , ed. Derk Visser (Allison Park, Penn.: Pickwick, ), –; Lyle Bierma, The Doctrine of the Sacraments in the Heidelberg Catechism: Melanchthonian, Calvinist, or Zwinglian? [Studies in Reformed Theology and History, New Series ] (Princeton: Prince- ton Theological Seminary, ). See the discussion of the Heidelberg Catechism in chap- ter . Charles D. Gunnoe - 9789004215061 Downloaded from Brill.com10/02/2021 03:34:02AM via free access reformed protestantism’s arrival in the palatinate The Confessional Situation in the Holy Roman Empire When Martin Luther posted his “Ninety-Five Theses” in , he could not have imagined that his internal critique of Catholic practice would ultimately lead to the creation of even one new church, and he would have been horrified to have thought that his protest would spawn three major magisterial churches and many splinter groups on the radical fringe. Luther’s message of justification by faith and acceptance of the scrip- tures alone as being authoritative found a receptive audience among the cities of the Holy Roman Empire, and soon it was no longer Luther’s proprietary teaching. A veritable army of preachers took up the evan- gelical mantle and remolded Luther’s ideas. In many cases these preach- ersappliedhisprincipleofsola scriptura in a more radical fashion than Luther himself. One such preacher, Huldrych Zwingli, the father of the Swiss-Reformed, led the evangelical movement in Zurich. The differ- ence between how Luther and Zwingli understood the Lord’s Supper would be the root of the separation of the continental Protestant move- ment into two main bodies, Lutheran and Reformed. Whereas Luther had himself attacked Catholic Eucharistic teaching—rejecting the doc- trine of transubstantiation as well as the Mass as a merit-generating sac- rifice, and calling for giving both bread and wine to the laity—he still embraced the traditional notion that Christ’s body and blood were phys- ically present “in, with, and under” the communion elements. Zwingli broke with medieval tradition and asserted that the Lord’s Supper was a memorial of Christ’s crucifixion. Christ’s body and blood were not present in the elements; rather, Christ remained in heaven, and Chris- tians simply remembered his efficacious death in the memorial celebra- tion. An attempt at the Marburg Colloquy in to bridge the split in the Protestant movement failed. Because Luther considered Zwingli and his followers to be heretics, deep hostility existed between the two centers of Protestantism. In the s when Protestantism gained official sanction in the Palati- nate, the difference of opinion on the Lord’s Supper remained of serious consequence to pan-Protestant unity. Whereas the diversity of opinions on the Lord’s Supper among Protestants may have looked like two con- flicting poles of truth and falsehood to Luther in when he issued his final condemnation of Zwingli, Oecolampadius, and Schwenckfeld, in the mid-s a non-partisan observer might have perceived a grad- ual continuum of positions. Wittenberg itself, where the Palatinate’s most famous son Phillip Melanchthon held sway after Luther’sdeath, remained Charles D. Gunnoe - 9789004215061 Downloaded from Brill.com10/02/2021 03:34:02AM via free access chapter two the foremost Lutheran intellectual center in the empire. Though long a leading proponent of the evangelical message, Melanchthon was hardly a slavish follower of Luther’stheology. He showed a willingness to accom- modate the Reformed in making changes to the text of the Augsburg Confession in the article treating the Lord’s Supper in (commonly called the Variata or altered version of the Augsburg Confession, as opposed to the original unaltered version of , which is known as the Invariata). Melanchthon further modified his position concerning the Lord’s Supper after Luther’s death. He rejected the Lutheran idea of the ubiquity of Christ’s human flesh and, like the Reformed, no longer held that Christ’s body and blood were physically consumed in the Lord’s Supper, leading Gnesio-Lutherans5 to derisively label Melanchthon and his followers “Crypto-Calvinists.” Recent studies have suggested that his Gnesio-Lutheran foes had finally exasperated Melanchthon beyond the point of reconciliation, and he was about to make a more definitive stance on behalf of his beleaguered “Calvinizing” allies at the time of his death in .6 His brand of Lutheranism, “Philippism,” or “Melanchthonianism,” remained a potent force in the empire at mid century. Strasbourg, a relatively short distance from Heidelberg up the well- traveled Rhine corridor, was a more immediate influence