DOCSLIB.ORG

Competing Views of Original Sin and Associated Arguments and Meanings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Competing Views of Original Sin and Associated Arguments and Meanings CHAPTER TWO COMPETING VIEWS OF ORIGINAL SIN AND ASSOCIATED ARGUMENTS AND MEANINGS The dispute over the definition of original sin, or more precisely, Matthias Flacius Illyricus’s1 controversial explanation of this doctrine, originated at the University of Jena in 1560 among the highest levels of the Lutheran academic world. It did not enter the territory of Mansfeld until a decade later. There it first claimed the attention of those clerics who operated in intellectual circles that went beyond the territory’s borders. But divisions within this ecclesiastical leadership soon spread throughout the territory’s entire pastorate. It may seem strange to begin a discussion of lay religiosity with elite theologians debating abstract points of doctrine in ivory towers. But in order to understand why the laity of Mansfeld became deeply involved in the controversy, it is important to start at the beginning with the central intellectual premise, and work outward to the various meanings and connotations it came to encompass. Only then can the laity’s association with one side or the other begin to make sense. The assumption here is that a purely intellectual weighing of the validity of the two definitions of original sin was not the only aspect of the debate 1 Matthias Flacius Illyricus (1520–1575) was born in Croatia, but studied in Venice, Basel, and Tübingen, before matriculating in Wittenberg in 1541. He eventu- ally became a professor of Hebrew there, where he was influenced by both Luther and Melanchthon, the former particularly with regard to pastoral care, the latter with regard to theology. After Emperor Charles V’s defeat of the Lutheran princes in the Schmalkald War (1547), as Melanchthon was urging a conciliatory policy, Flacius took up the banner of complete resistance. He left Wittenberg for the still unconquered Magdeburg, where he took part in the efforts there to resist the re-imposition of any and all aspects of the Roman religion. During this period he was involved in the composition of the Protestant church history referred to as the Magdeburg Centuries and played a key role in the establishment of a Lutheran hermeneutical tradition. He quickly became famous for his polemics against the Philippists, the followers of Melanchthon, who more than once successfully employed political forces to expel Flacius from various posts. For his views on original sin, however, he was not only condemned by the Philippists, but by the majority of members of his own party, the Gnesio-Lutherans. For more on Flacius see Oliver K. Olson, Matthias Flacius and the Survival of Luther’s Reform (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2002); and Wilhelm Preger, Matthias Flacius Illyricus und seine Zeit, 2 vols. (Erlangen: 1859–1861). original sin and associated arguments and meanings 49 that piqued lay interest. For already with Flacius, a group of argu- ments and premises attached themselves to his definition, the origin and identity of which are the subject of the first part of this chapter. But Flacius never spoke a word to the laity of Mansfeld, rather the pastorate there acted as intermediaries between the academy and the parish. What did they take from Flacius? How did they translate his views into more accessible language? What did they emphasize, add, subtract, and modify? Answers to such questions are essential for gauging the level of understanding the laity achieved regarding this complex doctrine and will also be addressed in this chapter. Matthias Flacius Illyricus on Original Sin Matthias Flacius Illyricus composed his most complete explanation of original sin in 1567 as a part of his comprehensive work of theology entitled Clavis scripturae sacrae.2 His decision to address original sin was in response to a notion that, he claimed, was widespread among Lutheran theologians, namely that original sin was an accident, some- thing non-essential to human nature, merely attached to it. Flacius asserted that such theologians often used the following analogy to exemplify their reckless and frivolous understanding of original sin: prior to the fall into sin, human nature was like a magnet, its capacity for free will like the magnet’s power to attract iron. When rubbed with garlic, the magnet’s powers were nullified, just as when corrupted by original sin, the human being’s free will no longer functioned prop- erly. But goat’s blood would reverse the effects of the garlic, allow- ing the magnet to resume it natural functions. The point was that the magnet never lost its inherent ability to attract iron, rather external materials defused its powers. So the human will, even after the fall into sin remained intact, its powers merely neutralized. Moreover, both the garlic and original sin were accidents, non-essential to the substance of 2 Matthias Flacius Illyricus, “Tractatus VI, De Peccati originalis aut veteris Adami appellationibus et essentia,” in Clavis Scripturae, seu de Sermone Sacrarum literarum, plurimas generales Regulas continens. Altera Pars. Authore Matthia Flacio Illyrico Albonese. Huius Operis multiplicem necessariumque usum ac rationem, Lector, ex Praefatione intelliges. Accessit quoque Rerum & verborum toto Opera praecipue memo- rabilium Index. (Basil: 1581 [Basil 1567]), 368–382 [479–498]. I am heavily indebted to Preger in the following explanation of Flacius’ position on original sin. Matthias Flacius Illyricus und seine Zeit, 2:310–321..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Durham Research Online
    Durham Research Online Deposited in DRO: 04 May 2017 Version of attached le: Accepted Version Peer-review status of attached le: Peer-reviewed Citation for published item: Ryrie, Alec (2016) 'The nature of spiritual experience.', in The Oxford handbook of the Protestant Reformations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 47-63. Oxford handbooks in history. Further information on publisher's website: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199646920.013.3 Publisher's copyright statement: This is a draft of a chapter that was accepted for publication by Oxford University Press in the book 'The Oxford Handbook of the Protestant Reformations' edited by Ulinka Rublack and published in 2016. Additional information: Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. Durham University Library, Stockton Road, Durham DH1 3LY, United Kingdom Tel : +44 (0)191 334 3042 | Fax : +44 (0)191 334 2971 https://dro.dur.ac.uk The Nature of Spiritual Experience ABSTRACT This article surveys the question of how early Protestantism was experienced by its practitioners, using the perspective of the history of emotions.
    [Show full text]
  • Melanchthon Versus Luther: the Contemporary Struggle
    CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL QUARTERLY Volume 44, Numbers 2-3 --- - - - JULY 1980 Can the Lutheran Confessions Have Any Meaning 450 Years Later?.................... Robert D. Preus 104 Augustana VII and the Eclipse of Ecumenism ....................................... Sieg bert W. Becker 108 Melancht hon versus Luther: The Contemporary Struggle ......................... Bengt Hagglund 123 In-. Response to Bengt Hagglund: The importance of Epistemology for Luther's and Melanchthon's Theology .............. Wilbert H. Rosin 134 Did Luther and Melanchthon Agree on the Real Presence?.. ....................................... David P. Scaer 14 1 Luther and Melanchthon in America ................................................ C. George Fry 148 Luther's Contribution to the Augsburg Confession .............................................. Eugene F. Klug 155 Fanaticism as a Theological Category in the Lutheran Confessions ............................... Paul L. Maier 173 Homiletical Studies 182 Melanchthon versus Luther: the Contemporary Struggle Bengt Hagglund Luther and Melanchthon in Modern Research In many churches in Scandinavia or in Germany one will find two oil paintings of the same size and datingfrom the same time, representing Martin Luther and Philip Melanchthon, the two prime reformers of the Church. From the point of view of modern research it may seem strange that Melanchthon is placed on the same level as Luther, side by side with him, equal in importance and equally worth remembering as he. Their common achieve- ment was, above all, the renewal of the preaching of the Gospel, and therefore it is deserving t hat their portraits often are placed in the neighborhood of the pulpit. Such pairs of pictures were typical of the nineteenth-century view of Melanchthon and Luther as harmonious co-workers in the Reformation. These pic- tures were widely displayed not only in the churches, but also in many private homes in areas where the Reformation tradition was strong.
    [Show full text]
  • Philip Melanchthon in the Writings of His Polish Contemporaries
    ODRODZENIE I REFORMACJA W POLSCE ■ SI 2017 ■ PL ISSN 0029-8514 Janusz Tazbir Philip Melanchthon in the Writings of his Polish Contemporaries Over thirty years ago Oskar Bartel, a distinguished scholar of the history of the Polish Reformation, bemoaned how little was known about the relations between preceptor Germaniae and the movement. In an article about the familiarity with Melanchthon, both as person and his oeuvre, in Poland, Bartel wrote: “wir besitzen einige Werke, meist Broschüren über Luther, Calvin, sogar Hus und Zwingli, aber ich habe keine über Melanchton gefunden”.1 Bartel’s article provided a recapitulation, if somewhat incomplete, of the state of research at the time, and essentially stopped at the death of the Reformer. There- fore, in this study I would like to point to the results of the last thirty years of research, on the one hand, and highlight the post-mortem impact of Melanchthon’s writings and the reflection of his person in the memories of the next generations, on the other. The new information about the contacts Melanchthon had with Poland that has come to light since the 1960s is scattered across a number of articles or monographs; there is to date no separate study devoted to the German Reformer. Only a handful of contributions have been published. No wonder therefore that twenty years after the publication of Bartel’s article, Roman Nir begins his study of corre- spondence between Melanchthon and Krzycki thus: “Relatively little 1 O. Bartel, “Luther und Melanchton in Polen,” in: Luther und Melanchton. Refe­ rate und Berichte des Zweiten Internationalen Kongress für Lutherforschung, Münster, 8.–13.
    [Show full text]
  • [Formula of Concord]
    [Formula of Concord] Editors‘ Introduction to the Formula of Concord Every movement has a period in which its adherents attempt to sort out and organize the fundamental principles on which the founder or founders of the movement had based its new paradigm and proposal for public life. This was true of the Lutheran Reformation. In the late 1520s one of Luther‘s early students, John Agricola, challenged first the conception of God‘s law expressed by Luther‘s close associate and colleague, Philip Melanchthon, and, a decade later, Luther‘s own doctrine of the law. This began the disputes over the proper interpretation of Luther‘s doctrinal legacy. In the 1530s and 1540s Melanchthon and a former Wittenberg colleague, Nicholas von Amsdorf, privately disagreed on the role of good works in salvation, the bondage or freedom of the human will in relationship to God‘s grace, the relationship of the Lutheran reform to the papacy, its relationship to government, and the real presence of Christ‘s body and blood in the Lord‘s Supper. The contention between the two foreshadowed a series of disputes that divided the followers of Luther and Melanchthon in the period after Luther‘s death, in which political developments in the empire fashioned an arena for these disputes. In the months after Luther‘s death on 18 February 1546, Emperor Charles V finally was able to marshal forces to attempt the imposition of his will on his defiant Lutheran subjects and to execute the Edict of Worms of 1521, which had outlawed Luther and his followers.
    [Show full text]
  • Martin Chemnitz on the Doctrine of Justification
    Martin Chemnitz on the Doctrine of Justification [Presented at the Reformation Lectures, Bethany Lutheran College and Bethany Lutheran Theological Seminary, October 30, 1985, Lecture II] By Dr. Jacob A. 0. Preus 1. In 1537 at Wittenberg Luther presided over a Disputatio held in connection with the academic promotion of two candidates, Palladius and Tilemann, in which he discussed the passage in Rom. 3:28, “We believe that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law.” Luther, in his prefatory remarks, said, “The article of justification is the master and prince, the lord and ruler and judge of all areas of doctrine. It preserves and governs the entire teaching of the church and directs our conscience before God. Without this article the world is in total death and darkness, for there is no error so small, so insignificant and isolated that it does not completely please the mind of man and mislead us, if we are cut off from thinking and meditating on this article. Therefore, because the world is so obtuse and insensitive, it is necessary to deal with this doctrine constantly and have the greatest understanding of it. Especially if we wish to advise the churches, we will fear no evil, if we give the greatest labor and diligence in teaching particularly this article. For when the mind has been strengthened and confirmed in this sure knowledge, then it can stand firm in all things. Therefore, this is not some small or unimportant matter, particularly for those who wish to stand on the battle line and contend against the devil, sin, and death and teach the churches.” 2.
    [Show full text]
  • John Blahoslav, "Father and Charioteer of the Lord's People in the Unitas Fratrum"
    John Blahoslav, "Father and Charioteer of the Lord's People in the Unitas Fratrum" MILOS STRUPL Brief was the span of life which the Lord had allotted to Brother John Blahoslav. When he, "of the topmost four", one of the bishops of his communion, died on the twenty-fourth day of November 1571, while on a visit near Moravsky Krumlov, he had not yet reached his forty- ninth year. "All too soon, according to our judgment", sighed Lawrence Orlik, Blahoslav's faithful co-worker, as he was recording the death of his superior in the Necrology of the Unitas Fratrum, "it pleased the Lord to take him away; he himself knows for what reason. Mysterious divine judgments!" 1 And yet, its brevity notwithstanding, it had been a full life, crowded with the most diversified activities in the service of his beloved Unitas. For Blahoslav was indeed - quoting once more from Orlik's Necrology - "a great and outstanding man, whose fame, having been carried far and wide, excelled among other nations, a great and precious jewel of the Unitas".2 In this glowing appraisal Orlik did not remain alone. Others have voiced similar opinions. To mention just one, a modern historian, Vaclav Novotny, referred to Blahoslav as "one of the noblest spirits of his time, one of the most learned of his contemporaries, and therefore one of the most celebrated sons of his nation".3 No one will seriously question that in the history of the Unitas Fratrum Blahoslav holds a truly pivotal position. His importance must be judged in comparison with that of Brother Lucas of Prague, "the second founder of the Unitas", and that of John Amos Comenius, its last great spiritual leader and a man of undeniable international stature.
    [Show full text]
  • Calvin's Doctrine of the Lord's Supper
    Perichoresis Volume 10. Issue 2 (2012): 137-163 DOI 10.2478/v10297-012-0007-3 CALVIN’S DOCTRINE OF THE LORD’S SUPPER * WIM JANSE Free University of Amsterdam ABSTRACT. In order to pinpoint its proprium , it is necessary to understand John Calvin’s Eu- charistic theology within the wider context of the intra-Protestant debates of his time. As a se- cond-generation Reformer, Calvin developed his ideas explicitly in reaction to and as a middle way between the Lutheran and Swiss Reformed discussions of the 1520’s. To that end this es- say first focuses on the main developments from the Middle Ages onwards, and then presents Calvin from the perspective of the positions taken up by some of his contemporaries, in parti- cular Philipp Melanchthon. Next, some representative texts written by Calvin himself are ana- lysed. Although Calvin’s Eucharistic views were not from the beginning a coherent and unified doctrine but developed only gradually, they may be described in a systematic-synthetic way. With respect to the matter of closed, open, and frequent communion, it is observed that for Calvin a regular celebration is essential to the deepening of the believer’s union with Christ. KEY WORDS: John Calvin, the Lord’s Supper, Eucharistic theology, Reformed sacramentolo- gy, communion Introduction Calvin’s doctrine of the Lord’s Supper is not just any chapter from Calvin’s theology. 1 In his Eucharistic theology we touch upon the core of Calvin’s thought. This is true not only for Calvin, but for all major sixteenth-century * WIM JANSE is professor of historical theology and dean of the Faculty of Theology wi- thin the Free University of Amsterdam.
    [Show full text]
  • Philip Melanchthon: Justification As the Renewal of the Intellect and the Will
    CHAPTER THREE PHILIP MELANCHTHON: JUSTIFICATION AS THE RENEWAL OF THE INTELLECT AND THE WILL Melanchthon has had the dubious honor of being the lupus fabulae of the history of Lutheranism. The reason for this hostility must be understood in context of controversies which followed Luther’s death and resulted in party-forming. The followers of Luther were split into a number of rival parties, two of which the most prominent were the Philippists, who were supporters of Melanchthon’s theology and style, and the Gnesiolutherans, who tried to identify themselves as the genuine followers of Luther.1 Melanchthon tried to formulate Lutheran theology in such a way as to maintain a connection with Calvinist theologians. During Luther’s lifetime, he had already sought an alliance with the Roman Catholic Church. Melanchthon’s ecumenical interests became apparent in Regens- burg (1541) and in the Leipzig interim (1548). The formulations of the interim in particular was interpreted as a deviation from Luther’s teachings. These accusations came from Joachim Mörlin, among others, whose comment embodies the ambivalent status of Melanchthon. He is our Preceptor, and Preceptor he shall be called. But when he speaks about the Lord’s Supper, free will, justifi cation of man, or actions concerning interims, then you, Philip, shall be praised by the devil, but me nevermore.2 Melanchthon’s notion of justifi cation evolved over the years so that the role of renewal in justifi cation varied. His greatest difference from Luther was his way of depicting renewal as the causal renewal of the 1 A third minor party was the Swabachian group, who were followers of Johannes Brenz.
    [Show full text]
  • The Formula of Concord As a Model for Discourse in the Church
    21st Conference of the International Lutheran Council Berlin, Germany August 27 – September 2, 2005 The Formula of Concord as a Model for Discourse in the Church Robert Kolb The appellation „Formula of Concord“ has designated the last of the symbolic or confessional writings of the Lutheran church almost from the time of its composition. This document was indeed a formulation aimed at bringing harmony to strife-ridden churches in the search for a proper expression of the faith that Luther had proclaimed and his colleagues and followers had confessed as a liberating message for both church and society fifty years earlier. This document is a formula, a written document that gives not even the slightest hint that it should be conveyed to human ears instead of human eyes. The Augsburg Confession had been written to be read: to the emperor, to the estates of the German nation, to the waiting crowds outside the hall of the diet in Augsburg. The Apology of the Augsburg Confession, it is quite clear from recent research,1 followed the oral form of judicial argument as Melanchthon presented his case for the Lutheran confession to a mythically yet neutral emperor; the Apology was created at the yet not carefully defined border between oral and written cultures. The Large Catechism reads like the sermons from which it was composed, and the Small Catechism reminds every reader that it was written to be recited and repeated aloud. The Formula of Concord as a „Binding Summary“ of Christian Teaching In contrast, the „Formula of Concord“ is written for readers, a carefully- crafted formulation for the theologians and educated lay people of German Lutheran churches to ponder and study.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 10 the Church in the Late Sixteenth Century
    Medieval and Reformation Church History Western Reformed Seminary (http://wrs.edu) John A. Battle, Th.D. CHAPTER 10 THE CHURCH IN THE LATE SIXTEENTH CENTURY Germany and the Lutherans after Luther’s death Political situation Other nations solidifying: England Spain France (language developing) Germany, Italy, Switzerland still in Holy Roman Empire, emperor crowned by pope Free cities generally independent Switzerland generally independent Only legal religions in Germany: Roman Catholicism Lutheranism Religious situation in general Reformation ideas widespread Spain: good start Poland: 1/3 converted Italy: many clergymen Austria: great bulk of people Switzerland: progress Especially widespread throughout Germany Variety of views 10.1 Diversity after Roman Catholic conformity Controversies in German Lutheran churches Reformed churches on borders Melanchthon’s controversies Situation in Saxony: Melanchthon the strongest influence there Opposed Calvinistic predestination (and strong statements of Luther) But influenced by Calvin and others on communion His school: “Philippists” or “Crypto-Calvinists” Prevailed for a time in Saxony Opposition to Melanchthon Lutherans generally accepted his milder view of predestination But bitter attacks against him and his views on Lord’s Supper Intolerant attitude of “real” Lutherans, called “Gnesio Lutherans”; they wanted state suppression of Philippists, consulted rulers Melanchthon’s death (1560) Attacks against him bitter and persistent 1560, about to die, “free from the bitterness of theologians” Spread
    [Show full text]
  • Lutheran Confessions Bible Study
    A Brief Introduction to the Lutheran Confessions A Bible Study Course for Adults by Robert J. Koester Student Lessons • Lesson One—The Three Ecumenical Creeds: “The Ancient Church’s Confession” • Lesson Two—The Small and Large Catechisms: “The People’s Confession” • Lesson Three—The Augsburg Confession and the Apology: “The Princes’ Confession” • Lesson Four—The Smalcald Articles: “Luther’s Confession” • Lesson Five—The Formula of Concord, Part One: “The Theologians’ Confession” Scripture is taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights reserved. All quotations from the confessions, where noted as Kolb and Wengert, are from The Book of Concord edited by Robert Kolb and Timothy Wengert, © 2000 Fortress Press, Minneapolis, MN. Used by permission of Augsburg Fortress Publishers. All rights reserved. Northwestern Publishing House 1250 N. 113th St., Milwaukee, WI 53226-3284 www.nph.net © 2009 by Northwestern Publishing House Published 2009 Lesson One The Three Ecumenical Creeds: “The Ancient Church’s Confession” Introduction: What Are the Lutheran Confessions? Anyone who has attended the installation of a pastor or teacher in a confessional Lutheran church has heard the officiant ask the person being installed several questions. Among them are “Do you confess the Holy Scriptures to be the inspired Word of God?” and “Do you hold to the confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran church and believe they are a correct exposition of Scripture?” Then the officiant reads off the list of the Lutheran Confessions. Unless you have received the formal training of a pastor or teacher, you may be left scratching your head.
    [Show full text]
  • Melanchthon's Understanding of the Will in the Loci Communes
    Concordia Seminary - Saint Louis Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary Master of Sacred Theology Thesis Concordia Seminary Scholarship 5-1-1984 Melanchthon's Understanding of the Will in the Loci Communes Richard Osslund Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.csl.edu/stm Part of the Religious Thought, Theology and Philosophy of Religion Commons Recommended Citation Osslund, Richard, "Melanchthon's Understanding of the Will in the Loci Communes" (1984). Master of Sacred Theology Thesis. 24. https://scholar.csl.edu/stm/24 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Concordia Seminary Scholarship at Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master of Sacred Theology Thesis by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Resources from Concordia Seminary. For more information, please contact [email protected]. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 Definitions 4 Melanchthons Pedagogue, Humanist, Theologian 7 II. THE LOCUS ON FREE WILL; EARLY EDITIONS 17 From the 1521 Loci 18 From the 1535 Loci 22 From the 1543 Loci 27 III. THE LOCUS ON FREE WILLS LATER EDITIONS 32 From the 1555 Loci 32 From the 1559 Loci 38 Importance of the 1559 Locus on free will 58 IV. THE FORMULA OF CONCORD, SOLID DECLARATION, ART. II FREE WILL 67 V. CONCLUSIONS 79 Was Melanchthon a Synergist? 79 Summary 92 BIBLIOGRAPHY 100 ii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION It is a commonplace among many Lutheran theologians that Philip Melanchthon was a synergist. The purpose of this study is to evaluate this theological judgment on the basis of Melanchthon's Loci of 1521, 1535,1543, 1555, and 1559.
    [Show full text]