cf the affairs of the Protestants. Then fol
lowed (II.) The convention at Torgau, in
1574. Next followed, by order of Lewis
ike of Wiirtemberg, (III.) The convention
9f Maulbronn, in 1576 ; where the Wiir
temberg divines Lucas Osiander and Balth.
Bidenbach, with the concurrence of some
foreign divines, drew up what is called the
Formula of Maulbronn ; in which the or
thodox ministers of our church state on what
conditions they would unite with the divines
of electoral Saxony, and recognise them as
members of our church. Afterwards came
(IV.) The Lichtenberg convention, in Feb.,
1576, in electoral Saxony ; at which the
Formula of Maulbronn was examined, and
pronounced too rigorous. Then followed
(V.) The convention of Torgau, in June of
the same year, after the suspected divines of
electoral Saxony were removed. Here the
Book of Torgau was compiled from the Swa
bian Concord and the Maulbronn Formula ;
and this was the real basis of that Formula
of Concord, which was afterwards sent to
all the German courts and churches to collect
suggestions and amendments. After the
suggestions of the foreign theologians were
received, in the year 1577 and at the cloister
of Bergen, the proper Formula of Concord
was formed from the Book of Torgau. The
principal person concerned in it, was James
Andrea, who was occupied many years in
the business, took a number of journeys and
showed extraordinary zeal in the whole af
fair, yet incurred many reproaches, by the
ambiguous expressions which he employed.
And by his influence it was, that the opin
ions of the Swabian divines respecting the
person of Christ, the communication of the
attributes [of Christ s divine nature to his
human] (communicatio idiomatum), and the
omnipresence of Christ s human nature,
which before had been only private opinions,
were received into the Formula of Concord
as doctrines of the whole Lutheran church.
With him was joined Nicholas Selneckcr, a
native Frenchman of Herspruck, and at that
time superintendent at Leipsic ; a learned and
persevering man, who had endured nvich per
secution from the Fhilippists. The two oth
ers that were associated with James Andrea,
were still more learned, and at the same time
HISTORY OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH 155
celebrated Formula, as is well known, was, to decide and terminate thft
many controversies which had drawn the Lutherans especially after Lu.
ther s death, into disagreeing parties ; and also, to exclude from the Luther
an community the opinions of the Reformed respecting the holy supper aod
the person of Christ.
40. Yet the book, which was to have restored harmony among the
Lutherans, and which actually did so in many places, furnished also new
ground of discord. In the first place the Reformed, and those who either
favoured the Reformed or at least wished to be at peace with them for the
sake of the common good, when they perceived that by this Formula all
hope of healing the schism was at an end, and that the Reformed were en-
tirely excluded from all communion with the Lutherans, violently attack
ed and in bitter terms censured both the Formula and its authors. Be
yond the bounds of Germany, the Swiss (of whom Rudolph Hospinian was
the chief) and the Belgians ;(49) and in Germany, those of the Palati-
nate,(50) of Anhalt, of Baden, and others, waged furious war upon the
Formula. This imposed upon the Lutheran divines anji especially upon
those of Saxony, the disagreeable task of defending it and its framers in
various treatises. (51)
41. Even among the Lutherans themselves, some of the most distin
guished churches could not be persuaded either by entreaties or arguments,
to receive the Formula and to add it to their guides in doctrinal instruction.
It was therefore rejected by the Hessians, the Pomeranians, the Nurem-
bergers, the Holstenians, (through the influence of Paul von Eitzen the
superintendent general), by the Silesians, the Danes, the Brunswickers or
Julians, and others. (52) But all these were not influenced by the same
much disposed to peace, namely, Martin libros symbolicos Lutheranor., lib. L, c. vii.,
Chemnitz and David Chylrcziis, both pupils p. 734, &c.
of Melancthon. The first was then superin- (52) On the fate of the Formula of Con-
tendent at Brunswick, and had few equals cord in Holstein, see die Danische Bibliothek,
in learning and facility in writing. He was vol. iv., p. 212, &c. ; vol. v., p. 355 ; vol.
a venerator of Melancthon, and endeavoured viii., p. 333-468 ; vol. ix., p. 1, &c. Hen-
in many respects to find out a middle path, ry Muhlius, Dissertt. Histor. Theolog.,Diss.
and to check the violence of Andrea. Hence, i. de Reformat. Holsat., p. 108, &c. Am.
he and Andrea may be considered as the Grevius, Memoria Pauli ab Eitzen ; who
proper composers of the instrument. Chy- however, only touches upon this subject.
trans was of Rostock. Musculus and The transactions in Denmark relative to the
Corner were of Frankfort on the Oder, and Formula and the causes of its rejection, may
were famed for their zeal for Luther s doc- be learned from the above-mentioned Da-
trines ; yet these had no great concern with nische Bibliothek, which contains numerous
the Book of Torgau. Schl.] documents, vol. iv., p. 222-282: and from
(49) Peter VUicr s Epistola Apologetica Eric Pontoppidan s Annales eccles. Danicae
Reformatarum in Belgio ecclesiarum ad et diplomatic!, torn, iii., p. 456, &c., who also
contra auctores libri Bergensis dicti Concor- shows, (p. 467, &c.), that what Jo. Herm,
diae, with the notes of Lew. Gerh. a Renesse ; von Elswich and others endeavour to make
republished by Daniel Gcrdes, in his Scrini- doubtful, was a real fact, namely, that king
urn Antiquarium,orMiscellaneaeGroningens. Frederic II. on receiving a copy of the For-
novse, tome i.,p. 121, &c. Add Unschuld. mula, threw it into the fire and burned it.
Nachricht., A.D. 1747, p. 957, &c. Respecting the rejection of the Formula by
(50) The palsgrave Jo. Casimir, in the the Hessians, see the documents in der Da-
year 1577, forthwith called a convention of nischen Bibliothek, vol. vii., p. 273-364, vol.
the Reformed at Frankfort, for the purpose ix., p. 1-87. Add Tieicmann s Vitoe Theol-
of repelling this Formula. See Henry Al- ogor. Marpurgens., p. 99, &c. Respecting
ting s Historia eccles. Palatine, <j dxxix., the countries of Liegnitz and Brieg, see the
p. 143, &c. Unschuld. Nachricht., A.D. 1745, p. 173,
(51) See Jo. Gco. Watch s Introductio in &c. [It cannot be denied, that there wer
156 BOOK IV. CENT. XVI. SEC. III. PART II. CHAP. I.
motives and arguments. Some of them, as the Holstenians, were led by
their high respect and reverence for Melancthon, to abhor a book in which
the opinions of so great a man were censured and exploded. Others were
not only partial to Melancthon, but they also believed that some of the
sentiments condemned in the Formula, were nearer the truth than the pre
vailing views. Some were kept from approving the Formula, by their se
cret attachment to the opinions of the Reformed ; and some by the hopes
they had indulged, that the Reformed and the Lutheran churches might
form an alliance. (53) Some either actually feared or at least pretended tc
fear, that the peace and harmony of the Lutheran church might be injured,
by adding a new symbolical book to their old ones. And others offered
other reasons for their dislike of it.
42. Julius duke of Brunswick, had been a kind of second father of the
Formula of Concord ; and had contributed to the fabrication of it, both by
his counsels and by liberal expenditures. And when drawn up, he had
commanded all the ministers of religion in his dominions, to receive it, an/1
to subscribe theic names to it. But after the Formula was published, Ju
lius changed his mind, and permitted his divines at Helmstadt, Tidemann
Heshusius and the others, to oppose it and to exclude it from a place
among the symbolical books of his territories. The principal grounds on
which the divines of Julius rejected the Formula, were : (I.) That the
printed copy differed in some parts from the written Formula, which the
Bruns wickers had approved. (II.) That the doctrine of free-will was in
correctly explained in the Formula ; and that some of the harsh and very
unsuitable phrases of Luther were employed in it. (HI.) That the ubi-
faults preceding this Formula of Concord, solely from the scriptures. And if, when
which gave to many Lutheran churches a Zwingle (who would parry his proofs from
reasonable excuse for procrastinating or even scripture) brought him on to the subject of
refusing to subscribe to it. It was published the person of Christ, he derived the ubiquity
too hastily, and before the suggestions of all of Christ s human nature from its personal
the churches had been received ; whence union with the divine nature ; yet he never
many, as e. g., the churches of Pomerania maintained, that the man Christ was alwaijs
and Holstein, believed that the Formula was and every where present; but merely that
sent to them only for form s sake. It was he could be present, wherever the execution
thought that the Saxons assumed a power in of his mediatorial office and the fulfilment of
the whole transaction, which did not belong his promises, required ; and of course, at the
to them ; and that they sought a kind of con- celebration of the holy supper. And in this,
trol over the Lutheran churches, which no the theologians of upper and lower Saxony
one would in this sense concede to them. followed him. But the theologians of Swa-
Schl.~\ bia and Alsace maintained an absolute om-
(53) [It was the fact, that the Formula of nipresence ; and their statements were trans-
Concord cut off all prospects of a union of ferred to the Formula of Concord, (yet so
our church with the Reformed, and opposed that the other opinion was not explicitly ex-
a bar to all attempts at pacification. At eluded), and thus were made articles of
that time, the points in controversy with the faith : (just as the doctrine of election by
Reformed, were only two ; namely, respect- grace, was previously a private opinion of
ing the doctrine of the supper, and the per- Calvin, and was transformed by the synod
son of Christ. The first pervaded the whole of Dort into an article of faith, to all that re-
Lutheran church ; the second did not; for ceived the decrees of that synod). Thus the
before the Formula of Concord, it was only points of controversy between us and the Re-
he Swabian divines that defended the om- formed, were increased by the Formula of
presence of Christ s human nature, on the Concord. They were also rendered mote
ground of a communication of attributes, virulent, because we censured and condemn-
Luther never attempted to prove his doc- ed as heretical a church that hitherto wished
trine concerning the supper, from the doc- to be a sister to us. Schl.]
trine de communir9 f ione idiomatum ; but
HISTORY OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH. 157
quily (as it was then termed) or the boundless presence of Christ s human
nature, which the Lutheran church had never adopted as her doctrine, was
taught in it. Besides these reasons, perhaps other and secret ones influ
enced duke Julius not to adopt the Formula. There were various ne
gotiations with him and his theologians, to remove these difficulties ; and
particularly in the year 1583, a convention of theologians from the electo
ral Palatinate, Saxony, Brandenburg, and Brunswick, was held at Qued.
linburg for the purpose of terminating this dissent : Out Julius remained
inflexible in his purpose, and wished to have the cause of the Formula re.
ferred to a council of the whole Lutheran church. (54)
43. In Saxony itself, not a few detested in their hearts, that Formula
which thr.y subscribed with their hands ; holding fast the doctrines which
they had received from Melancihon and his friends. And these, on the
death of Augustus and the accession of Christian I., who from his child
hood had been imbued with the milder sentiments of Melancthon. and is
said to have been too friendly to the doctrines and institutions of the Swiss
again lifted up their heads, and seemed to be plotting against the Formula
of Concord, in order to open the way for Calvinistic opinions and regula
tions to be introduced among the Saxons. And they found much support
from men of the first rank, and especially from Nicholas Crell, the prime
minister of state. Through their influence, first some laws were enacted
which might prepare the minds of the people to acquiesce in the contem
plated revolution ; and then, in the year 1591, the formula of exorcism as
it is called, was required to be omitted in the administration of baptism. (55)
Moreover, not only was there a new German catechism published, which
was favourable to the designs of these patrons of the Reformed doctrines,
but likewise a new edition of the German Bible with the notes of Henry
Salmuth, adapted to the object in contemplation, was prepared in 1591 at
(54) See Leonh. Hatter s Concordia con- trine in both was the same. So that if they
cors, cap. xlv., p. 1051. Phil. Jid. Refit- had been disposed, they might easily have
mcyer s Braunschweig. Kirchenhistorie, vol. compromised this point. So also the two
iii., ch. viii., sect. 1, p. 483, and the wri- other points were not so very important,
ters mentioned by Christ. Matth. Pfa/, de The Helmstadt theologians would not con-
Actis et scriptis ecclesiae Wiirtemberg., p. cede the ubiquity: yet they held it possible
62, and in his Historia litterar. Theolog., that Christ, as man, should be in various
pt. ii., p. 423. On the conference at Qued- places at the same time. Now, how far is
linburg and its Acts, see also the Danische one who concedes this, from believing the
Bibliothek, part viii., p. 595, &c. [The ubiquity 1 ! The grand difficulty was this,
court appears to have been actuated in this The electoral Saxons had, in the whole bu-
rnatter, by political considerations. For the siness, assumed U.9 much to themselves,
objections of the theologians to the Formu- and had acted as lawgivers to the church.
la, might admit an answer. The first ob- It was perceived that if this matter was al-
jection, respecting the discrepance between lowed to pass thus, the elector of Saxony
the printed and the written copies of the would personate the pope, and his principal
Formula, was founded on fact. There clergy the cardinals ; and they would in
really were words and phrases interpolated future prescribe laws to the whole Lutheran
in some of the statements, which were not church. They would- therefore maintain,
in the written copy. The other party did against the Saxons, their right to think for
not deny the fact; but said, they were themselves in matters of religion, and would
minute things, and not alterations of the show, that they conceded to Saxony the
doctrine, but merely changes in the phrase- direction of religious affairs, only under cer-
ology, introduced for the sake of perspicuity, tain restrictions. Schl. ]
And this was actually true. Dr. Mosheim (55) See Jo. Mclchior Kraft s Geschicht*
once compared the subscribed opy with dcr Exorcismi, p. 401, &c.
the printed ; and, as he asserted, the doc-
158 BOOK IV. CENT. XVI. SEC. III. PART II. CHAP. I.
Dresden. And as violent commotions and seditions of the people now
broke out every where, the government animadverted severely on those
ministers of religion who opposed the designs of the court. But the sud
den death of Christian, which took place this very year, frustrated all these
machinations. The theologians by whom the business had been prinod
pally managed, were, after the death of the elector, punished with impris
onment and exile ; and Crell the prime director of it, received in 1601 tha
fruit of his temerity, by being brought to a capital punishment. (56)
44. At the end of the century, Samuel Huber a Swiss of Bern, indis
creetly awakened a new controversy at Wittemberg where he taught the
ology. Fired with hatred of the Calvinistic doctrine of absolute decrees,
he maintained, that the whole human race were from eternity elected of
God to salvation ; and he accused his colleagues, together with all the di
vines of the Lutheran church, of being Calvinists ; because they taught
that those only are elected, whom God foresaw would die in faith. Learn
ed men are at this day agreed, that Huber swerved from the common Lu
theran doctrine, in words rather than in meaning : for what the Lutherans
maintain respecting the love of God as embracing the whole human race,
and excluding no one absolutely from eternal salvation, this he would ex
plain in a new manner and in new phraseology. But this age having
learned from numerous examples, that new phraseology and new modes of
explaining doctrines produced as lasting and as pernicious disturbance as
new errors, urged Huber to adopt the old and universal method of teach
ing, in preference to his own. And when he declared that he could not
do so, and his patrons here and there threatened to produce disturbance,
he was compelled to relinquish his office, and go into exile. (57)
45. That the controversies here recounted, and others of less magni
tude, were very injurious to the public interests of the church founded by
Luther, no one who is well informed in the history of those times, will deny.
The method also of discussing and terminating controversies, in that age,
if estimated according to the modern views of good men, contained much
that was inconsistent with equity, moderation, and charity. And while
they are unjust, who load with reproaches the authors of those evils, indis
criminately, and boldly pronounce them destitute of all reason and all vir
tue ; those are still more unjust, who cast all the blame on the victors, and
pronounce the vanquished to be saints and deserving of a better fate.
That men recently led out of the thickest darkness into the light, should
not at once discern and distinguish all objects, as they are able to do who
have long been in the light, is not at all strange. Besides, that was an un-
(56) See Godfr. Arnold s Kirchen-und cree and election, as equivalent to gracious
KetzerL storie, pt. ii., book xvi., ch. xxxii., invitation. This he supposed, in the eter-
p. 863, and the writers mentioned by Hcrm. nal counsels of God, extended to all men
Ascan. Engelcken, Diss. de Nic. Crellio, equally, and without distinction. But to
ejusque supplicio : Rostoch, 1724. make their calling and election sure, they
(57) The writers on this controversy are must repent and believe ; which, he sup-
mentioned by Christ. Matth. Pfaff, Intro- posed, the greater part of mankind will not
ductio in Histor. litterar. Theolog., pt. ii., do, and of course will be damned to all
lib. iii., p. 431, &c. [See, in particular, eternity. This he expressly stated in the
Godfr. Arnold s Kirchen-und Ketzerhisto- confession of his faith, which he published in
rie, book xvi., ch. xxx., vol. i., p. 952, &c. 1595. See Arnold, 1. c., p. 953, and
It must not be supposed by the incautious Schrocckh, Kirchengesch. seit der Reform.,
leader, that Huber believed in the final sal- vol. iv., p. 664 TV.]
nation of all men He used the words de-
HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH. 159
polished age, and one that not only t ftlerated but applauded many things in
morals and in the modes of living, acting, and contending, which modern
times, improved by experience and education, disapprove and reject. But
with what views and intentions the individuals contended, whether they
acted maliciously or ingenuously and in good faith, belongs not to us to
decide, but to Him who knows the hearts of men.
4G. The theologians among the Lutherans, who illustrated the various
branches of sacred learning, form a very long list. Besides Luther and
Melancthon, who excelled all the rest in genius and learning, the more dis
tinguished were, Hieronymus Wetter, Martin Chemnitz, John Brentius, Mat
thias Flacius, Urban Regius, George Major, Nicholas Amsdorf, Erasmus
Sarcerius, John Matthesius, John Wigand, Francis Lambert, James Andrea,
David Chyiraus, Nicholas Selnecker, Martin Bucer, Paul Fagiiis, Cas-per
Cruciger, Victorin Strigelius, Cyriacus Spangenberg, Matthew Judex, Tide-
mann Heshusius, Joachim Westphal, John JEpinus, Andrew Osiander, and
many others. (58)
CHAPTER II
HISTORY OF THE REFORMED CHURCH.
1. General Character of the Reformed Church. 2. Causes of this Character.
3. Origin of this Church. 4. Zwinglian Contests respecting the Lord s Supper.
5. History of them, till Luther s Death. 6. Transactions after his Death. 7.
Controversy respecting Predestination. 8. The Height of it. 9. Two Periods in
the early History of this Church. $ 10. Points of Difference between the Swiss and
the Lutherans. 9 11. John Calvin a principal Founder of this Church. 12. The
Doctrine and Discipline inculcated by Calvin. 13. All the Reformed did not em
brace his Views. 14. Progress of this Church in Germany. 15. Progress in
France. 16. Progress in England and Scotland. 17. Rise of the Puritans. $ 18,
19. Their Opinions. 20. Their Fundamental Principles. 21. Sects among them.
Brownists. $ 22. The Dutch Reformed Church. $ 23. Reformed Church of Poland.
$ 24. The Bohemian Brethren. 25. Waldensians : Hungarians: Transylvanians.
26. Churches which joined the Reformed. 27. Diversity among the Reformed.
28. Their Doctrines. t) 29. Their Dissent from the Lutherans. <$> 30. Importance
of the Difference. 31. Ecclesiastical Power. <$> 32. Organization of the Church.
() 33 Church Discipline. 34. State of Learning. $ 35. Biblical Expositors. 36.
Dogmatic Theology. 37. Practical Theology. 38. Calvin s Contest with the
Spiritual Libertines. 39. His Contests with the Genevans. 40. Castalio. 41.
Bolsec. 42. Ochin. 43, 44. Controversy between the Puritans and the Episco
palians.
1. THE church which chooses to be called the Reformed, or the Evan.
%dwal Reformed church, and which was formerly by its opposers called
the Zwinglian or the Cahinistic church, and is now by many called the
(58) For an account of these, Mtkhior arately written, with care, in our age ; e. ff.
Adam s Vitae Theologorum, the historical the life of Hieronymus Weller, by Lactfimel,
and literary [and biographical] Dictionaries, of Fl a civs by Ritter, of Heshusius and Span-
Lewis Elies du Pin s Bibliotheqoe des Au- genberg by Leuckfeld, of Fagius by Fcuer-
teurs separes de la communion de 1 Eglise lin, of Chytrccus by Schutzc, of Wcsfphalby
Romaine, and others, may be consulted. Arn. Grevius, of Buccr by Vcrporten, of
The lives of many of them have been sep- jEpinus by Grevius, &c.
160 BOOK IV.- CENT. XVI. SEC. III. PART II. CHAP. II.
Cahinistic Reformed,(l) differs in character from nearly all others. Foi
all others stand united by the bond of a common system of doctrine and
discipline ; but this is not the case with the Reformed church. It neither
holds to one system of faith, for it has many creeds considerably variant ;
nor adopts the same modes and forms of worship ; nor has it every where
the same constitution and government. Of course, this church does not
require of its ministers, that they should all hold and teach the same
things ; but allows very many points of doctrine and those of no little con-
sequence to be variously stated and explained", provided the great first prin
ciples of religion and piety remain inviolate. This church may therefore
be called a great community, made up of various kinds of churches ;
which the moderation of all in tolerating dissent, keeps from splitting into
various sects. (2)
2. Such was not the original character of this church, but it was
thrown into this state by the force of circumstances. The Swiss with
whom it originated, and especially John Calvin who was the second father
of it, spared no pains to bring all the congregations that united with them,
to adopt the same forms of faith and practice and the same mode of gov
ernment ; and while they looked upon the Lutherans as brethren that
were in error, they were not disposed to grant indulgence and impunity
themselves, nor were they willing their associates should grant it, to those
who openly favoured the Lutheran views of the Lord s supper, the person
(1) [In England and America, the term the fundamental doctrines of Christianity,
Reformed is commonly applied to all the yet frequent separate places of worship,
different sects, which in this century separa- and have each a visible centre of external
ted from the Romish church ; and the term