_________________________________________________________________ Historical Introduction First Chapter THE ORIGIN OF THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION. From THE AUGSBURG CONFESSION, A Collection of Sources J.M.Reu. Concordia Theological Seminary Press, Fort Wayne, Indiana. pgs. 3-113 Part 3 of 6 ______________________________________________________________ That the Emperor was sincere in his willingness to discuss and adjust difficulties can hardly be questioned. Indeed he had time and again declared that the current ecclesiastical conditions were no longer to be endured. The call for a Christian universal council, which was to check the spreading abuses, even connected him with the reformers.62 And it also can be stated with certainty that he expected his efforts to be successful. The thought, that the small insignificant little princes could resist him for any length of time, was absolutely foreign to him. He believed in himself, in 42 Historical Introduction the towering might and the inviolable dignity of his singular personality which just recently had received the highest benediction through the consecrating hand of the Pope. But where his own efforts were not sufficient he could always fall back on the notorious skill of his Machiavellian diplomats. Very few were able to cope the mastery of their practice. They understood the policy divide et impera; to take each prince or city alone and with promises, threats, or suspense, with favors or slights make them pliable and finally so completely ensnare them that they helplessly agree to anything so as not to lose the Emperor's necessary goodwill. How characteristic it therefore was that the Emperor's proclamation offered only a hasty reference regarding the course to be taken. Every single estate was to be heard and given an opportunity to voice its opinion, thoughts and ideas. Evidently the Emperor did not care to deal with a larger group such as had come together in signing the Protest at Speyer. He intended to recognize only individual, independent princes and cities who would be able to inform him regarding the actual conditions in the churches of their own domain. In this way he hoped to gain an insight into their doctrine, their innovations, their whole ecclesiastical outlook, and to make practical use of this information; to keep the separate cities apart, to make more acute their differences, especially those concerning the doctrine of the Sacrament, and so nip in the bud every effort to form a party. Then again it was to gain a suitable point of departure for a varying treatment in particular cases and finally to obtain the necessary foundation for his office of arbitrator. No wonder that the Emperor later on clung, with a firm logical determination, to his first idea and demanded again and again that only individual confessions and defensive writings be presented. Origin of the Confession 43 The Edict of Worms, the bull, the imperial ban, and the decree of Speyer of 1529 were wisely not mentioned in the summons. Not that the Emperor refused to recognize their reality. He simply set them aside, for the time being, since he wished to play the role of a mediator. If he should succeed in leading the heretics back into the bosom of the Church they would become superfluous. If he failed in this undertaking then they still were in force and could be invoked at any time. Prudently nothing was said in the summons whether the discussion of the opinions submitted was to take place in public or privately and in secret, nor if the Evangelical theologians would be allowed to be present and take part in the deliberations; it was not even stated whether the confessions, which were to be presented, were to be delivered and read in public. We know that the Pope made it the Emperor's duty to conduct deliberations secretly and in private, without public hearing and debates. This is easily understood for if Luther's doctrine already condemned by the Pope, was again to be debated, the opinion might prevail that the Pope's decision had not definitely settled the matter. The imperial summons received a varied reception. The old faction heard only generosity and could not understand nor become reconciled to it. They furthermore, could not understand how a matter already settled by the Pope was again to be considered, much less that this could happen through the Emperor who now expected to judge in matters of faith. But also among those of the new faith the summons was not everywhere read with undivided joy. The Landgrave of Hessia, this born statesman and farseeing politician among the Evangelical princes, also a sworn enemy of the Habsburgian world power, probably understood the document better than all. He understood that, in spite of the conciliatory tone. it was inspired by the spirit of "Divide et impera" 44 Historical Introduction and, therefore, must be received with great caution.62 It was also dangerous for him to appear before the Emperor for long was the list of his offenses. The Pack affair, his leaning toward Zwingli, his alliance with Strassburg and the Swiss cities, his unceasing efforts in helping the banned Duke of Wuerttemberg to return to his land, his attempt to slip a heretical book into the Emperor's hand;64 all this and more stood between him and Emperor Charles. But dangers rather incited the Landgrave than frightened him. Not out of fear, therefore, did he first refuse to attend the Diet, but out of consideration that it could be useless or even dangerous for the Evangelical cause. The Emperor would play one Evangelical opinion against the other and in the end try to present the Catholic doctrine as the happy medium. But above all the Landgrave was of the opinion that the Christian and the secular are to be strictly divided; neither Emperor nor Diet have any jurisdiction in religious matters. Not they, but the whole Christian Church, embodied in the general council which deliberates and decides on the basis of the Word, had, according to his opinion, the last word in all matters pertaining to conscience and the salvation of the soul. In harmony with this he then instructed his delegates. Moreover, he refused to admit that the relations between emperor and princes were that of master and servant, subject to the Fourth Commandment. The Saxons, following Luther Ä although not entirely without faltering Ä saw in the Emperor the godgiven ruler who was to be obeyed in all things. If he demanded something which violated their conscience they were to offer only passive resistance, as Luther wrote to the Elector as late as March 6, 1530, "Even if the Imperial Majesty errs and transgresses his duty and oath this does not abolish his imperial authority nor the obedience of his subjects as long as the empire and the electors recognize him Origin of the Confession 45 as their emperor and do not remove him." Over against this the Landgrave stressed that there also could be an end to this obedience and that the princes' duty toward their own subjects was far more important than their duty toward the Emperor. Finally, made wise by his experiences in Rotach, Saalfeld, Schwabach and Schmalkalden, he must have told himself that no united Evangelical stand for the gospel against the Emperor could be expected. Many of the South-German cities thought likewise.65 Above all Strassburg did not think the Emperor capable of any honest thoughts of peace and denied him, as a matter of principle, every right to decide in religious affairs. The imperial summons reached the Margrave George of Brandenburg-Ansbach in far-off Krakau. Therefore he could not appear in Augsburg at the set term. Still he has the honor of being the first of the Evangelical estates to realize the necessity of equipping himself for the Diet with writings of vindication.65 As soon as the 29th of January he commanded all of his superintendents to point out, on the ground of Holy Scripture, the basis and cause for their faith as well as the newly introduced church order. They were also to demand similar reports from all pastors under their jurisdiction. Especially were these three questions to be answered 1. What is right and true worship? 2. Which are the abuses which God Himself has condemned through his prophets and apostles? 3. If, and for what reasons, has a Christian government the power to abolish abuses? In the "Ansbach Religious Documents" we still have 49 of the Answers that were handed in at that time. Gussmann gave us three of them in 1911; in the collection "Die Fraenkischen Bekenntnisse' (Franconian Confessions), Muenchen, 1930 thirteen more are found. The Margrave also instructed his Counsellor, Fritz van Lidwach, to go, with one or two 46 Historical Introduction theologians, to Augsburg and defend the abolishing of abuses and intercede for the establishing of goodly Christian order. It would also be well if he did not remain isolated but if all estates, who are one in faith and Sacrament with the Margrave, would unite in peace. Especially was he to get in touch with Nuernberg and the Elector of Saxony, with whom the Margrave previously had dealt regarding the articles of faith and the order of visitation. The proclamation was received by the Elector and his people with unclouded joy. Before its arrival a resigned spirit had prevailed at his court. It had caused offence that nothing had been heard from the Emperor, although he had landed in Genoa as far back as the 12th of August. They began to believe those mysterious rumors that Charles V really did not expect to come to Germany at all but would return immediately after his coronation by the Pope to his Spanish court. They had become reconciled to the inevitable even if with bad grace. So much greater therefore was their surprise when the summons finally did arrive and on the 11th of March was handed the Elector. Its contents brought unadulterated joy. Upright and honest, to the core, the Elector, Luther and Melanchthon did not deem it possible that the Emperor's words should not mean what they said. The winning, fatherly tone awakened in them again something of the former old enthusiasm Ä a mixture of naive good nature, religious awe and monarchical faithfulness Ä which at the time of his first visit to German soil had so warmly greeted the "young Charles, the noble blood." The Elector, in notable difference to the Landgrave and his position of principle, voiced the hope, "that such Diet probably was to be held in place of a council or national assembly."66 It is not surprising that now the special delegation to the Emperor that had been planned, did not seem quite so important. Only because the Origin of the Confession 47 Counts von Nassau and Neuenahr, who probably knew the language and temper of the court far better than he, still thought it necessary, did the Elector instruct (March 16) Hans von Dolzig for his journey to Dillenburg and the imperial court (Second Part, 16). H. v. Schubert has again given us the text of these instructions. In it Dolzig and the Counts were instructed, in the Elector's behalf, to make many significant excuses and pleas in the above mentioned matters, but they were in no wise authorized to make any concessions in religious matters. In these matters, the Elector, although sharply separated from the Sacramentarians, is still standing, firmly, as a matter of conscience, behind the Protest of Speyer. He is willing to submit his confession of faith as well as his churches' order of service to the Emperor. For this purpose, he gave Dolzig a copy of "The Sum Total of Articles which concern the Faith," i.e., the Schwabach Articles, also a statement about "the customs followed in our land regarding the ceremonies," probably a copy of the German Mass of 1526, or, as seems still more probable, the Instruction for the Visitors of 1528 (Second Part, 1). It is easy to understand that this "Instruction" was sent because it is a detailed advise to the ministers what they are to preach and what the order of service on Sundays and other Festival Days ought to be.67 How, however, the Elector could justify sending a document like the Schwabach Articles to the Emperor without conferring with the others who joined in this confession, especially with the Margrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach and the Council of Nuernberg, remains, to say the least, a question. As energetically as the thought must be rejected that the Elector wished to betray his fellow-believers, still there never was such a combination of subjective honesty, deplorable selfishness and political simplicity as in this portentious hour. Hans von Dolzig reached Dillenburg on the 26th of 48 Historical Introduction March and left later with the Counts for the imperial court. Led astray by false reports regarding the Emperor's route from Italy to Augsburg, they reached Innsbruck on the 30th of April, only five days before the Emperor. Of greater importance for the Elector than the special delegation, was the question whether he should attend the Diet and if so what preparations he was to make for it. His counsellors, to whom he referred the matter, all advised him, with especial consent of the prince, John Frederick, to attend the Diet if his health permitted. He was to make arrangements to leave at once, if possible before Judica Sunday. They thought that in this way it would be easier for him to obtain the Emperor's endorsement of his electorship and, since questions of faith were to be treated Ä and in a way the Diet would take the place of a council Ä they thought his presence doubly to he desired. So arrangements for his visit to the Diet were made in all haste. The attendants were chosen, authorized substitutes were selected for cities and offices, allied princes were urged to attend the Diet at Augsburg, letters of safe conduct were secured for the lands through which they would travel and not even was it forgotten to order public prayers in all churches for the success of the Diet.68 It probably was the far-seeing electoral Chancellor, Dr. Gregory Brueck, who had collected all the documents, which in any way could be of value in the Emperor's well-known separate negotiations and had them ready for the journey to Augsburg, packed in a black, a white and a red chest.69 But he recommended one thing more. Since, according to the imperial summons, "every one's opinion and ideas are to be heard" he advised "that those opinions on which our party so far has stood and remained, be brought together in an orderly way, in writing and thoroughly confirmed by the divine Word so that, if the estates are not Origin of the Confession 49 permitted to present their opinions through their theologians, we may do this in writing."70 Then the statesmen, not familiar enough with the facts, would always have something to fall back on. The Elector was willing to attend the Diet in person and also adopted Dr. Brueck's suggestion. So the electoral request went to Luther, Justus Jonas, John Bugenhagen and Melanchthon (already on March 14) to speedily deliberate regarding the articles "in which there is declared contention both in faith and also in outward church usages, rules and customs" and personally report to him by March 20.71 But although the matter was rushed as much as possible Ä Luther, in the same night of March 14, called back Jonas who was absent on visitation Ä a second admonition was necessary on March 21 and the result of the Wittenberg deliberations was probably not handed the Elector until it was delivered at Torgau by Melanchthon on March 27.72 What was the result? Long the search had lasted and yet no document was found bearing the title "Torgau Articles" or "Opinions Delivered at Torgau." The search failed since the electoral instructions seemed to refer to a series of articles which took up both the faith and the ceremonies. Then Foerstemann was fortunate in finding a report of the religious deliberations of Augsburg written by none less than the Saxon Chancellor Brueck himself (Vorzaichnus der handlung, wie sich uf dem reichstag zu Avgsburg in der religion sache zugetragen. Anno Domini 1530), They were published in the first and only number of his Archiv fuer die Geschichte der Reformation (1831). Documents are appended to this manuscript which deal mostly with some phase of the Augsburg Diet. The third of these supplements contains seven separate essays. These Foerstemann also published Ä unfortunately in a different order than in the original documents Ä two years later in his Urkundenbuch zu der Geschichte des 50 Historical Introduction Reichstags zu Augsburg im Jahre l530.73 In the original order they dealt with the following seven matters: The First, De Missa, is a separate article, while the rest, copied by the same hand, runs on without any notable break, and later on received Ä although probably wrongly Ä the comprehensive title, "Report of the Elector of Saxony, how religious matters in their electoral states and principalities shall everywhere be conducted and what shall be taught and practiced in their electorate, etc." The Second consideration is divided into an introduction and ten articles: 1. Of human doctrine and human order; 2. De conjugio sacerdotum; 3. Of both forms; 4. De missa; 5. Of Confession: 6. De jurisdictione. Of episcopal jurisdiction and government; 7. Of ordination; 8. De votis. Of monastic life; 9. De invocatione sanctorum; 10. Of the German song. The Third is headed: Of faith and works. The Fourth deals with three cases: First, if his imperial majesty asked or demanded that my gracious Elector should require that fish and not meat be eaten on Friday and Saturday. Then also if his imperial majesty should demand that his electoral grace should not allow preaching. And for the third, if his imperial majesty should demand that his electoral grace attend mass. The Fifth contains nine articles. The first article of both forms in the Sacrament; the second article, of priest's marriage; the third article of the mass; the fourth of ordination or consecration: the fifth article of the Pope; the sixth of monasteries; the seventh article of confession; the eighth of fasting and differences in food; the ninth of the Sacraments. The Sixth Article is again divided into two parts. The first part begins: "In the churches of the Pope these things are found." The Seventh Article has three chapters: 1. The power of Keys. De potestate clavium; 2. Of the ban; 3. De gradibus conzanguinitatis. Of the degrees of relationship. Now Foerstemann defended the double supposition that Origin of the Confession 51 these six essays (with the exception of the fourth) were the long-sought Torgau Articles and that these had not contained any articles of doctrine at all but only had treated of the abolished abuses. The second supposition proved to be right but not the first one. With the correctness of the second supposition the fable, which with tenacity descended for centuries from generation to generation, that nothing but the twenty-three Visitation Articles, or the real seventeen Schwabach Articles were presented in Torgau was forever discredited. Since Jacobs also accepted Foerstemann's first supposition he translated all of the essays (excepting the fourth) as "Torgau Articles." But Engelhardt had already attacked this supposition and Theo. Brieger rendered us a service in 1888 when he proved that the Torgau Articles by no means are the contents of all of these six articles, but of the second one. This is the essay which under the title, "The Wittenberg theologians' considerations, what his imperial majesty is to be presented concerning the ceremonies and kindred affairs." was taken along to Augsburg. Neither Gussmann nor J. van Walter could render this uncertain.74 Yet Gusmann may he correct when he stated (1911) that the fifth essay is in so far connected with the Torgau Articles that it presents, so to speak, a summary record of the oral deliberations of the Wittenberg theologians, while the second is Melanchthon's careful compilation of what these scholars agreed upon.75 It reads, in many ways, like a formal defense, intended for the Emperor, for the abolishing of abuses in Saxony. This second essay, as stated above, is divided in an introduction and ten articles: 1. Of human doctrine and human order; 2. De conjugio sacerdotum; 3. of both forms; 4. De missa; 5. Of confession; 6. De jurisdictione; 7. Of ordination; 8. De votis. Of monastery life; 9. De invocatione sanctorum; 10. Of German song. (Second Part, 19). One 52 Historical Introduction only need read these articles to understand without difficulty that they are, in spite of all later changes, the basis of the second part of the Augsburg Confession. That in everything it was not yet meant to be the final draft of the document to be presented to the Emperor, but that much had to be changed and polished, is to be seen by this Latin remark found after the first paragraph of the introduction: In hanc sententiam prodest praeponere praefationem longam et rhetoricam. Also it is stated in the introduction why, in opposition to the electoral request to report on faith and ceremonies, they had concentrated on the latter: An exposition of faith and doctrine is not necessary since even the opponents admit that the doctrine preached in the Elector's land is "Christian and comforting and correct in itself," and the "contention primarily had arisen about certain abuses which had grown due to human precepts and doctrine." Also it is finally declared, "If one should desire to know further what our gracious Lord also permits to be preached, articles may be presented him in which the whole Christian doctrine is stated in order, so that it may be seen that our gracious lord does not permit heretical doctrine but has caused the true gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ to be preached in all its purity." There can be no doubt that Melanchthon, when speaking of articles "in which the whole Christian doctrine is stated," thinks of the Schwabach Articles. These the representatives of the Lutheran princes and cities had again adopted in Nuernberg in January, these the Elector handed, March 16, to Hans von Dolzig to be delivered to the Emperor (this of course Melanchthon did not know) and these, later on, really became the foundation of the first part of the Augsburg Confession. On the 3rd of April, Luther, (accompanied by his assistants Veit Dietrich) Justus Jonas and Melanchthon left Origin of the Confession 53 Wittenberg, expecting to accompany the Elector at least as far as Coburg. Here they hoped to hear "what would be done at the Diet at Augsburg in the presenting of everyone's opinions and ideas," especially as to whether the theologians were to have a part in this or not. As soon as the next day, Monday after Judica, they left Torgau with the Elector and his whole retinue. On the way there were joined, in the order mentioned, by George Spalatin from Altenburg, John Agricola from Eisleben and as a voluntary companion, Kaspar Aquila from Saalfeld. Weimar brought a lengthy rest Ä word had been received that the Emperor would reach Augsburg at a later date than announced Ä so that the party first reached Coburg, the point farthest south in the Electorate, on Good Friday, the 15th of April. Here the Elector and his company celebrated Easter while waiting for news of the Emperor's arrival and the time of the Diet. On the 23rd of April he continued his journey. It would have pleased him to take Luther along to Augsburg but due to the fact that the ban rested on Luther, it could not be considered. He did expect to take him as far as Nuernberg, partly because he wished to know him to be in a safe place, and also be cause he wished to have him as near as possible. But the negotiations with Nuernberg did not lead to this result. Kolde published the pertaining documents,76 but he was mistaken when he blamed the "fainthearted" Nuernberg council that was anxious to retain the Emperor's good will at all cost. H. von Schubert77 showed that the Nuernbergers were led by reproachless considerations: To open the city for Luther would be no service to the Gospel and would be against the best interests of Luther, the Elector, and their own city. In no way did they falter in their attitude to the Gospel or to Luther. The Elector understood their position quite well and did not feel hurt at all. So Luther was 54 Historical Introduction taken to the fortress Coburg while the Elector, with the others, went on to Augsburg. The route was by way of Bamberg and Forchheim to Nuernberg, where the Elector tarried a day, and then by way of Roth, Weissenburg and Donauwoerth to Augsburg. He entered the city on the 2nd of May, the first of all the princes to arrive for the Diet. While yet in Coburg, Melanchthon had begun to revise, in matter of style, the so-called Torgau Articles, the "Apology" which was to be presented at the Diet, and had also written the missing preface (C. R. II, 39). Since 1912, we are familiar with this Coburg preface. Willkomm published it from the manuscripts of the University of Jena.78 We present this text among the documents in Part Two, document number 12 From this preface three things are evident: 1. The Elector's court and the Wittenbergian theologians at this time expected, aside from God, everything from the Emperor, whose jurisdiction, to decide in this religious question, (thereby differing from Strassburg and the Landgrave) they did not question; and of whom they believed that he would listen to the Word of God and judge accordingly: 2. What had been prepared for the Diet was a defense of the Elector and was to justify the introduction of new church customs in his land; 3. It was to be exclusively the Elector's defense; the other Evangelical estates are not considered, discriminating against the Margrave George, who from the very beginning referred his representatives to Nuernberg and Saxony and with whom he had come to an understanding regarding the articles of faith and the nature of the Sacrament. But much more was this discriminating against the Landgrave, who wished to absent himself from the Diet because he only reluctantly wished to break with the Swiss and altogether refused to do so with the Strassburgers although he realized that the others would not unite with them. The situation Origin of the Confession 55 can be briefly described: The Landgrave wanted a union of all Evangelical estates in spite of their differences in the doctrine of the Sacrament; Brandenburg wished to unite only with those with whom they agreed, especially in the matter of the Sacrament, while the Elector did not think of uniting with anyone, but expected to remain and act absolutely alone. The indefatigable Melanchthon continued to labor in the following days while en route, as well as after reaching Augsburg on the document, which was to be presented, particularly on the preface. If all appearances are not deceiving, then we still have a page from Melanchthon's very own hand which is being treasured in the archives at Weimar. It is nothing else than one of these corrected pages of the preface written in Coburg. Foerstemann had already given us its contents without realizing its true character. Kolde and again Gussmann pointed in the right direction, until finally Willkomm79 proved the identity of the page and arranged it in its proper connection. We also reproduce this document in the Second Part of this book (document No. 21). The changes consisted mostly in this that while Melanchthon in the first draft of the preface anxiously avoided mentioning Luther's name now, probably since it had been definitely decided that Luther was not to go to Augsburg but remain in Coburg, calls him by name several times: "When then Luther rebuked this unseemingly preaching and proclamation of indulgences, as was his duty, with a short Latin sermon and yet everywhere diligently treated the papal power with all consideration, the opposition began to press him hard with Latin and German abusive writings, so that he was compelled to point out the ground and reason for his opinion. In this he has spoken about so many great and important matters, how the conscience was to be consoled by faith in Christ, that many educated and honest men have found his doctrine Christian and necessary; how formerly so many false and untrue doctrines of this, how grace and 56 Historical Introduction forgiveness of sin was to be obtained, were preached and written, and yet the grace of Christ ought to be the most important sermon and doctrine in all Christianity. So Luther first did not touch upon any other abuse but put forth alone this chief doctrine, which is necessary for all Christians to know. The opponents, however, did not cease but again and again have fought against Luther with citations, bans and improper writings and have caused much more abuse, and through their own impropriety have caused themselves so much apostasy that changes followed in many places. At the same time Luther stood firm and fought against all incompetent teachings and unnecessary changes with all his might. For before Luther many have attacked not only the morals of the clergy but many dogmas, which would have caused much more damage if Luther had not offered resistance." When Melanchthon from Augsburg on the 4th of May wrote to Luther: "I have fashioned the Preface to our apology more rhetorical than I had written it in Coburg," he hardly had these changes in mind but only such as we find in the Preface and Confession found by Schornbaum and published by Kolde. More of this anon. The first week of the stay in Augsburg, however, brought a far greater change in the Saxon protective document than these changes in the Preface. Hardly had Melanchthon reached Augsburg when he became acquainted with the newly issued publication, Dr. Eck's "Four hundred and four Articles for the Diet in Augsburg." It created an entirely new situation and produced new problems. Already in the just mentioned letter to Luther of May 4, Melanchthon himself touches on the matter, for he wrote: "Eck has compiled a large mass of inferences." What are the facts regarding Dr. Johann Eck's theses or 404 articles? Until recently a few printed copies were still available but were getting rare. In this country, H. E. Jacobs, in 1908, used the copy of the seminary library at Mt. Airy for his translation.79 To be sure, all specialists in Origin of the Confession 57 Augsburg Confession research were acquainted with the articles and some of them, as Plitt, Kolde and Ficker has shown their influence on the Confession. But a critical edition, with a reliable historical introduction and commentary, had not been published until Gussmann did so in this year of the Jubilee.80 Here the historical background of Dr. Eck's articles was first made clear and the form, especially the very significant dedication, which was sent to the Emperor, made known to us. Most important of all, Gussmann carefully examined the structure and purpose of the 404 articles and showed their influence on the Augsburg Confession. The same Ferdinand, who in Speyer (1529) did not hesitate to substitute, in place of the Emperor's his own proposition with the demand that the Worms' Edict be enforced, also had a hand in Eck's articles. As early as July 4, 1524, while at the Regensburg Convent, he had already sent a request to the senate of the Vienna University asking the four faculties to prepare in all haste a compendium which would afford a complete insight in the heretical writings and innovations in the faith recently circulated among the people.81 Ferdinand came back to this idea in January 1530. In his mandate of January 12, to the members of the Collegium Archiducale in Vienna,82 he demanded that they were first to examine Luther's writings but were also to arrange carefully, with notations as to sources, all the others of the last twelve years, together with all the old and new heresies, changes in the sacraments and ecclesiastical order, seditious speeches, invectives and other errors, in a summary. This was to be in his hands by the first of March 1530. So that they could know what was required of them he also enclosed an outline. The first part was to cover the dogmatical: Old and new apostacies from the Catholic faith were to be listed. Then was to follow: Changes in the sacraments, adulteration 58 Historical Introduction of the Scripture, and confusion in the religious life. Finally the political: Abolishing, opposing and vilifying of all spiritual as well as secular government, riots, bloodshed, disobedience and insolent attack on all divine and human laws. So when the imperial letter of January 11, which authorized Ferdinand to call the diet for the first of March or the first of June of 1530, reached him, he extended his demand, made to the Collegium at Vienna on January 22, so that it was also sent to the other Catholic princes and their universities83 (Second Part, 17). He realized that the time was at hand to make a frontal attack. Armed with the largest possible bill of indictments which was backed by all the theological minds of whole Germany, the papal faction was to advance in closed formation and frustrate, from the very beginning, all efforts at a peaceful agreement. Then the Emperor and the faltering estates would be forced to agree to an unequivocal enforcement of the Edict of Worms. The demand made of the Duke George of Saxony at the time is still in existence. It is not known whether it Ä and others Ä were effective. But the Dukes of Bavaria passed it on to their University Ingolstadt84 and Eck's 404 Articles are the result. They, therefore, are and remain the result of Ferdinand's vast attempt to bring about the final ruin of the Evangelicals, although they were the only fruit of this action. The request of the Bavarian Dukes reached the theological faculty in Ingolstadt on the 19th of February. Very little time would be left to write this summary if it was to be ready for the Diet. Furthermore, Dr. Eck, who alone in Ingolstadt could he considered for this task, was a very busy man. But, as Gussmann has said,85 his singular talents, characterized not only by a clear brain, a dependable memory, a ready eloquence and unbridled pugnacity, but also by an iron diligence, a vast knowledge, an unscrupulous sophistry and Origin of the Confession 59 an audacity, taken aback by nothing, placed him in a position to solve extraordinary problems with remarkable ease. And where, in all the Roman camp, was another theologian to be found who, with the same clearness and care, could whip in shape the vast amount of material, as Eck? As one of the first to enter the battle he had attacked both the Wittenbergers and the Swiss Ä later on also the Anabaptists; had remained in uninterrupted touch with the Roman court, maintained an intensive intercourse with most of the Catholic leaders and had taken part in all the important conferences, diets and meetings. Besides he could make use of a considerable number of his own and other similar papers as also the outline for a similar undertaking which as early as 1523 he had worked out in minutest detail for Pope Hadrian VI. So even if it sounded phantasmic when later on, in his quarrel with Erasmus, he stated that when he took up the pen to write the 404 Articles he had before him 3000 sentences gathered by himself; and even if his love of exaggeration compells us to make a sharp reduction, still his statement may be true in this case. At any rate we know that he undertook the task and that the desired compendium was finished in less than a month. The copy prepared for the Emperor carries March 14 as date of the dedication (Second Part, 22). Yet the document was not wholly what had been desired. First of all, it did not show how the teachings of the heretics could be refuted since it was planned as a series of theses which Eck hoped to refute in an open disputation during the Diet. Calling attention to himself as the well-known and victorious defender of the truth he catalogues in opening: 1. The 41 theses of the Bull Exsurge Domine which really were his own; 2. The theses which he had presented in July 1519 at the Leipzig Disputation; 3. The articles for the discussion at Baden in Aargau (May 1526) and the 60 Historical Introduction subsequent remarks on the documents of the meeting at Bern (January 1528). Then in Articles 66-404, the main part, he takes up his new material giving it the heading, "Errores novi et veteres iam ventilati." In these he loosely followed the outline which had been given the Vienna faculty, for three groups, a dogmatic (66-169), an ecclesiastical (170-332) and a political-social section (333-404), are visible in these articles. Within these groups there is, however, little to be discovered of a definite plan, since the theses are often very arbitrarily joined to each other. Wherever he noticed a deviation from the Roman doctrine or tradition or something that is contrary to anything that has been taught him, he drags it forth at the most suitable opportunity and, as it were, tossed it as another fagot on the ever-growing pyre on which the heretics are to suffer a well-earned punishment. Therefore, no better description can be found for the Four hundred and four Articles than the one which in recommendation is stressed on the title page, "Habes hic compendium errorum, quos hoc saeculo aeditos et conscriptos novimus, immundum certe Augiae stabulum, quod ut bene mundetur, summopere optandum et petendum a Deo Opt. Max." Luther's name dominates the catalog of heretics. He is the accursed heretic, the father of lies, the head of the Lernaean snake. Around him are massed the group of his scholars, disciples and friends: Phil. Melanchthon, Johann Bugenhagen, Justus Jonas, Johann Lange, Jacob Strauss, Antonius Zimmermann and in a certain way also Andrew Bodenstein of Karlstadt. At this point the lines divide. The one leads to the Sacramentarians, the Anabaptists and fanatics. The first in line are the Swiss and their associates, the South-Germans: Zwingli, Oecolampadius, Ambrose Blaurer, Otto Brunfels, Bucer, Benedict Burgauer, Berthold Haller, Capito, Franz Kolb, Conrad Schmid, Stephan Stoer, the Strassburg clergy, the Zuerich and Bern council. Then follow the Anabaptists: Balthasar Hubmaier, Oswald Glaib John Landsberger. The last in line are the fanatics represented by John Denk and the Zwickau prophets. _________________________________________________________________ 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: CFWLibrary@CRF.CUIS.EDU Surface Mail: 6600 N. Clinton St., Ft. Wayne, IN 46825 USA Phone: (219) 481-2123 Fax:(219) 481-2126 ________________________________________________________________