CHAPTER III. CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE SAXON AND THE schools of Reformers. THE progress of the continental Reformation, to say nothing for the present of the various shades of Anabaptism and of other wild and revolutionary sects, developed two grand types of Christian doctrine, both of which, in all Two great their leading characteristics, have been transmitted from that continental period to our own. They are conveniently distinguished as the Saxon and the Swiss, or in more technical phraseology, as Lutheran' or Protestant and 'Calvinistic' or Reformed. The earlier struggle of the schools embodying these varieties of faith, of feeling and of worship, has been noted in the previous chapters, and in tracing their propagation through the different states of Europe, many an instance of unseemly altercation and collision were presented to our view. For example, when their founders were reluctantly drawn together at Marburg (1529), for the purpose of adjusting, as far as might be, the divergencies in their respective confessions, Luther was persuaded more and more that the two schools were actuated by a very different spirit2, and that reconciliation was impossible. 2 Ihr habt einen andern Geist als wir:' cf. Daniel's Codex Liturg. Eccl. Reform. Proleg. p. 3, Lips. 1851. On the whole history of this important Conference, see Schmitt's work, entitled Das Religions-gespräch zu Marburg, Marb. 1840. On the interviews relating to the Eucharist, a full account is given by Ebrard (Das Dogma vom heiligen Abendmahl, II. The doctrine of the Eucha subject of contention. The turning-point of all their controversies was the docrist one chief trine of the Eucharist, which also furnished one of the main criteria for determining how other subjects, more or less vitally connected with it, had been contemplated by the writers on both sides of the discussion. It is true that Bucer and the school of Strasburg in submitting the Tetrapolitan Confession' to the emperor Charles V., as well as in their subsequent acts of mediation, were disposed to underrate the magnitude of the controversy, and even to represent it as little more than verbal; but so long as it continued in its original shape, the disputants were plainly justified in ascribing to it vast importance. During the lifetime of Zwingli the question to be solved was, whether Christians might regard the consecrated elements as media or conductors, really and truly uniting them with Christ, or whether the thing signified being absolutely incapable of association with the outward sign, the Eucharist was merely an external badge of membership in some confederation called the Church. unnatural for Romanists of the age to 1 Above, p. 57, n. 2. Schenkel, vinum sint signa exhibitiva quibus datis et acceptis simul detur et accipiatur corpus Christi:' it being added by way of qualification, 'panem et corpus uniri non per substantiarum mixtionem, sed quatenus datur cum sacramento, id quod sacramento promittitur, h. e. quia uno posito aliud ponitur. Nam quoniam utrimque in eo consentiatur, quod panis et vinum non mutentur, ideo sacramentalem ejusmodi conjunctionem sese statuere.' Schenkel, Ibid. p. 545, n. 3. On these grounds rested the Concordia Vitebergensis (1536): see above, p. 63, n. 6. The tenacity with which Bucer clung to his quasiLutheran theory in opposition to John Laski and others, who symbolized more fully with the Swiss, is seen in the angry letter of Martin Micronius, dated London, Oct. 13, 1550: Original Letters, ed. P. S. p. 572; cf. Ibid. p. 652. by Calvin. At length, however, when Calvin had transferred the How modified disputations into far loftier ground2, the combatants with greater reason might have been expected to lay down their arms, and even to embrace each other. Partly owing to the influence exercised by the conciliatory Bucer, but still more to Calvin's reputation and his powerful arguments, the leading Swiss divines3 had gradually receded more and more from the position occupied by Zwingli till the controversy was no longer touching the reality of Christ's presence in the Eucharist, nor of His actual communication then and there to every faithful recipient. So far the Lutheran and Calvinist were now agreed: yet while the former taught that Christ was present in the elements and so connected with them after consecration, that even the wicked to their detriment became partakers of His glorified humanity, the latter contended no less strenuously that Christ is not communicated in or through, but rather with, the consecrated Bread and Wine; the union of the outward and inward parts of the sacrament being always conditioned by the faith of the recipient, and the communication of Christ to the believing soul effected only in a mystical or supersensuous way by some specific action of the Holy Ghost1. 1562, and avowedly in more general 4 The following extract from a aversion to rigorous def nitions. Nor could the Eucharistic controversy be long restricted to the how; polemics felt themselves conducted further in the logical development of their ideas, and henceforth they enquired more narrowly into the what. That Christ was verily and indeed communicated some how or other to the faithful, and communicated in virtue of some connexion with the elements themselves, had been conceded alike in Switzerland and Germany; but when it was demanded whether the thing communicated was the corporal matter of our Saviour's glorified humanity (the Lutheran hypothesis), or whether it was the complex Person of the Christ, Divine no less than human (which the Calvinist as vigorously maintained), the disputants had launched on questions full of the profoundest mystery, because relating to the mode in which the properties of the Godhead and the manhood coexist and interpenetrate each other in the undivided Christ2. Of those who shrank from the discussion of the awful topics thus propounded, none was more conspicuous than Melancthon's Melancthon3. Satisfied on reaching the conclusion that Christ is truly present in the Eucharist, and that His presence is most truly efficacious in all persons who faithfully receive Him, the devout reformer invariably discouraged those ulterior speculations, and at length, when he had partially succeeded at Wittenberg itself, attempted to cement a union with his fellow-workers in Switzerland. It was in the execution of this purpose that, having obtained the sanction of Luther, he published in 1540 a new edition of the Augsburg Confession, known as the Confessio Variata, where, sui virtute carnis suæ vivificæ nos 1 Ebrard, II. 526. 2 On the opening of these questions by Zwingli, see above, p. 122. 3 Above, p. 63, n. 6. 4 Dass diese Variata bloss die Geltung einer Privatschrift gehabt, ist eine Chimäre.' Ebrard, n. 526. Respecting the motives of Melanc thon for advocating the change, see Francke's Libr. Symb. Eccl. Luther. Part 1. Proleg. p. xxviii. n. 13, and for Luther's position with respect to it, Ebrard, II. 473 sq., Kahnis, pp. 390 sq. together with some subordinate changes on other topics, he hoped to state the doctrine of the Eucharist in such a manner as to reconcile the more judicious members of the two great parties. Ere long, however, many of the sterner Lutherans were prepared to combat such modification on the ground that it amounted to a virtual surrender of the truth delivered to the ancient Church. Their opposition was confirmed by the intemperate fulminations which Luther had himselfs put forth not long before his mortal illness, with the hope of crushing every remnant of those Zwinglian errors that continued to deny the doctrine of the real presence. According to the same objectors, Me- His consequent lancthon so far wavered on the subject as to justify a strong suspicion that he would eventually recede still further from the principles of his great colleague; and his fresh compliance with the Leipzig Interim, though it related to a different class of questions, naturally tended to diminish their respect for him, and shook their faith in his consistency. The death of Luther in the midst of these conflicting elements relaxed the powerful ties that hitherto had bound his followers into one community. The Philippists, or party favourable to Melancthon, who appear to have been most numerous in the Electorate of Saxony 8, Above, p. 65, n. 8. That Melancthon was in truth dissatisfied with the rigorous definitions of the Wittenbergers is next to certain. In addition to the passages quoted above, p. 63, n. 6, we find him writing as follows: 'Egoque, ne longissime recederem a veteribus, posui in usu sacramentalem Præsentiam, et dixi, datis his rebus, Christum vere adesse et efficacem esse. Id profecto satis est [cf. Hooker's Eccl. Pol. V. LXVII. 2]. Nec addidi inclusionem, aut conjunctionem talem, qua affigeretur 7 dρTW Tò aua, aut ferruminaretur, aut misceretur. Ego vero realem (conjunctionem) pono, hoc est, ut signis positis adsit vere Christus efficax :' 7 Above, p. 69. 8 The opposite party ('Flacianists,' unpopularity. |