Reforming the Un-Reformed: Teachable Moments from Ursinus and the Heidelberg Catechism
Some background is offered below.
“Reforming” the unreformed Anglicans, Tractarians, Costals, Romanists and many others who might be teachable and reformable. We are aware that fools, however, are unteachable. This is a Catechism the English Reformers, including Reformed Archbishops of Canterbury, would have accepted. If solid then (and it was), it’s quite solid now. Forthwith, be it known to all here present, the time is now—or, yesterday—to insert the Heidelberg Catechism into the Book of Common Prayer and to use questions and answers just after the Apostles Creed and Nicene Creed. If the leaders are intractable, a day of new beginnings should hold forth; time for some goodbyes and some hellos. Some instructional thoughts for teachable moments from Mr. Ursinus for the above. Now, for some words from Mr. Ursinus.
http://www.seeking4truth.com/
Meanwhile the Elector was taken solemnly to account, in a more private way, by several of his brother princes, who seemed to think the whole empire scandalized by his unorthodox conduct. This led to the celebrated conference or debate of Maulbronn ; in which the leading theologians of Wirtemberg and the Palatinate came together, for the purpose of bringing the whole difficulty, if possible, to a proper resolution and settlement. The Heidelberg divines, were not themselves in favor of the measure ; apprehending more evil from it than good. But they allowed their objections to be over-ruled, not caring to show what might be construed in any quarter, into a want of confidence in their own cause. The conference took place in the month of April, 1564, and lasted we are told, a whole week, from the tenth day of the month to the sixteenth. Among the disputants from Heidelberg, were the Professors, Bocquin, Olevianus and Ursinus. On the other side appeared Brentius, two of the Tubingen Professors, and other distinguished divines. The burden of the debate, however, was thrown mainly upon Ursinus in the one case, and wholly upon James Andreas, the great and good chancellor of the University of Tubingen, in the other.
The acts of this colloquy of Naulbronn are of the highest value for the history of the German Reformed Church, and serve at the same time to throw a most honorable light on the whole character of Ursinus. They furnish throughout a lively image of his keen penetration, his comprehensive science, and his clear doctrinal precision, as well as a brilliant exemplification of the firmness with which he adhered to his own convictions of truth and right. His distinctions and determina tions, especially on the question of the Uliiquity, may be regarded as carrying with them a sort of truly classical authority for the Reformed theology in all sub sequent times.
The colloquy itself, however, only led afterwards to new controversy. It ended with a compact, indeed, to abstain from public strife, but, unhappily, this was soon forgotten and broken. Both sides, as a matter of course, claimed the victory ; and it was not long till an effort was made, on the part of the Wirtemberg divines, to establish this claim in their own favor, by publishing what they called an epitome of the debate in a form to suit themselves ; placing the whole discussion, with no email ingenuity and address, in a light by no means fair or satisfactory to the other eidje. To meet this misrepresentation, the divines of the Palatinate published, in the first place, a copy in full of the proceedings of the colloquy from the official record made at the time; and then added a clear and distinct reply to the Wirtemberg epitome, exposing what they conceived to be its grave offences against truth. This called forth, in the year 1565, the great " Declaration and Confession of the Theologians of Tubingen on the Majesty of the Man Christ, and the Presence of his Body and Blood in the Holy Supper. " Then came in reply again from the side of the Palatinate, in 1566, a " Solid Refutation of the Sophisms and Cavils of the Wirtemberg Divines," designed to make clean ground once more of the whole field. The controversy was renewed and continued thus in its full strength ; and the author of the Catechism was still required to hold a weapon for its defence in one hand, while he labored on its proper exposition with the other. Both services were well fulfilled.
Among his various apologetic tracts, the chief place is due to the Exegesis verae doctrinae de Sacramentis et Eucharistia, published in the name of the Heidelberg Faculty and by order of the Consistory, whose sanction gave it at the same time the force of a public confession. It was translated also into the vernacular tongue, and in a short time went through several editions. It is still a work of great interest and value, as it furnishes the most authentic interpretation, which is anywhere to be found, of the real sacramental doctrine of the Catechism, in the sense which it had in the beginning for Ursinus himself, as well as for the whole theological faculty of Heidelberg. As just intimated, howerw, the business of such public apology and defence for no means exhausted the labors of Ursinus in regard to this truly admirable symbol. The Catechism was fully enthroned in the Palatinate, from the begin ning, as the rule and measure of the public faith. It was made the basis of theo logical instruction in the University. It was introduced into all the churches and schools, under a regulation which required the whole of it to be gone over in course, in the way of familiar repetition and explanation, once every year. A regular system of catechisation was established in the churches, to which the afternoon of every Lord s day was devoted, and which was so conducted, as to include grown persons as well as children. Ursinus, in his capacity of professor, accommodated himself also to the general rule, and made it a point to go over the text of the Catechism once a year with his theological lectures. This custom he is said to have kept up regularly, on to the year 1577. Notes of his lectures were taken down by the students, which were allowed soon after his death, at three different places, to make their appearance in print. As much injustice was done to him, however, by the defective character of these publications, his particular friend and favorite disciple, David Pare us, who possessed besides all necessary qualifications foi the task, was called upon to revise the whole, and to put the work into a form that should be more faithful to the name and spirit of its illustrious au thor. This service of duty and love could not have fallen into better hands, and no pains were spared now to render the publication complete. Under such proper ly authentic form, it appeared first in the year 1591, at Heidelberg, in four parts, each furnished with a separate preface by Pareus ; since which time, it has gone through numerous editions, in different countries. The Heidelberg Catechism has been honored with an almost countless number of commentaries of later date ; but this first one, derived from Ursinus himself through David Pareus, has been gene rally allowed to be the best that has been written. No other, at all events, can have the same weight as an exposition of its true meaning.
In the midst of other agitations in the year 1564, the plague broke out with great violence in Heidelberg, causing both the court and the University to consult their own safety by withdrawing for a time from the place. During this solemn recess, Ursinus wrote and published a small work on Preparation for Death. It appeared first in Germany, but was translated afterwards into Latin, in which form it is found in the general collection of his Works, under the title of Pia Meditatio Mortis.
In the year 1571, he received an urgent call to Lausanne, which he seems to have been somewhat inclined to accept, in view chiefly of the undue burden ef his labors at Heidelberg, which was found to be greater than his physical constitution, naturally weak, could well support. To retain him in his place, the Elector allowed him to transfer a portion of his college service to an assistant.
His marriage with Margaret Trautwein, followed the year after, and is represented as having added materially to his comfort and rest. He was at the tune nearly forty years of age.
This domestic settlement, however, was not of long duration. With the death of his patron Frederick, in October 1576, the whole religious state of the Palatinate fell once more into disorder. He was succeeded in the electorate by his eldest son, Louis, whose previous connections had inspired him with a strong zeal for Lutheranism, in full opposition to the entire course of his father. Before his death, the old prince had sought an interview with his son, wishing to bring him under an engagement, if possible, to respect his views in regard to the church, as expressed in his last will and testament. Louis, however, thought proper to decline the interview, and subsequently showed no regard whatever to his father s directions. On the contrary, he made it his business, from the start, to turn all things into an entirely different train. The clergy, together with the mayor and citizens of Heidelberg, addressed a petition to him, praying for liberty of conscience, and offering one of the churches for the particular use of those who belonged to his confession. His brother, Duke Casimir, lent his intercession also, to sustain the request. But it answered no purpose j Louis declared that his conscience would not suffer him to receive the petition. The following year, accordingly, he came with his court to Heidelberg, dismissed the preachers, filled all places with Lutheran incumbents, caused a new church service to be introduced, and in one word, changed the public religion into quite another scheme and form. The more prominent theologians were soon compelled to leave- their places ; among whom of course, were the authors of the Heidelberg Catechism, Olevianus and Ursinus.
No comments:
Post a Comment