73. Meeting of Theologians.

At Smalcald the first duty imposed upon the scholars and theologians was

once more to discuss the Augustana and the Apology carefully, and to

acknowledge both as their own confessions by their signatures. Thereupon

they were, in a special treatise, to enlarge on the Papacy. The

Strassburg delegates report: "It has also come to pass that the scholars

received orders once more to read the articles of the Confession and to

enlarge somewhat on the Papacy, which they did." (Kolde, _Analecta,_

298.) However, since neither the Augustana nor its Apology contained an

article against the Papacy, the demand of the princes could only be

satisfied by a special treatise, the "Tractatus de Potestate et Primatu

Papae," which Melanchthon wrote and completed by February 17, whereupon

it was immediately delivered to the princes.

The princes had furthermore ordered the theologians, while reviewing and

discussing the Augustana (and its Apology), to reenforce its doctrine

with additional proofs. Owing to lack of time and books, this was not

carried out. February 17 Osiander reports to the Nuernberg preachers:

"We are enjoying good health here, although we traveled in stormy

weather and over roads that offered many difficulties, and are living

under a constantly beclouded sky, which unpleasantries are increased by

troublesome and difficult questions in complicated matters.... The first

business imposed on us by the princes embraces two things: first, to

fortify the Confession and the Apology with every kind of argument from

the Holy Scriptures, the fathers, councils, and the decrees of the

Popes; thereupon, diligently to discuss in detail everything concerning

the Primacy, which was omitted in the Confession because it was odious.

The latter we completed so far to-day that we shall immediately deliver

a copy to the princes. The former, however will be postponed to another

time and place, since it requires a longer time, as well as libraries,

which are lacking here." (_C. R._ 3, 267.)

The discussion of the Confession was also to serve the purpose of

obtaining mutual assurance whether they were all really agreed in

doctrine. This led to deliberations on the doctrine of the Lord's Supper

as well as on the question what concessions might be made to the

Romanists. According to a report of Melanchthon, March 1, the

theologians were to discuss the doctrines, not superficially, but very

thoroughly, in order that all disagreement might be removed, and a

harmonious and complete system of doctrines exist in our churches. They

were to review the Confession in order to learn whether any one

deviated in any article or disapproved of anything. But Melanchthon

remarks that this object was not reached, since the special request had

been voiced not to increase the disagreement by any quarrel and thus to

endanger the Smalcald League. (_C. R._ 3, 292.) In a second letter of

the same date he says that a real doctrinal discussion had never come to

pass, partly because Luther's illness prevented him from taking part in

the meetings, partly because the timidity of certain men [the Landgrave

and others] had prevented an exact disputation lest any discord might

arise. (296.) March 3 he wrote to Jonas in a similar vein saying that

the reports of violent controversies among the theologians at Smalcald

were false. For although they had been in consultation with one another

for the purpose of discovering whether all the theologians in attendance

there agreed in doctrine the matter had been treated briefly and

incidentally. (298.)

As far as the Lord's Supper is concerned Melanchthon's report concerning

the superficial character of the doctrinal discussions is little if at

all exaggerated. He himself was one of those timid souls of whom he

spoke having from the beginning done all he could not only to bar

Luther's articles from the deliberations but also to prevent any

penetrating discussion of the Lord's Supper. Assent to the Wittenberg

Concord was considered satisfactory although all felt, and believed to

know, that some of the Southern Germans did not agree with the loyal

Lutherans in this matter. Of the attending theologians who were under

suspicion Bucer, Blaurer, Fagius, Wolfart, Fontanus, and Melander, only

the first two took part in the deliberations. (292.) March 1 Melanchthon

wrote to Camerarius: "Bucer spoke openly and clearly of the Mystery [the

Lord's Supper] affirming the presence of Christ. He satisfied all of our

party also those who are more severe. Blaurer, however, employed such

general expressions as, that Christ was present. Afterward he added

several more ambiguous expressions. Osiander pressed him somewhat hotly;

but since we did not desire to arouse any very vehement quarrel, I

terminated the discussion. Thus we separated, so that agreement was

restored among all others, while he [Blaurer] did not seem to

contradict. I know that this is weak but nothing else could be done at

this time, especially since Luther was absent, being tortured by very

severe gravel pains." (292.)

This agrees with the report Veit Dietrich made to Foerster, May 16,

stating: At the first meeting of the committee of the theologians they

completed the first nine articles of the Augustana. Blaurer, Wolfart,

and some others of those who were doctrinally under suspicion (_nobis

suspecti de doctrina_) were present. "However, when the article of the

Lord's Supper was to be discussed on the following day, the meeting was

prevented, I do not know by whom. It is certain that the princes, too,

desired another meeting, because they feared a rupture of the [Smalcald]

Alliance, if any doctrinal difference should become evident, which,

however, would occur if the matter were thoroughly discussed. Since the

disputation was prevented, we were commissioned to write on the Power of

the Pope in order to have something to do. Report had it that Blaurer

did not approve the Concord of Wittenberg; certainly, he asked Philip

for expressions of the Fathers (which are now in my possession), in

order to be better furnished with arguments. This prompted Pomeranus and

Amsdorf again to convene the theologians against Melanchthon's will.

Then the Lord's Supper was discussed. Bucer indeed satisfied all.

Blaurer, however, while speaking vaguely of the other matters,

nevertheless publicly attacked the statement that the ungodly do not

receive the body of Christ." Wolfart declared that he was present at the

Concord made at Wittenberg, and had approved it. It was unpleasant for

him [Dietrich] when hereupon Stephanus Agricola and then Wolfart

rehashed some old statements, _vetera quaedam dicta._ (370.)

Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church · 第 80 / 313 题