134. Melanchthon's Humanistic and Unionistic Tendencies.

Till about 1530 Melanchthon seems to have been in complete harmony with

Luther, and to have followed him enthusiastically. To propagate, coin,

and bring into scholastic form the Christian truths once more brought to

light by the Reformer he considered to be his peculiar mission. But his

secret letters and, with gradually increasing clearness and boldness,

also his publications show that later on he began to strike out on paths

of his own, and to cultivate and disseminate doctrines incompatible with

the Lutheranism of Luther. In a measure, these deviations were known

also to the Wittenberg students and theologians, to Cordatus, Stifel,

Amsdorf, the Elector John Frederick, Brueck, and Luther, who also called

him to account whenever sufficient evidence warranted his doing so.

(_Lehre und Wehre_ 1908, 61ff.)

In a letter to Cordatus, dated April 15, 1537, Melanchthon was bold

enough to state that he had made many corrections in his writings and

was glad of the fact: "_Multa ultro correxi in libellis meis et

correxisse me gaudeo._" (_C. R._ 3, 342.) In discussing the squabble

between Cordatus and Melanchthon whether good works are necessary for

salvation, Luther is reported by the former to have said, in 1536: "To

Philip I leave the sciences and philosophy and nothing else. But I shall

be compelled to chop off the head of philosophy, too." (Kolde,

_Analecta,_ 266.) Melanchthon, as Luther put it, was always troubled by

his philosophy; that is to say, instead of subjecting his reason to the

Word of God, he was inclined to balance the former against the latter.

The truth is that Melanchthon never fully succeeded in freeing himself

from his original humanistic tendencies, a fact which gave his mind a

moralistic rather than a truly religious and Scriptural bent. Even

during the early years of the Reformation when he was carried away with

admiration for Luther and his work, the humanistic undercurrent did not

disappear altogether. January 22, 1525, he wrote to Camerarius: "_Ego

mihi conscius sum, non ullam ob causam unquam tetheologekenai, nisi at

mores meos emendarem_. I am conscious of the fact that I have never

theologized for any other reason than to improve my morals." (_C. R._ 1,

722.) Such, then, being his frame of mind, it was no wonder that he

should finally desert Luther in most important points, lapse into

synergism and other errors, and, in particular value

indifferentistically doctrinal convictions, notably on the real presence

in the Lord's Supper and the person of Christ. "Over against Luther,"

says Schaff, "Melanchthon represented the unionistic and liberal type of

Lutheranism." (_Creeds,_ 1, 259.) This is correct; but the stricture

must be added that, since unionism and liberalism are incompatible with

the very essence of Lutheranism, Melanchthonianism as such was in

reality not a "type," but a denial of Lutheranism.

Melanchthon lacked the simple faith in, and the firm adherence and

implicit submission to, the Word of God which made Luther the undaunted

and invincible hero of the Reformation. Standing four-square on the

Bible and deriving from this source of divine power alone all his

theological thoughts and convictions, Luther was a rock, firm and

immovable. With him every theological question was decided and settled

conclusively by quoting a clear passage from the Holy Scriptures, while

Melanchthon, devoid of Luther's single-minded and whole-hearted devotion

to the Word of God, endeavored to satisfy his reason as well.

Consequently he lacked assurance and firm conviction, wavered and

vacillated, and was never fully satisfied that the position he occupied

was really the only correct one, while, on the other hand, he endeavored

to present his views concerning some of the disputed doctrines in

ambiguous and indefinite terms. "We have twenty-eight large volumes of

Melanchthon's writings," says C. P. Krauth, "and, at this hour,

impartial and learned men are not agreed as to what were his views on

some of the profoundest questions of church doctrine, on which

Melanchthon was writing all his life!" (_Conservative Ref.,_ 291;

Schmauk, 748.) This indefinite and wavering attitude towards divine

truth, the natural consequence of the humanistic bent of his mind,

produced in Melanchthon a general tendency and proneness to surrender or

compromise doctrinal matters in the interest of policy, and to barter

away eternal truth for temporal peace. It made him an indifferentist and

a unionist, always ready to strike a bargain also in matters pertaining

to Christian faith, and to cover doctrinal differences with ambiguous

formulas. While Luther's lifelong attitude on matters of Christian

doctrine is characterized by the famous words spoken by him at Worms in

1521: "_Ich kann nicht anders,_ I cannot do otherwise," Melanchthon,

treating even questions of faith as matters of expediency rather than of

conscience, was the man who, as a rule, could also do otherwise, and who

was great in manufacturing "Polish boots," as the ambiguous phrases by

which he endeavored to unite opposing parties were called by the

Lutherans in Reuss.

In order to preserve peace with the Romanists at Augsburg in 1530, he

did not hesitate to sacrifice Lutheran truths and to receive into the

bargain a number of what he considered minor papal errors. In his

subsequent overtures to the Reformed he was more than willing to make

similar concessions. The spirit of Melanchthon was the spirit of

religious indifference and of unionism, which, though thoroughly

eliminated by the Formula of Concord, was from time to time revived

within the Lutheran Church by such men as Calixtus, Spener, Zinzendorf,

Neander, and, in our own country, by S. S. Schmucker.

The unionistic tendencies and doctrinal corruptions which Melanchthon

injected into Lutheranism were all the more dangerous to our Church

because they derived special weight and prestige from the fact that

Luther had unstintingly praised his gifts, his books, and the services

he had rendered the Church (St. L. 18, 1671; 23, 1152), that he was now

generally regarded as Luther's successor with regard to theological

leadership of the Church; and that he was gratefully admired as the

Praeceptor Germaniae by a host of loyal pupils, who made it a point also

to cultivate just those theological peculiarities of Master Philip, as

they called him, in which he differed from Luther.

Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church · 第 144 / 313 题