Feeling themselves firm and safe in the saddle, the Wittenberg
Philippists now decided on further public steps in the direction of
Calvinism. In 1570 they published _Propositions (Propositiones)
Concerning the Chief Controversies of This Time_, in which the Lutheran
doctrine regarding the majesty of the human nature of Christ was
repudiated. In the following year they added a new Catechism, entitled:
"_Catechesis_ continens explicationem simplicem et brevem decalogi,
Symboli Apostolici, orationis dominicae, doctrinae Christianae, quod
amplectuntur ac tuentur Ecclesiae regionum Saxonicarum et Misnicarum
quae sunt subiectae editioni Ducis Electoris Saxoniae, edita in Academia
Witebergensi et accommodata ad usum scholarum puerilium. 1571."
This Catechism, written, according to Wigand, by Pezel, appeared
anonymously. Its preface, signed by the Wittenberg theological faculty,
explains that the new Catechism was an epitome of the _Corpus Doctrinae
Misnicum_ and merely intended as a supplement of Luther's Catechism for
progressed scholars who were in need of additional instruction. As a
matter of fact, however, its doctrine concerning the person of Christ
and the Lord's Supper was in substantial agreement with the teaching of
Calvin. Under the odious name of "ubiquity" it rejected the omnipresence
of Christ according to His human nature, and sanctioned Calvin's
teaching concerning the local inclusion of Christ in heaven. Acts 3, 21
was rendered in Beza's translation: "_Quem oportet coelo capi_. Who must
be received by the heaven."
The Catechism declares: "The ascension was visible and corporeal; the
entire Antiquity has always written that Christ's body is restricted to
a certain place, wherever He wishes it to be; and a bodily ascension
was made upwards. _Ascensio fuit visibilis et coporalis, et semper ita
scripsit tota antiquitas, Christum corporali locatione in aliquo loco
esse, ubicumque vult, et ascensio corporalis facta est sursum_."
Concerning the real presence, the Catechism merely states: "The Lord's
Supper is the communication of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus
Christ as it is instituted in the words of the Gospel; in which eating
(_sumptione_) the Son of God is truly and substantially present, and
testifies that He applies His benefits to the believers. He also
testifies that He has assumed the human nature for the purpose of
making us, who are ingrafted into Him by faith, His members. He finally
testifies that He wishes to be in the believers, to teach, quicken and
govern them." (Gieseler 3, 2, 263.) The sacramental union, oral eating
and drinking, and the eating and drinking of the wicked are not
mentioned. Tschackert remarks that every Calvinist would readily have
subscribed to the teaching of this Catechism. (545.)
When the Wittenberg Catechism was warned against and designated as
Calvinistic by Chemnitz, Moerlin, and other theologians of Brunswick,
Lueneburg, Mansfeld, Jena, and Halle, the Wittenbergers answered and
endeavored to defend their position in the so-called _Grundfeste_, Firm
Foundation, of 1571. It was a coarse and slanderous publication, as even
the title indicates, which reads: "Firm Foundation of the True Christian
Church Concerning the Person and Incarnation of Our Lord Jesus Christ
against the Modern Marcionites, Samosatenes, Sabellians, Arians,
Nestorians, Eutychians, and Monothelites among the Flacian Rabble
Published by the Theologians in Wittenberg." In this _Grundfeste_ the
Wittenbergers present the matter as though the real issue were not the
Lord's Supper, but Christology. They enumerate as heretics also the
"Ubiquitists," including Brenz, Andreae, and Chemnitz. With respect to
their own agreement with Calvin, they remark that their teaching is the
doctrine of the early Church, in which point, they said, also Calvin
agreed. (Tschackert, 546.)
This daring Calvinistic publication again resulted in numerous protests
against the Wittenbergers on the part of alarmed Lutherans everywhere
outside of Electoral Saxony, which induced Elector August to require his
theologians to deliver at Dresden, October 10, 1571, a definite
statement of their faith. The confession which they presented was
entitled: "_Brief Christian and Simple Repetition of the Confession of
the Churches of God in the Territories of the Elector of Saxony
Concerning the Holy Supper_," etc. The _Consensus Dresdensis_, as the
document was called, satisfied the Elector at least temporarily, and was
published also in Latin and low German. Essentially, however, the
indefinite and dubious language of the Catechism was here but repeated.
Concerning the majesty of Christ the _Dresden Consensus_ declares that
after the resurrection and ascension the human nature of Christ "was
adorned with higher gifts than all angels and men." In His ascension,
the _Consensus_ continues, Christ "passed through the visible heavens
and occupied the heavenly dwelling, where He in glory and splendor
retains the essence, property, form, and shape of His true body, and
from there He, at the last day, will come again unto Judgment in great
splendor, visibly."
In a similar vague, ambiguous, and misleading manner Christ's sitting at
the right hand of God is spoken of. Omitting the oral eating and
drinking and the eating and drinking of the wicked, the _Consensus_
states concerning the Lord's Supper that "in this Sacrament Christ gives
us with the bread and wine His true body sacrificed for us on the cross,
and His true blood shed for us, and thereby testifies that He receives
us, makes us members of His body, washes us with His blood, presents
forgiveness of sins, and wishes truly to dwell and to be efficacious in
us." (Tschackert, 546.) The opponents of the Wittenbergers are branded
as unruly men, who, seeking neither truth nor peace, excite offensive
disputations concerning the real presence in the Lord's Supper as well
as with regard to other articles. Their doctrine of the real
communication ("_realis seu physica communicatio_") is characterized as
a corruption of the article of the two natures in Christ and as a
revamping of the heresies of the Marcionites, Valentinians, Manicheans,
Samosatenes, Sabellians, Arians, Nestorians, Eutychians, and
Monothelites. (Gieseler 3, 2, 264f.)