In 1573, the Calvinization of Electoral and Ducal Saxony was,
apparently, an accomplished fact. But the very next year marked the
ignominious downfall and the unmasking of the dishonest Philippists. For
in this year appeared the infamous _Exegesis_, which finally opened the
eyes of Elector August. Its complete title ran: "_Exegesis Perspicua et
ferme Integra Controversiae de Sacra Coena_--Perspicuous and Almost
Complete Explanation of the Controversy Concerning the Holy Supper." The
contents and make-up of the book as well as the secret methods adopted
for its circulation clearly revealed that its purpose was to deal a
final blow to Lutheranism in order to banish it forever from Saxony.
Neither the author, nor the publisher, nor the place and date of
publication were anywhere indicated in the book. The paper bore Geneva
mark and the lettering was French. The _prima facie_ impression was that
it came from abroad.
Before long, however, it was established that the _Exegesis_ had been
published in Leipzig by the printer Voegelin, who at first also claimed
its authorship. But when the impossibility of this was shown, Voegelin,
in a public hearing, stated that Joachim Curaeus of Silesia, a physician
who had left Saxony and died 1573, was the author of the book. Valentin
Loescher, however, relates (_Historia Motuum_ 3, 195) that probably
Pezel and the son-in-law of Melanchthon, Peucer, had a hand in it; that
the Crypto-Calvinist Esram Ruedinger [born 1523, son-in-law of
Camerarius, professor of physics in Wittenberg, died 1591] was its real
author; that it was printed at Leipzig in order to keep the real
originators of it hidden, and that, for the same purpose, the Silesian
Candidate of Medicine Curaeus had taken the responsibility of its
authorship upon himself. (Tschackert, 547.)
Self-evidently, the Wittenberg theologians disclaimed any knowledge of,
or any connection with, the origin of the _Exegesis_. However, they were
everywhere believed to share its radical teachings, and known to have
spread it among the students of the university, and suspected also of
having before this resorted to tactics similar to those employed in the
_Exegesis_. As early as 1561, for example, rhymes had secretly been
circulated in Wittenberg, the burden of which was that faith alone
effects the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper, and that the mouth
receives nothing but natural bread. One of these ran as follows: "Allein
der Glaub' an Jesum Christ Schafft, dass er gegenwaertig ist, Und speist
uns mit sei'm Fleisch und Blut Und sich mit uns einigen tut. Der Mund
empfaeht natuerlich Brot, Die Seel' aber speist selber Gott." (Walther,
46.) Of course, the purpose of such dodgers was to prepare the way for
Calvinism. And on the very face of it, the _Exegesis Perspicua_ was
intended to serve similar secret propaganda.
The chief difference between the preceding publications of the
Philippists and the _Exegesis_ was that here they came out in clear and
unmistakable language. The sacramental union, the oral eating and
drinking (_manducatio oralis_), and the eating and drinking of the
wicked, which before were passed by in silence, are dealt with
extensively and repudiated. The _Exegesis_ teaches: The body of Christ
is inclosed in heaven; in the Holy Supper it is present only according
to its efficacy, there is no union of the body of Christ with the bread
and wine; hence, there neither is nor can be such a thing as oral eating
and drinking or eating and drinking of unbelievers. The "ubiquity," as
the _Exegesis_ terms the omnipresence of Christ's human nature, is
condemned as Eutychian heresy. The _Exegesis_ declared: "In the use of
the bread and wine the believers by faith become true and living members
of the body of Christ, who is present and efficacious through these
symbols, as through a ministry inflaming and renewing our hearts by His
Holy Spirit. The unbelieving, however, do not become partakers, or
_koinonoi_, but because of their contempt are guilty of the body of
Christ." (Seeberg, _Grundriss_ 146.)
After fulsome praise of the Reformed, whose doctrine, the _Exegesis_
says, is in agreement with the symbols of the ancient Church, and who as
to martyrdom surpass the Lutherans, and after a corresponding
depreciation of Luther, who in the heat of the controversy was said
frequently to have gone too far, the _Exegesis_ recommends that the
wisest thing would be to follow the men whom God had placed at the side
of Luther, and who had spoken more correctly than Luther. Following
Melanchthon, all might unite in the neutral formula, "The bread is the
communion of the body of Christ," avoiding all further definition
regarding the ubiquity [the omnipresence of Christ's human nature] and
the eating of the true body of Christ, until a synod had definitely
decided these matters. (Tschackert, 547.)
All purified churches (all churches in Germany, Switzerland, etc.,
purified from Roman errors), the _Exegesis_ urges, "ought to be in
accord with one another; and this pious concord should not be disturbed
on account of this difference [regarding the Holy Supper]. Let us be
united in Christ and discontinue those dangerous teachings concerning
the ubiquity, the eating of the true body on the part of the wicked, and
similar things. The teachers should agree on a formula which could not
create offense. They should employ the modes of speech found in the
writings of Melanchthon. It is best to suppress public disputations, and
when contentious men create strife and disquiet among the people, the
proper thing to do, as Philip advised [in his opinion to the Elector of
the Palatinate], is to depose such persons of either party, and to fill
their places with more modest men. The teachers must promote unity, and
recommend the churches and teachers of the opposite party." (Walther,
51.) Such was the teaching and the theological attitude of the
_Exegesis_. It advocated a union of the Lutherans and the Reformed based
on indifferentism, and a surrender in all important doctrinal points to
Calvinism, the Lutherans merely retaining their name. This unionistic
attitude of the _Exegesis_ has been generally, also in America, termed
Melanchthonianism.