The attitude of the _Formula of Concord_ with respect to Luther's _De
Servo Arbitrio_ was shared by contemporary Lutheran theologians. They
expressed objections neither to the book itself nor to its public
endorsement by the _Formula of Concord_. In 1569 the theologians of
Ducal Saxony publicly declared their adherence to the doctrine "set
forth most luminously and skilfully (_summa luce et dexteritate
traditum_)" in _De Servo Arbitrio_, the _Commentary on Genesis_, and
other books of Luther. (Schluesselburg 6, 133.) That the authors of the
_Formula of Concord_ were fully conscious of their agreement with
Luther's _De Servo Arbitrio_ and his _Commentary on Genesis_ appears
also from the _Apology of the Book of Concord_, composed 1582 by
Kirchner Selneccer, and Chemnitz. Instead of charging Luther with
errors, these theologians, who were prominent in the drafting of the
_Formula or Concord_, endorse and defend his position, _viz_., that we
must neither deny nor investigate the hidden God, but search the Gospel
for an answer to the question how God is disposed toward us.
In this _Apology_ the opening paragraph of the section defending Article
XI of the _Formula of Concord_ against the Neustadt theologians reads as
follows: "In their antilog [antilogia--attack on Article XI of the
_Formula of Concord_] regarding God's eternal election and
predestination they merely endeavor to persuade the people that in this
article the doctrine of the _Christian Book of Concord_ [_Formula of
Concord_] conflicts with the teaching of Doctor Luther and his book _De
Servo Arbitrio_, while otherwise we ourselves are accustomed to appeal
to Luther's writings. They accordingly charge the _Book of Concord_ with
condemning Luther, who in the book called _Servum Arbitrium_ maintained
the proposition that it was not superfluous but highly necessary and
useful for a Christian to know whether God's foreknowledge (_Versehung_)
is certain or uncertain, changeable, etc. Now, praise the Lord, these
words of Dr. Luther are not unknown to us, but, besides, we also well
know how Dr. Luther in his last explanation of the 26th chapter of the
First Book of Moses explains and guards these words of his." (Fol.
204a.) After quoting the passages from Luther's Genesis, which we cited
above (p. 223f.), the _Apology_ continues: "With this explanation of
Luther we let the matter rest. If our opponents [the Neustadt
theologians] wish to brood over it any further and in their
investigating and disputing dive into the abyss or unfathomable depth of
this mystery, they may do so for themselves [at their own risk] and
suffer the consequences of such an attempt. As for us we are content to
adhere to God in so far as He has revealed Himself in His Word, and lead
and direct Christianity thereto, reserving the rest for the life to
come." (405a.)