Lutheran orthodoxy

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
For the Eastern Christian reformation movement, see
Protestant Eastern Christianity.
For the branch of Lutheranism based in the Byzantine Rite of the Eastern Orthodox Church, see Eastern Lutheranism.
Part of a series on
Lutheranism
Background
Doctrine and theology
Bible
Creeds
Book of Concord
  • Formula of Concord
    		•
    Distinctive theological concepts
    Other relevant topics
    Organization
    Movements
    Key figures
    Missionaries

    Bible Translators

    Theologians

    Lutheran orthodoxy was an era in the history of Lutheranism, which began in 1580 from the writing of the Book of Concord and ended at the Age of Enlightenment. Lutheran orthodoxy was paralleled by similar eras in Calvinism and tridentine Roman Catholicism after the Counter-Reformation.

    Lutheran scholasticism was a

    neo-Aristotelian form of presentation, already popular in academia, in their writings and lectures. They defined the Lutheran faith and defended it against the polemics
    of opposing parties.

    History

    Part of the series on
    Modern scholasticism
    Title page of the Operis de religione (1625) from Francisco Suárez.
    Background

    Protestant Reformation

    Counter-Reformation
    Aristotelianism
    Scholasticism
    Patristics

    Modern scholastics

    Second scholasticism of the School of Salamanca
    Lutheran scholasticism during Lutheran orthodoxy
    Ramism among the Reformed orthodoxy
    Metaphysical poets in the Church of England

    Reactions within Christianity

    The Jesuits against Jansenism
    Labadists against the Jesuits
    Pietism against orthodox Lutherans

    Calvinism

    Richard Hooker against the Ramists

    Reactions within philosophy

    Lutherans

    Spinozists
    against Dutch Calvinists
    Deists against Anglicanism
    John Locke against Bishop Stillingfleet

    This box:

    Crypto-Calvinists, Philippists, Sacramentarians, Ubiquitarians, and Gnesio-Lutherans
    .

    Early orthodoxy: 1580–1600

    See also: History of Lutheranism § Early Orthodoxy: 1580–1600

    The

    crypto-Calvinistic
    " influence. Lutheran theology became more stable in its theoretical definitions.

    High orthodoxy: 1600–1685

    See also: History of Lutheranism § High Orthodoxy: 1600–1685

    Lutheran scholasticism developed gradually, especially for the purpose of disputation with the

    Jesper Rasmussen Brochmand, Salomo Glassius, Johann Hülsemann, Johann Conrad Dannhauer, Valerius Herberger, Johannes Andreas Quenstedt, Johann Friedrich König and Johann Wilhelm Baier
    .

    The theological heritage of

    Georgius Calixtus (1586–1656), which caused the syncretistic controversy of 1640–1686. Another theological issue was the Crypto-Kenotic Controversy[1]
    of 1619–1627.

    Late orthodoxy: 1685–1730

    See also: History of Lutheranism § Late Orthodoxy (1685–1730)

    Late orthodoxy was torn by influences from rationalism and pietism. Orthodoxy produced numerous postils, which were important devotional readings. Along with hymns, they conserved orthodox Lutheran spirituality during this period of heavy influence from pietism and neology. Johann Gerhard, Heinrich Müller and Christian Scriver wrote other kinds of devotional literature.[2] The last prominent orthodox Lutheran theologian before the Enlightenment and

    Stephan Prätorius
    , which have often been later mixed with pietistic literature.

    David Hollatz[3] combined mystic and scholastic elements.[4]

    Content

    Scholastic dogmaticians followed the historical order of God's saving acts. First Creation was taught, then the Fall, followed by Redemption, and finished by the Last Things.[5] This order, as an independent part of the Lutheran tradition, was not derived from any philosophical method. It was followed not only by those using the loci method, but also those using the analytical.[6] The usual order of the loci:[5]

    1. Holy Scriptures
    2. Trinity (including Christology and the doctrine of the Holy Spirit)
    3. Creation
    4. Providence
    5. Predestination
    6. Image of God
    7. Fall of Man
    8. Sin
    9. Free Will
    10. Law
    11. Gospel
    12. Repentance
    13. Faith and Justification
    14. Good Works
    15. Sacraments
    16. Church
    17. Three Estates
    18. Last Things

    Lutheran scholasticism

    Background

    High Scholasticism in Western Christianity aimed at an exhaustive treatment of theology, supplementing revelation by the deductions of reason. Aristotle furnished the rules according to which it proceeded, and after a while he became the authority for both the source and process of theology.[4]

    Initial rejection

    Lutheranism began as a vigorous protest against scholasticism, starting with

    Scripture therefore became increasingly important to him.[8]

    In particular, Luther wrote theses 43 and 44 for his student Franz Günther to publicly defend in 1517 as part of earning his Baccalaureus Biblicus degree:[9]

    It is not merely incorrect to say that without Aristotle no man can become a theologian; on the contrary, we must say: he is no theologian who does not become one without Aristotle

    Martin Luther held that it was "not at all in conformity with the New Testament to write books about Christian doctrine." He noted that before the Apostles wrote books, they "previously preached to and converted the people with the physical voice, which was also their real apostolic and New Testament work."

    books of the Bible in an exegetical manner. To Luther, St. Paul was the greatest of all systematic theologians, and his Epistle to the Romans was the greatest dogmatics textbook of all time.[4]

    Analysis of Luther's works, however, reveals a reliance on scholastic distinctions and modes of argument even after he had dismissed scholasticism entirely. Luther seems to be comfortable with the use of such theological methods so long as the content of theology is normed by scripture, though his direct statements regarding scholastic method are unequivocally negative.[12]

    Loci method

    Main article:
    Loci Theologici

    Beginning of the loci method

    Loci Communes, 1521 edition
    Main article:
    Loci Communes

    In contrast,

    Loci Communes.[13]

    Flourishing of the loci method

    Mathias Haffenreffer, and Leonhard Hutter simply expanded upon Melanchthon's Loci Communes.[14] With Chemnitz, however, a biblical method prevailed. At Melanchthon's suggestion he undertook a course of self-study. He began by carefully working through the Bible in the original languages while also answering questions that had previously puzzled him. When he felt ready to move on, he turned his attention to reading through the early theologians of the church slowly and carefully. Then he turned to current theological concerns and once again read painstakingly while making copious notes.[15] His tendency was to constantly support his arguments with what is now known as biblical theology. He understood biblical revelation to be progressive—building from the earlier books to the later ones—and examined his supporting texts in their literary contexts and historical settings.[4]

    Analytic method

    Properly speaking, Lutheran scholasticism began in the 17th century, when the theological faculty of

    Wittenberg took up the scholastic method to fend off attacks by Jesuit theologians of the Second Scholastic Period of Roman Catholicism.[16]

    Origin of the analytic method

    The philosophical school of

    neo-Aristotelianism began among Roman Catholics, for example, the universities Padua and Coimbra. However, it spread to Germany by the late 16th century, resulting in a distinctly Protestant system of metaphysics associated with humanism.[17] This scholastic system of metaphysics held that abstract concepts could explain the world in clear, distinct terms. This influenced the character of the scientific method.[18]

    loci method used by Melancthon in his Loci Communes. This method made the presentation of theology more uniform, as each theologian could present Christian teaching as the message of salvation and the way to attain this salvation.[6]

    Flourishing of the analytic and synthetic methods

    After the time of

    analytic method, but all of them allowed Scripture to determine the form and content of their statements.[23]

    Abuse of the methods

    Some Lutheran scholastic theologians, for example,

    mysteries of the faith to fit into strict cause and effect relationships, they created "serious inconsistencies".[20] In addition, sometimes they drew unneeded or baseless conclusions from the writings of their opponents, which not only was unproductive, but also harmed their own cause more than that of their rivals.[20] Later orthodox dogmaticians tended to have an enormous number of artificial distinctions.[6]

    Merits of the methods

    On the other hand, the Lutheran scholastic method, although often tedious and complicated, managed to largely avoid vagueness and the fallacy of equivocation. As a result, their writings are understandable and prone to misrepresentation only by those entirely opposed to their theology.[20] The use of scholastic philosophy also made Lutheran orthodoxy more intellectually rigorous. Theological questions could be resolved in a clean cut, even scientific, manner. The use of philosophy gave orthodox Lutheran theologians better tools to pass on their tradition than were otherwise available. It is also worth noting that it was only after neo-Aristotelian philosophical methods were ended that orthodox Lutheranism came to be criticized as austere, non-Christian formalism.[6]

    Distinction between scholastic theology and method

    The term “scholasticism” is used to indicate both the scholastic theology that arose during the pre-Reformation Church and the methodology associated with it. While Lutherans reject the theology of the scholastics, some accept their method.[4] Henry Eyster Jacobs writes of the scholastic method:

    The method is the application of the most rigorous appliances of logic to the formulation and analysis of theological definitions. The method per se cannot be vicious, as sound logic always must keep within its own boundaries. It became false, when logic, as a science that has only to do with the natural, and with the supernatural only so far as it has been brought, by revelation, within the sphere of natural apprehension, undertakes not only to be the test of the supernatural, but to determine all of its relations.[4]

    Worship and spirituality

    Further information: Hymnody of continental Europe § Lutheran Orthodoxy and the Counter-Reformation

    Congregations maintained the full

    The Creed sung in Latin by the choir.[29]

    Church music flourished and this era is considered as a "golden age" of

    Reformation, due in part to the Thirty Years' War. Finland suffered a severe famine in 1696-1697 as part of what is now called the Little Ice Age, and almost one third of the population died.[33]
    This struggle to survive can often be seen in hymns and devotional writings.

    Evaluation

    The era of Lutheran orthodoxy is not well known, and it has been very often looked at only through the view of

    confessional Lutheran
    attempts to understand and restore Lutheran orthodoxy.

    More recently, a number of social historians, as well as historical theologians, have brought Lutheran orthodoxy to the forefront of their research. These scholars have expanded the understanding of Lutheran orthodoxy to include topics such as preaching and catechesis, devotional literature, popular piety, religious ritual, music and hymnody, and the concerns of cultural and political historians.[34]

    The most significant theologians of Orthodoxy can be said to be

    Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden
    .

    See also

    References

    1. ^ Lutheran Theology after 1580 article in Christian Cyclopedia
    2. ^ "Untitled Document". Archived from the original on 2015-09-24. Retrieved 2015-03-05.
    3. ^ For a selection of Hollatz's theology, see Examen, chapter 1, Prolegomena, question 18. (Google Books)
    4. ^ a b c d e f g h i Jacobs, Henry Eyster. “Scholasticism in the Luth. Church.” Lutheran Cyclopedia. New York: Scribner, 1899. pp. 434–5.
    5. ^ a b Hägglund, Bengt, History of Theology. trans. Lund, Gene, L. St. Louis: Concordia, 1968. p. 302.
    6. ^ a b c d Hägglund, Bengt, History of Theology. trans. Lund, Gene, L. St. Louis: Concordia, 1968. p. 301.
    7. ^ a b Marty, Martin. Martin Luther. Viking Penguin, 2004, p. 5.
    8. ^ a b c Marty, Martin. Martin Luther. Viking Penguin, 2004, p. 6.
    9. ^ Luther, Volume I by Hartmann Grisar, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner. 1913, page 313
    10. ^ quotes found in WA 10 I, I, p. 625, 15ff. taken from Morphologie des Luthertums [The Shaping of Lutheranism], (Munich: C.H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1931–32): Volume 1: Theologie und Weltanschauung des Luthertums hauptsächlich im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert [The Theology and World View of Lutheranism Mainly in the 16th and 17th Centuries]: translated by Walter A. Hansen: Werner Elert, The Structure of Lutheranism: The Theology and Philosophy of Life of Lutheranism Especially in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, Walter R. Hansen, (St. Louis: CPH, 1962). p. 188
    11. ^ WA 10 I, I, p. 627, taken from Morphologie des Luthertums [The Shaping of Lutheranism], (Munich: C.H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1931–32): Volume 1: Theologie und Weltanschauung des Luthertums hauptsächlich im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert [The Theology and World View of Lutheranism Mainly in the 16th and 17th Centuries]: translated by Walter A. Hansen: Werner Elert, The Structure of Lutheranism: The Theology and Philosophy of Life of Lutheranism Especially in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, Walter R. Hansen, (St. Louis: CPH, 1962). p. 188
    12. ISBN 978-0853648536
      .
    13. ^ For further investigation, see Outlines of Loci Communes (Google Books) and a selection from the work, "For What Reasons Should Good Works Be Done?" (Google Books)
    14. ^ For an example of this from Chemnitz, see this chapter on almsgiving Archived 2009-02-26 at the Wayback Machine from his Loci Theologici.
    15. ^ Martin Chemnitii einhändige Lebens-Beschreibung. Nebst denen ihm zu Braunschweig gesetzen Epitaphiis [Martin Chemnitz's Submitted Life-Description {Autobiography}. Together with the Epitaphs Erected to Him in Braunschweig]. 1719. Translated into English as An Autobiography of Martin Chemnitz. A.L. Graebner, trans. Theological Quarterly, vol. 3, no. 4 (1899).
    16. ^ Thorluck, A. Der Geist der lutherischen Theologen Wittenbergs im Verlaufe des 17. Jahrhunderts, Hamburg und Gotha, 1852, p. 55. as cited in Preus, Robert. The Inspiration of Scripture: A Study of the Theology of the 17th Century Lutheran Dogmaticians. London: Oliver and Boyd, 1957.
    17. ^ Hägglund, Bengt, History of Theology. trans. Lund, Gene, L. St. Louis: Concordia, 1968. p. 299.
    18. ^ a b Hägglund, Bengt, History of Theology. trans. Lund, Gene, L. St. Louis: Concordia, 1968. p. 300.
    19. ^ Gass, W., Geschichte der protestantischen Dogmatik, I, 206ff. as cited in Preus, Robert. The Inspiration of Scripture: A Study of the Theology of the 17th Century Lutheran Dogmaticians. London: Oliver and Boyd, 1957.
    20. ^ a b c d e Preus, Robert. The Inspiration of Scripture: A Study of the Theology of the 17th Century Lutheran Dogmaticians. London: Oliver and Boyd, 1957.
    21. ^ Kahnis, Karl Friedrich August, Die lutherische Dogmatik, Leipzig, 1874, I, 21. as cited in Preus, Robert. The Inspiration of Scripture: A Study of the Theology of the 17th Century Lutheran Dogmaticians. London: Oliver and Boyd, 1957.
    22. ^ Wundt, Maximilian., Die deutsche Schulmetaphysik des 17. Jahrhunderts, Tübingen, 1939, p. 110. as cited in Preus, Robert. The Inspiration of Scripture: A Study of the Theology of the 17th Century Lutheran Dogmaticians. London: Oliver and Boyd, 1957.
    23. ^ Kirn, Otto. Grundriss der evangelischen Dogmatik, Leipzip, 1905, p. 3ff. as cited in Preus, Robert. The Inspiration of Scripture: A Study of the Theology of the 17th Century Lutheran Dogmaticians. London: Oliver and Boyd, 1957.
    24. ^ For several selections of Gerhard's theology, Loci Theologici Book. 1. Prooemium 31 and Loci Theologici Book 1, Locus 2: De Natura Dei, ch. 4, 59. (Google Books)
    25. ^ Hägglund, Bengt, History of Theology. trans. Lund, Gene, L. St. Louis: Concordia, 1968. p. 301. For examples of Calov's dogmatic method, see these selections from Schmid's Dogmatics.
    26. ^ For several selections of Quenstedt's theology, see Didactico-Polemica Part 1, chapter 1, section 2, question 3 and Theologia Didactico-Polemica chapter 4: De Deo, section 2, question 1 (Google Books)
    27. ^ Gesch. d. ev. Kirche in Deutschland, p. 300 by Rudolf Rocholl
    28. ^ Worship and Liturgy in the 17th century Archived 2006-03-17 at the Wayback Machine Lutheran Music, accessed November 7, 2006
    29. ^ Worship and Liturgy in the 16th century Archived 2006-03-17 at the Wayback Machine Lutheran Music, accessed November 7, 2006
    30. ^ Hymnody, Christian Archived 2005-04-26 at the Wayback Machine, article in Christian Cyclopedia
    31. ^ Composers of the 17th century Archived 2006-03-17 at the Wayback Machine Lutheran Music, accessed November 7, 2006
    32. ^ Composers of the 18th century Lutheran Music, accessed November 7, 2006
    33. ISBN 0-465-02272-3
      .
    34. OCLC 1011233712
      .
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lutheran_orthodoxy&oldid=1266398389"