Fathers

A Candid Inquiry into the Controversies among Evangelicals · §117

§.VII: Opponents nearly αὐτοκατάκριτοι — they stretch the Invariata to swallow the Formula, then Dorsche's own canons clear the Philippica

Click or tap any sentence to jump there. The side buttons skip a paragraph.

Finally these opponents are caught at odds with themselves — all but αὐτοκατάκριτοι.

(1.) They stretch the unvaried Augsburg Confession and its sense so wide that they even fold into it the Formula of Concord's household doctrines — oral manducation of Christ's body, ubiquity or omnipresence of Christ's body, and the like — of which the Augsburg Confession never so much as dreamed — yes, the whole Formula, they say, is packed inside it.

Yet they strike out the Philippica Confession where it varies in some points, so as to make room for Brentian readings and consequences while Melanchthon's are barred and shut out.

Where the finger of Johann Georg Dorsche points — otherwise among the most learned Lutheran divines, and a name I speak only with reverence — in his Secular Disputation on the more noted consequences of the Augsburg Confession, forming among others these conclusions:

Interpretation of the Augsburg Confession admits whatever is drawn from it by legitimate consequence.

Also: Augsburg religion is not to be so narrowed by interpreting that it must be said to be expressed wholly, and in all its articles, inside the Augsburg Confession itself (ch. 2, pp. 182 and 200).

In plain: whatever the Formulists have already spun, or will invent later, is to count as unvaried Augsburg doctrine — because deduced, as they see it, by legitimate consequence.

But whatever Philip added or changed in declaring the Confession he himself once framed — and he may well seem its best interpreter, as of his own words — and whatever Philippists (Pezel, Sohn, Crocius, Georg Pauli, Hoffmann, the Helmstedt men, and others) comment and draw by consequences that seem legitimate to them, that is to be held most alien from the unvaried Confession.

(2.) Or with the same Dorsche in the next, third chapter they mint canons which, if admitted as not far from the truth, show the Variata Philippica altogether genuine to anyone who weighs it with an even hand — and only odiously harassed, even by Dorsche.

Variation of the Augsburg Confession of whatever kind, says Dorsche, even substantial, ought not to have talked anyone into crossing to another religion (Canon 2).

Therefore he who holds to the Philippica, though Dorsche calls it substantially varied, still holds to the religion the unvaried Augsburg Confession professes; the Philippica does not urge a crossing to another religion, still less binds a man to one.

Again: variation that brings no change into the substance of truth set out in the Augsburg articles ought not to be odiously harassed or used to push anyone outside the peace of religion (Canon 3).

Also: variation that leaves the original exemplars their place does not block the sincerity of the Augsburg Confession (pp. 216–218).

I subsume for the Variata Philippica: it brings no change into the substance of truth — Mentzer is witness — and it leaves the original exemplars their place, if any still survive. Therefore.

Latin

Denique sibi ipsis adversi & tantum non αὐτοκατάκριτοι deprehenduntur, qui vel (1.) Confessionem Augustanam invariatam hujusque Sensum adeò ampliatum eunt, ut etiam soli Formulae Concordiae domesticas Doctrinas, e.g. de Orali Corporis Christi Manducatione, de Ubiquitate seu Omnipraesentia Corporis Christi, similesque, (de quibus ne somniavit quidem Augustana Confessio) quin totam Concordiae Formulam illacomprehenfam ajunt, expunctâ tamen variante in nonnullis, Philippicâ Confessione, Brentianis sic interpretationibus & Consequentibus locum facturi, prohibitis exclusisque Melanchthonianis. Quorsum digitum intendit doctissimus alioquin Lutheranorum Theologorum & non nisi cum veneratione mihi nominandus, Joh. Georg. Dorscheus, Disp. Seculari de Consequentibus Augustanae Confessionis insignioribus, quippe has inter alias, Conclusiones formans: Interpretatio Augustanae Confessionis admittit, quicquid ex ea per legitimam Consequentiam deductum est. Item: Religio August. Confess. non ita interpretando coangustanda est, ut totaliter & secundum omnes suos Articulos, in August. Confess. expressa esse dicenda sit, Cap. 2. pag. m. 182. & 200. Scilicet: Quicquid Formulistae vel jam commenti sunt, vel in posterum comminiscentur, istud August. Confess. invariatae Doctrina fuerit, quippe per legitimam consequentiam, (uti ipsis videtur,) ex ea deductum; Quicquid ex adverso, vel Philippus, declarandae ergo Augustanae Confess. à se ipso olim confectae (cujusque proinde interpres, ceu verborum suorum, optimus, videri potest) vel addidit, vel immutavit, Philipistae quoque Pezelius, Sohnius, Crocius, Georgius Pauli, Hoffmannus, Helmstadienses aliique commentantur in Augustanam Confessionem, perque legitimas sibi visas Consequentias inde deducunt, illud ab Augustana Conf. invariata quàm alienissimum habendum. Vel (2.) cum eodem Dorscheo, capite sequenti tertiô, Canones ejusmodi cudunt, qui, ceu à vero haud abludentes, indeque admissi, Variatam Confessionem Philippicam, omnibus aequâ istam lance expendentibus, omnino genuinam ostendunt, & nonnisi odiose, etiam à Dorscheo exagitatam. Variatio, inquit Dorscheus, Augustanae Confessionis quacunque, etiam Substantialis, non debuit alicui transitum ad aliam religionem suadere. Canon. 2. Ergò qui Philippicae adhaeret Confessioni, licèt substantialiter, juxta Dorscheum, variatae, adhuc dum Religioni illi adhaeret, quam Augustana Confessio invariata profitetur, nec Confessio Philippica ad aliam huic Religionem transitum suadet, nedum eundem alteri Religioni addicit. Iterum: Variatio, ait Dorscheus, in Substantiam Veritatis, Articulis Augustanae Confessionis expositae mutationem nullam inferens, non debet odiose exagitari aut causa esse aliquem extra pacem Religionis constituendi. Canon. 3. Item: Variatio, quae suum locum Originalibus exemplaribus relinquit, sinceritati Augustanae Confessionis, non obstat, p. m. 216. 217. 218. Subsumo ego: de Variata Philippica: Non infert haec mutationem in Substantiam Veritatis, [testante Mentzero] relinquit verò locum suum Originalibus Exemplaribus, si quae alicubi supersunt. Ergò.

About this text

Samuel Strimesius — Prefatio through Controversiae Post Lutherum Controv. III-XIII + XV Tolerantia, Hexades Annotationum Prooemium and Annotatio I through Decem Theses / Francus plus Annotatio II §.I-§.VI and Annotatio III §.I–§.VII (through Cassellanum 1661) from Ingenua in Controversias Evangelicorum (Frankfurt an der Oder, 1708). Honest partial; Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio III §.VIII+ fruits / §.IX+, Hexades theses body, deeper Controversiae / Part II remain.

English follows the locked 1708 Francofurti ad Viadrum Latin of Prefatio §I–II, Crimina defenses through III, Part I Protheoria through Controversiae Obices/Historia/Varii gradus, Formula Discord/Disparitas, Ulterius confirmatur / Classes / Formula protest / triplex differentia, Coena Domini Controversiae Priores through Precariae Hypotheses (Controv. print pp. 34–40), Controversiae Post Lutherum Natae Controv. III–XV tip (providence through De Tolerantia mutua; Controv. print pp. 40–78), Hexades Annotationum Prooemium H.I–§.III (Hexades print pp. 1–4 / PDF ~182–185), and Annotatio I De Augustana Confessione §.I–§.VIII tip (Hexades print pp. 5–24+ / PDF ~186–205+), reconstructed from Google Books PDF page images (ONB copy, id 3epYAAAAcAAJ) with pdftotext as check. No modern English was copied. Sister Halle digitization of Ingenua in Arminianismum (DOI 10.25673/65287) remains Anubis-blocked — skipped; Controversias only. Prefatio silence reasons, Annotatio I §.IX+, Hexades theses body beyond §.VIII, and remainder of Controversiae / folio remain.

Witnesses

This is an AI-assisted study translation. Source fidelity and completeness have not been independently certified. Open Latin on each section (or the Latin source witness link) for the source text. This is not a complete critical edition.