M21: L. calmed, but M. “himself was not calm”

       This continues from Part 20 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting an English translation of C. F. W. Walther's 1876 essay “The ‘Carrying’ of Melanchthon on the Part of Luther.” — What Walther reports here of Melanchthon's state of mind is rarely reported on by modernist historians. —  This portion from LuW, 22, pp. 363-365 [EN]:

 - - - - - - -  “Luther's ‘Carrying’ of Melanchthon?” by C. F. W. Walther — Part 21 of 28  - - - - - - -

One can see from this that even if Melanchthon had calmed Luther by glosses that could be heard, he himself was not calm; as often as Luther “thundered” at this against the sacramentarians, he feared nothing the less, it was his own business. So it was no wonder then that Melanchthon, when he heard that Luther would again write against the sacramentarians, and when it was rumored that Luther would also call him an opponent on this occasion, was startled. He now feared without doubt that he had become manifest to Luther. Thus, as already noted, he wrote to Bucer on August 28, 1544: 

“Of our Pericles, I wrote to you through Milichius that he begins to thunder again over the Lord's Supper and has written a horrible (atrocem) book, which has not yet been published, in which I and you are attacked. For this cause he was in these days near Amsdorf, whom he alone draws into the fellowship of this matter and who alone approves of these outbursts. [i.e. Amsdorf, not Melanchthon] As I hear, he will call me and (LuW 364) Cruciger to him tomorrow. … I am a quiet bird and will not be reluctant to leave this prison if I should be pushed hostilely. In a short time you will know the further course of events.” (p. 474) 

How Melanchthon wrote to Bullinger on August 30 about the writing [of Luther] he awaited with great anxiety has already been mentioned above [in Part 7]. At about the same time he also wrote to Jonas: 

“I have written this to you with a sorrowful heart about that of which I communicated to you the other day. For now one expects that it will come to a meeting. A formula about the Lord's Supper is presented, of which I do not know what it will be like.” (p. 476) 

Cruciger also reports the same to his friend Veit Dietrich under September 7 with the following words: 

“For the sake of the Cologne church order, Philip has come under suspicion; in the same, however, he himself wrote nothing about the Eucharist, nor did he seem to be allowed to disapprove of Bucer's opinion, as far as doctrine is concerned. But our zealot (Amsdorf), stiff as he is, has also inflamed our master (Luther). And, as I hear, he argues that not even a synecdoche is to be permitted in the words of the Lord's Supper; *) 

—————— 

*) Cruciger is wrong here. Luther had not even read the Cologne Reformation formula at that time. Also, as is well known, Luther rejected the rhetorical but not the grammatical synecdoche in the sacramental words. 

and ours (Luther), when he was with that one (Amsdorf) the other day, is said to have written a little book, which no one has yet seen, and now, I hear, he is preparing a formula which he wants us all to sign, perhaps with the intention of publishing what he has written. At least he has been heard to say that if one of us believes differently than he does, he will not stay here. You see, therefore, what might happen if he should present a formula that is too strict, especially with anathematizations, by which also those are to be condemned who, out of weakness or mere error, believe differently in other churches, or who do not want to approve even this, which he once stiffly asserted with “N.”: the bread is God etc. **) 

—————— 

**) This too Cruciger says, contrary to all truth, that it is to be expected of Luther that he will also want to condemn those who err out of weakness; and, in any case, it was an empty rumor that Luther (or Amsdorf?) had ever claimed that the bread was God. 

Therefore the other (Melanchthon) decided that he should rather go straight out of the city than agree or argue with the Master.” (p. 477) 

Now all this was indeed empty fears of an evil conscience. When Luther's so dreaded “Brief Confession [Concerning the Holy Sacrament]” had finally appeared at the beginning of October 1544 [StL 20, 1764 EN], the same Cruciger therefore wrote to Dietrich on October 7: 

“Ours [Luther] did not give any hint of disfavor against us, although one could tell from his addresses beforehand that he had harbored, I do not know what, suspicions. Also, the published booklet is written much more moderately (LuW 365) than one had hoped, although there is no doubt that some have been annoyed by it for the sake of certain all too harsh words, such as that he calls almost without distinction those ‘devilish’ who believe the opposite. *) … 

——————                                           

*) Luther does not say of his opponents directly that they have a "devilish" etc. heart, but speaks conditionally that, if the opponents called his God a “baked God, bread God,” etc., he could have paid them with similar coin. 

- - - - - - - - -   Continued in Part 22  - - - - - - - - - -

Walther helps all Christians as he highlights how the enemies of the truth can misuse and misquote Luther, not just by Papists, but also those inclined to Zwingli’s doctrine, and sadly, also by some who today call themselves… Lutheran.  In the next Part 22…