M23: L. to write against M., but…; Dr. Green's false thesis on M.

       This continues from Part 22 (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.” — Walther, after presenting Luther's high praise of Melanchthon, now presents the most powerful evidence for his thesis, that Luther later intended to write against Melanchthon.  — This portion from LuW, 22, pp. 366-367 [EN]:

 - - - - - - -  “Luther's ‘Carrying’ of Melanchthon?” by C. F. W. Walther — Part 23 of 28  - - - - - - -

Prof. C. Schmidt says in his Melanchthon that in the Cologne Reformation it was said of the Lord's Supper that it is "the communion of the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, in which communion we are to keep His memorial, that we may abide and live more fully in Him by faith, and He in us; and because this giving and receiving of the body and blood of Christ our Lord is a heavenly work and commerce of faith, men ought to cast out all carnal thoughts in this mystery.”  Schmidt himself adds: 

“The essential presence had been passed over and the enjoyment of body and blood was presented as a matter of faith; obviously this had to displease Luther to the highest degree.” (p. 437 [sic: 427]) 

It is true that Luther, despite this discovery, must still have thought the best of Melanchthon and considered (LuW 367) Bucer alone to be the culprit, since as late as March 5, 1545, in his preface to the first Tomus [volume] of his Latin writings, he judges Melanchthon in terms of the highest esteem (cf. Tom. Hal. XIV, 427. f.; 453 [StL 14, 438]); *)

—————— 

*) Melanchthon had also advised against admitting the Swiss into the Smalcald League in March, and advised against allowing the sale of their books in Saxony! (C. R. V., 723. 741) 

but soon thereafter, perhaps made aware by Amsdorf, it seemed undeniable to Luther that Melanchthon here, as the collaborator of that draft of the [Cologne] Reformation, had betrayed his erring faith. So Luther decided, however, to finally write publicly against Melanchthon. With great shock this came to the ears of the Elector, and he now sent a written instruction to his chancellor Brück how he should negotiate with Luther so that the open break, where possible, might still be averted. In this instruction of April 26, 1545, it says among other things 

“Consider it good, therefore, that you, as for yourselves or by our command, as you will judge such to be the best and the least dangerous, would make the following announcement to Dr. Martin, since it would be done by our order, after reporting our gracious greeting and transferring the enclosed document of our credentials. We would be told credibly, as if he were now working on writing a book against the sacramentarians,**) which we put up with quite well, we would also graciously and gladly see it. But besides that, it also seems to us as if he should want to name Master Philip Melanchthon in such a book because of some stated suspicion, which, if this were the case, would truly be a great concern to us. … 

—————— 

**) This is first of all a writing against Bullinger, who had published an extremely vehement response to Luther's “Brief Confession” [StL 20, 1764 ff.]  at the beginning of this year, which even Calvin and Melanchthon disapproved of. 

- - - - - - - - -   Continued in Part 24  - - - - - - - - - -

Walther uncovers an impending situation between Luther and Melanchthon that no other modern historian brings to light. Admittedly he speculates that Amsdorf warned Luther about Melanchthon's culpability in the "Cologne Reformation", but this is perfectly plausible, even if Dr. Kolb maintains that there was a continuing friendship between Amsdorf and Melanchthon during this period. Dr. Kolb becomes even more suspect by overlooking what Walther reports… in the next Part 24.

- - - - - - -   LC-MS Opposing Theologians, Historians: Dr. Lowell Green   - - - - - - - -

Walther above gives the references to the passages in Walch's Luther's Works that are now immediately available for English readers in the St. Louis Edition. But I would highlight 2 excerpts of Luther from these in the following:

438: “By the grace of God there are now many well-prepared books available, among which the Loci Communes of Philip stand out”; 442: “Philipp Melanchthon was called here by Prince Frederick to teach the Greek sciences, no doubt so that I would have a helper in the work of theology. For what the Lord has wrought through this instrument not only in the sciences but also in theology, his works sufficiently testify.” 

Luther calls Melanchthon his “helper”, not his teacher. He does not hint that "Melanchthon helped him discover the Gospel",  the thesis of Dr. Lowell Green's 1980 book, but was only his helper "to teach". Admittedly Luther judges Melanchthon well, and rightfully so, but did not submit to his judgment. Instead of Melanchthon helping Luther, Luther gave testimony of perhaps the one who gave him the earliest testimony of the Gospel, in his Lectures on Genesis, StL 2, 181, AE 5, 47: 

“[Johann von] Staupitz used to comfort me with these words and said to me: "Dear, why do you bother yourself with these speculations and high thoughts; look at the wounds of Christ, and his blood, which he shed for you, and from it the salvation will shine forth. Therefore hear the Son of God, who was sent into the flesh, became man, and for this reason appeared to destroy the works of the devil, 1 John 3:8, and to make you sure of salvation.” 

The reality, contrary to over-zealous Melanchthon defenders, is that Luther had to bolster Melanchthon in theology, especially from 1530 onward. — It may be noted that Dr. Green makes no mention of Martin Chemnitz who clearly identified Melanchthon's theological errors that had to be corrected in the Formula of Concord. — In the next Part 24…