Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T03:49:55.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Consolation of a Christian Scholar: Zacharias Ursinus (1534–83) and the Reformation in Heidelberg

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2011

Christopher J. Burchill
Christopher J. Burchill
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh, William Robertson Building, George Square, Edinburgh EH8 9JY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is perhaps the most fitting comment on a Christian scholar to note that, whereas his work has been of importance to the Church down the years, the details of his life have passed into obscurity. This remark is particularly appropriate in looking at the figure of Zacharius Ursinus, the main author of the Heidelberg Catechism and one of the founding fathers of the German reformed tradition. Most previous analysis has been focused on his growing sympathy with the teaching of Calvin in the period prior to his open adoption of the reformed cause following the death of Melanchthon. The effort to explain the background to the break-up of the Philippist party in the 1560s has yet deflected attention from a proper consideration of Ursinus' own views. Even the most recent account by Derk Visser, where some new insights have been provided on the basis of the published correspondence, is mostly concerned with this problem of his early development. Yet any serious attempt to place his writing in its historical context must concentrate on the situation in Heidelberg, which was the setting for the bulk of his work both as a reformer and pedagogue. In seeking to fill this gap, it is the purpose of the present paper to rediscover something of the man's character and the nature of his religious conviction, rather than to take up the now established debate about the relation of his theology to that of the other leading reformers. Such a study should furnish a useful basis for a more balanced assessment of his own contribution to the broader history of the Church.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , October 1986 , pp. 565 - 583
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I am grateful to George Yule and James Torrance of Aberdeen University for the invitation to present an earlier draft of this paper on an occasion designed to mark the fourth centenary of Ursinus’ death, as to Gustav Adolf Benrath in Mainz who has made a number of helpful suggestions for improving the text.

1 Visser, Derek, Zacharias Ursinus: the reluctant reformer. New York 1983.Google Scholar The main biographical account remains that by Karl Sudhoff, C. Olevianus und Z. Ursinus, Elberfeld 1857, though a rather fuller portrait can be gleaned from Gillet's, J. F. A. two-volume work, Crato von Crqfftheim und seine Freunde, Frankfort 1860-1860-1861Google Scholar The most important recent study is that by Sturm, E. K., Der junge Zacharias Ursin: sein Weg vom Philippismus zum Calvinismus (1534-1562), Neukirchen 1972Google Scholar.

2 The first biographer, Adam, Melchior, records that his father ‘a primario pastore Ambrosio Moibano cathedra ecclesiastica dignus judicatur’: Vitae Germanorum Theologorum, Heidelberg 1620, 530Google Scholar.

3 Some ninety letters can be found in Becker, W., ‘Zacharias Ursins Briefe an Crato von Crafftheim’, Theologische Arbeiten aus dem rheinischen wissenschafllichen Predigerverein ix (1889), 79–123 and xii (1892), 41-107.Google Scholar Most of the other correspondence has been edited by Rott, H., ‘Briefe des Heidelberger Theologen Zacharias Ursinus aus Heidelberg und Neustadt a.d. H.’, NeueHeidelberger Jahrbücher xiv (1906), 39–172Google Scholar ; Benrath, G. A., ‘Briefedes Heidelberger Theologen Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583)’, Heidelberger Jahrbücher viii (1964), 93–141Google Scholar ; and Sturm, E. K., ‘Briefe des Heidelberger Theologen Zacharias Ursinus aus Wittenberg und Zurich (1560-1561)’, Heidelberger Jahrbücher xiv (1970), 85–119Google Scholar.

4 Sturm, Der junge Ursin, 67-86. On the background see Mahlmann, T., Das neue Dogma der lulherischen Christologic: Problem und Ceschichte seiner Begründung, Gütersloh 1969Google Scholar.

5 Neuser, W., ‘Das Stammbuch des Zacharias Ursinus’, Blätter fur pfalzische Kirchengeschichle xxxi (1964), 101–55.Google Scholar

6 ‘Quando erit ut tandem/discordia noxia cesset/Concordi ut celebrent/omnia mente Deum/Quando tandem’: Ibid. 150.

7 , Sturm, Derjunge Ursin, 111–67.Google Scholar

8 ‘Theses complectentes breviter et perspicue summam verae doctrinaede Sacramentis’, Opera Theologica (hereinafter cited as OT), Heidelberg 1612, i. 766–802.Google Scholar

9 , Sturm, Der junge Ursin, 168–219Google Scholar . On Martyr see Donnelly, J. P., Calvinism and Scholasticism in Vermigli's Doctrine of Man and Grace, Leiden 1976Google Scholar.

10 Staedtke, J., ‘Der Zürcher Prädestinationsstreit von 1560’, Zwingliana ix (1953), 536–46Google Scholar ; and Moltmann, J., Prädestination und Perseveranz: Geschichte und Bedeutung der reformierten Lehre ‘de persevcratia sanctorum’, Neukirchen 1961, 72–109Google Scholar.

11 ‘Antapokrisis ad Heshusii et Flacii sectae responsa’, OT ii. 1431-50. On Heshusen see the incomplete biography of Barton, P. F., Um Luthers Erbe: Tilemann Heshusius (1527-1559), Witten 1972Google Scholar.

12 On the background to the Palatine reformation see Press, V., Calvinismus und Territorialstaat: Regierung und Zentralbehörden der Kurpfalz 1559-1619, Stuttgart 1970, 221–67.Google Scholar The personality of the elector is discussed in an essay by Chadwick, W. O., ‘The making of a reforming prince: Frederick in, elector palatine’, in Knox, R. Buick (ed.), Reformation, Conformity and Dissent: essays in honour of Geoffrey Muttall, London 1977, 44–69Google Scholar.

13 Benrath, G. A., ‘Die Korrespondenz zwischen Bullinger und Thomas Erastus’, in Gäbler, U. and Herkenrath, E. (ed.), Heinrich Bullinger 1504-1575: Gesammelte Aufsätze zum 400. Todestag, Zurich 1975, ii. 87–141.Google Scholar On the influence of Erastus see Wesel-Roth, R., Thomas Erastus: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der reformierten Kirche und zur Lehre von der Staatssouveränitdt, Baden 1954Google Scholar.

14 Published in Sehling, E. (ed.), Die evangelische Kirchcnordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts Tübingen 1969, xiv. 333–408Google Scholar.

16 On this problem see the two volumes of Hollweg's, W.Neue Untersuchungen zur Geschichte undLehre des Heidelberger Katechirmus, Neuekirchen 1961-1968, 1. 86–152 and ii. 38-47Google Scholar.

10 ‘Apologia catechismi ecclesiarum et scholarum electoralis Palatini’, OT ii. 1-54.

17 The acts are published in OT ii. 81-350.

18 On what follows see Hollweg, W., Der Augsburger Reichstag von 1366 und seine Bedeutung fur die Entstehung der Reformierten Kirche und ihres Bekenntnisses, Neukirchen 1964Google Scholar.

19 See Koch, E., ‘Die Textiiberlieferung der Confessio Helvetica Posterior und ihre Vorgeschichte’, in Staedtke, J. (ed.), Glauben und Bekennen: 400 Jahre Confessio Helvetica Posterior, Zurich 1966, 13–40.Google Scholar

20 See Vogler, B., Le Clergi protestant rhénan au siècle de la reforme (1555-1619), Paris 1976, 17–78.Google Scholar

21 On the background to Ursinus’ work see Schnell, U., Die homeletische Theorie Philipp Melanchlhons, Berlin 1968, 153–60Google Scholar.

22 Scholasticarum in materiis theologicis exercitationum liber, Neustadt 1584.Google Scholar The second volume was produced together with a reprinted edition some five years later. As far as I am aware, this important source for our understanding of Ursinus, only a small part of which is included in the collected works, has not hitherto been treated.

23 The theses ‘de persona et officio unici mediatoris’ (0T i. 744-8 and iii. appendix, 64-7) are discussed in Sturm, Der junge Ursin, 266-72.

24 ‘D. Zachariae Ursini loci theologici’, 0T i. 426-743, where following the old calendar the date of the termination of the course is given as 10 February 1567.

25 Toepke, G. (ed.), Die Matrikel der Universitdt Heidelberg, Heidelberg 1886, ii. 45–9.Google Scholar

26 The dean, Pierre Boquin, had initially refused permission for Withers to dispute on the subject of vestments, a matter of obvious concern to the English government. On the ensuing row see , Wesel-Roth, Erastus, 43–78Google Scholar.

27 On the attitude of Zurich see Baker, J. W., ‘In defense of magisterial discipline: Bullinger's “Tractatus de excommunicatione of 1568“’, in Heinrich Bullinger 1504-1575 i. 141–59Google Scholar.

28 Die evangelische Kirchtnordnungen, 436-41. Ursinus’ statement ‘de disciplina ecclesiastica et excommunicatione’ is published in OT iii. 803-12.

29 There is no comprehensive modern account of the affair, though details can be found in Wundt, D., ‘Versuch einer Geschichte des pfalzischen Arianismus in den Jahren 1568-1572’, Magazin für die Kitchen- und Gelchrtengcschichte des Kurjiirstenthums Pfalz, Heidelberg 1789, i. 88–154Google Scholar.

30 The original version of the ‘Confessio fidei theologorum et ministrorum Heidelberg-ensium’ (OT ii. 379-438) was in German. The work included a long appendix ‘in qua demonstratur, nostram hanc de Christo eiusque coena doctrinam & confessionem inique & malitiose exagitari & vituperari, ab illis, qui damitant, earn revera aut ipsam Turcicam religionem, aut hanc de ea consequi’.

31 ‘Bedencken gegen die pfälzische Politik’, 26 May 1568, in Kluckhohn, A. (ed.), Briefe Friedrich des Frommen, Kurfürsten von der Pfalz, mil verwandttn Schriftstücktn, Braunschweig 1872, ii (2). 1053-1055Google Scholar.

32 Scholasticarum exercitationum liber secundus, 559-77.

33 The best account is that provided by Skinner, Q., The Foundations of Modem Political Thought, Cambridge 1978, ii. 302–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

34 The surviving information has been pieced together by Moraw, P. and Karst, T., Die Universität Heidelberg und Neustadt an der Haardt, Speyer 1963Google Scholar.

35 , Gillet, Crato von Crafftheim ii. 186–203.Google Scholar

36 ‘De libro concordiae admonitio Christiana’, OT ii. 481-694. The importance of this work has been noted by Nischan, B., ‘The second Reformation in Brandenburg: aims and goals’, Sixteenth Century Journal xiv (1983), 173–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 ‘Amici, quisquis hue venis, aut agito paucis; aut abi; aut me laborantem adiuva’: Adam, Vitae, 540.

38 ‘Commonefactio D. Davidis Chytraei de sacra domini coena et eiusdem consideratio’, OT ii. 1141-404.

39 On what follows see , Sudhoff, Olevianus und Ursinus, 456–8 and 502-4Google Scholar.

40 Organi Arislolelis libri quinque priores per quaestiones expositi, Neustadt 1586.Google Scholar This included a translation of Ursinus’ Bedencken ob P. Rami Dialectka und Rhetorica in die Schulen einzuführen, which had been drawn up in response to a request from the elector during Ramus’ visit to Heidelberg at the end of 1569. The original was published by W. Ross of Magdeburg in 1586. Mention should also be made of the Disputationes philosophical, Frankfurt 1610, to which Prof. Benrath has kindly drawn my attention.

41 ‘Iesaiae prophetae divinissimi explicatio’, OT iii. 1-706.

48 ‘Explications Catecheseos Palatinae’, OT I. 46-413.

43 Information on the composition of the ‘Compendium doctrinae Christianae’ can be found in the dedication to Thobolski's pupil, Count Georg Latalski, where it is noted that seven different transcripts were used in drawing up the text.

44 Interest in the work was particularly pronounced in England, where it was first published by Thomas Thomasius of Cambridge in 1585. This edition was reprinted two years later in response to a pirate edition by Thomas Chard of London. Parry's translation was published by J. Barnes of Oxford as ‘The Summe of Christian Religion’ and went through a further seven editions prior to the civil war. It should also be noted that between 1589 and 1614 the Cambridge firm of Legatt produced five separate imprints of a translation of Jerome Basting's commentary on the catechism. For parallel developments in the Low Countries see Platt, J., Reformed Thought and Scholasticism: the arguments for the existence of God in Dutch theology 1575-1650, Leiden 1982, 49–103Google Scholar.

45 See the dedication of August 1598 to Elector Frederick iv. The prefatory material to Pareus’ four-part Neustadt edition of 1591, a work which represented a half-way stage to the definitive version, can be found in the ‘Miscellanea catechetica’, OT iii. appendix, 3-20.

48 The OT included a number of previously unpublished works, together with Latin translations of those originally written in the vernacular. Aside from the commentary on the catechism, there were to be no further imprints of Ursinus’ work.

47 For a judgement on its contemporary relevance see Barth, K., The Heidelberg Catechism for Today, trans. Guthrie, S., London 1964Google Scholar.

48 Aside from the recent work of Platt, Reformed Thought and Scholasticism, which suffers from its too narrow concentration on a particular aspect of the doctrine of God, there has been no real attempt to provide a ‘Wirkungsgeschichte’. On differing interpretations of the Heidelberg Catechism, it would be useful to compare the predestinarian theology of Basting and Lubbert, two former pupils of Ursinus, with the major commentary of Cocceius, where the principles of federal theology were outlined.

18 In addition to the well-known history of reformed dogmatics, Heppe's major work was the four-volume Geschichte des deutschen Protestantismus in den Jahren 1555-1581, Marburg 1852-9, which was written to prove precisely this point.

50 See Thompson, B., ‘The Catechism and the Mercersburg Theology’, Essays on the Heidelberg Catechism, Philadelphia 1963, 53–74.Google Scholar

51 , Adam, Vitae, 537.Google Scholar In his advice to students Ursinus cited the dictum of Melanchthon ‘bona grammatica est bona Theologia’ – a far cry from Luther's Heidelberg disputation of 1518!

52 Frühorthodoxie und Rationalismus, Zurich 1963, 16–32.Google Scholar

53 0T i. 49-51. The fullest treatment of the question is contained in the lectures on the loci, OT i 426-47.

54 These problems ar e discussed in Bray, J., Theodore Beza's Doctrine of Predestination, Nieuwkoop 1975Google Scholar , and Gründler, O., Die Gotteslehre Girolamo Zanchis und Hire Bedeutung für seine Lehre von der Prädestination, Neukirchen 1965.Google Scholar

55 OT iii. appendix, 28-39. A German translation can be found in , Sudhoff, Olevianus und Ursinus, 614–33Google Scholar.

54 Baker, J., Heinrich Bullinger and the Covenant: the other reformed tradition, Ohio 1980.Google Scholar The main weakness of this work is the author's determination to divide the reformed camp into two exclusive parties according to their interpretation of the covenant. While the distinction has some validity, it here lacks a proper theological grounding and leads to great confusion when dealing with a figure like Ursinus, who is finally dismissed ‘as a bit of an enigma’, 203.

57 OT iii. 707-10.

58 There is unfortunately no study to extend the insights of Bizer's, E.Studien zur Gtschichte des Abendmahlstreits im 16. Jahrhundert, Darmstadt 1972Google Scholar , into the latter part of the century. The basis of the reformed teaching is discussed in Beyer, U., Abendmahl und Messe: Sinn und Recht der 80. Frage des Heidelberger Katechismus, Neukirchen 1965Google Scholar.

59 I owe this point to a discussion with David Stevenson of Aberdeen University, where Heidelberg theology was particularly influential during the early part of the seventeenth century.

80 On this question see the excellent study by Metz, W., Necessitas satisfactionis? Eine systematische Sludie zu den Fragen 12-18 des Heidelberger Katechismus und zur Theologie des Z&charias Ursinus, Zurich 1970Google Scholar.

61 The majority of some thirty declamations, published with the ‘Scholastic exercises’, were taken up with this theme and include pieces by Kimedoncius, Oslebius, Pareus and Reuter, as well as those by Ursinus himself.

62 ‘Pia meditatio mortis et consolationum adversus eius horrorem’, OT i. 910-23.