CHAPTER XXX.
THE CONFLICT WITH OSIANDER.
We can briefly pass over a conflict which arose in Hamburg, concerning the object of Christ's descent into hell. The superintendent, Æpinus, of that place, had expressed the opinion that Christ's descent into hell was the last stage of his humiliation, and that he there suffered the pains of hell for us. The Wittenbergers, at the head of whom we are always to regard Melanchthon, declared in an opinion that the descent into hell represented Christ's victory over hell and the devil, and counted it, as it indeed is, one of the stages of his exaltation. But, although the contending parties were not entirely satisfied, yet this conflict did not produce such results as that excited by Osiander, in regard to the doctrine of Justification, which may be called the heart's blood of the Evangelical Church. Andrew Osiander, or Hosenmann, or Hosen-Enderlein, was born of poor parents in Gunzenhausen, December 19th, 1498. He contended with great poverty in the school and University; but, by his talents, he soon acquired great knowledge, yet not equal to that of the learned Wittenberg Professor. Melanchthon always recognized his talents and other excellent gifts, so that he was anxious to draw him to Wittenberg to occupy the chair of Cruciger, when Osiander no longer wished to remain as Pastor in Nuremberg, on account of the Interim. Duke Albert of Prussia had once heard Osiander preach in Nuremberg, and had been gained over to the side of the Gospel by that sermon. The Duke always remembered this gratefully, and was rejoiced that he was now able to call him as first professor of Divinity, to the new University of Königsberg, in 1544. In his very first disputation, held April, 1549, he spoke of Justification, but in such a way, that it was very evident that he did not stand upon the ground of the Evangelical, but rather of the Catholic Church. He explained Justification as meaning "to make just," and concluded that man becomes just before God by means of the righteousness or holiness communicated to him. He also entirely separated repentance from faith. When Melanchthon at first heard indistinct rumors of this Königsburg dispute, he regarded it as a mere battle of words; but he came to a very different conclusion when he received further particulars. On the 12th of August he wrote to Camerarius concerning Osiander, that he denied all imputation. And to a friend in Pomerania: "I do not believe that Osiander's controversy is a mere dispute about words, but he differs from our Church in a very important matter, and darkens our only consolation in true conflicts, or rather destroys it, by teaching us to rely upon essential righteousness, and does not lead us to the promise which offers us mercy by the obedience of the Mediator." Osiander continued to express his views more boldly, and was much displeased with those who were constantly appealing to Melanchthon. He said that they should no longer offend him by the stupid words: "Our preceptor Philippus teaches differently!" The confusion in Königsberg increased. He now also published his work: "A Confession concerning the only mediator Jesus Christ, and Justification." In this he maintains that the Redemption, by the death of Christ, has been bestowed upon all men. By Justification, man is not only declared to be righteous, but he is made righteous, inasmuch as the essential righteousness of God is communicated to him through faith in Jesus Christ. He disregarded the human nature of Christ entirely, and laid all stress upon his divinity, the righteousness of which enters the heart. He thus continued to adhere to his Catholic doctrine of Justification.
On the 1st of May, 1551, Melanchthon wrote a friendly letter to Osiander, in which he assures him of his high esteem, and says: "You are greatly mistaken if you suspect me of entertaining different feelings." He at the same time also, in a supplement, added a few propositions for serious examination. But at last, when the views of Osiander seemed to be spreading more and more, he in January, 1552, published his well-known work: "Reply to the work of Mr. Andrew Osiander concerning the justification of man." As this work presents the pure doctrine of the Evangelical Church concerning justification, in a clear and calm manner, and at the same time also displays the amiable character of Melanchthon, it will not be amiss to present some extracts. He says in the beginning, that he rejoiced that others had also expressed their views in regard to this article; however, he would likewise speak, having been called upon to do so, by many distinguished and other persons. He would express his opinions in a clear and simple manner, in order that those who have been filled with trouble and sorrow by this dispute, may see upon what it rests, and what will be for the comfort of their souls. He had never intended to depart from Luther's views in this very important article. "As for the slanderous attacks of Osiander, in which he does me wrong, I will leave these to God, who knoweth the hearts of all men, and who is our judge. I have always loved and honored him, as every one knows, and I truly wonder whence all this bitterness proceeds.... I know that all my writings are too insignificant and weak, and therefore I have always submitted them to the judgment of our Church." He then proceeds to speak of the Grace of God and the free gifts, according to Romans v., and says, Grace is the forgiveness of Sin, and acceptance of our person with God; but the gift is the divine presence in us, by which we are renewed, and find comfort and the beginning of life everlasting. These two, Grace and Gift, we have by the merits of Christ; and this is not gained by our works, but is alone obtained by our faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. This faith must ever continue, receive and retain both Grace and Gift, for the sake of the Mediator Christ, even though Regeneration has been commenced. It is like this, when John says, that Grace and Truth came through the Lord Jesus Christ. Faith reposes all its confidence in the entire Lord Christ, God and man, even as the same Lord Christ God and man is Mediator and Redeemer according to both natures. For although the human nature alone felt wounds and sufferings, yet the whole Christ is Mediator and Redeemer. For this suffering would not have been the price, if the Redeemer were not God at the same time. They had at all times confessed that we must all undergo a change.
Melanchthon refutes Osiander's objection, by which he asserted that nothing had hitherto been said in our churches of the indwelling of God in us. He then proceeds and says, that a distinction must be made between the righteousness of the saints after the resurrection, and of the saints during this life. Although God dwells in the saints, yet our nature abounds with great impurity, and sinful defects and desires. Here it was needful for the saints to have comfort, and to know how they have forgiveness of Sins and Grace. All this is proved by passages of Scripture. He says that a principal passage is recorded in Rom. iii. "Being justified freely by his grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood." This all refers to the merits of Christ, and cannot be referred to the essential righteousness of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. He adds several other clear passages, which all speak of the merit of Christ. (Rom. 5, 1 John 1, Hebrews 10, Isaiah 53.) Here there is reference to Christ's merit alone, which we apply by faith. And this was preached also from the beginning, by the prophets. Osiander is mistaken, when he says: "I call that righteousness which makes us do right. Here there is no mention of a forgiveness of sins." To this we reply: "We call the Lord Christ righteousness, by whom we have forgiveness of sins, a merciful God, and besides, the presence of God within us." In this sense must we regard the Mediator Jesus Christ, God and man, and hide ourselves in his wounds. Osiander confounds cause and effect. If he objects that this doctrine was calculated to fill men with a false security, they would reply: "We must teach the truth, give God the honor due to him, rebuke sin, and comfort troubled hearts with true comfort, although our hearers are not all alike." He is surprised that Osiander rejects this proposition: "Faith is a reliance upon mercy which is promised us for the Mediator's sake." "There must be a difference between the faith which the devils have, and this faith which accepts the promise, and by which the heart obtains comfort and joy." In conclusion, he remarks, that he had written all this in haste, and had passed by many other points, in order to avoid greater disputes. But he did not thus avoid them; for Osiander is said to have remarked, when he read Melanchthon's confession, that "he would so bleed Melanchthon, that his blood should flow throughout Germany." He subsequently published two works, one of which was called "Bleeding of Mr. Philip," and the other "Refutation of the groundless and useless answer of Philip Melanchthon." These contained slanders after the manner of Flacius. He not only attacked Melanchthon, but also the other teachers of Wittenberg, in the most violent manner. He particularly reproached them for not ordaining or declaring any one a Master or Doctor, unless he solemnly promised to teach in accordance with the three Confessions of Faith of the ancient Church, and also the Augsburg Confession. Melanchthon, in his reply, acknowledged this to be the case; but also that it had been introduced twenty years before by Luther, Bugenhagen, and Jonas, and was not only useful but necessary. But while the conflict was thus waged in the most violent manner, Osiander died, very unexpectedly, on the 17th of October, 1552. When Melanchthon received the tidings of his death, he wrote to Veit Winsheim: "As you see, he had a short pilgrimage. Oh that he had made a better use of it! Why was he so enraged against us? Merely because we maintain that we must build upon the merits of Christ, and not upon our new life. This was the principal point of the whole controversy."
Although the principal person was thus removed from the arena, yet the conflict did not cease, because his son-in-law Funck exerted a great influence upon the aged Duke Albert. But when these errors of Osiander found adherents and champions in Germany, particularly in Nuremberg, they were finally condemned by the Church. They are still haunting various places, and find champions in the pulpit and the lecture-room. It is nothing less than the spirit of Osiander, to disregard too much the sufferings and death of Christ, that is, his humanity in general, and to look to the exalted one almost exclusively, and to place the sinner's justification before God more in the righteousness and holiness, which are communicated to him from thence. As Osiander had given prominence to the divine nature of Christ in his office as Mediator, another teacher of Königsberg fell into the opposite error, and wished the humanity of Christ to be regarded alone in the work of Redemption and Justification. This was Francis Stankar, born in Mantua in Italy, who had left his native land for the love of the Gospel. He had formerly been teaching Hebrew in Krakau, and from thence came to Königsberg. He here quarreled with Osiander, and resigned his office.
When Melanchthon was asked in regard to his opinion of Stankar's views, he declared that Christ is Mediator according to both natures, for not only suffering and death, but also victory and intercession were necessary attributes of a Mediator. He also published a full opinion in reference to this, in the year 1553. Besides these, one Lauterwald of Hungary, also departed from the doctrine of Justification. He went to greater lengths than Osiander, for he taught that Repentance and new obedience were necessary to obtain the Grace of God.
But we will leave these disputes here, to look upon the state of affairs in the German Empire.