FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316  
317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   >>   >|  
sunt necessaria et debita_)? This question, too, was a point of dispute in the Majoristic controversy. Originally the controversy concerning these terms and phrases was a mere logomachy, which, however, later on (when, after the error lurking in the absolute rejection of them had been pointed out, the phrases were still flatly condemned), developed into a violent controversy. The _Formula of Concord_ explains: "It has also been argued by some that good works are not _necessary (noetig)_, but are _voluntary (freiwillig)_, because they are not extorted by fear and the penalty of the Law, but are to be done from a voluntary spirit and a joyful heart. Over against this the other side contended that good works are _necessary_. This controversy was originally occasioned by the words _necessitas_ and _libertas_ ["_notwendig_" und "_frei_"], that is, necessary and free, because especially the word _necessitas,_ necessary, signifies not only the eternal, immutable order according to which all men are obliged and in duty bound to obey God, but sometimes also a coercion, by which the Law forces men to good works. But afterwards there was a disputation not only concerning the words, but the doctrine itself was attacked in the most violent manner, and it was contended that the new obedience in the regenerate is not necessary because of the above-mentioned divine order." (939, 4f.) From the very beginning of the Reformation the Romanists had slandered Luther also by maintaining that he condemned good works and simply denied their necessity. A similar charge was made by the Majorists against their opponents generally. And Melanchthon's writings, too, frequently create the same impression. But it was an inference of their own. They argued: If good works are not necessary to salvation, they cannot be necessary at all. Wigand wrote: "It is a most malicious and insidious trait in the new teachers [the Majorists] that they, in order to gloss over their case, cry out with the Papists that the controversy is whether good works are necessary. But this is not in dispute, for no Christian ever denied it. Good works are necessary; that is certainly true. But the conflict arises from the appendix attached to it, and the patch pasted to it, _viz._, 'to salvation.' And here all God-fearing men say that it is a detrimental, offensive, damnable, papistic appendix." (Planck 4, 498. 544.) It is true, however, that the Antinomians (who will be dealt
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   292   293   294   295   296   297   298   299   300   301   302   303   304   305   306   307   308   309   310   311   312   313   314   315   316  
317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

controversy

 
voluntary
 
dispute
 

phrases

 
argued
 
appendix
 

contended

 

salvation

 

necessitas

 

Majorists


denied

 

condemned

 
violent
 

impression

 
inference
 

slandered

 

beginning

 
Reformation
 

Romanists

 

Luther


create

 

opponents

 

necessity

 

charge

 

similar

 
generally
 

simply

 

frequently

 
writings
 

Melanchthon


maintaining

 

fearing

 

detrimental

 

offensive

 
attached
 

pasted

 

damnable

 

papistic

 

Antinomians

 
Planck

arises
 
conflict
 

teachers

 

malicious

 

insidious

 

Christian

 

Papists

 

Wigand

 
doctrine
 

Originally