07069.1 - Heidelberg Catechism - 1
§69.1. The Heidelberg Catechism. A.D. 1563 -Part 1.
Literature.
I. Standard Editions of the Catechism.
Official German editions of 1563 (three), 1585, 1595, 1684, 1724, 1863 (American). The original title is ’Catechismus | Oder | Christlicher Underricht , | wieder in Kirchen und Schu- | len der Churfürstlichen | Pfaltz getrieben | wirdt. | Gedruckt in der Churfürstli- | chen Stad Heydelberg, durch | Johannem Mayer. | 1563.’ With the Electoral arms. 95 pages.
There is but one copy of the first edition known to exist, and this did not come into public notice till 1864. It belonged to Prof. Hermann Wilken, of Heidelberg, whose name it bears, with the date 1563; was bought by Dr. Treviranus, of Bremen, in 1823, given by him to Dr. Menken, bought back after Menken’s death, 1832, and is now in the University Library at Utrecht. I examined it in October and November, 1865, at Bremen. It has the remark, ’Diesses ist die allererste Edition, in welcher Pag. 55 die 80ste Frag und Antwort nicht gefunden wirdt. Auff Churfürstlichen Befehl eingezogen. Liber rarissimus. ’ The Scripture texts are quoted in the margin, but only the chapters, since the versicular division (which first appeared in Stephens’s Greek Testament of 1551) had not yet come into general use. A quasi fac-simile of this copy was issued by the Rev. Albrecht Wolters, then at Bonn (now at Halle), under the title, ’Der Heidelberger Katechismus in seiner ursprünglichen Gestalt, herausgegeben nebst der Geschichte seines Textes im Jahre 1563.’ Bonn, 1864. Comp. his art. in the Studien und Kritiken for 1867, pp. 1, 2.
Niemeyer, in his collection of Reformed Confessions, pp. 390 sqq., gives, besides the Latin text, a faithful reprint of the third German edition, with the eightieth question in full.
Philipp Schaff: Der Heidelberger Katechismus. Nach der ersten Ausgabe von 1563 revidirt und mit kritischen Anmerkungen, sowie einer Geschichte und Charakteristik des Katechismus versehen. Philadelphia (J. Kohler), 1863; second edition, revised and enlarged, 1866. This edition was prepared for the tercentenary celebration of the Heidelberg Catechism, and gives the received text of the third edition with the readings of the first and second editions, and the Scripture proofs in full. The Latin translation was published in 1563, and again in 1566, under the title, ’Cate- | chesis Religio- | nis Christianæ, | quæ traditur in Ecclesiis | et Scholis Pala- | tinatus. | Heydelbergæ. | Excusum anno post Christum | natum M.D.LXVI. ’ I saw a copy of this ed. Latina, in the library of the late Dr. Treviranus, in Bremen (1865). On the title-page the words are written, ’Editio rara et originalis ;’ also the name of G. Menken, the former owner. The Scripture references are marked on the margin, including the verses. The eightieth question is complete (with ’execranda idololatia ’), pp. 62 and 63, and supported by many Scripture texts and the Can. Missæ. The questions are divided into fifty-two Sundays. ’Precationes aliquot privatæ et publicæ ,’ a ’Precatio scholastica ,’ and some versified prayers of Joachim Camerarius (the friend and biographer of Melanchthon), are added. The best English, or rather American, edition of the Catechism is the stately triglot tercentenary edition prepared at the direction of the German Reformed Church in the United States, by a committee consisting of E. V. Gerhart, D.D., John W. Nevin, D.D., Henry Harbaugh, D.D., John S. Kessler, D.D., Daniel Zacharias, D.D., and three laymen, and issued under the title, ’The Heidelberg Catechism, in German, Latin, and English; with an Historical Introduction (by Dr. Nevin), New York (Charles Scribner), 1863.’ 4to. The German text is a reprint of the third edition after Niemeyer, with the German in modern spelling added; the English translation is made directly from the German original, and is far better than the one in popular use, which was made from the Latin. It is the most elegant and complete edition of the Catechism ever published, but it appeared before the discovery of the editio princeps, and repeats the error concerning the eightieth question (see Introd. p. 38).
II. Commentaries. The commentaries and sermons on the Heidelberg Catechism are exceedingly numerous, especially in the German and Dutch languages. The first and most valuable is from the chief author, Zach. Ursinus: Corpus Doctrinæ orthodoxæ, or Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, ed. by his pupil, David Pareus, and repeatedly published at Heidelberg and elsewhere-1591, 1618, etc.-in Latin, German, Dutch, and English. An American edition, on the basis of the English translation of Bishop Dr. H. Parry, was issued by Dr. Williard (President of Heidelberg College, Tiffin, O.), Columbus, O. 1850. Other standard commentaries are by Coccejus (1671), d’Outrein (1719), Lampe (1721), Stähelin (1724), and van Alpen (1800). See a fuller list by Harbaugh in ’Mercersb. Rev. ’ for 1860, pp. 601-625, and in Bethune’s Lectures. Of more recent works we name- Karl Sudhoff: Theologisches Handbuch zur Auslesung des Heidelberger Catechismus. Francf. a M. 1862.
Geo. W. Bethune (D.D., and minister of the Ref. Dutch Ch., N.Y.; d. 1862): Expository Lectures on the Heidelb. Catech. N.York, 1864, 2 vols., with an alphabet. list of works by Van Nest at close of Vol. II.
Hermann Dalton (Ger. Ref. minister at St. Petersb.): Immanuel. Der Heidelberger Katechismus als Bekenntniss- und Erbauungsbuch der evangel. Kirche erklärt und an’s Herz gelegt. Wiesbaden, 1870 (pp. 539).
III. Historical Works on the Catechism.
H. Alting (Prof. of Theology at Heidelberg and Gröningen, d. 1644): Historia Ecclesiæ Patatinæ. Frankf. a. M. 1701.
B. G. Struve: Pfälzische Kirchenhistorie. Frankf. 1721, Ch. V. sqq.
D. L. Wundt: Grundriss der pfälzischen Kirchengeschichte bis zum Jahr 1742. Heidelb. 1798.
Jaques Lenfant: L’innocence du Catéchisme de Heidelberg.Heidelb. 1688 (1723).
J. Chr. Köcher: Katechetische Geschichte der Reformirten Kirche, sonderlich der Schicksale des Heidelberger Katechismi. Jena, 1766, pp. 237-444.
G. J. Planck: Geschichte der protestantischen Theologie von Luther’s Tode, etc. Vol. II. Part II. pp. 475-491. (This is Vol. V. of his great work on the Geschichte der Entstehung, etc., unseres protestant. Lehrbegriffs. )
Heinr. Simon van Alpen; Geschichte u. Literatur des Heidelb. Katechismus. Frankf. a. M. 1800. Vol. III. Part II. (The first two volumes and the first part of the third volume of this catechetical work contain explanations and observations on the Catechism, which are, however, semi-rationalistic.)
Joh. Chr. W. Augusti: Versuch einer hist.-kritischen Einleitung in die beiden Haupt-Katechismen (the Luth. and Heidelb.) der evangelischen Kirche. Elberfeld, 1824, pp. 96 sqq.
Rienäcker: Article on the Heidelb. Catechism in Ersch und Gruber, Allgem. Encyklop. Sect. II. Part IV. pp. 386 sqq.
Ludwig Häusser: Geschichte der Rhein-Pfalz. Heidelb. 1845. Vol. II.
D. Seisen: Geschichte der Reformation zu Heidelberg, von ihren ersten Anfängen bis zur Abfassung des Heidelb. Katechismus. Eine Denkschrift zur dreihundertjährigen Jubelfeier daselbstAmos 3:1-15. Jan. 1846. Heidelb. 1846.
Aug.. Ebrard: Das Dogma vom heil. Abendmahl und seine Geschichte. F. a. M. 1846. Vol. II. pp. 575 sqq.
K. Fr. Vierordt: Geschichte der Reformation im Grossherzogthum Baden. Nach grossentheils handschriftlichen Quellen. Karlsruhe, 1847.
John W. Nevin: History and Genius of the Heidelberg Catechism. Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, 1847. (The best work on the Catechism in English.) Comp. Dr. Nevin’s able Introduction to the triglot tercentenary edition of the H. C. New York, 1863, pp. 11-127.
Karl Sudhoff: C. Olevianus und Z. Ursinus. Leben und ausgewählte Schriften. Elberfeld, 1857.
G. D. J. Schotel: History of the Origin, Introduction, and Fortunes of the Heidelberg Catechism (in Dutch). Amsterdam, 1863.
Several valuable essays on the Heidelberg Catechism, by Plitt, Sack, and Ullmann, in the Studien und Kritiken for 1863, and by Wolters and Trechsel, ibid, for 1867.
Tercentenary Monument. In Commemoration of the Three Hundredth Anniversary of the Heidelberg Catechism. Published by the German Reformed Church of the United States of North America, in English and German. The German ed. by Dr. Schaff, with an historical introduction. Chambersburg and Philadelphia, Pa. 1863. This work contains about twenty essays, by European and American theologians, on the history and theology of the Heidelberg Catechism.
J. 1. Dœdes (Prof. at Utrecht): De Heidelbergsche Catechismus in zijne eerste Levensjaren 1563-1567. Historische en Bibliografische Nalezing met 26 Facsimiles. Utrecht, 1867 (pp. 154). Very valuable for the early literary history of the H. C., with fac-similes of the first German, Latin, and Dutch editions. THE REFORMATION IN THE PALATINATE. The Palatinate, one of the finest provinces of Germany, on both sides of the upper Rhine, was one of the seven electorates (Kurfürstenthümer ), whose rulers, in the name of the German people, elected the Emperor of Germany. After the dissolution of the old empire (1806) it ceased to be a politico-geographical name, and its territory is now divided between Baden, Bavaria, Hesse Darmstadt, Nassau, and Prussia. Its capital was Heidelberg (from 1231 till 1720), famous for its charming situation at the foot of the Königsstuhl, on the banks of the Swabian river Neckar, for its picturesque castle, and for its university (founded in 1346).
Luther made a short visit to Heidelberg in 1518, and defended certain evangelical theses. In 1546, the year of Luther’s death, the Reformation was introduced under the Elector Frederick II. Melanchthon, who was a native of the Palatinate, and twice received a call to a professorship of theology at Heidelberg (1546 and 1557), but declined, acted as the chief counselor in the work, and aided, on a personal visit in 1557, in reorganizing the university on an evangelical basis under Otto Henry (1556-59). He may therefore be called the Reformer of the Palatinate. He impressed upon it the character of a moderate Lutheranism friendly to Calvinism. The Augsburg Confession was adopted as the doctrinal basis, and the cultus was remodeled (as also in the neighboring Duchy of Würtemberg) after Zwinglian simplicity. Heidelberg now began to attract Protestant scholars from different countries, and became a battle-ground of Lutheran, Philippist, Calvinist, and Zwinglian views. The conflict was enkindled as usual by the zeal for the real presence. Tilemann Heshusius, whom Melanchthon, without knowing his true character, had recommended to a theological chair (1558), introduced, as General Superintendent, exclusive Lutheranism, excommunicated Deacon Klebitz for holding the Zwinglian view, and even fought with him at the altar about the communion cup. This public scandal was the immediate occasion of the Heidelberg Catechism.
FREDERICK III.
During this controversy Frederick III., surnamed the Pious (1515-1576), became Elector of the Palatinate, 1559. He made it the chief object of his reign to carry out the reformation begun by his predecessors. He tried at first to conciliate the parties, and asked the advice of Melanchthon, who, a few months before his death, counseled peace, moderation, and Biblical simplicity, and warned against extreme and scholastic subtleties in the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. [See
Frederick was one of the purest and noblest characters among the princes of Germany. He was to the Palatinate what King Alfred and Edward VI. were to England, what the Electors Frederick the Wise and John the Constant were to Saxony, and Duke Christopher to Würtemberg. He did more for educational and charitable institutions than all his predecessors. He devoted to them the entire proceeds of the oppressed convents. He lived in great simplicity that he might contribute liberally from his private income to the cause of learning and religion. He was the first German prince who professed the Reformed Creed, as distinct from the Lutheran. For this he suffered much reproach, and was threatened with exclusion from the benefits of the Augsburg Treaty of Peace (concluded in 1555), since Zwinglianism and Calvinism were not yet tolerated on German soil. But at the Diet of Augsburg, in 1566, he made before the Emperor a manly confession of his faith, and declared himself ready to lose his crown rather than violate his conscience. Even his opponents could not but admire his courage, and the Lutheran Elector Augustus of Saxony applauded him, saying, ’Fritz, thou art more pious than all of us.’ He praised God on his death-bed that he had been permitted to see such a reformation in Church and school that men were led away from human traditions to Christ and his divine Word. He left in writing a full confession of his faith, which may be regarded as an authentic explanation of the Heidelberg Catechism; it was published after his death by his son, John Casimir (1577).
URSINUS AND OLEVIANUS.
Frederick showed his wisdom by calling two young divines, Ursinus and Olevianus, to Heidelberg to aid in the Reformation and to prepare an evangelical catechism. They belong to the reformers of the second generation. Theirs it was to nurture and to mature rather than to plant. Both were Germans, but well acquainted with the Reformed Churches in Switzerland and France. Both suffered deposition and exile for the Reformed faith.
Zacharias Ursinus (Bär ), the chief author of the Heidelberg Catechism, was born at Breslau, July 18, 1534, and studied seven years (1550-1557) at Wittenberg under Melanchthon, who esteemed him as one of his best pupils and friends. He accompanied his teacher to the religious conference at Worms, 1557, and to Heidelberg, and then proceeded on a literary journey to Switzerland and France. He made the personal acquaintance of Bullinger and Peter Martyr at Zurich, of Calvin and Beza at Geneva, and was thoroughly initiated into the Reformed Creed. Calvin presented him with his works, and wrote in them the best wishes for his young friend. On his return to Wittenberg he received a call to the rectorship of the Elizabeth College at Breslau. After the death of Melanchthon he went a second time to Zurich (Oct., 1560), intending to remain there. In the following year he was called to a theological chair at Heidelberg. Here he labored with untiring zeal and success till the death of Frederick III., 1576, when, together with six hundred steadfast Reformed ministers and teachers, he was deposed and exiled by Louis VI., who introduced the Lutheran Creed. Ursinus found a refuge at Neustadt an der Hardt, and established there, with other deposed professors, a flourishing theological school under the protection of John Casimir, the second son of Frederick III. He died in the prime of his life and usefulness, March 6, 1583, leaving a widow and one son. In the same year Casimir succeeded his Lutheran brother in the Electorate, recalled the exiled preachers, and re-established the Reformed Church in the Palatinate.
Ursinus was a man of profound classical, philosophical, and theological learning, poetic taste, rare gift of teaching, and fervent piety. His devotion to Christ is beautifully reflected in the first question of the Heidelberg Catechism, and in his saying that he would not take a thousand worlds for the blessed assurance of being owned by Jesus Christ. He was no orator, and no man of action, but a retired, modest, and industrious student. [See
Caspar Olevianus (Olewig), born at Treves Aug. 10,1536, studied the ancient languages at Paris, Bourges, and Orleans, and theology at Geneva and Zurich. He enjoyed, like Ursinus, the personal instruction and friendship of the surviving reformers of Switzerland. He began to preach the evangelical doctrines at Treves, was thrown into prison, but soon released, and called to Heidelberg, 1560, by Frederick III., who felt under personal obligation to him for saving one of his sons from drowning at the risk of his own life. He taught theology and preached at the court. He was the chief counselor of the Elector in all affairs of the Church. In 1576 he was banished on account of his faith, and accepted a call to Herborn, 1584, where he died, Feb. 27, 1585. His last word was a triumphant ’certissimus ,’ in reply to a friend who asked him whether he were certain of his salvation. Theodore Beza lamented his death in a Latin poem, beginning ’Eheu, quibus suspiriis, Eheu, quibus te lacrymis Oleviane, planxero?’
Olevianus was inferior to Ursinus in learning, but his superior in the pulpit and in church government. He wrote an important catechetical work on the covenant of grace, and is regarded as the forerunner of the federal theology of Coccejus and Lampe. He labored earnestly, but only with moderate success, for the introduction of the Presbyterian form of government and a strict discipline, after the model of Geneva. Thomas Erastus (Lieber), Professor of Medicine at Heidelberg, and afterwards of Ethics at Basle (died 1583), opposed excommunication, and defended the supremacy of the state in matters of religion; hence the term ’Erastianism’ (equivalent to Cæsaropapism).
PREPARATION AND PUBLICATION OF THE CATECHISM. The Heidelberg Catechism, as it is called after the city of its birth, or the Palatinate (also Palatine ) Catechism, as it is named after the country for which it was intended, was prepared on the basis of two Latin drafts of Ursinus and a German draft of Olevianus. The peculiar gifts of both, the didactic clearness and precision of the one, and the pathetic warmth and unction of the other, were blended in beautiful harmony, and produced a joint work which is far superior to all the separate productions of either. In the Catechism they surpassed themselves. They were in a measure inspired for it. At the same time, they made free and independent use of the Catechisms of Calvin, Lasky, and Bullinger. The Elector took the liveliest interest in the preparation, and even made some corrections. In December, 1562, Frederick submitted the work to a general synod of the chief ministers and teachers assembled at Heidelberg, for revision and approval. It was published early in 1563, in German, under the title ’Catechismus, Or Christian Instruction, as conducted in the Churches and Schools of the Electoral Palatinate.’ [See
THIRD EDITION AND THE EIGHTIETH QUESTION.
There appeared, in the year 1563, three official editions of the Catechism with an important variation in the eightieth question, which denounces the Romish mass as ’a denial of the one sacrifice of Christ, and as an accursed idolatry.’ In the first edition this question was wanting altogether; the second edition has it in part; the third in full, as it now stands. [See
TRANSLATIONS. The Heidelberg Catechism was translated into all the European and many Asiatic languages. It has the pentecostal gift of tongues in a rare degree. It is stated that, next to the Bible, the ’Imitation of Christ,’ by Thomas à Kempis, and Bunyan’s ’Pilgrim’s Progress,’ no book has been more frequently translated, more widely circulated and used. Whole libraries of paraphrases, commentaries, sermons, attacks, and defenses were written about it. In many Reformed churches, especially in Holland (and also in the United States), it was and is to some extent even now obligatory or customary to explain the Catechism from the pulpit every Sunday afternoon. Hence the division of the questions into fifty-two Sundays, in imitation of the example set by Calvin’s Catechism. [See
There are three Dutch translations: the first appeared at Emden, 1563; the second, by Peter Dathenus, in connection with a Dutch version of the Psalter, in 1566, and very often separately. [See
Three or four English translations were made from the Latin, and obtained a wide circulation in Scotland, England, and America. [See
The German Original, 1563. | Latin Version, 1563. | |||
Frage 1. Was ist dein einiger Trost im Leben und im Sterben? | Qu. 1. Quæ est unica tua consolatio in vita et in morte? | |||
Das ich mit Leib und Seele, beides im Leben und im Sterben, nicht mein, sondern meines getreuen Heilandes Jesu Christi eigen bin, der mit seinem theuren Blute für alle meine Sünden vollkommen bezahlet, und mich aus aller Gewalt des Teufels erlöset hat; und also bewahret, dass ohne den Willen meines Vaters im Himmel kein Haar von meinem Haupte kann fallen, ja auch mir alles zu meiner Seligkeit dienen muss. Darum er mich auch durch seinen heiligen Geist des ewigen Lebens versichert, und ihm forthin zu leben von Herzen willig und bereit macht. | Quod animo pariter et corpore, sive vivam, sive moriar, non meus, sed fidissimi Domini et Servatoris mei Jesus Christi sum proprius, qui pretioso sanguine suo pro omnibus peccatis meis plenissime satisfaciens, [See | |||
Frage 2. Wie viele Stücke sind dir nöthig zu wissen, dass du in diesem Troste seliglich leben und sterben mögest? | Qu. 2. Quot sunt tibi scitu necessaria, ut ista [See | |||
Drei Stücke: Erstlich, wie gross meine Sünde und Elend sei. Zum Andern, wie ich von allen meinen Sünden und Elend erlöset werde. Und zum Dritten, wie ich Gott für solche Erlösung soll dankbar sein. | Tria. Primum, quanta sit peccati mei et miseriæ meæ magnitudo. Secundum, [See | |||
Scotch Edition of 1591. | Perry’s Translation (1591). | |||
From Dunlop’s Collection (1722). | Oxford Edition of 1601. | |||
Ques. 1. What is thy only comfort in life and in death? | Ques. 1. What is thy only comfort in lift and death? | |||
That in soul and body, whether I live or die, I am not mine own, but I belong unto my most faithful Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ: who by his precious blood, most fully satisfying for all my sins, hath delivered me from the whole power of the Devil; and doth so preserve me, that without the will of my heavenly Father, not so much as a hair can fall from my head: yea, all things are made to serve for my salvation. Wherefore by his Spirit also, he assureth me of everlasting life, and maketh me ready and prepared, that henceforth I may live unto him. | That both in soul and body, whether I live or die, I am not mine own, but belong wholly [See | |||
Ques. 2. How many things are needful for thee to know, to the end [that ] thou, enjoying this comfort, mayest live and die an happy man? | Ques. 2. How many things are necessary for thee to know, that thou enjoying this comfort mayest live and die happily? | |||
Three things. First, What is the greatness of my sin, and of my misery. Secondly, By what means I may be delivered from all my sin and misery. Thirdly, What thankfulness I owe to God for that deliverance. | Three. The first, what is the greatness of my sin and misery. The second, how I am delivered from all sin and misery. The third, what thanks I owe unto God for this delivery. | |||
Received American Version, 1771. | New American Version, 1863. | |||
Ques. 1. What is thy only comfort in life and death? | Ques. 1. What is thy only comfort in life and in death? | |||
That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong unto my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ, who, with his precious blood, hath fully satisfied for all my sins, and delivered me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be subservient to my salvation; and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, he also assures me of eternal life, and makes me sincerely willing and ready henceforth, to live unto him. | That I, with body and soul, both in life and in death, am not my own, but belong to my faithful Saviour Jesus Christ, who with His precious blood has fully satisfied for all my sins, and redeemed me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me, that without the will of my Father in heaven not a hair can fall from my head; yea, that all things must work together for my salvation. Wherefore, by His Holy Spirit, He also assures me of eternal life, and makes me heartily willing and ready henceforth to live unto Him. | |||
Ques. 2. How many things are necessary for thee to know, that thou, enjoying this comfort, mayest live and die happily? | Ques. 2. How many things are necessary for thee to know, that thou in this comfort mayest live and die happily? | |||
Three; the first, how great my sins and miseries are; the second, how I may be delivered from all my sins and miseries; the third, how I shall express my gratitude to God for such deliverance. | Three things: First, the greatness of my sin and misery. Second, how I am redeemed from all my sins and misery. Third, how I am to be thankful to God for such redemption. | |||
Note . -All the English versions, except the last, follow the Latin in its departures from the German, as ’most faithful Lord’ (fidelissimi Domini ) for ’faithful’ (getreuen ), ’heavenly Father’ (Patris cœlestis ) for ’Father in heaven’ (Vater im Himmel ). The dependence on the Latin may be seen also in the words ’most fully satisfying’ (plenissime satisfaciens ), ’delivered’ (liberavit ) for ’redeemed’ (erlöset ), ’delivery’ (liberatio ) for ’redemption’ (Erlösung ) and in the omission of ’heartily’ (von Herzen ), for which, however, the common American version (which seems to have made use also of the Dutch version) substitutes ’sincerely.’
CHARACTER AND AIM. The Heidelberg Catechism answers the double purpose of a guide for the religious instruction of the youth and a confession of faith for the Church. As a catechism it is an acknowledged masterpiece, with few to equal and none to surpass it. Its only defect is that its answers are mostly too long for the capacity and memory of children. It is intended for a riper age. Hence an abridgment was made as early as 1585, but no attempts to simplify and popularize it have been able to supersede it. As a standard of public doctrine the Heidelberg Catechism is the most catholic and popular of all the Reformed symbols. The German Reformed Church acknowledges no other. The Calvinistic system is herein set forth with wise moderation, and without its sharp, angular points. This may be a defect in logic, but it is an advantage in religion, which is broader and deeper than logic. Children and the mass of the people are unable to appreciate metaphysical distinctions and the transcendent mysteries of eternal decrees. The doctrine of election to holiness and salvation in Christ (or the positive and edifying part of the dogma of predestination) is indeed incidentally set forth as a source of humility, gratitude, and comfort (Ques. 1, 31, 53, 54), but nothing is said of a double predestination, or of an eternal decree of reprobation, or of a limited atonement (comp. Ques. 37). These difficult questions are left to private opinion and theological science. This reserve is the more remarkable since the authors (as well as all other Reformers, except Melanchthon in his later period) were strict predestinarians.
PLAN AND ARRANGEMENT. The Heidelberg Catechism follows the order of the Epistle to the Romans, and is divided into three parts. The first two questions are introductory. The first part treats of the sin and misery of man (Ques. 3-11; comp. Romans 1:18 - Romans 2:20); the second of the redemption by Christ (Ques. 12-85; comp. Romans 3:21 - Romans 11:36); the third of the thankfulness of the redeemed, or the Christian life (Ques. 86-129; comp. Rom 12:-16.). The second part is the largest, and contains an explanation of all the articles of the Apostles’ Creed under the three heads of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. The doctrine of the sacraments is rightly incorporated in this part, instead of being treated in separate sections, as in the Roman and Lutheran Catechisms. The third part gives an exposition of the Decalogue (as a rule of obedience, viewed in the light of redemption) and of the Lord’s Prayer. This order corresponds to the development of religious life and to the three leading ideas of repentance, faith, and love. The conception of Christian life, as an expression of gratitude for redeeming grace, is truly evangelical. In older catechisms the five or six parts of a catechism-namely, the Creed, the Decalogue, the Lord’s Prayer, Baptism, the Lord’s Supper-are mechanically co-ordinated; here they are worked up into an organic system. The execution is admirable throughout. Several answers are acknowledged gems in the history of catechetical literature-e.g., the definition of faith (Ques. 21), on providence (Ques. 27 and 28), on the significance of the Christian name (Ques. 31 and 32), on the benefit of the ascension (Ques. 49), and on justification by faith (Ques. 60). THE SPIRIT OF THE CATECHISM. The genius of the Catechism is brought out at once in the first question, which contains the central idea, and strikes the key-note. It is unsurpassed for depth, comfort, and beauty, and, once committed to memory, can never be forgotten. It represents Christianity in its evangelical, practical, cheering aspect, not as a commanding law, not as an intellectual scheme, not as a system of outward observances, but as the best gift of God to man, as a source of peace and comfort in life and in death. What can be more comforting, what at the same time more honoring and stimulating to a holy life than the assurance of being owned wholly by Christ our blessed Lord and Saviour, who sacrificed his own spotless life for us on the cross? The first question and answer of the Heidelberg Catechism is the whole gospel in a nutshell; blessed is he who can repeat it from the heart and hold it fast to the end. [See
It would be difficult to find a more evangelical definition of faith than in Ques. 21: ’Faith is not only a certain knowledge, whereby I hold for truth all that God has revealed to us in his Word; but also a hearty trust, which the Holy Spirit works in me by the gospel, that not only to others, but to me also, forgiveness of sins, everlasting righteousness, and salvation are freely given by God, merely of grace, only for the sake of Christ’s merits.’ How rich and consoling is the lesson derived from God’s all-ruling Providence in Ques. 28! ’That we may be patient in adversity, thankful in prosperity, and for what is future have good confidence in our faithful God and Father, that no creature shall separate us from his love, since all creatures are so in his hand that without his will they can not so much as move.’ The Catechism is a work of religious enthusiasm, based on solid theological learning, and directed by excellent judgment. It is baptized with the pentecostal fire of the great Reformation, yet remarkably free from the polemic zeal and intolerance which characterized that wonderfully excited period-by far the richest and deepest in Church history next to the age of Christ and his inspired apostles. It is the product of the heart as well as the head, full of faith and unction from above. It is fresh, lively, glowing, yet clear, sober, self-sustained. The ideas are Biblical and orthodox, and well fortified by apt Scripture proofs. [See