The Confessionalist Homiletics of Lucas Osiander (1534-1604): A Study of a South-German Lutheran Preacher in the Age of Confessionalization ... Humanismus, Reformation / Studies in the La) 9783161534676, 9783161586200, 3161534670

Citation preview

Spätmittelalter, Humanismus, Reformation Studies in the Late Middle Ages, Humanisms and the Reformation

herausgegeben von Volker Leppin (Tübingen) in Verbindung mit Amy Nelson Burnett (Lincoln, NE), Johannes Helmrath (Berlin) Matthias Pohlig (Münster), Eva Schlotheuber (Düsseldorf)

82

Sivert Angel

The Confessionalist Homiletics of Lucas Osiander (1534–1604) A Study of a South-German Lutheran Preacher in the Age of Confessionalization

Mohr Siebeck

Sivert Angel, born 1973; 1998 Cand. Theol. University of Oslo; 1999–2006 Pastor in the Church of Norway; 2011 PhD University of Oslo; 2010–14 Associate Professor of Homiletics, The Practical-Theological Seminary, Oslo; since 2014 Rector of The Practical-Theological Seminary, Oslo.

Printed with support from the Norwegian Research Council. ISBN 978-3-16-153467-6 / eISBN 978-3-16-158620-0 unveränderte eBook-Ausgabe 2019 ISSN 1865-2840 (Spätmittelalter, Humanismus, Reformation) Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2014 by Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was typeset by Martin Fischer in Tübingen using Minion Pro typeface, printed by Gulde-Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper and bound Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Portrait of Lucas Osiander provided by Universitätsbibliothek Tübingen, Bilddatenbank. Printed in Germany.

Acknowledgements The present book is a revised version of my doctoral dissertation which was defended at the Faculty of Theology, University of Oslo, in December 2011. The Faculty of Theology funded my work from 2006–2010 and provided the stimulating environment that made this work possible. The most important contribution was Professor Tarald Rasmussen’s wise and discrete supervision. Our faculty librarians, Svein Helge Birkeflet and Hans Petter Christensen, accommodated endless book requests, and my colleagues in Oslo were a continuous source of inspiration. For the revision of the dissertation for this book, I am very grateful for the advice of Professor Irene Dingel, Mainz, and Professor Thomas Kaufmann, Göttingen, who formed the adjudication committee for my dissertation, and also for many suggestions and difficult questions from my colleague Professor Geir Hellemo. I would also like to express my gratitude to PhD candidate Paul Strauss, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and to Dr. Claus-Jürgen Thornton, Berlin, for their conscientious copy-editing and proofing of the manuscript. On my travels in Germany I experienced many warm welcomes. Professor Sabine Holtz in Tübingen and Professor Hermann Ehmer in Stuttgart gave generously of their time and were of invaluable help. Also the many friendly and competent librarians at the Herzog August Bibliothek in Wolfenbüttel, the University Library in Tübingen, the University Library in Dresden and the Landesbibliothek and Landesarchiv in Stuttgart deserve great thanks. Throughout these years I have been reassured by my parents Solveig and Svein Willy Danielsen’s constant support. Still, the most important contribution was without doubt the patience and care from my wife Kristin. Oslo, March 2013

Sivert Angel

Table of Contents Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . XI

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1. Confessionalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Confessional Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Homiletics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Printed Sermons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Osiander’s Homiletics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 Osiander and Luther . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 Osiander in His Sermons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3 11 14 14 16 22 24

Part One

Lucas Osiander as Court Preacher in Stuttgart (1569–1594) Chapter 1: The Memory of Lucas Osiander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 1.1 An Epitaph in the Collegiate Church of Stuttgart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 The Funeral Sermon for Lucas Osiander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.1 The Apostle Paul and Lucas Osiander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.2 They Fought a Good Fight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.3 They Finished the Course . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2.4 They Kept Their Faith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 A Typical Lutheran Preacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

29 31 31 33 34 35 39

Chapter 2: Lucas Osiander at the Court . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 2.1 A Court Preacher’s Place in the Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Lucas Osiander between Secular and Spiritual Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 A Useful Servant of Church and Duke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Lucas Osiander and Duke Ludwig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.4 Lucas Osiander and Duke Friedrich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.5 Lucas Osiander as a Lutheran Pastor of the Pre-Absolutist Era . . . . . . . .

42 45 52 55 58 64

VIII

Table of Contents

Chapter 3: Funeral Sermons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 3.1 A Survey of the Funeral Sermon Genre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.1 The Funeral Sermon as a Textual Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.2 The Funeral Sermon as Ritual . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1.3 Funeral Sermon Homiletics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.1 Court Preacher Andreas Osiander’s Sermon in the Castle Chapel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.2 Prelate Eberhard Bidembach’s Sermon in the Monastery of Bebenhausen on the Night Before the Funeral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.3 Stiftsprobst (Diocesan Dean) Johannes Magirus’ Sermon in the Stuttgart Stiftskirche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.4 Lucas Osiander’s Funeral Sermon in Tübingen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2.5 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s First Wife Duchess Dorothea Ursula . . . . . 3.4 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s Mother Duchess Anna Maria . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 The Death of a Nobleman and Some of the Duke’s Servants . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.1 The Death of Hans von und zu Stamhaim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.2 The Death of Ducal Secretary Frantz Kurtz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5.3 The Death of Two of the Duke’s Knights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.6 The Death of Theologian and University Chancellor D. Jacob Andreae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

68 68 74 79 80 83 85 86 88 96 97 104 114 114 117 120 123

Chapter 4: Osiander as Funeral Preacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 Part Two

Forming Young Lutherans: Lucas Osiander as Catechist in Esslingen (1598–1603) Chapter 5: Lucas Osiander in Esslingen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 5.1 Cities and Confessionalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.1 Communalism: Political Structures and Social Common Sense . . 5.1.2 Shifting Premises for Political Influence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.3 Esslingen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.4 The Emperor’s Intervention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.5 The Expansion of the Territorial State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.6 Osiander and City Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1.7 City Reformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

139 140 142 143 145 146 149 153

Table of Contents

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.1 The Protestant Catechism Genre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.2 Luther’s Catechisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.3 Brenz’s Catechism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.4 Osiander’s Position as a Württembergian Point of View . . . . . . . . . 5.3 Catechetical Traditions in Esslingen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.1 Otther’s Catechism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.2 Andreae’s Catechism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.3 Hermann’s Catechism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IX 156 156 160 164 167 174 174 176 178 180

Chapter 6: Catechism Sermons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181 6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.1 The Catechist as Shepherd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.2 The Catechists’ Opponents: Turks and Jews or Monks and Priests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.3 Baptism’s Pedagogical Function: Engagement or Daily Conversion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1.4 Concluding Remarks: A God Who Demands Faith and a God Who Demands Fulfilment of His Commandments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.1 To Recite the Creed Is to Learn to Trust God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2 To Recite the Creed Involves Believing in Christ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2.1 Christ as Lord: The Importance of Knowing Christ . . . . . . . 6.2.2.2 The Passion of Christ: Entering in the Right Relationship with Christ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2.3 Christ Defeats Devil and Hell for the Christian . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2.4 Jesus as a Present Force: Christ’s Ascension . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2.5 Christ as Judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2.6 Concluding Remarks: Christ as Pedagogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.3 To Believe in the Spirit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.3.1 The Spirit and the Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.3.2 The Spirit Gives Forgiveness for Sin and Eternal Life . . . . . 6.2.3.3 Concluding Remarks: Trust of the Heart Is the Faith that Saves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.1 Starting Point: The Spirit’s Urging or God’s Command . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.2 Prayer’s Progression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.2.1 God as Father . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.2.2 Praying Is Being a Child . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.2.3 To Pray Is to Wander with God . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.3 Concluding Remarks: The Situation of Prayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

184 184 189 198 203 206 206 211 212 215 221 225 232 234 236 239 247 250 252 252 253 253 256 261 264

X

Table of Contents

Chapter 7: Conclusion: Catechist and City Preacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269 7.1 City and Confessionalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2 Luther and Osiander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3 Composition as an Analytical Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4 Doctrinal Content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.5 Teaching Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.6 The Formation of Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.7 The Preacher as a Political Player . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

269 270 271 272 274 277 279

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283 Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287 Index of Bible Verses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299 Index of Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 Index of Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303

Abbreviations Philipp Melanchthon, Corpus Reformatorum. Ed. Carolus Gottlieb Brettschneider (Halle: C. A. Schwetschke, 1846). RGG1 Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Handwörterbuch in gemeinverständ­ licher Darstellung. Edited by Friedrich Michael Schiele and Leopold Zscharnack (5 vols.; Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1909–1912). RGG4 Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Handwörterbuch für Theologie und Religions­ wissenschaft. Edited by Don Browning, Hans Dieter Betz, Bernd Janowski, and Eberhard Jüngel (8 vols.; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1998–2005). TRE Theologische Realenzyklopädie. Edited by Gerhard Krause and Gerhard Müller et al. (36 vols.; Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1977–2004). WA D. Martin Luthers Werke. Kritische Gesammtausgabe. 77 vols. Edited by Joachim K. F. Knaake et al. (Weimar: Hermann Böhlau, 1883–2009). CR

Introduction For Lutherans, faith was received passively and justified the believer without merits, but it was still not a faith that occurred out of nothing. Faith’s coming into existence depended on the preached word, and therefore even a passive conception of faith involved some form of activity. This was so not only because the word had to be preached and heard, but also because it had to be preached the right way in the right situation if it was to create a saving faith. Many different strategies were possible to meet this aim. This study will describe some of these strategies and the theology and political interests they express. The religious formation studied here took place when Lutheranism had gone from being a critical voice within an established Catholic Church to having become a religion of its own, reproducing itself from generation to generation. As an established religion, Lutheranism’s political and social functions became more obvious. The Lutheran church became a central institution contributing to integration, morality, and a shared identity in the countries that established themselves as confessional Lutheran states. This study will investigate how theological and political concerns interplay in shaping the form and content of the Lutheran formation. It will do so by a case study of the preacher Lucas Osiander. Sermons will be employed as the study’s main source material, and therefore it is the intentions and activities of formation that will be studied rather than the results. By analysing in detail a selection of Lucas Osiander’s sermons and tracing how theology and politics were interwoven in them, this study will describe how a very central instance in the Lutheran forming activity, namely preaching, was connected to specific historical conditions, and how central theological concerns were accommodated to new challenges. It will analyze Osiander’s sermons as a means for moving and forming congregants who were also subjects of a confessional secular authority. Thereby it will investigate his sermons as expressions of a Lutheran formation taking place in a specific historical situation. Lucas Osiander is a welcome case for such an investigation. Sermons were not only his preferred mode of communication, but his religion’s most prestigious genre, and as a preacher he was centrally placed as part of a theological elite which in this period of history was among the foremost Lutheran centres of learning. He was involved with religious instruction from a central position in

2

Introduction

Württemberg, a territory that had become one of the foremost examples within the Holy Roman Empire of a Lutheran confessional state. The study of the distinguished but typical Lutheran preacher Lucas Osiander is also a study of something more. Osiander was a pupil of Johannes Brenz, the most famous Württemberg theologian and author of Duke Christoph’s church order written from 1552–1559,1 and he became a close friend and ally of Jacob Andreae, one of the major figures behind the Book of Concord and legendary chancellor of the University in Tübingen for many years.2 He was himself a doctor of theology who on occasions taught at the University in Tübingen, and who established a dynasty of university theologians in Tübingen.3 It is safe to describe him as a central Württemberg theologian. He also held a key position in the Württembergian church. As court preacher for many years, he presented some of the country’s most exposed sermons, had a seat in the central church council, and was a link between duke and church in Württemberg. When he later became abbot in Adelberg and general superintendent, he was, together with the other three general superintendents and the dean of Stuttgart, one of five leading clerics in the territory.

1 Sabine Holtz, Theologie und Alltag: Lehre und Leben in den Predigten der Tübinger Theologen 1550–1750, Spätmittelalter und Reformation N. R. 3 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1993), 20–21. Holtz’ study has been a valuable resource for this work. It deals with similar source material as this study, namely Lutheran sermons from the time after 1550, and it has a similar interest for theology’s relationship to societal life. However, Holtz pursues this interest differently from the study undertaken in this book. In her study, the problem to be investigated is identified on an abstract level and answered through an analysis of a wide source material. The question about the relationship between theological doctrine and social-ethical norm is answered by an investigation of how theology through preaching contributes to the constitution of society’s system of symbols and values. The sermons are studied as mirrors into the currents of time, and the vast sermon material is categorized according to the doctrinal themes they negotiate. They are analyzed to show how doctrine and moral, elite theology and popular religion are interrelated. The study concludes that the elite theologians of the Lutheran orthodoxy through their sermons succeed in laying down a norm for human life. Holtz, Theologie und Alltag, 1–10. 372. The present study aims at similar description, namely that of the relationship between church practice in the form of preaching and life in society. However, by employing a more narrow focus, it follows this aim along a different path, as this chapter will describe in detail. It will describe one preacher as a political agent in a certain historical process, namely Lutheran confessionalization in Württemberg. By a rhetorical analysis it will describe how his sermons functioned in a certain situation, but thereby it will also identify aspects of this style of preaching that are tied to specific historical situations. Hopefully this will enable a more precise description of the interests that were negotiated in the sermons, of how the sermon negotiated them, and of how doctrinal concepts held political significance and responded to political interests. 2  Martin Brecht, “Andreae, Jakob”, in TRE 2, 672–680; and Julian Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorialstaat: Die Gelehrtenfamilie Bidem­ bach vom 16. bis zum 18. Jahrhundert, Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg 170 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2008), 117–118. 3 Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorialstaat, 81.

1. Confessionalization

3

Osiander’s career as a preacher took place during the period when Württemberg emerged as one of the leading Lutheran territories within the Empire. Württemberg was admired among fellow Lutheran territories for its early, wellplanned church order with its integration of secular and religious concerns. The territory came to be regarded as one of the important Lutheran voices within the Empire. Through its famous university in Tübingen, it became a major supplier of theologians to other Lutheran territories in the Empire and thereby a significant exporter of Lutheran theology and ideas.4 Osiander’s biography is in itself interesting with its dramatic shifts and conflicts as well as its great success and failures. He had a prominent origin as the offspring of first generation reformer Andreas Osiander, who had fallen into disfavour with mainstream Lutherans due to a conflict over the doctrine of justification, but remained secretly allied with Johannes Brenz and Duke Christoph of Württemberg. Still, this study will treat these parts of his biography only briefly and instead focus on two phases of his life that are of special interest for the study of religious formation in the intersection between theology and politics. Part One examines the first phase when Osiander served as court preacher in Stuttgart from 1569–1594, and Part Two examines the second phase when he was city preacher in Esslingen from 1598–1603. In these two phases of his life, Osiander found himself as a preacher positioned between the interests of church and duke, and later, seemingly, between the interest of church and city council, but in fact also between the interests of city and territory. In Part One, funeral sermons make up the main source material. These were presented on the occasion of deaths in the ducal family and they show how faith and salvation and an existence in the beyond are connected with the lives of concrete examples, namely the deceased. Part Two studies catechism sermons presented to the youth of Esslingen as a means of educating them in a Christian life and a saving faith. These sermons present a comprehensive picture of Christian teaching and therefore also a theological level complementing the form of preaching studied in Part One.

1. Confessionalization This study aims to describe Lucas Osiander as a preacher in his historical context. Because of the way the case of Lucas Osiander is placed in time, and because 4 Matthias Langensteiner, Für Land und Luthertum: Die Politik Herzog Christophs von Würt­ temberg (1550–1568), (Köln, Weimar, and Wien: Böhlau, 2008), 244–245. Dieter Mertens claims that Württemberg from the end of the 1550s took the leading role among orthodox Lutheran territories; “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, in Handbuch der baden-württembergischen Geschichte, ed. Meinrad Schaab and Hansmartin Schwarzmaier (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1995), 119.

4

Introduction

of the themes to which it calls attention, a discussion of the “confessionalization” thesis and its applicability for this study is unavoidable. The relationship between church and secular authorities in the formation of the population in early modern German territories is a central research interest associated with the paradigm, and the parts of Osiander’s life and work that are to be discussed in this study fall within the epoch that has been described as the peak of confessionalization.5 The German historians Wolfgang Reinhard and Heinz Schilling developed the theory of confessionalization during the late 1970s as a perspective on historic change in German societies and the Holy Roman Empire in the period from, roughly speaking, the Peace of Augsburg in 1555 to the end of the Thirty Years’ War in 1648.6 It continued the perspective called “the era of the building of confessions” (Konfessionsbildung) which was introduced in the late 1950s by Ernst Walter Zeeden and referred to the period as a time when a similar development took place within the three major confessions, namely that they consolidated themselves according to dogma, institutions and morality.7 The theory of confessionalization emphasized how the building of the confessions was linked to the formation of the early modern state. By employing Gerhard Oestreich’s concept of social disciplining (Sozialdisziplinierung) scholars could show how church and state cooperated in the formation of the early absolutist state that later appeared.8 They could do so by subordinating the shorter history to a universal historical perspective,9 so that the short history was not understood only according to the conscious interests of its actors, but also by what was effected unintentionally.10 On one level, the confessionalization process brought confessional constraint within the territories and animosity between the territories in a way that led to a devastating war, but on another level the monopolization within the territories and the competition between them laid the foundation for early modern society. It made possible coherent and controllable territories with manageable structures and competent servants, and contributed to the formation of a disciplined  5 See Heinz Schilling, “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich: Religiöser und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in Deutschland zwischen 1555 und 1620”, in idem, Ausgewählte Abhandlungen zur eu­ ropäischen Reformations‑ und Konfessionsgeschichte, ed. Luise Schorn-Schütte and Olaf Mörke (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2002), 524.  6 See Stefan Ehrenpreis and Ute Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2002), 62–79. See especially 71.  7 See Ehrenpreis and Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter, 63; and Ernst Walter Zeeden, “Grundlagen und Wege der Konfessionsbildung in Deutschland im Zeitalter der Glaubenskämpfe”, Historische Zeitschrift 185, no. 2 (1958): 251–252.  8  Ehrenpreis and Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter, 65 and 68. However, this disciplining perspective was present already in Zeeden’s concept. See Zeeden, “Grundlagen und Wege der Konfessionsbildung”, 256 and 274.  9 Schilling, “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich”, 505. 10 Ehrenpreis and Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter, 72.

1. Confessionalization

5

­ opulation of subjects.11 According to Schilling, this universal historical perp spective makes possible a new historical evaluation of the epoch. It is not only to be seen as the depressing transition from the glorious Reformation to the tragic Thirty Years’ War, but as something more, namely a reorganization of society with lasting significance.12 The progression of confessionalization has been divided into several stages.13 Schilling has described the years 1540–1560 as its initiation period and the 1570s as years of confrontation when heterogeneous opinions were excluded, people fled from territories because of confession, and an offensive of confession-building displaced the pragmatism of the religious peace treaty. The 1580s were the peak of confessionalization as territories willingly risked peace and disrespected agreements and alliances for the sake of confession, theologians encouraged secular authority to disrespect imperial law if they could thereby hurt confessional opponents, and great public disputes caused disturbances within territories. During these years, Protestants took over dioceses and organized visitations effectively. It was in this period that Lucas Osiander was at the height of his career: In a time when confessional theology provided premises for domestic and foreign policy in Württemberg, Osiander was a central counselor at the duke’s court and a member of the church leadership, and could therefore contribute to the processes here labeled as confessionalization. Toward the end of this period he fell into disfavour with the new duke and ended up in the imperial city of Esslingen. Here he influenced the shape of religious life and church organization in a time when imperial cities were losing some of their religious independence to the confessional territorial states that surrounded them. The last phase of confessionalization took place during the Thirty Years’ War, when the terrors of war weakened confessionalization prior to the peace treaty of Westphalia.14 According to Schilling, the confessionalization process effected a confessional polarization affecting all areas of life. It involved a religious formation that was at the same time also a political and social formation. The process let Christian morality function as the morality of society.15 Schilling identifies the engine behind the change that took place during the confessionalization era not only in the competition between the territories, but also in a synergy that arose when two processes from two different parts of society met. In theology and religion there was a struggle for stability, and a similar struggle for stability was a governing 11 Schilling,

“Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich”, 526 and 530. “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich”, 504–505. 13 Ehrenpreis and Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter, 71. 14 Schilling, “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich”, 515–527. Zeeden had given the process a slightly broader dating and saw it as beginning after the Peasants’ War, with the Diet of Speyer and the beginning of the visitations in Saxony and lasting for approximately 100 years. See Zeeden, “Grundlagen und Wege der Konfessionsbildung”, 250, 252, and 259. 15 Schilling, “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich”, 530. 12 Schilling,

6

Introduction

interest of the early modern state. These two areas of society interacted with each other in this struggle in a way that resulted in a closer integration of church and state, expressed in the visitation system, school and university politics, and in the politics of marriage and family.16 When the subjects of a territory were bound to a confession and unity of faith was secured by law, religion emerged as the bond holding society together. In this way, confessionalization contributed to several different tendencies within territories, such as social discipline, concentration of society, and political and social integration, even though the traditional conflict between the dukes’ absolutist ambitions and the nobility’s influence remained throughout the period.17 Confessionalization has been an influential thesis for the last few decades, but it has also been criticized. For this study, the most relevant criticism against it is that there is an implied etatism inherent in the theory because it views the state as the dominant historical agent.18 Heinrich Richard Schmidt has been an important voice for this objection. He claims that the confessionalization thesis has shifted focus from the religious form of life and the content of faith that was of primary importance in Zeeden’s original research concept of Konfessionsbildung. The reason for this, he claims, is that within the confessionalization paradigm religion does not appear as interesting in itself, but only as a subordinate and partial process in the universal historic account of the state’s disciplining, as a stage in its development. According to Schmidt, a researcher who sees religion as a means for disciplining will never be able to make religion the real subject of his or her research.19 Such a perspective would be impossible if one instead started by asking about the faith of individuals, Schmidt claims. As an alternative to the focus on the state and the disciplining that takes place top-down, Schmidt advocates the opposite perspective. According to him, a perspective that respects the religious dimension of life also admits that faith and morality can never be realized by a disciplining state, but must be rooted individually in the believer’s 16 Schilling, “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich”, 513 and 528–530. Zeeden also identified stability as a main motivator for this change; Zeeden, “Grundlagen und Wege der Konfessionsbildung ”, 286. He also saw that this motivation had a double basis among church theologians as well as among secular lords; ibid., 253, 255, and 257. 17 Schilling, “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich”, 535. 18 In their survey of the concept’s research history, Stefan Ehrenpreis and Ute Lotz-Heumann list the following as the most important issues that have been discussed: the claimed parallel developments between the three confessions; the characteristics and validity claims of the different confessions; and the paradigm’s implied etatism, meaning the view of the state as the dominant historical agent. See Ehrenpreis and Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter, 67. Since this study is restricted to only one of the three confessions, the first objection will not be discussed. The second objection will be dealt with in the next section’s presentation of Thomas Kaufmann’s view of the confessionalization thesis. 19  Heinrich Richard Schmidt, “Sozialdisziplinierung? Ein Plädoyer für das Ende des Etatismus in der Konfessionalisierungsforschung”, Historische Zeitschrift 265, no. 3 (1997): 639–641 and 648 and 658.

1. Confessionalization

7

awareness of the world and the hereafter, of the meaning of life and his or her view of eternity, and in his or her faith in an omnipotent and retaliating God.20 Instead of the movement that takes place top-down in society, Schmidt focuses on the movement that takes place from the bottom to the top of society. The confessionalization thesis deals with a period when the state was weak and when local representatives of the state were respected only if they acted in harmony with the wishes and expectations of parish and village. According to Schmidt, it was a time when the state was expressed by the subjects in various ways including estate assemblies and supplications from subjects and through various violent and non-violent actions by subjects. Rulers relied on a basic consensus in society. When laws were passed, it was as answers to challenges, and new laws therefore expressed a changed mentality in the population. More than the opposite, the state was an instrument for villagers. Schmidt claims that this may be studied in relatively small-scale surveys which thereby may falsify giant theories, such as that of confessionalization.21 Despite the harsh criticism, Schmidt still ends by giving Schilling credit for his modifications of the confessionalization thesis, in which Schilling emphasizes the importance of interplay between micro-historical perspectives and macro-historical perspectives in confessionalization studies.22 Schmidt may be right when he claims that confessionalization was not accomplished with the state as its primary agent, since it is only towards the end of the seventeenth century that absolutism replaced a participatory form of government. The question, however, is not whether Schmidt correctly critiqued Schilling for misplacing the absolutist state. The important question is obviously what the word “state” may refer to in this period. As far as I can see, Schilling is trying to describe a process on the way to the state as we know it, without describing this state as realized in the era of confessionalization. When he labels the confessionalization period a Vorsattelzeit der Moderne (saddling up for modernity), it signifies a view of this epoch’s trends as something that takes place on the way to the formation of the absolutist state.23 More than seeing confessionalization as an expression of the state, he sees it as a time when processes and structures are formed that later become decisive for the modern state. In the article to which Schmidt was responding, Schilling describes how the confessionalization thesis has been modified by research it has inspired. Here he promotes a dual perspective combining micro-history with macro-history and presents the confessionalization thesis not as a description of the state as an agent and an independent entity, but as a lengthy and differentiated happening following two movements. One movement takes place from above by state and church 20 Schmidt,

“Sozialdisziplinierung?”, 659–660. “Sozialdisziplinierung?”, 665–668 and 678–679. 22 Schmidt, “Sozialdisziplinierung?”, 644–646 and 682. 23 See Heinz Schilling, Early Modern European Civilization and Its Political and Cultural Dynamism (Hanover and London: University Press of New England, 2008), 14. 21 Schmidt,

8

Introduction

authorities, while another takes place from below by families, neighbourhoods, brotherhoods and corporations. The state was a disciplining factor during this period, but it was not the only one. Self-control was another important force for disciplining, and often the objects of disciplining were also its subjects. Another major force from below in the era of confessionalization was resistance by villages and estates characteristic of the old European societies.24 In addition to this description of disciplining as a pincer movement taking place from above as well as from below, Schilling also defines the concept of disciplining as signifying far more than traditional church discipline and punishment. It involves all discourses on morality and attitudes, thinking, faith, and emotions. With these modifications, Schilling argues that his critics criticize an etatism in the paradigm that no longer exists. Macro-historic proposals should still be attempted, Schilling claims, but they must be kept open for modifications by micro-historic studies that may analyze the interplay between different social actors and make individual strategies understandable. According to Schilling, this openness to micro-historic description is a major constituent of macro-historic paradigms.25 He still maintains that overarching structures and tendencies described by macro-history are necessary for micro-historic studies to discuss an operational historical problem, a view Schmidt would share, since he sees micro-historic study as a means for falsifying macro-historic theses. For Schilling, the small studies must be part of a greater history, and he judges the quality of such studies on their ability to combine the two perspectives.26 The perspectives from above and from below as combined in the confessionalization thesis are useful for describing how Lucas Osiander as a preacher was an agent both in theology and politics. In a way, the two perspectives meet in his work. He was an agent for the dukes’ disciplining efforts and at the same time a representative of the faith shared by the subjects, which was required to be respected by them and protected by the duke. His communications were definitely part of a discourse on morality and attitudes, thinking, faith, and emotions. The role Osiander fulfilled as a preacher is a very describable meeting point for the two perspectives from above and below. Surrounded by expectations and embedded in a social and political system, Osiander’s role as preacher placed him in 24 Heinz Schilling, “Disziplinierung oder ‘Selbstregulierung der Untertanen’? Ein Plädoyer für die Doppelperspektive von Makro‑ und Mikrohistorie bei der Erforschung der frühmodernen Kirchenzucht”, in Ausgewählte Abhandlungen zur europäischen Reformations‑ und Kon­ fessionsgeschichte, ed. Luise Schorn-Schütte and Olaf Mörke (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2002), 635–636. As I see it, this view is compatible with Luise Schorn-Schütte’s view of pre-modern history’s change towards modernization as an organic more than a functional change. See Schütte, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit, 23 and 26. 25 Schilling, “Disziplinierung oder ‘Selbstregulierung der Untertanen’?”, 637. 26  Zeeden seems to advocate a similar view of how microhistorical studies may at the same time be studies of macro-history. See Zeeden, “Grundlagen und Wege der Konfessionsbildung”, 299.

1. Confessionalization

9

a position where different interests in society met. The perspectives from above and below help position Osiander within a social and political system and enable an analysis of his sermons as theological and political actions. Preachers played a special role in the processes that shaped unified territories subjected to a ruler and developing into early modern states. Since it could supply personnel, land, and legitimacy to the ruler, the role of the church was crucial when land was secularized, income was channeled more directly to rulers’ treasuries, church laws were incorporated in secular laws within a common jurisdiction, and when the ruler wanted to establish a system of loyal servants that could help tie different parts of the territory to the central power. The clerical elite thereby gained a central significance for government. During these processes, the Lutheran clergy appeared as a third estate between ruler and nobility. They could help unite the ruler’s power with that of the nobility, but they could also balance the ruler’s power.27 Several alliances were possible in which the clergy could find shared interests as well as conflicts. Their significance as theologians thus connected their activity as clerics to the political field. This study presents a two-stage description of Lucas Osiander as a preacher. Part One describes him as court preacher in Württemberg and demonstrates how the perspectives from above and below meet in Osiander’s dealings with duke, estates, colleagues, and subjects. In Part Two, on Osiander as a city preacher in Esslingen, the two perspectives meet in Osiander’s dealings with city council, church organization, citizens, and foreign authorities. Osiander’s theological background and contribution form an equally important framework as the political. He was a Lutheran theologian in the first generation after Luther, concerned with confirming Lutheran theology and accomplishing the institutional and religious consequences he believed should be implemented as a result of this confirmation. His theological thinking and argumentation followed its own logic, but it was also associated with historical change on a broader level. Part One will show how Osiander’s funeral preaching rested on and developed theological premises, especially an understanding of death and a practice for burial which enabled a new form of exemplarity and learning. They enabled descriptions of secular lives as examples of faith that had been hardly possible previously, and Osiander employed such descriptions far more boldly than Lutherans of previous generations. Osiander’s style of preaching seems to have been characterized by this example rhetoric, and the sermon analyzes undertaken in this study will have a special focus on this rhetorical device. The way Osiander employed contemporary examples together with examples from the Bible lent his sermons a special dynamic. By investigating how the combination of contemporary and biblical examples was utilized in each specific situation, this study will trace the 27 This theme will be discussed further in Part One, Chapter 2.5. For a comprehensive study of preachers’ role in this era, see Schorn-Schütte, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit.

10

Introduction

speech-act his sermons would have employed in their original situations. This new form of preaching would have held a specific political utility. By reading the sermons with an eye for this utility, it is possible to study how different interests were supported and confronted in sermons presented at funerals. The proceedings surrounding the duke’s death and the funeral sermons presented for him and for central persons in his court hold a central place in Part One’s descriptions of Osiander as a court preacher. They will be read in order to investigate whose interests these sermon examples served. Did Osiander in his use of secular lives as examples of faith simply serve the duke’s interests or was he promoting church doctrine and laying down religious premises for the duke’s rule? Here theological and homiletic traditions become crucial for understanding the form of confessionalization that Osiander took part in with his preaching. Part Two stresses how the Reformation’s emphasis on faith and knowledge resulted in a new and energetic effort for reaching the population with religious education, and it places Lucas Osiander at the centre of this effort. The theology taught in his catechism sermons promoted a faith closely connected with civic morality. Protestant catechism teaching involved a change in religious education with theological roots, but it was a change which also held great political consequence, and the politics it influenced could in return influence the shape and content of religious education. In Osiander’s teaching, youths were led into a coherent universe where civil society, political hierarchy and religious meaning were closely connected. They were connected by the same means as in Osiander’s funeral sermons, namely by the use of examples. Here, the examples were not made up of the lives of recently departed members of the community, but by descriptions of people and situations in the young peoples’ surroundings. The examples enabled Osiander to promote a religious universe where contemporary society was linked very clearly with an ordered cosmos. The comprehensive coherence of the religious universe Osiander promoted in his catechism sermons lent him a political role and could involve him in conflict. If youths were moved by his teaching to adopt this religious universe, their resulting loyalty to society and superiors would be loyalty over which the preacher held considerable influence. It appears that Osiander’s political role and the message he promoted influenced each other. The study of this interplay, which will be undertaken in Part Two’s sermon analysis, is therefore also a study of Osiander’s role in the confessionalization process. In both Parts One and Two, theological and political changes were connected with a redefinition of how secular life was connected with the truths of faith, and with how religious authority related to secular authority. This study traces how interplay between these two spheres continued as seen through the case of Lucas Osiander. In order to trace theological change with some level of precision, and thereby to better point out how the political is connected with the theological, Luther regularly appears as a contrasting figure in this study. In these instances,

2. Confessional Culture

11

Luther is employed together with Osiander as a way to describe theological change within the confessionalization paradigm. As a work in the field of church history, this study will obviously not describe religion as a derivative phenomenon. Instead it will pursue the doctrine of concurrent origin as it has been described by Berndt Hamm. He stated that an open view on religion’s reality should not only take seriously theology’s and religion’s embeddedness in the political, social, and mental environment, but also take the opposite fact equally seriously, namely the embeddedness of politics, economy, and psychology in religion. He calls this openness a model of explanation that presupposes a concurrent origin of religious and social interests, so that one phenomenon may not be deduced from the other, but where both are seen as mutually interwoven with each other. Accompanying this model is, according to Hamm, a double rule. Firstly, one must be willing to see that the way people feel threatened and insecure influences their theological understanding and thereby the character of the church. Secondly, one must see that people’s faith influences the way they feel threatened and insecure.28

2. Confessional Culture This study uses Lucas Osiander as a case study to display how confessionalization could take place in the work of a typical preacher in a central environment of Lutheran orthodoxy at the height of confessionalization. The case will be studied in order to answer questions about how a preacher’s action aided confessionalization, as well as about how the goals of confessionalization suited the intentions of this preacher.29 In order to pursue this interest, awareness of the significance of Osiander’s specific theological and confessional background is necessary. Interest in the confessions’ contribution to historical change has been accompanied by a focus on the similar processes taking place within the three different confessions in sixteenth century Europe. Confessionalization research has also been aware, however, that the confessions contributed differently to societal change and that these differences are associated with theological and cultural differences. A prominent example is the concept of a “second reformation”, describing the confessionalization that took place in Reformed territories and cities during the second half of the sixteenth century. 28 Berndt Hamm, Bürgertum und Glaube: Konturen der städtischen Reformation, Sammlung Vandenhoeck (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996), 19–20. 29 Admittedly this question resembles some of the questions Zeeden saw in 1958 as following from his article: “Wer sind schließlich die eigentlichen Träger der Konfessionalisierung  …? Welche Überzeugungen und Gesinnungen stehen hinter diesen Aktivisten; welcher Mittel und Kräfte bedienen sie sich? Wie steht es um ihre Provenienz, ihre Ausbildung, ihre geistige Formung?” Zeeden, “Grundlagen und Wege der Konfessionsbildung”, 298.

12

Introduction

In a summary of research on this concept, Heinz Schilling described the second reformation with reference to some common characteristics of Reformed confessionalization. Though there was considerable theological variety among Reformed theologians, they stood unified against the Lutheranism of the Formula of Concord and shared some common interests in society. Instead of the typically Lutheran focus on the inner core of religion, they turned towards outer life and especially the public part of life as a member of the church. Considerable energy was invested in the rational organization of society, for Reformed theologians claimed that Luther’s reformation of doctrine had to be completed by a second reformation, namely a reformation of the community. Their primary tools in this reformation were church discipline and cooperation with the secular punitive system. Individual life was not their primary target, but rather life in congregation and society.30 Though a similar concentration on society also took place in Lutheran territories and the confessional differences therefore are not clear cut, Schilling still holds that focus on social organization and discipline and a wide theological basis for secular rule to have been specifically Reformed characteristics, as well as a lack of focus on the publication of vernacular edifying literature and on individual pastoral care.31 Thomas Kaufmann also has seen the need to complement the confessionalization thesis with a focus on specific differences between the confessions.32 Though there are structural similarities in the developments between the epoch’s different confessions and territories, Kaufmann emphasizes that the confessions also represent different cultures. Therefore, if one is to understand this epoch’s changes, it is not enough to study the similarities between the three confessions. One must also study how they developed different cultures with confessional characteristics. The different confessions developed different ways of integrating church and society and of influencing societal change, and Kaufmann suggests that this phenomenon be studied under the concept “confessional culture” (Kon­ fessionskultur). Kaufmann’s description of the most important characteristics of Lutheran confessional culture is relevant to this study. His major argument is that the development of Lutheranism within the framework of the territorial state led to a Lutheran pluralism which did not end with the Book of Concord in 1580 and Lutheran orthodoxy. Lutheran orthodoxy did not present a fixed dogma, but 30 Heinz Schilling, “Die ‘Zweite Reformation’ als Kategorie der Geschichtswissenschaft”, in Die reformierte Konfessionalisierung in Deutschland: Das Problem der “Zweiten Reformation”; Wissenschaftliches Symposion des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte, ed. Heinz Schilling, Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 195 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus G. Mohn, 1986), 413–418. 31 Schilling, “Die ‘Zweite Reformation’ als Kategorie der Geschichtswissenschaft”, 415. 32  Thomas Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur: Lutherischer Protestantismus in der zweiten Hälfte des Reformationsjahrhunderts, Spätmittelalter und Reformation N. R. 29 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 326.

2. Confessional Culture

13

was a dynamic process of continuing appropriation and rejection in discussions within the Lutheran confession as well as with other confessions and with philosophy.33 Within this pluralism Kaufmann identifies some common features that correspond to a Lutheran focus on dogma and inner faith different from the concerns of Reformed confessionalization. Firstly, there was a common sense of belonging to the Wittenberg Reformation led by Luther and Melanchthon. Secondly, Lutheran confessional culture was a culture of dissent and controversy and was formed by controversy. Thirdly, it is a culture marked by the great influence of theology professors. This feature had its origin among university professors in Wittenberg, and elites educated at universities remained central for Lutheran confessionalization as learned clerics addressing the ordinary man. Finally, Kaufman saw Luther’s continuing high status as a characteristic feature. Lutherans were cautious to avoid idolization, but there was no one who could fill Luther’s position after his death, and thus, through a persistent reception history and interpretation controversy about his writings, he gained lasting influence.34 According to Kaufmann, Lutheran communicational culture was, to a greater extent than the other confessions, characterized by a vast publication of vernacular books.35 Book production was an engine in the dynamics that developed Lutheran confessional culture. This culture expressed a faith in the power of the written word, and according to Kaufmann the huge production of books only makes sense if there was a demand and a market for all the books. At least a pious middle class of citizens would have read the books and drawn consequences of them.36 I regard Kaufmann’s contribution to this study’s focus on Lutheran preaching as a formative activity placed between state and congregation in this period. His perspective on Lutheranism as a pluralist culture of controversy will be employed when this study asks about the sort of Lutheranism Osiander represents as well as about its characteristics. When this study investigates the relationship between Osiander and Luther’s writings, it presupposes the importance of Luther and his writings that Kaufmann points out. Kaufmann’s observations about the ardent publication of books in the popular language by Lutherans and the culture of reading associated therewith is another basic precondition for this study. Its source material is published sermons and this study relies on the premise that this material is a meaningful object of study and a window into Lutheran confessional culture. These observations support the choice of material for this study, Konfession und Kultur, 16. Konfession und Kultur, 17–21. 35 Mary Jane Haemig and Robert Kolb, “Preaching in Lutheran Pulpits in the Age of Confessionalization”, in Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550–1675, ed. Robert Kolb, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 11 (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 124–134. 36 Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur, 23. Cf., Schilling, “Die ‘Zweite Reformation’ als Kategorie der Geschichtswissenschaft”, 415. 33 Kaufmann, 34 Kaufmann,

14

Introduction

namely published sermons and popular theological discourse, and the way this study aims at testing Osiander’s contribution to confessionalization.

3. Homiletics This study will focus on Osiander’s sermons and their intentions and tie them to their original historical context. It is therefore worthwhile to take a closer look at Osiander’s own theory for preaching. Lucas Osiander holds a prominent position within Lutheran homiletics and wrote one of Lutheran orthodoxy’s earliest homiletics. Here, and in some of his other writings on the sermon, he shows how he views the sermon and how he ties intentions to the concrete shape and content of a sermon. However, before turning to his homiletics text, I will make a short evaluation of printed sermons as source material. 3.1 Printed Sermons The source material that is the basis for this study consists mainly of printed sermons published sometime after they had been presented orally and claiming to reproduce the sermons as they were presented. The exception is Luther’s catechism sermons, which were recorded by hand by Luther’s scribe Rörer.37 These sermons will be compared with the printed version of the same sermons later compiled by Luther himself and published as his Large Catechism.38 The other sermons used in this study were published and therefore had a longer life and larger audience than those who heard them in their original context when they were presented from a pulpit. Still, it will be the original situation with its specified time and place that is here chosen as the context for the analysis of the sermons. Since the original manuscripts of the sermons in this study are not easily accessible or have been lost, this study is not based on manuscripts but on printed texts. An evaluation of printed sermons as source material therefore is unavoidable. Johannes Wallmann has claimed that printed sermons in this period came into being in two different ways. One was on the basis of an original manuscript delivered for printing after the sermon had been given, perhaps with alterations resulting from the presentation. The other possibility was that the preacher preached freely and without a manuscript, and that the printed version came into 37  About Georg Rörer, see Albrecht Beutel, “Predigt VIII”, in TRE 27, 297; WA 30/1, 1; and Georg Buchwald, “Jenaer Lutherfunde”, Theologische Studien und Kritiken 76, no. 1 (1894): 374–391. On the basis of study of some of Luther’s sermon manuscripts, Stolt claims that few of Luther’s sermons that were printed bear closer resemblance to his actual sermons than do the records of Rörer and Veit Dietrich; Birgit Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000), 62. 38 WA 30/1, 123–238.

3. Homiletics

15

being on the basis of records taken down by someone in the audience. According to Wallmann, the second option was common among the first generation of reformers, whereas the first option was common in the time of Lutheran orthodoxy. He presents Luther and Zwingli as examples of preachers who did not use manuscripts, and whose printed sermons came into being on the basis of transcriptions, while Spener is seen as an example of someone preaching on the basis of manuscripts later delivered for print. Wallmann claims in those cases where the pastor preached from a manuscript, the printed sermon will bear close resemblance to the original, whereas this connection will be more uncertain in those cases where the print original is a record from one of the sermon’s listeners.39 Birgit Stolt offers a slightly different view. In her studies of some of Luther’s original sermon manuscripts, she shows that Luther also probably preached on the basis of well-prepared manuscripts. However, her evaluation of sermon transcriptions is similar to Wallmann’s. She points out that some of Luther’s sermons may have been printed on the basis of original manuscripts and argues that the printed versions may be closer to the original than the records by Luther’s scribes Rörer and Dietrich.40 I have not conducted any text critical investigations of Osiander’s sermons, but I still believe that Osiander probably preached on the basis of thoroughly prepared manuscripts. His sermons follow his own compositional principles quite strictly and are well-balanced and planned, and I have not come across any mention of a scribe. In his prefaces he refers to the original context for his sermons and to the wishes of his original audience as the main reason for sending his sermon manuscripts to be printed. This audience would probably have expected the printed version to accord at some level with what they had heard. The individual sermons within his sermon collections have traces of the original context in their regular references to the listeners gathered in the church.41 Osiander’s own homiletics theory gives another argument favouring the view that he preached on the basis of manuscripts. His advice in his De ratione concio­ nandi from 1582 is quite clear. Preachers should preach on the basis of well-prepared manuscripts. The preparation of a manuscript is necessary if one is to employ the rhetorical rules that should guide a sermon and secure the sermon’s communication. It involves a process of selecting the material for the sermon, guards the sermon’s connection to the biblical text and to true doctrine, and thus secures the sermon’s clarity. When a sermon manuscript is completed, Osiander 39 Johannes Wallmann, “Prolegomena zur Erforschung der Predigt im Zeitalter der lutherischen Orthodoxie”, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 106 (2009): 294–296. 40 Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens, 75–76. 41 E. g. Lucas Osiander, Bawren Postilla: Das ist / Einfältige / jedoch gründtliche Außlegung der Episteln und Euangelien …, Theil 1 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1597), 2; and Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum / Gehalten in des heiligen Römischen Reichs Statt Eßlingen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1600), iv and 4.

16

Introduction

continues, it is important that the preacher present the sermon exactly as he has written in his manuscript without omitting any part. According to Osiander, the most admirable preacher is he who writes down his sermon word by word and thereafter presents it as it is written. All the more blameworthy is the preacher who leaves this out because of impatience, for he may come to insult his listeners, Osiander warns.42 On this basis, I find it safe to use Osiander’s written sermons as source material and analyze them in view of their original context. 3.2 Osiander’s Homiletics Osiander’s homiletic book is one of the first in Lutheran orthodoxy, published thirteen years prior to Andreae’s, which was published posthumously and presents a similar view of the sermon as Osiander’s book.43 His homiletics was part of a young Protestant homiletical tradition. In the homiletics survey of his Lehr­ buch der Praktischen Theologie, Achelis presents Osiander as one of few bright spots between Melanchthon’s humanistically inspired homiletics and the biblical new scholasticism that took over with Lutheran orthodoxy’s preaching tradition. Melanchthon continued classical rhetoric as it had been rediscovered in the homiletics works of the humanists Reuchlin and Erasmus, both with regards to a speech’s construction (inventio, memoria, pronunciatio), its disposition (princi­ pium, lectio, divisio, confirmatio, confutatio, conclusio), as well as its classification in three genres (genus demonstrativum, which presents something as laudable or blameworthy; genus deliberativum, which confirms or disapproves; and genus iudicale, which settles a controversy between accusation and defence). Achelis portrays Melanchthon as continuing this tradition by describing the preacher as a classical rhetor and the theologian as a humanist. Melanchthon contributed by adding two genres of speech to the three classical ones, namely genus dialektikum and genus didaskalikon. He regarded the deliberative genre as convincing or exhorting, whereas didaskalikon was a speech genre for teaching. This last genre would often be superfluous, such as when a comprehensible dialectic speech on a dogmatic subject had been given.44 This system gave the different genres different purposes. Didaskalikon’s purpose was to teach and demonstrativum’s purpose was to praise a person, whereas iudicale was not regarded as suitable in a sermon. Since Melanchthon saw Christian doctrine as the sermon’s main content, Achelis claims that he brought little new that was not already present in Reuchlin and Erasmus’ conceptions. 42  Lucas Osiander, De ratione concionandi (Tübingen: Alexander Hoggis, 1588), 52. E. g. “Sanè eorum Concionatorum diligentia & zelus admiratione dignus est, qui integras Conciones ad verbum conscribunt: idq; operam dant, vt ijsdem verbis eas recitent, quibus sunt consignatae.” 43 Jacob Andreae, Methodus concionandi (Wittenberg: Gronenberg, 1595); and Ernst Christian Achelis, Lehrbuch der Praktischen Theologie, vol. 2 (3d ed.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911), 108. 44 Achelis, Lehrbuch der Praktischen Theologie, vol. 2, 103, and Haemig and Kolb, “Preaching in Lutheran Pulpits in the Age of Confessionalization”, 136–137.

3. Homiletics

17

According to Achelis, it was mainly Andreas Hyperius who turned homiletics into a Protestant and evangelical theological discipline. His De formandis con­ cionibus sacris seu interpretatione scripturarum populari libri from 1553 and 1562 established a clear distinction between rhetoric and homiletics and emphasized the difference between speaking in a church and in other fora. He saw the purpose of a sermon not in its teaching about faith or praising of a person, but in the way it led people to salvation and redemption. Though he employed classical rhetoric in a way that resembled Melanchthon in his description of the purpose of the speech (docere, delectare, flectere), his recommended composition process showed a greater concern for homiletics’ relationship to scriptural exegesis. According to Hyperius, the style and genre of a speech should be found in the text that was the sermon’s subject, which meant that the preacher sometimes had to mix different speech genres.45 After Hyperius, Achelis identifies a general decay in Protestant homiletics characterized by exaggerated focus on the speech genres of Melanchthon’s scheme, resulting in a mechanical and superficial form of speech. When this was later combined with Lutheran orthodoxy’s view of Scripture, it resulted in a learned and arrogant form of preaching which was primarily interested in arresting all forms of heresy, Achelis claims.46 The exceptions Achelis sees from this discouraging tendency are the homiletics of Osiander and Andreae, which he claims represent a homiletics emphasizing a style of preaching that is understandable and close to the biblical text.47 A reading of Osiander’s De ratione concionandi confirms to a large degree Achelis’ general characterization. At the outset Osiander identifies two main principles that apply to the sermon. The first principle is that the sermon should give a true and understandable explanation of the biblical text. The second is that a saving doctrine should be extracted from the text and explained, and that listeners should be imprinted with this doctrine.48 Biblicality and understandability are thus presented as his homiletics’ major concerns. Biblicality should be secured by the preacher’s proper preparation. In order to discern good commentaries from bad commentaries, he must be sure to understand the biblical text and be able to read it in its original language. This understanding is important also because Osiander, like Hyperius, saw that the biblical text indicates its own rhetorical function. It is therefore necessary that one asks about rhetorical function when selecting and interpreting a biblical text in order Lehrbuch der Praktischen Theologie, vol. 2, 104–106. Lehrbuch der Praktischen Theologie, vol. 2, 107–108. A similar view of Lutheran orthodoxy’s preaching is presented by Hans Martin Müller, “Homiletik”, in TRE 15, 535, who makes no exception for Osiander, but sees him as a representative of Lutheran orthodoxy’s homiletics characterized by lifeless and doctrinal formalism lending preachers very little freedom to reach hearts with vibrant preaching and get in touch with life as it was lived in the parishes. 47 Achelis, Lehrbuch der Praktischen Theologie, vol. 2, 108. 48 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 9. 45 Achelis, 46 Achelis,

18

Introduction

to see for which situation the text is suitable, whether it be funerals or weddings.49 The text’s rhetorical function also indicates which speech genre the preacher should choose for his sermon, and since Jesus and the prophets from time to time employed several genres within one speech, preachers may do the same when it is indicated by the text.50 Thus, biblicality is also achieved by the proper choice of genre. Finally, biblicality is secured by the sermon’s disposition, where the importance of the narrative part (narratio) of the sermon is emphasized, but also restricted to only retelling the text clearly. In the propositional part (propositio), where the arguments of the text are to be reported, it is not sufficient to recite loci communes (dogmatic themes). However, when the arguments of the text are repeated and pointed out, one may paraphrase a locus suiting the text.51 Osiander holds the biblicality of a sermon to be so important that even if a preacher speaks indistinctly and is a bad rhetorician, he should still not be condemned if he has not mistaken the purpose of the text and presents it properly and understandably.52 For, as Osiander explains, the great classical rhetorician Quintilian claimed rhetoric is to be employed as a means and a tool, and not as a law.53 The other main theme in Osiander’s homiletics is the pedagogical aspect of preaching and the concern that the biblical teaching should reach and touch the listeners. This concern is present already in the discussion of how to select texts for preaching. Some texts instruct, some exhort, and others comfort or threaten. The preacher must therefore ask how the different texts may be used, for if he fails to do so, the study of the Word of God becomes boring and stiffens, which in turn prevents the sermon from reaching its audience. The sermon should avoid this boredom and rather teach attentiveness and cheerfulness.54 The texts must therefore be chosen with regards to the listener’s situation in order to be relevant and interesting. Thus, since it is the text that indicates speech genre, and since the text should be chosen with regards to the situation, it is indirectly the situation of the audience that directs the choice of speech genre.55 Osiander finds that all the traditional speech genres inherited from Melanchthon have their place in the sermon, and sometimes a sermon must employ more than one genre. Two of them De ratione concionandi, 13. De ratione concionandi, 32. 51 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 39–42. 52 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 26. 53 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 27: “… quemadmodum ipsi etiam Oratores non præceptis Rhetoricis SERVIVNT, sed ijs ad suum institutum VTVNTVR quantum ipsis commodum est. Et sapienter Quintilianus monet, præceptiones Rhetoricas non habendas esse pro legibus, quæ in æs sint incisæ.” 54  Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 13: “quæ tamen summa alacritate & auiditate erant discenda & docenda.” 55  Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 26. A similar principle seems to have been applied later by Osiander’s colleague Felix Bidembach in his manual from 1603. See Haemig and Kolb, “Preaching in Lutheran Pulpits in the Age of Confessionalization”, 143. 49 Osiander, 50 Osiander,

3. Homiletics

19

are most relevant for this study and will be discussed in the subsequent chapters. Osiander’s discussion of the demonstrative genre will be presented in Part One’s discussion of funeral sermons, whereas his views on the teaching genre will be presented in Part Two’s discussion of catechism sermons.56 Concern that sermons should be easily understandable is also the reason for Osiander’s insistence that sermons be short. He insists that in order to avoid exhausting its listeners, a sermon should never last more than an hour,57 and he repeats this view in the miniature homiletics that serves as a preface to his much read Sermons for Farmers.58 In order to reach listeners with good comfort, the preacher should speak in simple sentences, omit everything unnecessary and make sure to repeat his most important points.59 He should refrain from polemics and from mentioning theological opponents, since this may confuse simple folk. Subtle disputes may disorient them and therefore one should strive to explain one’s intentions clearly and plainly.60 For the same reason preachers should avoid bringing too many loci communes into their sermons. One locus may suffice and one should never discuss more than three, for he who enters into a discussion of these things for the greater part of an hour will exhaust his audience and abuse their attention. The general rule is that what is not plainly explained will not be understood. The same focus on recipients and understandability is present in Osiander’s recommendations for the use of illustrations. Here as well the preacher should strive for understandable simplicity. Examples that are meant to enlighten an element of Christian doctrine should not be intricate or complicated. Obscure quotations from profane poets or heathen history, as recommended by classical rhetoric’s collections of examples, should therefore be avoided. Instead, examples should be taken from the Bible and the prophets, where examples can be found that are simple and familiar and which invoke the trust of the congregation.61 A few understandable examples may have the best effect and are to be preferred over employing many examples.62 Thus, according to Osiander’s view of the sermon, behind the choice of texts and examples, there should always be a conscious consideration of the listeners  Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 26–28 and 29–30. De ratione concionandi, 37. 58 Osiander, Bawren Postilla, Theil 1, 3. 59 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 37; and Osiander, Bawren Postilla, Theil 1, 4. 60 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 51; and Osiander, Bawren Postilla, Theil 1, 3. According to Thomas Kaufmann, the effort to present a theological dogmatic plainly and appropriately was common among Lutheran preachers of the period. See Thomas Kaufmann, “Lutherische Predigt im Krieg und zum Friedensschluß”, in 1648 – Krieg und Frieden in Europa, Textband I: Politik, Religion, Recht und Gesellschaft, ed. Klaus Bußmann and Heinz Schilling (München: Bruckmann, 1998), 246. 61 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 47–48; and Osiander, Bawren Postilla, Theil 1, 4. 62 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 28. 56

57 Osiander,

20

Introduction

and their situation. There should be a similar consideration when a sermon’s genre and shape are decided. The basic situation of a sermon is a preacher who wants to reach and move his audience and who has deliberate strategies for how to accomplish his intention. In Osiander’s homiletics, this basic task is emphasized as the only legitimate priority for a preacher. The wish to appear as a skilled rhetorician must always be secondary, and the preacher’s pride, which urges him to appear as learned and industrious, is the least important and must be kept at bay. These instructions are followed in the sermons by Osiander examined in this study. Biblical examples are combined skillfully with examples from the listeners’ context to present a clear and easily understood message. His homiletical instructions reveal the intentions behind his way of preaching and make it safe to analyze these sermons as windows into the situations that surround them as well as testimonies of Osiander’s intentions concerning his surroundings. Still there is an apparent ambiguity in Osiander’s homiletics, for even though he prescribes a preparation process and a style of preaching centred around the listener, he does so within a learned and fairly complicated rhetorical scheme with all the traditional ingredients, displaying clearly that he himself had mastered the rhetorical tradition. There is an intention to portray preaching as something understandable, context-bound, and biblical, but it is done in a way that describes preaching as a noble art for scholars. This duality becomes pressingly obvious in the two example sermons he includes in his homiletics and which he analyzes according to the rhetorical categories he introduced. On several points, these sermons fail to meet the ideal Osiander presented earlier in his book. Osiander explains that both example sermons follow the disposition of ex­ ordium, propositio, and epilogus, which means that the biblical narratio he held to be of vital importance in his homiletic almost disappears.63 The sermons have a far more learned style than most of his other published sermons. In the first example sermon on the prologue of the Gospel of John, he employs examples from the church fathers in a dogmatic argument in a way that hardly makes them illustrations at all.64 In the other sermon on the naming of Jesus in Luke 2, he focuses on the dogmatic argument in addition to some moral deductions. In this sermon, Osiander shows how he uses three genres (didaskalikon, deliberativum, and demonstrativum) in one sermon, and, contrary to his own recommendation, he discusses as much as six dogmatic loci. The sermon hardly employs illustrations or examples, and biblical texts are employed only as support for dogmatic arguments.65 63 In accordance with Lutheran orthodoxy’s classical sermon disposition: exordium, proposi­ tio, paraphrasis, doctrina/tractatio, applicatio, conclusio. See Norbert Haag, Predigt und Gesell­ schaft: Die lutherische Orthodoxie in Ulm; 1640–1740, Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Europäische Geschichte Mainz, Abteilung Religionsgeschichte 145 (Mainz: P. von Zabern, 1992), 5. 64 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 74–102. 65 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 102–131.

3. Homiletics

21

The reason for the ambiguity in Osiander’s homiletic, and for the difference of the example sermons from many of his other sermons may be found in the intention and function of his homiletic book. It was probably intended not only as a practical introduction to preaching, but also as a confirmation of preaching as a noble art and of the preacher’s learned dignity. That his book may also have functioned this way is confirmed by the smaller texts framing his homiletic. In the preface to his book, Osiander addresses his three sons, Andreas, Johannes and Lucas, who are all learned theologians and preachers, and who he as an experienced master offers his advice. The literal content of his greeting is explicitly humble. He considers children to be a greater blessing than his own wisdom,66 and he thanks his senior colleague, the enlightened Jacob Andreae, for having received him so outstandingly for so many years. He encourages his sons not to let themselves be blinded by thoughtful and complicated sermons, for such sermons bear little fruit. Even if they build on many books of rhetoric, such sermons are obstacles to learning when they are presented to simple folk,67 for it is not method and intelligence that promote understanding, but only the Spirit. The sons should therefore never trust their talent and industriousness, but rather call upon God eagerly. A preacher should be like Aurifaber, Luther’s house preacher and recorder of much of his table talk, and be a sober instrument which does not add silver or gold to that which is to be said, Osiander advises.68 In the opening greeting, Lucas Osiander also subjects himself to this pious humility. If his dear sons are to write themselves into his work and continue their father’s preaching service, it will not be because Osiander himself has brought them any help in the matter, but only because Christ sends them His Spirit and makes them tools for His salvation. The humble content of this opening greeting, like the rest of the book, is written in a learned Latin. A humble tone also presents the true Lutheran doctrine of faith and action and human merits. The sons will not succeed because of their father, but they are still presented as his sons who by God’s mercy continue his work and establish a family of priests within the territory’s church. They are advised not to trust scholarliness, but scholarliness is still something they know and rise above and choose not to give priority. They do so not because they lack learning, but because they abstain from it for a higher good. In the same way as humility is closely connected to nobility for the preacher’s sons, so it is in the author’s presentation of himself. A similar logic is present in the same preface when Osiander expresses his gratitude towards Jacob Andreae. It credits Andreae with Osiander’s success, but De ratione concionandi, 1. De ratione concionandi, 2. 68 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 6. See Albrecht Beutel, In dem Anfang war das Wort: Stu­ dien zu Luthers Sprachverständnis, Hermeneutische Untersuchungen zur Theologie 27 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1991), 480. He sees it as central to Luther’s understanding of preaching that the use of rhetorical means should be appropriate to their object. 66 Osiander, 67 Osiander,

22

Introduction

it also connects Osiander with one of the most prominent figures in the church of Württemberg.69 There is a similar gesture in the final greeting which concludes his book. After having presented his own sermon examples, he states that he could very well have added more examples from his own sermons, but that he prefers instead to refer to the sermons by Johannes Brenz. They are exemplary in every respect and meet all the criteria for a good sermon presented in the book. Osiander concludes by warmly recommending the teachings and writings by Johannes Brenz, and by honouring his memory with an expression of gratitude to Brenz who had been willing to teach such a simple and raw person as him.70 In this way Osiander combines the greatest humility pointing away from himself while tying himself and his book to the greatest and most esteemed theologian of the church of Württemberg. This humility also placed his own family dynasty at the centre of Württemberg’s hierarchy of preachers. It was a description of the art of preaching that also emphasized the great significance and authority of the preacher’s office. 3.3 Osiander and Luther Two of the few authorities for preaching to which Osiander refers in his book are Quintilian and Luther. He credits Quintilian for seeing rhetoric as a tool and not as a law, and for defining a good speech as that which fulfils its purpose, but which is not necessarily admired.71 He lauds Luther for similar reasons and presents him as an ideal because of his precise and pithy use of the German language: Luther did not seek admiration for his eloquence, but desired to be understood. Preachers should use the German language in a similar way as Luther, Osiander says, for simple folk take little interest in elegant figures of speech. Therefore preachers should employ learning with the same constraint as Luther. Popular language and sayings may, on the other hand, be very useful.72 Thus, Osiander’s main homiletic reference is one that was left out of Achelis’ exposition of the Protestant homiletic tradition. The reason for this omission was probably because Luther never wrote any book on homiletics, but perhaps also because he was regarded as not having promoted any specific homiletic school. Birgit Stolt has shown, however, that homiletics, or rhetoric, played a more prominent role in Luther’s preaching than was previously recognized. She presents Luther with a specific style of preaching and understanding of rhetoric that might also shed light on Osiander’s preaching activity. On the basis of Luther’s table talk and some of his sermons, she constructs a Luther rhetoric that is fairly advanced, and she has in some of Luther’s sermon manuscripts found traces of a deliberate De ratione concionandi, 5.  Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 132. 71 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 27. See note 53. 72 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 54–56. 69 Osiander, 70

3. Homiletics

23

sermon disposition inspired by the rhetorical tradition. She documents that Luther sometimes valued popular rhetorical authors, such as Valla and Augustine, and that he would obviously have been informed by the rhetoric of Quintilian, which at the time was a compulsory part of the curriculum at Luther’s university in Wittenberg. According to her, it is especially Quintilian’s teaching on how speeches function affectively that influenced Luther as a preacher.73 Stolt places Luther in the so called sermo humilis tradition, which sees it as the preacher’s task to awaken the faith of the heart.74 To be able to do so, it is not sufficient for the preacher to have a bright mind and teach well. Even if he is a good rhetor with a good voice and memory who sets his honour in completing his task, it is still not enough, for a preacher must also be willing to be scorned by everyone and to suffer patiently. In other words, one should not preach to be admired and regarded as learned, for, according to Luther, simple folk need milk and not Madeira.75 Typical of this tradition is a popular rhetoric that appears so natural as if it was non-existent. It is supposed to be close to life, instructive, moving and personal. It is a rhetoric that should serve the pedagogical cause of making an impression. Here Stolt sees a link between the preaching tradition of Luther and Quintilian’s teaching on affects. According to Quintilian, simple folk will never be convinced by reason alone. They also need to be moved by affect. Luther similarly saw that a sermon should contain both instruction and admonition; it should both teach and touch.76 However, if the sermon is to accomplish this, it needs a third element, namely the illustration. The illustration has a dual function because it serves both teaching and moving as it reaches the listeners’ intellect as well as their feelings. The example has a natural role in explanation and may produce a link to feeling. When explaining, one always starts with description before one proceeds to defining and employing examples of what has been defined. These examples may be adorned with illustrations.77 In this way, the explanation will involve a gradual transition from instruction to admonition so that the explanation also becomes an admonition that touches the heart and moves the listener’s will. Quintilian saw the example and the parable as something that could enhance perception and thus regarded them as items of evidence. Examples convince and awaken perception by producing a feeling of being touched.78 They Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens, 42–48. observation also made by Beutel, In dem Anfang war das Wort, 478. 75 Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens, 63–64. 76 Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens, 66. 77 Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens, 68. 78 Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens, 71; and Vincent Leitch, The Norton Anthol­ ogy of Theory and Criticism (New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001), 156. Although Quintilian is interested primarily in the application of ornaments to rhetoric, not poetry, he frequently uses the poetry of Homer, Virgil, Horace, and others as examples. As a result, throughout the Middle Ages and Renaissance, his analysis of various tropes and figures 73 Stolt, 74 An

24

Introduction

are rhetorical figures with persuasion as their function. The rhetor or preacher could employ parables and stories as examples. According to Stolt, Luther held example stories in high regard and saw their function as instructive, explanatory, clarifying, and as awakening emotions.79 She claims that the reason they held such a prominent role in Luther’s rhetoric lies in his theological concept which saw faith as being realized in affect.80 In Osiander’s own book on homiletics, the function of examples is not explained as thoroughly or as advanced as Stolt presents it in the rhetoric of Luther. Osiander settles with underlining the criteria for the selection of examples and with stating their purpose. They should be selected for their understandability and their potential for invoking trust, and they should serve the purpose of touching listeners. An especially important role is given to them as part of the instructive speech genre. As will become clear in the next chapters, however, in practice the use of examples in Osiander’s sermons exceeds by far the prescriptions for their use presented in his homiletic. They are used not only to invoke trust from his listeners and to explain doctrinal concepts. A perhaps more prominent intention behind their use is to touch the feelings of his audience and to reach and move them on a level beyond reason. One may suspect that Osiander is part of a preaching tradition that is greater than the theory he presents in his own homiletic. 3.4 Osiander in His Sermons Osiander’s use of examples, illustrations and parables will be a major focus in this study’s sermon analysis. Part One will focus on his use of biblical examples and the deceased as examples in Osiander’s funeral sermons. Part Two will focus on how parables and illustrations from the audience’s life are connected to biblical stories in his catechism sermons. This short survey of Osiander’s homiletic and the preaching traditions surrounding it supports one of this study’s main presumptions, namely that Osiander was both influenced by the structures and genres available to him and at the same time was a conscious agent who employed these genres as techniques to help him meet his intentions. Osiander’s use of rhetorical devices followed from a pedagogical concern for his audience and for how he might reach them on a rational as well as an emotional level. He did so in a genre that many historians have was construed as advice for poets as well as rhetoricians on how to increase vividness, feeling, variety, interest, conviction, and belief. Chapter 6 of Book 8 describes the various tropes, which he defines as “the artistic alteration of a word or a phrase from its proper meaning to another”. He examines closely metaphor and synecdoche, mentioning simile, ellipsis, and metonymy and warning against their coarse or obscure use. 79 Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens, 73. 80 Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens, 74. See also Beutel, In dem Anfang war das Wort, 470.

3. Homiletics

25

described as holding a very special significance in Lutheran societies towards the end of the sixteenth century.81 Preaching was protected and supported by secular law and attendance was enforced by policing.82 It took place as interpretation of the Word of God in societies which based normativity on the Word of God. In sermons, preachers therefore took part in the normative discourse of society,83 by negotiating how reality was to be perceived and how life and doctrine were to be connected.84 Here the preacher’s complex relationship with secular authority was expressed. On the one hand, he was an integral part of confessional society, while on the other hand he stood opposite secular authority as an authoritative interpreter of Scripture.85 In Osiander’s sermons, one may therefore trace an historical agent taking part in processes where interests were negotiated. This introduction has made clear that this book about the confessionalist homiletics of Lucas Osiander will not simply be a book about Osiander’s homiletic theory, but also about the preaching practice and intentions of a homiletically and politically conscious preacher preaching at the height of the era of confessionalization.

81 Haemig and Kolb, “Preaching in Lutheran Pulpits in the Age of Confessionalization”, 117–120. 82 Robert Christman, “The Pulpit and the Pew: Shaping Popular Piety in the Late Reformation”, in Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550–1675, ed. Robert Kolb, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 11 (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 293. 83 Haag, Predigt und Gesellschaft, 4. 84 Hans-Christoph Rublack, “Lutherische Predigt und soziale Wirklichkeiten”, in Die lu­ therische Konfessionalisierung in Deutschland: Wissenschaftliches Symposion des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 1988, ed. Hans-Christoph Rublack, Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 197 (Gütersloh: G. Mohn, 1992), 378; and Haemig and Kolb, “Preaching in Lutheran Pulpits in the Age of Confessionalization”, 157. 85 Kaufmann, “Lutherische Predigt im Krieg und zum Friedensschluß”, 245; and Thomas Kaufmann, Universität und lutherische Konfessionalisierung: Die Rostocker Theologieprofessoren und ihr Beitrag zur theologischen Bildung und kirchlichen Gestaltung im Herzogtum Mecklenburg zwischen 1550 und 1675, Quellen und Forschungen zur Reformationsgeschichte 66 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1997), 251.

Part One

Lucas Osiander as Court Preacher in Stuttgart (1569–1594)

Chapter 1

The Memory of Lucas Osiander Today there are not many traces left from the life of Lucas Osiander. He wrote many books that are still available, but they are rarely read. In his own time and by the time of his death, the situation was quite different and there were few signs that he would ever be threatened with insignificance. A short survey of how he was remembered will be undertaken here in order to give a glimpse of the expectations that surrounded him and of the role he played in life.

1.1 An Epitaph in the Collegiate Church of Stuttgart There was once an epitaph in the collegiate church of Stuttgart which remembered Lucas Osiander as a man “who happily built the church of God with his writings, speeches and counsels” and who “defended the truth of the Gospel forcefully with voice and pen”. It is not clear when the epitaph disappeared from the church, whether it was sometime between 1709 and 1887 or not until the church was destroyed in 1944 during the Second World War.1 The epitaph was a testimony of the importance his family had acquired in Württemberg during Lucas Osiander’s 1 Hermann Ehmer has argued thus about the existence and presence of an epitaph in the Stuttgart Stiftskirche. Ludwig Melchior Fischlin, Memoria theologorum Wirtembergensium resu­ scitata  …, 2 pts. (Ulm: Georg Wilhelm Kühnen, 1709) gives the impression that Osiander’s epitaph is still present in the collegiate church, whereas Hermann Mosapp, Die Stiftskirche in Stuttgart (Stuttgart: Hänselmann, 1887) does not mention it. It is therefore likely that the epitaph disappeared from the church sometime between 1709 and 1887, even though the text on the epitaph is cited in E. Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, Blätter für württembergische Kirchengeschichte 8 (1893): 37–77, since Hochstetter seems to be basing much of his information on Fischlin. It is possible, however, that his epitaph first disappeared when the church was destroyed during the Second World War, in 1944. The text on Osiander’s epitaph reads: “Lucas Osiander, XVI Decemb. a. XXXIII Noribergae natus. S. Theologiae Doctor. Illustrissimorum ducum Wirtembergicorum concionator aulicus per annos XXVI et eorundem consiliarius ecclesiasticus. Etiam hujus ecclesiae aliquamdiu pastor. Postea Adelbergensis abbas. Et tandem ecclesiastes Esslingen’sis factus. Utilissimis suis scriptis concionibus et consiliis ecclesiam Dei feliciter aedificavit. Theologicis aliquot colloquiis utiliter interfuit. Multas in religionis causa profectiones dextre subivit. Veritatem evangelicam ore et calamo fortiter defendit. Vitam professioni convenientem duxit. Cumque ministerio ecclesiastico annos 48 magno cum zelo et fructu functus esset, XVII Sept. a. 1604 placidissime in domino obdormivit et tertio post die non sine acerbissimo piorum omnium luctu hic sepultus est.” Fischlin, Memoria theologorum Wirtembergensium resuscitata, 76). See also J. Wagenmann and G. Bossert, “Lukas Osiander, der

30

1. The Memory of Lucas Osiander

life-time, but probably also of his contemporaries’ recognition and of their wishes for how he should remain present as a reminder of morality and faith.2 On the 19th of September 1604, two days after Osiander’s death, Johannes Magirus, who at the time held the most prominent clerical position in Württemberg as dean of Stuttgart, conducted his funeral in the Collegiate Church of Stuttgart.3 It was the main church of Württemberg and the nearest neighbour to the duke’s castle, situated between the castle and its granary. It had been there for centuries, and its placement made it the perfect location for Lucas Osiander’s last farewell, since his life and career had been characterized by very intimate relations between church and state which prevailed in this period of Württemberg’s history.4 As much as the splendour of the funeral suited a personality of Lucas Osiander’s proportions, it also concealed the complex relationship of Lucas Osiander with the Württemberg court. As late as the winter of 1603/1604, the duke had allowed his return to Stuttgart and Württemberg, after he had been exiled to the imperial city of Esslingen for six years due to a series of conflicts with the duke. The “writings, speeches and counsels” mentioned in the epitaph not only built the church of God in Württemberg, but were at times also a source of conflict. When he was described in the inscription with the adverb “forcefully”, it might also have reminded readers of his temperament and wilfulness. The epitaph commemorated a man who was both important and difficult. During his lifetime, Lucas Osiander had been trusted and given privileges, but he had also been punished for his provocations. The inscription honouring him also indicated the complex function of Lutheran religion in Württemberg during Osiander’s lifetime. Ältere”, in Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche, 3rd ed., vol. 14 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1904), 510. 2 The Osiander family later became a very influential dynasty of theologians, poets and lawyers in the territory; Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorialstaat, 81–86. On the role of epitaphs as memorial objects, see Johanna Dahm, “Epitaph”, in Gedächtnis und Erinnerung: Ein interdisziplinäres Lexikon, ed. Nicolas Pethes and Jens Ruchatz (Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt, 2001), 144, and Doreen Zerbe, “Memorialkunst im Wandel: Die Ausbildung eines lutherischen Typus des Grab‑ und Gedächtnismals im 16. Jahrhundert”, in Archäologie der Reformation: Studien zu den Auswirkungen des Konfessionswechsels auf die materielle Kultur, ed. Carola Jäggi and Jörn Staecker, Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 104 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2007), 117–163. 3 See: Iohannes Magirus, Christliche Leichpredigt  / Bey der Begrabnus des Ehrwurdigen  / Hochgelehrten Herren Lucae Osiandri, der H. Schrifft Doctoris, so Montags den 17. Septembris, Anno 1604, in Christo seliglich entschlaffen / vnd Mittwochs / den 19. hernach zur Erden bestattet worden. Gehalten zu Stutgarten in der Stifftkirchen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1604). On the church hierarchy in Württemberg and the role of the dean of Stuttgart, see my chapter and Helga Schnabel-Schüle, Der protestantische Südwesten = Part 2 of vol. 2: Baden-Württemberg of Repertorium der Kirchenvisitationsakten aus dem 16. und 17. Jahrhundert in Archiven der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, ed. Peter Thaddäus Lang, Ernst Walter Zeeden, Christa Reinhardt, Helga Schnabel-Schüle (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1985), 39 ff. 4 The nature of these relations will be discussed in Chapter 2.

1.2 The Funeral Sermon for Lucas Osiander

31

1.2 The Funeral Sermon for Lucas Osiander In the days of Lucas Osiander, funeral sermons were important monuments for the deceased, especially sermons given for dignitaries, and inscriptions on epitaphs often related to what had been said in the funeral sermon. Lucas Osiander had himself given quite a number of them during his days as the duke’s trusted pastor.5 Many funeral sermons were published shortly after they had been given and were important for the construction of the memory of the deceased, as was the case with Johannes Magirus’ sermon at the funeral of Lucas Osiander. Since the sermon received much of its honouring character from its edifying potential, it was designed to honour the deceased’s memory by the way it touched the feelings of the audience. In the funeral sermon, the ability of the deceased to serve as an example of truths of faith increased his or her honour.6 Therefore, as typical for the genre, the emotional impact of Johannes Magirus’ funeral sermon for Lucas Osiander reached its climax towards its end, when Lucas Osiander’s biography was introduced and he appeared as an example of an ideal Christian. At page twenty-two of the thirty-two page sermon, Magirus turned explicitly to the life of Lucas Osiander with the words: “… finally we should say a few things about the present dead person” (von gegenwertiger Leich).7 1.2.1 The Apostle Paul and Lucas Osiander The first two thirds of the funeral sermon concern Paul and Paul’s words in 2 Timothy 4:6–8, which were ideal words of farewell for a Christian and a perfect summary of a Christian life. The text was the classic point of departure in funeral sermons for clergy, and Magirus employs the same composition principles when he portrays Osiander as Osiander himself and many before him had done in their funeral sermons’ portrayal of clergy.8 For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith: Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also that love his appearing.9 5 Funeral sermons and Lucas Osiander’s activity as funeral preacher will be discussed in Chapters 3 and 4. 6 See Chapter 3.1 for a discussion on funeral sermons’ rhetorical and pedagogical functions. 7 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 22: “Nun müssen wir zum Beschluß auch von gegenwertiger Leich ettwas reden …” 8 See Chapter 3.6 of this study. 9 King James’s translation. In Magirus, Leichpredigt, 1, it is given as “Ich werde schon geopffert / und die zeit meines Abscheidens ist fürhanden. Ich hab einen guten Kampff gekämpffet / ich hab den Lauff vollendet / ich hab Glauben gehalten. Hinfurt ist mir beygelegt die Kron der Gerechtigkeit / welche mir der HERR an jenem Tag / der gerechte Richter geben würdt. Nicht mir allein / sondern auch allen / die seine Erscheinung lieb haben.”

32

1. The Memory of Lucas Osiander

Though naturally counted among Christian saints, Paul had gained a special significance for Protestants. Since the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith had been found in the reading of Paul’s letter to the Romans, he had become the father of the Protestant understanding of the relation of law to gospel and of actions to faith. He was seen as inspiring this way of thinking, but he also became an ideal and a role model expressing this truth of faith.10 That Paul was the obvious ideal for Christians to follow would therefore be accepted easily by both listeners and readers, but the sermon further emphasized this by referring to him as Christ’s unique tool and apostle. He was a prominent scholar of the Holy Spirit, as testified by Christ Himself, and a teacher not only for the heathens and kings of his day, but through the Holy Scriptures also up to the day of Osiander’s funeral. Johannes Magirus expected it would remain so until the end of the world. The heart of Paul’s contribution had been to reveal God’s own counsels and bear witness to the necessary penance to God and faith in the Lord Jesus.11 Though it was his role as a teacher that explained Paul’s prominence, the proper way to relate to him was not only through hearing and learning, but also to think of him with gratitude, show respect for his conduct, consider the blessed ending of his life, and follow his faith.12 Thus, as a role model, Paul himself became an integral part of the biblical text and its proclamation.13 According to Magirus, Paul had known that he would be rewarded in eternity with the crown of justice and had promised that it would be so for all others who loved the appearance of the Lord. To love His appearance, which would only occur in eternity, implied a longing for His magnificent future and enduring everything for His sake.14 His future appearance was linked with one’s own future appearance, since it would be visible only to those who long for the magnificent future and wear the crown of justice. Even if the memorial speech pointed to this future as a very visible one, it presented it as present in this world only as longing, hoping, waiting, and patience in all suffering. It was a form of invisible visibility. Since that which is visible is bound to time and that which is invisible is eternal,15 the eternal is invisibly present in the visible. Therefore, on those who were going to appear in eternity, the crown of justice would shine according to what they had struggled and suffered,16 or, one could say, according to how invisible the crown 10 E. g. Martin Luther, “Vorrede Luthers zum ersten Bande der Gesamtausgabe seiner lateinischen Schriften” (1545), in WA 54, 185; and Magirus, Leichpredigt, 15. 11 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 1. 12 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 1. 13  For a discussion of the role of examples in Lutheran funeral sermons, see Chapter 2. 14 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 20: “Dann Paulus sagt in verlesenen worten: Der HERR werde solche Kron der Gerechtigkeit / nicht allein jme geben / sondern auch allen / die sein Erscheinung lieb haben / das ist / die mit hertzlichem verlangen seiner herrlichen Zukunfft warten / auff dieselb sich frewen / gern bey jm weren / und umb seintwillen alles erdulden.” 15 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 20. 16 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 21.

1.2 The Funeral Sermon for Lucas Osiander

33

had been in the time of visibility. This perspective shed light on Paul’s reference to his death as an “offering” or a sacrifice, and on how it looked when a life was offered to God. If Paul had received ample gratitude and worldly thanks, his life would have been nothing but an act or a spectacle and would have referred only to itself even if he had claimed to be Christian. But since he had suffered in his life, he never had reason to feel ashamed.17 Since Paul had not been rewarded in this world, his life could be summed up as a gift to God and his death described as a sacrifice. In the funeral sermon, it is this perspective that connects the life of Paul with the life of Lucas Osiander and shows how the sermon’s edifying message serves the construction of the official memory of Lucas Osiander. During the first twenty-two pages of the sermon, the analogies between Osiander and Paul are drawn only implicitly before Johannes Magirus reaches the sermon’s rhetorical climax and states that the life of Osiander can be summed up with the same words Paul used to sum up his life and can be described in the same perspective as Paul’s. Paul was the ideal to follow, and the sermon proves that this is exactly what Lucas Osiander had done in his life. Therefore, just as Paul’s life was an ideal to be followed and honoured, so was Osiander’s. Magirus makes the connection between the two protagonists explicit with the following statement: “Even if we do not turn him [Lucas Osiander] into the apostle Paul himself, or compare him to Paul in all detail … still it may truly be said about him, that he fought a good fight, finished the race and kept his faith.”18 1.2.2 They Fought a Good Fight A skilled funeral preacher such as Johannes Magirus knew well how to employ characteristics that held a hidden complexity and which could serve the edifying and honouring purpose of a funeral sermon while remaining recognizable as a true account of a known life to a well-informed audience. In this respect, the sermon’s characterization of Lucas Osiander as resembling Paul in fighting a good fight was especially fitting and retained an ambiguity that would have been considered appropriate. Fighting was a very prominent characteristic in the sermon’s presentation of Paul, but Magirus was less specific in mentioning the fighting in which Lucas Osiander had taken part. While Paul was described to have fought against Jews, heathens, false brothers, heretics, wild beasts, his own flesh and all sorts of danLeichpredigt, 2–3 and 5–6. Leichpredigt, 22–23: “Unnd ob wir wol nicht den Apostel Paulum selbs auß jhm machen / oder demselben durchauß vergleichen (der one Mittel von Christo zum Apostolat beruffen / biß in den dritten Himmel / unnd ins Paradeiß entzuckt / und daselbsten sein Theologi studiert / auch seine Predigten mit sichtbarn Göttlichen Wunderzeichen bestättiget) dannoch können wir mit Warheit auch von jm sagen / er hab einen guten Kampff gekämpfft / er hab den Lauff vollendet / er hab Glauben gehalten.” 17 Magirus, 18 Magirus,

34

1. The Memory of Lucas Osiander

gers and bad weathers, and as having been brave and chivalrous in all of these fights, Lucas Osiander’s fighting was described rather abstractly. All the way from his baptism through his ministry as a theologian, Osiander’s life could be summed up as a fight against the devil and for divine truth.19 Since he had been a theologian, the weapons he had fought with against heretics and for true doctrine were his sermons, disputations, conversations, and books.20 Mention of Osiander’s metaphorical fighting was part of Magirus’ recalling of a short and gilded version of Osiander’s biography and career. His childhood as the son of the great theologian Andreas Osiander was the start of his fight, but the well-known fact that his father was also controversial was not mentioned. The fight continued during the rapid ascent of his career helped by friendship with Jacob Andreae, the climax of his career as court preacher in Stuttgart, his service as abbot and general superintendent in Adelberg, and finally as city preacher in Esslingen. The references to Osiander’s career as an abstract form of fighting would have reminded the audience of another well-known aspect of Osiander’s fighting spirit, namely that his style as a theologian had involved him in several conflicts that were also political. During his stay in Esslingen, he had confronted almost the entire city clergy in his effort to reorganize the city church and redefine church authority, and had found himself in a heated conflict that eventually left him weak and exhausted. Prior to that, as prelate of the Lutheran monastery Adelberg, where he ranked as a nobleman, he had confronted the duke in the Landestag over the question of Jewish settlement, with the result that the duke deprived him of his position and exiled him to Esslingen. Some years earlier, while still at the ducal court as Hofprediger (court preacher), the duke had him removed from court because of what he saw as the theologian’s unwanted and insistent interference with his government.21 Magirus’ characterizations in connection with the account of Osiander’s life would also have rekindled memories of Osiander as a fighting theologian who had been relatively stubborn, independent, and outspoken, and who had entered confrontation also with his own ruler. 1.2.3 They Finished the Course The sermon emphasized that Paul’s life had been the most laborious of the apostles. With his many travels and writings he inspired faith in people during his life and served Christ’s church.22 On this point Lucas Osiander’s life appeared not only as an echo of Paul’s life, but in leaving behind a vast number of writings he had been as laborious as Paul. It would take more than a hundred eager servants Leichpredigt, 23.  Magirus, Leichpredigt, 23–28. 21 These occurrences will be described in greater detail in the following two chapters. 22 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 11. 19 Magirus, 20

1.2 The Funeral Sermon for Lucas Osiander

35

of the church to produce the same amount.23 Through all his working days as a pastor to the churches, he had not once let churchgoers leave for home without proper consolation and teaching. Since he had not only been a pastor, but also a father, another sign of his enduring significance for preaching was his descendants. He had raised his sons to become theologians and to take on prominent church positions. By marriage to his first wife, he had taken on care for her son Polykarp Leyser, who at the time of Lucas Osiander’s death held the position of court preacher to the elector of Saxony. Osiander’s own eldest son, Andreas, had been promoted to doctor of theology and was abbot of Adelberg and general superintendent in the church of Württemberg. His two other sons, Johannes and Lucas, were also pastors and superintendents in the church of Württemberg. His two beloved daughters he had given in marriage to learned ministers of the church.24 In its completeness, Lucas Osiander’s life could truly be described as having furthered God’s honour, right knowledge, and true piety.25 The portrayal of this completeness, however, glossed over parts of his life that were not unambiguously harmonious, and which many would have known ended after Osiander had been allowed to return to Württemberg because of his weakness and of the mercy of his former adversary Duke Friedrich. 1.2.4 They Kept Their Faith With the authority of an apostle, Paul could testify himself to his kept faith in his words of farewell. According to the funeral sermon, Lucas Osiander also kept his faith until the end, but friends and colleagues played a crucial role in the keeping and display of this faith. Sitting by his side, friends could hear that he stood by his spiritual will of 1597, which he had written to make sure no one declared him an heretic after his death. If someone would see his work as contradicting Lutheran teaching, they should know that it had been his intention to let the meaning of his work be always regulated by Holy Scripture, the 1530 version of the Augs­ burg Confession, and the Book of Concord.26 As Osiander confirmed his will, he also added his Institutio christianae religionis,27 his Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Leichpredigt, 27.  Magirus, Leichpredigt, 28. 25 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 24: “Diß seind die Schrancken und der Bezürck / so jme Gott in seinem Leben und Ministerio assigniert und zugetheilt / darinnen er lang / vnd biß in das sibentzigste Jar seines Alters (welches er in nächst künfftigem Decembri würde compliert haben) vnd vber das achtundviertzigste Jar seines Predigampts mit grossem Ernst unnd Eifer geloffen / und sein gantzes Ministerium mit lesen / meditirn, predigen / vilem schreiben / vnd andern Vbungen dahin gerichtet / daß die Ehr Gottes gefördert / desselben rechtes Erkanntnus und wahre Gottseligkeit jmmer fortgepflanzet / und die gute Beylag der Göttlichen himmelischen Lehr rein vnd vnuerfälscht behalten werde.” 26 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 29. Osiander was also lauded in the funeral sermon as a major contributor to the Book of Concord. 27 Lucas Osiander, Institutio christianae religionis (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1582). 23 Magirus, 24

36

1. The Memory of Lucas Osiander

Christlichen Catechismum (Explanation of the Catechism),28 and his Bawren Pos­ tilla (Collection of Sermons for Farmers)29 to the list of books shaping his views.30 More importantly, however, his friends were by Lucas Osiander’s side to assist him in his piety during his final days of weakness, and afterwards they could bear witness to the same piety. Towards the end of 1603, Osiander had felt faint and had returned to Stuttgart from his ministry as city preacher in Esslingen. Shortly thereafter he suffered a stroke that paralyzed his right side, regularly confining him to his bed, and regularly sending pain through his limbs. Magirus carefully underlined that by the grace of God Osiander kept both his mind and speech, though the account of his last days reveals that the ability to speak also eventually left him, which is a normal consequence of strokes that lame the right side of the body. Parallel to the description of his fading vitality was the description of a piety that never faded. These descriptions show a death that took place in accordance with a Lutheran version of the ars moriendi genre, with its emphasis on the use of the sacraments, penance, absolution, and the Eucharist as ensuring the certainty of salvation for the dying and preventing the disbelief that would risk it.31 As part of the sermon’s description of Lucas Osiander, the ars moriendi described in the death scene gains a rhetorical function and becomes central in the sermon’s characterization of Osiander as a Christian example. Not only had Lucas Osiander showed great patience in his illness, he had also continued to trust God and call on Him relentlessly. Colleagues and friends helped him receive communion thrice during these days, with the precursory confession, penance and absolution. They observed that he kept repeating the Creed. On the day before his last, they repeatedly reminded Osiander of his confession and of the faith in the Lord Jesus, and admonished him to remain in the grace of God, to which they all heard him answer in Latin, “Dominus hoc bonum opus, quod in me caepit, perficiet usque in diem Jesu Christi” (May the Lord complete the good work he has started in me, until the day of Jesus Christ).32 On Lucas Osiander’s last day they kept reading him words of consolation, mentioning the words “Christ is our life”, to which he replied, seemingly with a little speech left, “He is everything”.33 Still the surrounding friends kept on, now asking him if he believed all the articles of faith they had just read to him, to which he nodded his head since his speech was now gone. And when they thereafter asked him to pray St. 28 Lucas Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum / Gehalten in des heiligen Römischen Reichs Statt Eßlingen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1600). This book will be discussed in detail in Part Two. 29  Lucas Osiander, Bawren Postilla. 30 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 31. 31  See Luther’s Ein Sermon von der Bereitung zum Sterben, in WA 2, 692–697; and Tarald Rasmussen, “Hell Disarmed? The Function of Hell in Reformation Spirituality”, Numen 56 (2009): 379–382. 32 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 31. 33 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 31.

1.2 The Funeral Sermon for Lucas Osiander

37

Stephen’s prayer (“Lord Jesus, receive my spirit!”) had he also nodded.34 All present continued to pray both silently and loudly, and two hours later he was dead. The great eagerness of those who surrounded Lucas Osiander on his death bed allows Osiander’s death to appear as a very central instance in the description of his life as a Christian. Death is the final confrontation where the truth about his faith and the core of his pious self become visible, and it is first in death that his faith receives its full meaning. Lucas Osiander’s piety became visible in this final scene not only through the confrontation with death as an enemy, but just as much by the way Osiander’s strength left him on his way to death. As his vitality disappeared, his faith and its brilliance became more visible. In the absence of human strength there emerged a strength that might not have been as obvious earlier. This strength was the faith and trust in God that needed weakness to be true. In this way, the death scene was a prolonged moment that showed the changing relation between strength and weakness in a man, and let the life of Lucas Osiander, just as Paul’s, appear as a sacrifice to God. Everything that he had been out of his own strength dissolved and all he had done for himself disappeared. Only his faith and trust in God remained as the last impression of him. Though Magirus did not use such words, it was as if the sum of Osiander’s life became a sacrificial smoke that did nothing but refer to God. The majority of his accomplishments could have been summed up as preaching, but at this point in the sermon, his entire person was transformed into preaching. In this way he also resembled Paul, as Magirus pointed out in his sermon: Since he [Lucas Osiander] had to endure many battles in this vale of tears, and since he fought a good fight, completed well the course of his life and vocation as God had decided it for him, and kept the faith in Christ his commander and saviour … Therefore we shall not doubt that the Lord has received His soul in his hand … and will give him the crown of justice, honour and splendour.35

Magirus concluded his sermon with a wish that Osiander’s example would affect a similar course of life for the congregants: … that also we may fight a good fight of faith, finish our course in piety and keep the faith in Christ until the end, and seize the imperishable crown of eternal life.36  Magirus, Leichpredigt, 32: “… mit neigung des Haupts Urkund geben”.

34

35 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 32: “Weil er dann in disem Jammerthal manchen Kampff außstehen

müssen / und ein guten Kampff gekämpffet: den Lauff seines Lebens und Beruffs / so jhme von Gott bestimpt gewesen / wol vollendet: und seinem Feldherrn und Erlöser Christo glauben gehalten. Sollen wir in keinen Zweiffel setzen / der HERR hab seine Seel in sein Hand entpfangen / da kein Qual sie anrühren könne / der werde auch den leib / so jetz in sein Schlaffkämmerlein gelegt / am Jüngsten Tag mit Frewden wider erwecken / und / als der einige höchsten Agonotheta, unnd gerechte Richter/ jhme die versprochne Kron der Gerechtigkeit / Ehren und Herrligkeit auffsetzen.” 36 Magirus, Leichpredigt, 32: “… dass wir auch einen guten Kampff des Glaubens kämpffen / vnsern Lauff gottseliglich vollenden / den Glauben an Christum / biß ans end behalten / vnd die vnvergängliche Kron des ewigen Lebens ergreiffen mögen …”

38

1. The Memory of Lucas Osiander

Not only was his deathbed testimony described as the sum of Osiander’s life, but it also became an interpretation of his career’s accomplishments. All his efforts during his forty-eight years of service as a preacher had served God’s honour. These efforts had rooted proper knowledge of God and true piety in the people, so that the heavenly teaching could be kept uncorrupted among them.37 Since the essence of Osiander’s testimony was also visible in his career, the sermon’s plot made sense not only according to its explicit characterizations of Osiander, but also according to the ambiguity the characterizations addressed. Just as the death scene described Osiander’s fading vitality, the characterizations of his life recalled the downward movement of his career. After reaching the greatest height, his career declined steadily because he maintained his views without compromising with either the duke or other officials until it had left Osiander weak and exhausted. He lived his life as a theologian in a way that had not been rewarded in this world, but which would be rewarded in the next and which was lauded by the funeral preacher. Osiander’s willfulness had been a major engine in his career’s downward movement, but so had the duke’s opposition. When read in light of its ambiguous characterizations and implicit stories, the funeral sermon also rehabilitates Osiander’s biography and career, implicitly at the expense of his opponents. The sermon’s plot interprets Osiander’s adversities as suffering and as testifying to the truth that is not rewarded in this life. And since the implicit stories involved political controversy, there is also a political aspect to the sermon’s rehabilitation of Osiander’s role in them. The funeral sermon’s rehabilitation of Osiander was not performed by a neutral judge, but by a preacher who was also a friend and former colleague from Osiander’s time as leading court preacher in Stuttgart. Like Osiander, Magirus belonged to an important family of clerics in Württemberg, and therefore to a group that acted almost as an estate within the duke’s power base.38 Still, Magirus would have had the duke’s blessing in presenting and publishing his funeral sermon for Lucas Osiander. The duke would have accepted the dean’s prerogative in writing his own sermons, but he might also have seen this acceptance to be in his own interest.39 Thus, not only was there a political component in the biography presented in the funeral sermon, but also in the activity of remembering Osiander, of which Magirus’ sermon formed an important part. The sermon testifies to how different interests were negotiated in the memory of Osiander as preacher and theologian.  Magirus, Leichpredigt, 24. Protestant preachers as part of a system of three estates (status ecclesiasticus, status oeconomicus, status politicus), see Schorn-Schütte, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit, 450. On the close relationship between important families of preachers, see Kümmerle, Lu­ thertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorialstaat, 180–181. 39 The balance between preachers’ independence and the duke’s power will be discussed in Chapter 2 of this study. 37

38 On

1.3 A Typical Lutheran Preacher

39

1.3 A Typical Lutheran Preacher The memory of the preacher Lucas Osiander preserved in the funeral sermon is not only the most accessible trace of an historic person and a window to studying him. It also gives access to an aspect of his homiletics, since it is not primarily a homiletics he invents, but also a homiletical practice in which he partakes. This homiletical practice is clearly present in Magirus’ sermon and in the way the sermon constructs the memory of Lucas Osiander. In order to see more clearly how Osiander’s memory is tied to this homiletics, it may be useful to take a short detour to discuss theories on “collective memory”, a field of research that has met with increased interest during the last few decades. According to Astrid Erl, the focus on that which conditions and shapes memory and on the social aspect of memory might be seen as a common feature of the many theories associated with the concept “collective memory”. Memory is not only governed by that which is remembered. It is also shaped by the way it remembers, which is always marked by interests and always follows patterns. Central is the distinction between collective memory and collected memory. Collective memory is the shared symbols, media, institutions and practices of a society connecting to the past by memory, whereas collected memory is the individual memory formed socially and remembering according to culturally specific patterns and values.40 An important concept for studying the intermediary between the collective and the collected memory is media. Media is part of the collective memory as a material memory, and it has its own rules and forms and possibilities governing the collected memory which it targets. According to memory theory, media are connected to individual memory because they mark how and what individuals remember. Media are not neutral conveyors of the past, but present versions which bring with them values, norms, and concepts for identity. More than just presenting a message, media therefore have power to influence thought, perception of truth, memory, and communication.41 Since it sees a link from collective memory present in media to the socially formed individual memory, the theory may help confirm the pedagogical function of the funeral sermon. It may also strengthen the connection between the genre’s pedagogical function and its historical context. If individuals remember by cultural specific patterns and values which let them assimilate others’ experiences in their own, the negotiations over the media that govern these patterns and values have obvious social and political relevance.

40 Astrid Erl, Kollektives Gedächtnis und Erinnerungskulturen (Stuttgart and Weimar: Metzler, 2005), 97. 41 Erl, Kollektives Gedächtnis und Erinnerungskulturen, 123–124.

40

1. The Memory of Lucas Osiander

This is clearly the case with the genre of the funeral sermon, which had its own rules, forms, and possibilities, as well as a tradition and social group, the Lutheran clergy, which administered its use.42 The funeral sermons’ version of the past is strongly marked by a certain theology and religious culture, but it is also marked by social and political interests.43 The medium that communicates Osiander’s memory is a genre that marks the way he is remembered. Magirus’ funeral sermon lets Osiander’s life appear as a unique example of a life lived in faith and as a new version of Paul’s life, but it does so by shaping Osiander’s life in a well-known mould through the conventions of the genre of a funeral sermon for a distinguished preacher. This mould will reappear in the next chapter when Osiander portrays his older colleague Jacob Andreae within the same rhetorical framework and in a way that also lets this deceased preacher appear as an echo of Paul.44 Therefore, the sermon not only gives information about Osiander’s biography, but also tells us about the religious genre structuring it and about the preacher who presents it and administers it in a specific historical situation. Magirus not only presents Osiander’s life in his sermon, but he also presents himself and his religious culture. The sermon invoked a pedagogical form of remembering marked by Lutheran values and patterns of thought and in agreement with the preacher’s interests in order to shape the lives of the congregants. This is a form of remembering which Osiander himself took part in with his work as a funeral preacher. The way Osiander is transformed from life to message in his funeral therefore offers a perspective on his own funeral sermons and their pedagogical function. Magirus’ sermon also tells of the expectations surrounding a preacher like Osiander by presenting him as a typical preacher. Formed as a type, the memory of Osiander offers a glimpse into his contemporary colleagues’ understanding of a preacher’s role. This understanding provides a starting point for studying Osiander’s own understanding of his role as a preacher in the self-presentations necessarily involved in his own sermons.

42 The

funeral sermon genre will be treated in detail in Part One, Chapter 3.

43 This way of employing the theory rests on the assumption that history and memory are not

contradictory terms, but that memory may be seen as a category supplementing an historical account as a critical tool. For an account of the discussion on memory’s relationship to history, see Erl, Kollektives Gedächtnis und Erinnerungskulturen, 43–44. 44  Johannes Brenz is portrayed similarly as resembling Paul in Wilhelm Bidembach’s funeral sermon for him. See Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorialstaat, 154. Luther is portrayed the same way in Johan Bugenhagen’s funeral sermon for him. See Johan(nes) Bugenhagen, “Eine christliche Predigt / vber der Leich vnd Begrebnis / des Ehrwirdigen D. Martini Luthers”, in “Vom Christlichen Abschied aus diesem tödlichen Leben des Ehrwirdigen Herrn D. Martini Lutheri”, ed. Peter Freybe (Stuttgart: Joachim W. Siener, 1996), Aiii, Bii.

Chapter 2

Lucas Osiander at the Court A meteoric career brought Lucas Osiander to the position of court preacher for the duke of Württemberg at the age of 35 in 1569. At the same time he was also appointed a member of the central church council of Württemberg. After having served as the second court preacher under Balthasar Bidembach for two years, he became the leading preacher at the court in 1571, when Bidembach was chosen to follow Johannes Brenz as Landprobst in Stuttgart and leading cleric in Württemberg.1 Osiander’s steep career had been the result of both talent and destiny.2 Due to influential supporters, Osiander had been able to finish his theological studies in Tübingen at the age of 21 in 1555. With the death of his father, the controversial theologian Andreas Osiander, in 1552, he had to break off his studies in Königsberg. However, Duke Christoph of Württemberg was a close ally of his father’s loyal sponsor Duke Albrecht of Prussia, and had, some years earlier with Brenz, tried to negotiate during the Osiandrian controversy. Duke Christoph came to play an active role in Lucas Osiander’s transfer to the University in Tübingen as well as in his reception in Württemberg.3 In his first position as deacon in Göppingen, Osiander’s superior and special superintendent was the influential theologian Jacob Andreae. A special superintendent was equivalent to an assistant bishop and, if the provost of Stuttgart is not taken into account, the second highest ranking clerical position in the church of Württemberg. He 1 E. Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, Blätter für württembergische Kirchengeschichte 8 (1893): 37. 2 Luise Schorn-Schütte, “Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit: Zur politischen und sozialen Stellung einer neuen bürgerlichen Führungsgruppe in der höfischen Gesellschaft des 17. Jahrhunderts, dargestellt am Beispiel von Hessen-Kassel, Hessen-Darmstadt und Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel”, in Bürgerliche Eliten in den Niederlanden und in Nordwestdeutschland: Studien zur Sozialgeschichte des europäischen Bürgertums im Mittelalter und in der Neuzeit, ed. Heinz Schilling and Herman Diederiks, Städteforschung A 23 (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1985), 278. Schorn-Schütte emphasizes that although offices in the territorial administrations for the most part no longer were hereditary positions, but required personal qualifications, appointments were still decided by family ties and personal interrelations. 3 See Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, ed. Die historische Commission bei der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, vol. 24 (Leipzig and Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1887 [repr. 1970]), 493; and Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Terri­ torialstaat, 79.

42

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

was responsible for supervising teachers and pastors, and subjected to one of the four general superintendents, who each supervised a fourth part of the territory.4 During this period Osiander married the sister of Jacob Andreae’s wife, who was the widow of the outstanding preacher Kaspar Leyser and a citizen’s daughter from Tübingen. In addition to working under Andreae’s supervision, Osiander thus became related to him and included in an elite circle. From this position Osiander’s talents would be noticed by Andreae, who helped Osiander benefit from his connections and recommendations. These fortunate circumstances helped Lucas Osiander’s advancement. After six years Osiander was himself appointed a special superintendent of Blaubeuren, and four years later was called to Stuttgart to serve as one of the special superintendents of the capital and as pastor of one of the main churches in the city, the church of St. Leonhard. Two years later, in 1564, he received the degree Doctor of Theology in Tübingen,5 and thereby met what had come to be a required qualification for Lutheran court preachers.6 When the duke chose Osiander to become one of his court preachers, he chose a member of the land’s religious elite who was skilled and learned as well as a distinguished representative of an important group within the duke’s territory. To some degree Lucas Osiander might be said to have been a traditional pedagogue in his service at the court. Court preachers had a special responsibility for the religious education of children in the ducal family and especially for that of the heir. When Osiander took on service at the court he received this responsibility, but since the future Duke Ludwig already was fifteen years old, he had probably already received most of his religious education from Osiander’s senior colleague Balthasar Bidembach. From his position as preacher for the duke, his influence as a theologian reached far beyond the court. As a member of the church council and an important councilor of the duke, Osiander helped write laws regulating religious teaching in the church and involved in the administration and control of these regulations. His sermons reached a wide audience and had a special significance as exemplary sermons of an outstanding cleric who was also the duke’s own pastor.

2.1 A Court Preacher’s Place in the Hierarchy When Osiander took over as first court preacher, he became the leader of three court preachers and the superior of all those employed in the court chapel,  Schnabel-Schüle, Der protestantische Südwesten, 39. “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 37. 6  Cornelia Niekus Moore, Patterned Lives: The Lutheran Funeral Biography in Early Modern Germany, (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006), 213. Cf. Schorn-Schütte, “Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit …”. 4

5 Hochstetter,

2.1 A Court Preacher’s Place in the Hierarchy

43

including the musicians. As other Protestant court preachers, he was paid in accordance with the duke’s corps of personal physicians, and as the leading court preacher he ranked equal to a leading court marshal, who was the highest administrative officer at the court.7 His main responsibilities were preaching to the princely family and administering the sacraments to them as well as to the court congregation. He also conducted the services and gave sermons on important public occasions, such as the opening and closing of the Landtag, festive days, weddings, funerals, and the inauguration of a new government.8 Lutheran court preachers followed in the tradition of court chaplains, who had served as personal confessors for heads of states since the time of the Byzantine emperors.9 In the sixteenth century, Jesuits often had a parallel function at Catholic courts within the Holy Roman Empire, but they were selected for the task by their order, subjected to papal supervision, and had no formal function in the church hierarchy of the territory.10 Protestant court preachers, on the other hand, were chosen for this position by the ruler himself on the advice of the church council, and given a formal position both at the court and within the hierarchy of the territorial church. This background established strong bonds of loyalty between ruler and preacher in Protestant territories. The nature of this close relationship varied depending on the personalities of prince and preacher, and therefore the court preacher was often changed when rule changed in a territory,11 but the relationship could also give the court preacher considerable influence. His spiritual responsibilities gave him free access to the ruler and let him act as the ruler’s personal advisor on many issues.12 Since theological and moral issues were hardly separable from political issues and since political considerations were based on theological and religious principles, the court preacher’s area of competence was one that potentially touched on all others.13 As theological authorities, court preachers took part in regulating what was considered common sense in society, and they could therefore influence political premises even though they had no formal decision-making powers in practical politics.14 Court preachers’ political function rested on their closeness to princes who had to reign according to the word of God not only to  7 Wolfgang Sommer, “Die Stellung lutherischer Hofprediger im Herausbildungsprozeß frühmoderner Staatlichkeit und Gesellschaft”, in idem, Politik, Theologie und Frömmigkeit im Luthertum der frühen Neuzeit: Ausgewählte Aufsätze (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999), 82.  8 Sommer, “Die Stellung lutherischer Hofprediger”, 77.  9 See Wiebke Köhler, “Hofprediger”, in RGG4 3, 1831–1832. 10 Sommer, “Die Stellung lutherischer Hofprediger”, 77. 11 Cf. Moore, Patterned Lives, 227. 12 Sommer, “Die Stellung lutherischer Hofprediger”, 78. 13 Sommer, “Die Stellung lutherischer Hofprediger”, 78; and Moore, Patterned Lives, 239. 14 Schorn-Schütte, “Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit”, 281.

44

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

be considered good and pious rulers, but to be able to rule at all.15 A primary obligation of a Lutheran ruler was to secure true religion and pure doctrine within his territory and this resulted in a double obligation. Not only did the ruler have to rule according to the word of God and be open to the corrections of theologians, but he also had the right to intervene in the government of the church. The responsibility of the prince to care for the church was seen as part of a valid commitment of loyalty between the people and the ruler.16 In an era when rulers did not have absolute control of their territories, but were dependant on the support of the nobility and the church to be able to rule, court preachers held an influential mediating role. A few years later, in the time of the Thirty Years’ War, the role of religion in politics changed, and many rulers gained more independent control of their territories, narrowing the court preacher’s sphere of influence and leading to a changed role for court preachers. From being important political counsellors, they would become purely spiritual advisors with less political influence.17 Though embedded in political interests, Lutheran court preachers perceived their position as relatively independent and considered themselves as having the capacity and obligation to judge the faith and morals of all, regardless their standing, including that of the ruler himself. The ruler was seen as the foremost member of the church, but was not seen as having a special influence within a church which had only one office, that of preacher.18 Polykarp Leyser, Lucas Osiander’s stepson, who came into Osiander’s care at the age of two and for whom Osiander arranged to study theology in Tübingen, became one of the most prototypical Lutheran court preachers of this era. He was court preacher in Saxony at the beginning of the seventeenth century and the author of a central text about the role of the court preacher, which is the foreword to his sermon on Psalm 101, labelled the Regentenspiegel.19 In his view, the role of spiritual guardian and advisor for the duke included an obligation to base one’s advice solely on Christian doctrine and not on considerations of what was convenient or practical. Such advice potentially covered all areas of government and could at times be unwelcome. But just as the prophets of the Old Testament had had to tell their rulers what they might 15 Schorn-Schütte,

“Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit”, 288, and P. Drews, “Hofprediger”, in RGG1 3, 100. 16 Schorn-Schütte, “Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit”, 290. 17 Wiebke Köhler, “Hofprediger”, in RGG4 3, 1831–1832; and Sommer, “Die Stellung lutherischer Hofprediger”, 88. 18  Schorn-Schütte, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit, 399. 19 Polykarp Leyser, Regenten Spiegel, gepredigt aus dem Ci. Psalm des Königlichen Propheten Davids, auff gehaltenem Landtage zu Torgaw, dieses 1605. Jahres, im Junio (Leipzig: Lamberg, 1605). Cited from Moore, Patterned Lives. This understanding of the preacher’s role was also compatible with a central point in Lutheran homiletics that the preacher’s tongue functioned as a tool for Christ’s work, letting God himself speak in the sermon and lending the preacher courage to speak even against the duke. See Beutel, In dem Anfang war das Wort, 469–470.

2.2 Lucas Osiander between Secular and Spiritual Power

45

not have wanted to hear, so should the court preacher also be willing to do.20 In the funeral sermon for Polykarp Leyser, he was described as having exemplified this role. It stated that “… a preacher who stays in the good grace of his audience and especially of his superiors must have forgotten his duties to admonish”.21 The same sort of ideal court preacher was also described in the funeral sermon for Lucas Osiander, where he was depicted as fulfilling his office as court preacher by being a contentious theologian who never smoothed his message to accommodate his audience.22 This ideal might not only have been an expression of the court preacher’s self-understanding, but probably agreed with the prince’s expectation for the role. A court preacher who understood himself as obligated by the Word of God alone would also have been the one who could best fulfil the desired political function of the court preacher. Only by representing true and genuine religion could the court preacher’s presence at the court confirm the nearness of the ruler to the Word of God. This would have been especially important in a situation where the ruler had to balance his powers against nobility and church.

2.2 Lucas Osiander between Secular and Spiritual Power There is a tension in the court preacher’s role between his closeness to the duke and usefulness for the duke’s rule on the one hand and his view of himself as led only by the word of God on the other. How were the preacher’s interests related to the duke’s interests? A closer look at Württemberg’s political system may be helpful in order to see the different aspects of this tension, which is also present in court preacher Lucas Osiander’s sermons. The political environment which surrounded the preacher’s understanding of himself and which lay down premises for negotiations and cooperation between preacher and duke provides a relevant background for the analysis of Osiander’s sermons. The question about the relationship between duke and court preacher is part of the greater question about the relationship between church and secular authority. Already when Osiander was appointed to his position, these two spheres Patterned Lives, 238. Jenisch’s funeral sermon for Polykarp Leyser, cited from ibid., 239: “A preacher who stays in the good grace of his audience and especially of his superiors must have forgotten his duties to admonish. One still finds, thank God, rulers who are willing to have themselves corrected, and remind their preachers if necessary of their duties not to abstain from giving their opinion, even when courtiers sometimes find this excessive and would love to turn a ruler against his teacher … But in teaching, admonishing, and caring (from which the good doctor, even if he was quiet and gentle in nature, never abstained), one can still retain the grace of God and the love and good will of all.” 22 Magirus, Leichpredigt. See the presentation of this sermon in Chapter 1 of this study. 20 Moore, 21 Paul

46

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

appeared connected to each other in a way that involved negotiations between duke and church. It was the duke who chose Osiander for the post, but he did so on the advice of the church council (Kirchenrat), and when Osiander was appointed court preacher he was also installed as member of the church council which was the governing body of the church. By his appointment Osiander became one of the council’s three theologians. In addition to the theologians, of whom the dean of Stuttgart was one, the council consisted of three political councilors, of whom the Landhofmeister was one. The council was supported by a secretariat and was responsible for the administration of church property and finances, including the care of orphans and the poor, as well as for the employment and dismissal of servants of churches and schools and the supervision of their lives and teachings as well as the regulation of their salaries. The three theologians in the council were also part of a smaller governing body, the consistory, which met twice weekly to decide upon disciplinary matters among pastors and schoolmasters.23 Once a year the theologians of the council, together with the Landhofmeister, met with the four general superintendents, who were also prelates of four of the major monasteries of the land, to discuss reports from the visitations and, if necessary, to give statements on pressing issues relating to the legislation of the church.24 In a way Osiander stood with one foot in the church and one foot in secular authority as a link between the two. There is, however, more to be said about the sort of link he represented. The church council, of which Osiander was a member, was one of the duke’s three governing bodies, together with the Oberrat, responsible for the management of internal affairs, and the Rentkammer, which managed the finances of the land.25 As the department responsible for disciplining and educating the people to become pious and loyal subjects, the church council appeared as an important part of the duke’s worldly power.26 However, though its leadership was defined as a governmental organ, the church was not only an administrative agency subjected to the duke’s government. The power balance between church and duke was more delicate and the relation between them more complex, and the background for this complexity can be found in Württemberg’s constitutional and confessional history. 23 Martin Brecht and Hermann Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte: Einführung der Reformation im Herzogtum Württemberg 1534 (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1984), 318. 24 Schnabel-Schüle, Der protestantische Südwesten, 43; and Hermann Ehmer, “Württemberg”, in Die Territorien des Reichs im Zeitalter der Reformation und Konfessionalisierung: Land und Konfession 1500–1650, ed. Anton Schindling and Walter Ziegler, pt. 5: Der Südwesten, Katholisches Leben und Kirchenreform im Zeitalter der Glaubensspaltung 53 (Münster: Aschendorff, 1993), 181. 25 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 318; and Ehmer, “Württemberg”, 179. 26 Schorn-Schütte, “Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit”, 288.

2.2 Lucas Osiander between Secular and Spiritual Power

47

One of the most important events expressing and regulating this relation took place four years before Osiander came to office as court preacher, during the final negotiations at the Landtag in Stuttgart in 1565. This was the meeting where the great church order of 1559 was to be passed as part of the constitutional foundation of the land. The cause of the negotiations was the pressing financial situation of Duke Christoph, Duke Ludwig’s father, who at this point had contracted a debt of 1.2 million gulden, for which he needed the estates to assume responsibility. However, in order to do so, the estates demanded compensation, and this resulted in a compromise securing the position of the estates in a way that had consequences for the church.27 The question of the duke’s finances and the power balance between duke and estates, consisting of nobility, the cities, and prelates of the major monasteries, had been a recurrent theme for important agreements made in Württemberg’s constitutional development. State finances had been a constant problem for the dukes of Württemberg, even the first of them, Eberhard I, who with the so called Münsinger Vertrag in 1482 had secured the territorial integrity of Württemberg. His efforts to establish Württemberg as an independent political entity had incurred expenses for a common defence, roads to secure trade and communication, and the establishment of an educational system. The duke had had limited income to balance these expenses, since taxes in the land were paid through the estates. To access these finances, Eberhard had been dependent on the support of the land and the estates, who thus gained increased influence on government through the Landtag.28 However, when agreement was finally reached, it had strengthened the duke’s influence in his own territory, since the estates possessing the land and accepting taxation had been subjected to a common legislation under the duke. Duke Ulrich, Duke Christoph’s father and de facto successor of Duke Eberhard I, had also faced this challenge. To fund his expenses, he tried to introduce a direct tax on all consumption in the land, but this resulted in massive riots which forced him to turn to the estates for support. In the so called Tübinger Vertrag of 1514 Duke Ulrich reached an agreement with the estates which came to hold constitutional importance. In exchange for assuming responsibility for the duke’s debts, the estates were granted the right to be asked if parts of the land were to be disposed of, or if taxes were to be permitted, or if wars were to be fought. They were also guaranteed the right to move freely and the right to fair trials.29 Religion played an important role in the relationship between duke and estates, and the Duke’s relationship to the church was crucial for his ability to rule and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 339. and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 18. 29 Ehmer, “Württemberg”, 171. 27 Brecht 28 Brecht

48

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

his territory. The Reformation was probably the event in Württemberg most consequential for this relationship. It changed the distribution of power within the territory as well as the organization of the territory. Duke Ulrich, who brought the Reformation to Württemberg in 1534, had been able to reclaim his office with the help of other Protestant territories, primarily Hesse, and his authority in the Empire thus rested on confessional loyalty. This also made religion a primary and lasting concern in Württemberg’s foreign policy.30 A perhaps more important consequence was that the Reformation brought the duke increased room for political manoeuvring. Before the Reformation, the church’s property consisted of more than a third of Württemberg’s territory and its income exceeded the incomes from ordinary taxation and from the duke’s property. Monasteries were independent units owning the most profitable lands in the country and represented in the Landtag by their prelates. Thus, a great part of the country’s production did not contribute to state finances and could not be influenced by the duke’s dispositions.31 When Eberhard I began in the fifteenth century the construction of Württemberg as an early modern state and united the estates of the Landtag to a common area of taxation and jurisdiction, this unity had not encompassed the church. The church was a force of its own, not subject to the power of the duke. It possessed its own territories exempt from tax liability and therefore beyond the duke’s economic sphere of influence, and it had its own authority over education, health care, and a judicial system and therefore held a potential for conflict with the duke and his state. The territories of the church and of the state overlapped each other, and since the bishops and the duke shared a political and Christian interest for church matters, they were necessarily brought to confrontation. The bishops needed to be landlords to protect the church, whereas the duke had to be a protector of the church to establish a Christian society and bring blessing to his land.32 To the duke the church as an independent force was a foreign body in the state he was building. He therefore sought to control it by respecting its competence on some areas, such as matrimonial law, while disrespecting it on others, such as matters concerning heritage and fortune, as well as by gaining control of as many as possible of the appointments controlling the foundations financing clergy and clerical institutions. When Ulrich took over as duke in 1498, half of this patronage in the territory was in his hands.33 Thus 30 Dieter Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, in Handbuch der baden-würt­ tembergischen Geschichte, ed. Meinrad Schaab and Hansmartin Schwarzmaier (Stuttgart: Klett-­ Cotta, 1995),100; and Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 198–202. 31  Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 101. 32 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 26. 33  Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 27; and Dieter Stievermann, “Die württembergischen Klosterreformen des 15. Jahrhunderts: Ein bedeutendes landeskirchliches Strukturelement des Spätmittelalters und ein Kontinuitätsstrang zum ausgebildeten Landeskirchentum der Frühneuzeit”, Zeitschrift für Württembergische Landesgeschichte 44 (1985): 65–104.

2.2 Lucas Osiander between Secular and Spiritual Power

49

a shift in power and influence from church towards territorial state took place before Luther presented a theoretical basis with his attacks on the pope.34 The process of integrating the church into the state accelerated when Ulrich introduced the Reformation in Württemberg in 1534, included church property in the court treasury, and subjected the administration of the church to that of the Rentkammer, his governmental organ for financial affairs. In this process he also reduced the number of clerical positions and directed to his treasury the income from foundations that became redundant35 as a source of finance to help cover the expenses of his court and wars as well as to help pay off his debts.36 Gold collected from churches was melted to produce coins37 and efforts were made to secularize the monasteries to gain control of their property.38 The duke’s attempt to control the church directly from one of his governmental organs was not successful, however, since he lacked the necessary administrative system. This lack was partly corrected by instituting a form of leadership in the church by making arrangements for visitations in the territory, and by the establishment of an arrangement for a church synod dividing the church into 23 administrative units.39 The limited success of Duke Ulrich’s church organization seems to imply that a church administered directly by the state and its efficient bureaucracy was an anachronistic alternative presupposing an absolute state. A more successful integration of state and church took place with the church order of Duke Christoph. It organized the church in a way that could prevent the old foundations of the church from dissolving after the spiritual motivation which had established them had disappeared with the introduction of the Protestant religion. The control and integration of the church were secured with the establishment of a relatively independent church hierarchy consisting of the church council as one of three governmental organs, four general superintendents, a synod, special superintendents and vicars, as well as a system for securing regular visitations of the territory.40 The agreement at the Landtag in 1565 marked an endpoint of a long process and would distinguish Württemberg’s constitution for centuries to come. During the negotiations, the estates demanded guarantees for maintaining the confessional state of the territory and the church organization, meaning Duke Christoph’s own church order, in exchange for assuming responsibility for Duke Christoph’s debts. They assured the duke that they had no doubts about his good 34 Stievermann,

“Die württembergischen Klosterreformen des 15. Jahrhunderts”, 99. and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 244. 36 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 215. 37 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 243. 38 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 216. 39 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 264–265. 40 Schnabel-Schüle, Der protestantische Südwesten, 39; and Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 116. 35 Brecht

50

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

intentions and his good will, but that they also knew from neighbouring countries that Satan was everywhere at hand spreading his heresy. One of the fears of the estates was probably the prospect of Christoph’s intemperate and unreliable son Eberhard taking over after his father, another was probably Calvinism which was spreading in neighbouring countries and which had accompanied the turn to a more absolutist form of government in several of them. The estates insisted that the duke should declare the church order and the confessional state of the country as eternal orders that could not be changed without the consent of the estates. The duke saw these demands as attacks on the freedom imperial law gave him as ruler and refused to comply.41 Upon this objection the estates reminded the duke of the venerable King Josiah of the Old Testament who was the epitome of a good Christian ruler, since he, like the sovereigns of the Reformation, had rid the land of false religion and reinstituted true worship. Even Josiah, the heroic king of God’s own people, had been willing to enter into an agreement with his people about the lasting religion of the land.42 Convinced by Johannes Brenz, the country’s leading theologian and a close ally of the duke, that the agreement did not necessarily attack his freedom as ruler, the duke eventually gave in to the economic power of the estates. With a note making explicit that the agreement did not admit the estates a right of resistance, the concluding document was signed, guaranteeing not only the Lutheran confession of the land, but also the church organization and a relative independence for church finances, as well as that of the prelates of the major monasteries.43 The new church order organized the income from church property as a separate chest or economy, reducing the church’s character as a state institution. In reality, however, the church’s economy was far from autonomous, and only half of the income from its property ended up in its chest. The monasteries were also kept as separate administrative units and not regarded as part of either the church’s property or the duke’s property. They were represented at the Landtag by their Lutheran prelates and run by the church as educational institutions. Still, their independence of the duke was relative, since they were administered by a marshal appointed by the duke and since surplus income went to the duke. Under Duke Christoph’s successors, these incomes were diverted to the church’s chest, which was being drained by the duke whenever he saw it necessary.44

and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 341.  Langensteiner, Für Land und Luthertum, 236–239; and Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 341. Luther, in his funeral sermon for Friedrich the Wise of Saxony, had also used Josiah as a standard for a ruler of the Reformation to measure up against (WA 17/1, 196–227), and Lucas Osiander would later use Josiah likewise in his funeral sermon for Duke Ludwig. 43 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 340–341. 44 Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 105 and 114. 41 Brecht 42

2.2 Lucas Osiander between Secular and Spiritual Power

51

In this way the distribution of power between duke and estates established in the Tübinger Vertrag of 1514 was confirmed, though in a way favouring the duke’s power. Still, it was made explicit that the church rested not only on the duke’s protection, but was also guaranteed by the estates, and thus the estates influenced the church organization as well.45 With the church order established as part of the constitution in 1565, the church was given a room of its own, though still being the duke’s church under his control. Through foundations and the church treasury, the church had its own financial basis for the recruitment of clergy and for sustaining clerical positions. The duke obviously had a great influence in most church activities and especially in appointments to important positions. On the basis of the new church order, however, a group of theologians related to each other in various ways established itself as an influential, self-recruiting elite distributing important positions among themselves, continuing the confessional characteristic of the territory, and at times offering the duke resistance to his rule.46 In her extensive study of Protestant clergy, Luise Schorn-Schütte describes it as a typical tendency for this period’s Lutheran clergy to ally with political forces defending the traditional estates system. According to her, the most classic conflict which Lutheran clergy took part in was that between the nobility of the old estates system and rulers seeking centralization of their power.47 Lutheran clergy often stood on good terms with landowning nobility,48 and they did not see themselves merely as servants of the ruler. Rather, in accordance with old traditions, preachers regarded themselves as a third estate, namely those that preach as different from those who protect and those who nourish, and came to enter into alliances with other estates as it benefitted them.49 The theory of the three estates secured their integration in society while at the same time legitimized their claimed right of resistance towards secular authority.50 45 Mertens,

“Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 118. and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 330; and Ehmer, “Württemberg”, 181; Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorialstaat: Die Gelehrtenfamilie Bidembach vom 16. bis zum 18. Jahrhundert, 47–55; and Moore, Patterned Lives. Moore claims this type of elite was typical for Lutheran territories. 47 Schorn-Schütte, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit, 450. 48 Schorn-Schütte, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit, 452. 49 Schorn-Schütte, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit, 36 and 24. 50 Schorn-Schütte, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit, 455. Osiander also sees society as divided in three estates (Die Christliche Haußtafel: Verfasset in fünffzehen Predigten [1601] [Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1650], 1–2): “Es seind aber fürnemlich dreyerley Ständ / in deren einem / ein Christ allhie auff Erden sein vnd leben muss: nämlich der Kirchendienst oder Predigampt: Der Stand vnd Ampt der weltlichen Obrigkeit: Vnd der Ehestand / oder der Haußhaltung. Den ersten Stand / nennet man den Lehrstand: Den andern den Wehrstand: Den dritten / nennet man den Neerstand. Jn dieser dreyer Ständen einem / muß ein Christ leben: Eintweder / daß er sey ein Prediger oder Zuhörer: ein weltliche Obrigkeit / oder ein Vnterthon: 46 Brecht

52

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

Both as court preacher and as a member of the leadership of the church, Lucas Osiander was the duke’s servant and a part of the duke’s governmental organization. His service was part of the duke’s execution of power, but influence also ran in the opposite direction. The church was also a part of the foundation of the duke’s power, not only as an ideological and religious instrument which he needed for legitimizing his power and disciplining his subjects, but also as part of the state’s economic and organizational basis as well as a representative of the faith and values that secured trust between the duke and his subjects. Though the church sphere was not easily separated from the worldly sphere in this system, it would be a mistake to see power and authority as floating directly from the duke in a way which made the church his tool. Power also emanated from church and estates to the highest level in politics. The political context surrounding Osiander’s work as court preacher is a necessary background for understanding the interests to which his sermons relate. As court preacher, he was the duke’s servant representing the duke’s interests in the church and legitimizing his rule as Christian. He was, however, also a representative of the church in the duke’s court, free to speak according to church interest and theological consideration. The two aspects of his service did not necessarily contradict each other. By giving room for an independent and true theologian as his preacher and by being willing to be taught by him, the duke displayed that he subjected himself to true religion and respected the compromise that had been decisive for ensuring his ability to rule as well as his access to finances and an organization of well-educated servants. Even more pronouncedly than for the church as a whole, the court preacher found himself in the middle of the mutual dependency between duke and estates, and between duke and subjects. 2.2.1 A Useful Servant of Church and Duke This study will focus on the court preacher’s sermons, but Osiander’s office at court also involved other activities. As a member of the church council and a servant at the duke’s court, he was potentially useful in several areas of the duke’s government. One of these areas was religious diplomacy. It was an activity which had gained importance in the period when Württemberg was under the feudal lordship of Austria and had to refrain from taking part in alliances with other countries. Religious politics was one of the few ways for the territory to secure its interests within the Empire.51 By tying loyal bonds to other Lutheran states, they could ein Haußuatter / oder ein Haußgesind.” Osiander’s teaching on rules in a Christian household are structured by this division in three groups. 51 Ehmer, “Württemberg”, 185 and 183. On Württemberg in the system of Austrian feudal lordships, see Volker Press, “Vorderösterreich in der habsburgischen Reichspolitik des späten

2.2 Lucas Osiander between Secular and Spiritual Power

53

contribute to balancing Habsburg power. Osiander took part in this diplomacy on several occasions.52 Perhaps the most successful diplomatic task he was involved in was the effort to achieve agreement among Lutheran cities and territories. Duke Ludwig assigned Osiander to contribute in writing Württemberg’s part of what was to become the Book of Concord 53 and later involved him in the work to have the imperial cities of southwestern Germany sign the book.54 Osiander was also involved in efforts to expand the Lutheran bloc within the Empire, such as helping Gebhardt, archbishop of Cologne, bring the Reformation to his territory, even if his efforts on this occasion proved futile, since the archbishop later turned to Reformed doctrine instead of Lutheran.55 One of the most obvious threats to the Lutheran bloc was the expansion of Calvinism in neighbouring territories, and the duke used his court preacher to try to stem Calvinism from gaining influence in Pfalz, Baden, and the Württembergian county of Mömpelgart, but with little success.56 An on-going battle of Osiander’s religious diplomatic activity was his struggle with the Jesuits, mainly those active in Württemberg’s neighbouring territory Bavaria, where they filled similar functions at the court and the university as Osiander did in Württemberg. This battle was not initiated by the duke, but had begun already before Osiander took on the position as court preacher and continued with the duke’s support throughout Osiander’s years of service at

Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit”, in Vorderösterreich in der frühen Neuzeit, ed. Hans Maier and Volker Press (Stuttgart: Thorbecke, 1998), 1–41. 52 Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 48, states that many of Osiander’s efforts brought little success. The duke brought him to the Diets in 1582 and 1583 to help express Lutheran interests. Protestant countries in 1582 demanded tolerance of the Lutheran religion in order to support the emperor’s campaign against the Muslims. In 1583 he disputed the implementation of the new calendar within the Empire. 53 Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 48. 54  Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 48. 55 Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 48. 56 When French Huguenots who had fled from Catholic France made their presence felt in his own county of Mömpelgart, the duke summoned Jacob Andreae and Lucas Osiander to converse with the leading Calvinist theologian Theodore Beza of Geneva in the hope of promoting religious understanding among the subjects of the county, but they could not accomplish their task. Duke Ludwig also employed his court preacher to counter similar challenges posed by the possible conversion of neighboring dukes to Calvinism. During the winter of 1579–1580, Osiander was sent to Pfalz to negotiate with the Reformed pastor Pantaleon Weiss who was trying to persuade Count Johann in Zweibrücken to turn from Lutheran to Reformed teaching, but Osiander was not successful this time either. Osiander was also assigned to help prevent Duke Jakob of Baden, Württemberg’s neighbouring territory, from turning from Lutheranism, and he was sent with other leading theologians of Württemberg (Andreae, Gerlach and Heerbrand) to converse with Johann Pistorius, the leading theologian in Baden, who had converted from Lutheranism to Calvinism before he ended up as a Catholic. Again the Württembergian theologians failed to prevent a ruler from abandoning Lutheranism. See Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 48 and 56.

54

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

the court. It was fought with the exchange of texts and evolved around matters such as the catechism57 and religious discipline within Catholic territories.58 Court preacher Osiander was also a useful servant of the Württemberg church. He took an active part in preparing a new version of the church order, which was completed in 1586 and had references to the first hymnbook of Württemberg. This hymnbook had been collected and arranged by Lucas Osiander with the help of the court chapel. It originated from devotional life at the court and came to influence church life in Württemberg by its revolutionary way of accommodating congregational singing.59 As court preacher, Lucas Osiander also partook in the 57  In his first attack on the Jesuits and their activity, Osiander set out to show that the Jesuits were mistaken when they claimed they were preaching the gospel as the Lutherans did. In his polemic pamphlet Osiander used the catechisms of Petrus Canisius to prove his point. Petrus Canisius was the Jesuit “patriarch” in Germany and his catechism had a similar position in Bavaria as the catechisms of Luther had in the Lutheran territories. Lucas Osiander, Warnung / Vor der falschen Lehr und Phariseischen Gleißnerei der Jesuiter (Tübingen: Ulrich Morhart Wittib, 1568). Another conflict about the catechism arose towards the end of Osiander’s service at the court, when he discovered that the Jesuits had published a catechism in Luther’s name where they collected answers to the questions in his Small Catechism from the early period of Luther’s writing in order to make his teaching appear Catholic. Osiander responded by publishing another polemic pamphlet against the Jesuits. See also, Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 68–69. 58  Arguing with Jesuits seems to have been one of Osiander’s favorite activities as court preacher and theological diplomat, and he seems to have continued it as long as he held the office. He published a book with answers to the 37 questions the Jesuits used when they examined subjects in their territories suspected of evangelical sympathies. Lucas Osiander, Ableinung / Der Lugen, Verkerungen, vnnd Lösterungen, mit denen Bruder Johann Naß in seinen Centurijs der Euangelischen Warheiten (wie ers nennet) die Christlich Lehr der Augspurgischen Confession auch deren Personen, so sich zu derselben begeben, vnwarhafftig vnd schmälich antastet (Tübingen: Ulrich Morhart, 1569); and Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 61. His attack on them over a picture he had heard of in one of their churches in Prague, which he claimed portrayed Protestants as enemies of the Empire, caused a diplomatic disturbance on the highest level. His accusation was disquieting enough for Duke Albrecht of Bavaria to respond to it and ask Duke Ludwig for an explanation and moderation of his court preacher’s views. Duke Ludwig, however, responded that no such explanation was necessary, since he always read and approved what his theologians published. See, Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 63–64. The final point in this struggle came when Duke Wilhelm of Bavaria on his way home from a stay at a spa in Göppingen travelled through Stuttgart and suggested to Duke Ludwig that this might be a good opportunity to let their theologians meet to converse. It is reported that Osiander acted as the leading theologian on Württemberg’s side and that Duke Ludwig himself on one occasion took part in the disputation’s exchange. Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 69. 59 “Derowegen ich vor dieser Zeit Nachdenckens gehabt, wie bei einer christlichen Gemeinde eine solche Musik einzurichten wäre, da gleichwohl vier Stimmen zusammengingen und dennoch ein jeder Christ wohl mitsingen könnte. Hab’ derowegen als zur Probe (in denen Stunden, da ich sonsten von andern, wichtigern Geschäften müd gewesen) diese 50 geistlichen Lieder und Psalmen mit vier Stimmen also gesetzt, daß ein gantze christliche Gemeine, auch junge Kinder mitsingen können und dennoch diese Musik darneben zur Zierde dieses Gesanges ihren Fortgang hat. Wie auch mit der Zeit andere dergleichen mehr Kompositiones, welche ich allbereit unterhanden, erfolgen mögen. Und bin der tröstlichen Zuversicht, daß durch solche

2.3 Lucas Osiander and Duke Ludwig

55

duke’s censorship of written works, especially those relating to church practice,60 and as a doctor of theology he wrote books to be used by students of theology.61 A great deal of the sermons Osiander presented as court preacher were published and widely read.62

2.3 Lucas Osiander and Duke Ludwig Lucas Osiander’s service as court preacher tells of a close and prolonged relationship with Duke Ludwig. Balthasar Bidembach had as first court preacher been responsible for the religious upbringing of the young prince, but Osiander, who entered service at the court when Ludwig was fifteen years old and still under guardianship, probably also contributed to the young duke’s distinctly confessional education. The educators read and explained central parts of the Bible meine ringfüge Arbeit das Christlich allgemein Gesang in der Kirchen nicht allein nicht gehindert, sondern auch die gutherzigen Christen durch solche liebliche Melodieen noch mehr zum Psalmensingen angereizt werden sollen.” Quoted from, Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 46. 60 This is evident in an episode that took place when Osiander in 1590, as chair of the church council, was asked by a representative of Schwäbisch-Hall for his view on an improved and extended version of Brenz’s catechism. The representative was Jakob Gräter, author of the book and preacher and dean of Schwäbisch-Hall, who first had been sent to Tübingen to get printing permission for the new book from the professors of theology at the University. They reviewed the book positively, but told Gräter he would have to go to Stuttgart to have the book approved by the church council before it could be printed. In Stuttgart Gräter met with the council who found they could give no authoritative statement about the book without their leading theologian Lucas Osiander being present. But since Osiander was staying at a spa in Göppingen with the duke, Gräter had to travel to Göppingen and the bathing Osiander to obtain the required expert’s opinion on his book. Osiander willingly wrote his opinion on the new catechism, but when Gräter returned to Tübingen with the statement from Osiander to have his book printed, he discovered Osiander’s opinion was less favourable. Even though he acknowledged the good intentions behind the book, he advised against the proposed renewal of the catechism, since it was very dangerous to renew things when it was not strictly needed. If such renewals were to be allowed too easily, it could open up the possibility for false teachings and also confuse the young. Were the people in Schwäbisch-Hall in need of a more extensive explanation, they should rather add Luther’s Small Catechism to that of Brenz, or at least Luther’s explanation of the most important questions. The proposed extension of Brenz’s catechism would also, in Osiander’s view, make it too long for a proper catechism and at the same time too short for a proper explanation of the catechism. See Part Two, Chapter 1 of this study and Christoph Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, Spätmittelalter und Reformation 21 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1990), 359–360. On general rules for the censorship of funeral sermons, see Moore, Patterned Lives, 82. 61 Lucas Osiander, Institutio christianae eligionis (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1582); and Epitome historiae ecclesiasticae, centuriae I–Xvi, in quibus breviter et perspicue commemoratur, quis fuerit status ecclesiae Christi a nativitate salvatoris usque ad annum 1600 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1592–1604). See also Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 47. 62 Sabine Holtz, Theologie und Alltag, 46.

56

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

to the young prince and presented him with daily readings and explanations of the Confessio Augustana, the central Lutheran confession, and of the Confessio Wirtembergica, Württemberg’s own confession, which a few years previously had been commissioned by the young prince’s father Duke Christoph and written by Johannes Brenz.63 Osiander followed all the important occasions in the duke’s life as his court preacher. He gave the sermon when Ludwig married his first wife Dorothea Ursula in 1575 and also gave the sermon in the castle church during the celebration of the end of Ludwig’s guardianship in 1578, when Ludwig began his rule.64 In 1583, when Ludwig lost his young wife after eight years of marriage, Osiander presented the funeral sermon, and one year later, when Ludwig married Ursula in 1585, Osiander gave the wedding sermon. In 1589 he gave the funeral sermon for Ludwig’s mother Anna Maria, and in 1593 gave the funeral sermon for Ludwig himself when he was laid to rest in the collegiate church of Tübingen. On 18 April 1587 Osiander is said to have been awarded 1000 fl. from the church treasury by the duke himself, because of his good and loyal service.65 Duke Ludwig’s style of rule probably lent Lucas Osiander an influential role at the court. Ludwig’s father Duke Christoph initially designated Ludwig’s elder brother Eberhard to take over rule in Württemberg, but he died before his father. In Duke Christoph’s testament describing the arrangements for the succession of the throne to Ludwig, Christoph arranged a guardianship for Ludwig, which consisted of the rulers in three of Württemberg’s neighbouring countries and was not to be lifted until his twenty-fourth birthday. This meant that he would be surrounded by skilled counselors and guardians for ten years after his father’s death, before he could take over rule as duke.66 Perhaps it contributed to the allegedly dependent characteristic of his rule. Ludwig chose “Nach Gottes Willen” as the slogan for his rule. According to Dean of Stuttgart Johannes Magirus, this was due to his wish that his government 63 The importance of this religious education, which was also influenced by his mother Anna Maria, is underlined by Manfred Rudersdorf, “Ursula von Pfalz-Veldenz-Lützelstein”, in Sönke Lorenz, Dieter Mertens, and Volker Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon (Berlin and Köln: Kohlhammer, 1997), 117. Eberhard Bidembach, Johannes Magirus, Andreas Osiander and Lucas Osiander, Vier Christliche Predigten / Vber der Leich / weilund des Durch­ leuchtigen / Hochgeborenen Fürsten vnd Herrn / Herrn Ludwigen / Hertzogen zu Würtenberg … (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1593), 71. Bidembach in his funeral sermon tells that Osiander had taken part in giving the duke a religious upbringing. See also Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 38; and Paul Friedrich Stälin, Wirtembergische Geschichte, 4 vols. (Stuttgart and Tübingen: Cotta, 1841–1870), 780. 64  Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 38. 65 J. Wagenmann and G. Bossert, “Lukas Osiander, der Ältere”, in Realencyklopädie für Pro­ testantische Theologie und Kirche, 3rd ed., ed. D. Albert Hauck, vol. 14 (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrich’sche Buchhandlung, 1904), 509–514. 66 Ehmer, “Württemberg”, 182–183.

2.3 Lucas Osiander and Duke Ludwig

57

should comply with the will of God.67 Already during his lifetime he was called Ludwig the Pious, perhaps because of his instrumental role in completing and disseminating the Formula of Concord, or perhaps because he had shown piety and mildness as a ruler.68 Both the funeral sermons and commentators mention his theological interest and state that on several occasions he expressed a wish to be able to preach the Gospel himself,69 and that he took part regularly in the services of the church.70 His personal piety, theological education, and concern for the church, which let Württemberg emerge as the leading power within Lutheran Germany, are seen as characteristics of Duke Ludwig’s reign.71 As well as being eager to help preserve and disseminate the true doctrine and the true faith,72 he was described as having a paternalistic style of rule.73 He was said to have had a mild heart for the sick and the poor, and especially for fellow believers driven away from their homeland because of their faith who had come to Württemberg as refugees.74 His servants also experienced this Christian mildness when he had expensive Bibles printed and given to each of them a copy with pious admonitions he himself had written.75 Commentators also point to another image of the duke, however, and continue from the description of his piety to saying that he in most other parts of his rule trusted his councilors and officials to govern.76 All commentators emphasized his 67  Magirus, Christliche Leichpredigt  / Bey der Begrabnus des Ehrwurdigen  / Hochgelehrten Herren Lucae Osiandri, 32. 68 Johan Ulrich Pregitzer, Wirttembergischer Cedern-Baum Oder Vollständige Genealogie Des Hoch-Fürstlichen Hauses Wirttemberg, 2d ed. (Stuttgart: Metzler und Erhardt, 1734), 17; and Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 32; Ehmer, “Württemberg”, 185; and Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 47–48. 69 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 83; and Ludwig Timotheus Spittler, Geschichte Wirtembergs unter der Regierung der Grafen und Herzoge (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck, 1783), 186–187. 70 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 30; and Christian Gottlob Barth, Geschichte von Württemberg: Neu erzählt für den Bürger und Landmann (Calw: Vereinsbuchhandlung des Calwer Verlags-Vereins, 1843; repr. Stuttgart: Thienemann, 1986), 175, cited from Gerhard Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I: Das Haus Württemberg von Graf Ulrich dem Stifter bis Herzog Ludwig, 5th ed. (Stuttgart and Leipzig: Hohenheim-Verlag, 2003), 578. 71 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 114–115; and Paul Sauer, Herzog Friedrich von Württemberg 1557–1608: Ungestümer Reformer und welt­ gewandter Autokrat (München: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 2003), 97. 72 This point is emphasized in all four of the funeral sermons held after the duke’s death. Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten; see also Spittler, Geschichte Wirtembergs unter der Regierung der Grafen und Herzoge, 185. 73 Walter Grube, Der Stuttgarter Landtag 1457–1957: Von den Landständen zum demokrati­ schen Parlament (Stuttgart: Klett, 1957), 249; and Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Würt­ temberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 116. 74 Barth, Geschichte von Württemberg: Neu erzählt für den Bürger und Landmann, 175–176. 75 Stälin, Wirtembergische Geschichte, vol. 4, 813. 76 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 115; and Spittler, Geschichte Wirtembergs unter der Regierung der Grafen und Herzoge, 186–187.

58

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

intemperance. His privy councilor Jäger, who is claimed to have been the most influential man at court during Duke Ludwig’s reign,77 expressed the most direct characteristic criticism when he noted that the duke hardly knew the meaning of the word sobriety because of his constant drunkenness which sent him to his early death. Jäger claimed to have warned the duke that if he continued his drinking, it would make him incapable of begetting offspring, and thereby indirectly also claimed to know the reason why the duke never had an heir.78 The nobility experienced few confrontations with the duke under Ludwig’s reign, his councilors enjoyed some degree of freedom, and the leading theologians experienced increased significance as an established influential group.79 It was also claimed that Ludwig was loved by his people who appreciated his friendliness and mildness in a way that let them forget his mistakes and shortcomings.80 This was also emphasized in the letter of condolence Emperor Rudolf sent on the occasion of his death, which noted that Ludwig’s subjects knew the duke more as a father than a lord.81 These different characterizations of Duke Ludwig support the view that Osiander had an especially privileged position at his court. Not only was he tied to the duke personally through his pastoral service for him, but probably also enjoyed the same freedom as the other councilors, perhaps with some more attention from the duke since he was responsible for an area of government which interested Ludwig greatly. The conflict which arose between Osiander and Duke Ludwig’s successor, Duke Friedrich, confirms this impression of Osiander’s role at court under Duke Ludwig as influential and relatively free.

2.4 Lucas Osiander and Duke Friedrich Friedrich was the nephew of Duke Ludwig and came to power in Württemberg when Duke Ludwig died childless. He had partly been brought up together with Ludwig at the court in Stuttgart, where Duke Christoph made sure he was given a proper education at the academy in Tübingen. His schooling let him learn both Latin and French and brought him on visits to numerous foreign courts both within the Empire and outside it.82 Already as a young man his gifts had been ap77 Ehmer,

“Württemberg”, 183; and Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 120. Geschichte Wirtembergs unter der Regierung der Grafen und Herzoge, 185. 79 Sauer, Herzog Friedrich von Württemberg 1557–1608, 97; and Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 115. 80 Johann Gottfried Pahl, Geschichte von Wirtemberg: Für das wirtembergische Volk, vol. 3 (Stuttgart: Löflund, 1828), 182. 81 Cited in Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 575: “Das die vnderthonen sein Landesfürst mehr für ainen allgemeinen Vatter als herrn erkennt vnd gerhüemt …” 82 Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 121; and Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 139. 78 Spittler,

2.4 Lucas Osiander and Duke Friedrich

59

parent.83 He was an active and ambitious man distinguished for his intelligence, good memory, and strong will.84 While Duke Ludwig had come to power gradually by being guided by guardians for several years before he was installed as ruling duke, Friedrich’s way to power was of a different kind. He had already ruled as count for twelve years in the county of Mömpelgart when he was installed as duke in Württemberg. Many claim that it was during these years that Friedrich developed his style of rule,85 and that there can be found thoughts characteristic for his rule in Jean Bodin’s Les six livres de la république which Friedrich hallowed to be published in 1592 in Mömpelgart in a German translation as Sechs Bücher vom Staat. The focus on the ruler’s sovereignty and power, and on him as the source of justice only limited by natural law and the Law of God, as well as the view that a land’s industry and commerce should serve the state, would be guiding ideas for Duke Friedrich’s style of rule in Württemberg.86 This style meant a considerable change from Duke Ludwig’s rule. In contrast to his predecessor, Friedrich was an activist more concerned with French political ideas than with Lutheran theology, and he was far less attentive towards theologians and counselors than his predecessor had been.87 Instead of a pious and cheerful duke who enjoyed drinking, a politician of power strongly opposed to excessive drinking came to hold court in Stuttgart and introduce a form of early absolutism in Württemberg.88 The new duke strongly opposed all limitations to his own power and therefore soon entered into conflict with the estates.89 His cosmopolitan court and the French bodyguard he brought with him meant that he was met with mistrust already at the outset of his rule.90 The estates viewed him as aggressive, wasteful, and lacking respect for the local way of life, and suspected he would be an unreliable protector of faith and constitution since he appeared not to be willing to let himself be guided by his court preachers.  Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 142. Herzog Friedrich von Württemberg 1557–1608, 97 and 112 and 114. 85 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 139. 86 Hans-Georg Hofacker, …“sonderliche hohe Künste und vortreffliche Geheimnis”: Alchemie am Hof Herzog Friedrichs I von Württemberg – 1593 bis 1608 (Stuttgart: Wegrahistorik, 1993), 10. 87  Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 121. 88 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 139; and Sauer, Herzog Friedrich von Württemberg 1557–1608, 97 and 108. 89 Friedrich ran into numerous conflicts with the estates during his reign and constantly tried to limit their freedoms. On one occasion he even tried to dismiss the entire Landtag. Werner Fleischhauer, Volker Himmlein, Ulrich Klein, Hans-Martin Maurer, and Paul Sauer, Geschichte Württembergs in Bildern 1083–1918 (Stuttgart, Berlin, and Köln: Kohlhammer, 1992), 95. 90 In contrast to his popular predecessor, Friedrich caused such aversion among his subjects that in 1598 he had to pass a prescript which forbade derogatory mentioning of any of his servants, many of whom had come from foreign courts to bring noble customs to the Württemberg court household. Paul Sauer, Von der Einführung der Reformation bis zum Ende des 17. Jahrhun­ derts, vol. 2 of Geschichte der Stadt Stuttgart (Stuttgart, Berlin and Köln: Kohlhammer, 1993), 44. 83

84 Sauer,

60

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

They demanded that he should repay the finances they had granted him, but the duke responded by refusing to grant the estates the freedoms guaranteed by the Tübinger Vertrag.91 The estates issued complaints against the duke for his efforts to restrict their freedoms and for his removal of dissenting prelates. The complaints were political complaints, but more than attacking the duke’s concrete politics, they attacked his view of ducal power.92 Despite his confrontational style, however, Duke Friedrich also entered into compromises and came to respect the constitutional basis of the country. He died before he could see his radical organizational changes realized and was succeeded by a more traditional ruler, and is regarded as an early absolutist intermezzo in the history of Württemberg.93 His rule still had obvious political consequences. His active economic politics aimed at providing him greater economic independence and involved investments in the mining and weaving industries, resulting in greatly increased incomes. This made possible strengthened fortresses and increased building activity in the cities as well as the establishment of a theatre and an orchestra at the court in Stuttgart.94 The new wealth made possible a display of power in accordance with his early absolutist ideology and style of rule, suiting the court of a duke who kept contact with the courts in France and England.95 It also made possible some territorial expansion.96 Aided by a grant from the estates, Duke Friedrich was also able to lift the rest of Austria’s feudal lordship over Württemberg and thus strengthen his position within the Empire.97 Within domestic politics, his reduced concern for peace and tranquillity and his willingness for confrontation meant reduced influence for the country’s traditional elites. Among them were theologians and elite preachers, such as those at court.98 Not only was the court preachers’ influence reduced, but so was their freedom. Though he did not put much weight on the court preachers’ words, the duke was still very sensitive to their criticism. The court preachers who had enjoyed great freedom under Duke Ludwig now had to choose the words for their sermons very carefully.99 The trustful relationship that had existed between court preacher and ruler under Duke Friedrich’s two predecessors seems to Herzog Friedrich von Württemberg 1557–1608, 108. “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 123. 93 Grube, Der Stuttgarter Landtag 1457–1957: Von den Landständen zum demokratischen Parlament, 273. 94 Hofacker, … “sonderliche hohe Künste und vortreffliche Geheimnis”, 12. 95 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 140; and Grube, Der Stuttgarter Landtag 1457–1957: Von den Landständen zum demokratischen Par­ lament, 273. 96  Hofacker, … “sonderliche hohe Künste und vortreffliche Geheimnis”, 12. 97 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 139. 98  Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 123; and Grube, Der Stuttgarter Landtag 1457–1957: Von den Landständen zum demokratischen Parlament, 273. 99 Sauer, Herzog Friedrich von Württemberg 1557–1608, 114. 91 Sauer,

92 Mertens,

2.4 Lucas Osiander and Duke Friedrich

61

have ceased.100 In his account of Duke Friedrich’s career, Dieter Stievermann concludes that when the duke transgressed Württemberg’s traditional Lutheran culture’s tranquillity and limitations, it led to conflicts with the estates.101 It is a view that confirms confession as interwoven with the organization of society, as expressed in the Landtagsabschluss of 1565, when the estates were accepted as co-guarantors of the country’s confession. The way theologians and preachers were affected by the changes brought by Duke Friedrich, confirms that preachers held a key role in the traditional organization which Duke Friedrich tried to overcome. When he appeared inattentive to his preachers and disrespectful towards non-conforming clerics, he also awakened mistrust among the estates. The change in Lucas Osiander’s career which took place with the change of ruler fits the description of Duke Friedrich and confirms that Osiander held an influential position at Duke Ludwig’s court. Already during the first year of Duke Friedrich’s government, Lucas Osiander was dismissed from his position at court and moved to the position of diocesan preacher in Stuttgart, allegedly because of his sharp sermons.102 In this position, however, the preacher’s distance from court might have been too short for the duke. When Osiander in 1596 was installed as prelate for the Adelberg monastery and became one of Württemberg’s four general superintendents, he was given an honourable position, but he was also, and probably just as importantly, kept at a proper distance from the duke’s court in Stuttgart. As prelate of Adelberg, Osiander not only became the head of the monastery’s school and churches, but also a significant landlord. The Lutheran prelates were servants of the duke, but also functioned as bailiffs holding jurisdiction within their area and administering hunting rights on their land. This function was reflected in the ceremony for their installation. As well as being obligated to respect and uphold church order in their area, they were also committed to steward the economy of the monastery, but with the help of an official appointed by the duke. The installation ceremony was conducted by the Landhofmeister, the highest ranking official of the secular government, and the diocesan dean (Stiftsprobst) of Stuttgart, the territory’s most prominent cleric. They were both representatives of the duke and in the ceremony they presented the prelate to those who were to become his subjects; school and church servants as well as others working on the property of the monastery, who all had to swear obedience to the new prelate.103 As prelate Osiander became one of the influential representatives of the Land­ tag. Therefore, instead of having rid himself of a troublesome court preacher, Duke Friedrich came to confront Osiander in the Landtag as a representative of 100 For court preacher Bidembach’s case, see Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorialstaat, 369. 101 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 142. 102 Hermelink, “Osiander, Lukas I”, in RGG1 4, 1069–1070. 103 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 328.

62

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

the estates. The concrete conflict between them regarded the question of whether Jewish settlement should be permitted in the territory. On this issue Osiander also fell into disfavour.104 Duke Friedrich wanted to promote trade and hoped the land would benefit from the Jews’ trade union which they had promised the duke would increase trade and bring prosperity to the land if they were allowed to settle. Jews had been banned from the territory since 1498 and the time of Austrian governance,105 but in order to increase his income, the duke now wanted to make a deal with the Jews. However, scepticism generally prevailed in the territory regarding the duke’s plan. There could be several reasons for this. The foreigners of the court had become symbols of the duke’s extravagant consumption of state finances and the Jews were probably suspected to have a similar result. The duke’s preference for alchemy was also well known and disrespected,106 and the Jews had a reputation for being involved in this activity and were expected to help the duke spend even more money on this purpose.107 On behalf of the estates, Osiander sent a letter of protest to the duke, where he not only mentioned the duke’s alleged weakness for magic, but also claimed that the Jews both disdained Christian religion and were swindlers who would turn the subjects of Württemberg into beggars. Duke Friedrich gave a temperamental answer to Osiander’s letter, demanding that Osiander should bend down to him and recant if he were to be forgiven for his disrespect. To this Osiander answered that the duke had rather decapitate him at his court or on a square than expect a withdrawal, for he had written his letter out of his conscience and out of love for the Lord of his soul.108 As a result of the confrontation, Osiander was deprived of the right to live in his house and had to leave the territory and settle in Esslingen, which, though positioned only a few kilometres outside Stuttgart, was out of reach for the duke as a free imperial city. Afterwards the duke discretely restored Osiander by installing his son Andreas in the office of prelate of Adelberg. The confrontation with the duke over the Jews ended with a victory for the duke when the Landtag admitted the Jews the right to settle, although on terms so strict that the Jews did not find it in their interest to come to Württemberg.109 Though this episode is linked to specific Württembergian circumstances, the fact that it was Osiander who as a cleric came to represent resistance towards 104 Wagenmann and Bossert, “Lukas Osiander, der Ältere”; and Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”. 105 Hofacker,  … “sonderliche hohe Künste und vortreffliche Geheimnis”, 12; and Martin H. Jung, Christen und Juden: Die Geschichte ihrer Beziehungen (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2008), 156. 106 Hofacker,  … “sonderliche hohe Künste und vortreffliche Geheimnis”, 14; and Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg”, 123. 107 The characterization of Jews as notorious swindlers and counterfeiters was a dominant theme in pamphlets at the time. See Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur, 148. 108 Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 70–71. 109 Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 70–71.

2.4 Lucas Osiander and Duke Friedrich

63

Jewish presence connects it to a pattern specific to the period. Thomas Kaufmann describes how Brunswick theologians played a similar role in a conflict with their duke in 1578. Duke Julius had proposed to allow Jews the right to engage in trade and commerce in the city, but the theologians, led by Martin Chemnitz, voted against his proposal. According to Kaufmann, the theologians’ way of acting was typical for the period. In their advisory opinion to the duke, the theologians referred to statements in Luther’s later writing on the Jews,110 and they based their argument on the same source as Luther, the popular and widespread book by the converted Jew Antonius Margaritha, called Der gantz Jüdisch glaub. The book had been published in 1530 and claimed that Jewish religious practice involved animosity against Christians. It described Judaism as a cult containing prayers cursing Christians as well as blasphemous contempt against Christ and the Christian faith. The book’s information was regarded as reliable and relevant and made the Jews appear as a threat to Christian society simply because of their religion. This point of view lay at the heart of the Brunswick theologians’ appeal to the duke. He should be aware that by tolerating the Jews, he would also contribute to strengthening the Jews’ awful blasphemous practice.111 His proposed tolerance would therefore threaten the uniform Lutheran church which the duke had strived to build with his contribution to the writing and acceptance of the Book of Concord, the theologians claimed. Kaufmann points out that the consolidation and confessionalization taking place in this period’s Lutheran territories seems to have brought with it an increased intolerance towards Jews. He observes that during the sixteenth century, tolerating Jews came to be regarded as un-Lutheran by many.112 Osiander’s arguments against Jewish settlement were partly economic and political, but they also had a religious component by mentioning the Jews’ contempt for the Christian religion, which placed the arguments within the theologian’s area of competence. It is an argument resembling those employed by the Brunswick theologians in a corresponding situation. The fact that Osiander regarded this understanding and description of the Jewish religion as central Christian knowledge becomes clear in his catechism sermons. Osiander’s view on Jews and their religion will be discussed in Part Two, Chapter 5.2’s analysis of his service as catechist in Esslingen. Here it suffices to point out that the conflict between preacher and duke over Jewish settlement had a religious core and therefore falls within the same pattern as the other conflicts between Osiander and Duke FrieKonfession und Kultur, 139. Konfession und Kultur, 140. 112 Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur, 141; and Thomas Kaufmann, Luthers “Judenschriften”: Ein Beitrag zu ihrer historischen Kontextualisierung (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011), 136–140; and Jung, Christen und Juden, 135–138 and 155–156. See also Peter von der Osten-Sacken, Martin Luther und die Juden: Neu untersucht anhand von Anton Margarithas “Der gantz Jüdisch Glaub” (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2002). 110 Kaufmann, 111 Kaufmann,

64

2. Lucas Osiander at the Court

drich, namely as a conflict between the duke’s power and the preacher’s area of competence and influence. The duke wanted freedom and authority to improve finances, and his openness towards Jewish trade followed naturally from this attitude. Osiander, on the other hand, insisted that true religion as administered by theologians should lay the premises for politics, and when it came to the question of Jewish trade, true religion should override the desire for prosperity.

2.5 Lucas Osiander as a Lutheran Pastor of the Pre-Absolutist Era Osiander’s changed role at court in the transition from a patriarchal and traditionally Lutheran duke to an early absolutist duke gives a clue to the interests Osiander promoted and represented as court preacher. He was well-integrated at court when he served a duke who respected the decentralized basis for power and who allowed his counsellors considerable influence. He was, on the other hand, a misfit at court under a duke who strove to centralize power and sought independence from and confrontation with the estates, and who expected counsellors and preachers to conform to his views. The changes that took place in Osiander’s career with the succession of Duke Friedrich to Duke Ludwig parallel a development observed by several commentators. Wolfgang Sommer has pointed out that in the time around the second half of the sixteenth century when Protestant territories in Germany were ruled by dependent rulers, court preachers filled the role as important mediators between different interests. With the rise of more independent rulers in the time around the Thirty Years’ War, court preachers went from being important political counsellors to becoming merely spiritual advisors.113 Luise Schorn-Schütte has described how Lutheran clergy in this first period saw themselves as a third estate in a way that gave them the right to offer other estates resistance, while at the same time being an integrated part of society. Since the imparting of social norms took place through them, they might be said to have represented contradicting values. On the one hand they were useful to secular authority, but they could also choose not to be useful and impede secular authority.114 Schorn-Schütte sees as common for Lutheran court preachers and clergy in this period a tendency to ally with the aristocracy against the ambitions of dukes seeking absolute power. According to her, the struggle of the clerics to balance the ruler’s influence on church matters was parallel to the nobility’s struggle to retain for themselves as many privileges as possible, especially those concerning taxation.115

 Sommer, “Die Stellung lutherischer Hofprediger”, 88. Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit, 456. 115 Schorn-Schütte, “Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit”, 298.

113

114 Schorn-Schütte,

2.5 Lucas Osiander as a Lutheran Pastor of the Pre-Absolutist Era

65

Osiander became a misfit at court under Duke Friedrich because he retained his old role when it no longer suited his surroundings and his employer. He would not have viewed his role as simply reflecting his employer’s interests and expectations. When he had been influential at court under Duke Ludwig, it was not primarily because of his abilities to promote the duke’s interests, but just as much because Ludwig respected the church and the theology Osiander represented as one of the pillars upholding his government.116 With the obvious exception of Duke Ludwig’s own funeral sermon, the sermons that are to be analyzed in the next chapter were all presented during Duke Ludwig’s reign. It is reasonable to presume that Osiander in these sermons sees himself not simply as representing the duke’s interests, but more importantly as a representative of the church and theology upon which the duke should base his rule while relying on the duke as its foremost protector. They are sermons preached in a time when the duke by respecting his court preacher showed that he supported true religion and respected the compromise between duke and estate which was fundamental for the territory’s constitution.

116 This way of describing Osiander’s self-understanding as a preacher conforms with a tendency among Lutheran preachers described by Thomas Kaufmann. While well-integrated into the secular governments of confessional states, they could still frequently enter into conflict with secular authority due to their role as authoritative interpreters of God’s word. Kaufmann, “Lutherische Predigt im Krieg und zum Friedensschluß”, 245.

Chapter 3

Funeral Sermons Presenting funeral sermons on important occasions was among Osiander’s tasks as court preacher. In the funeral sermons, it is possible to study in detail the court preacher’s role as both the duke’s servant and at the same time a free theologian and church representative, negotiating the duke’s influence with other interests in society. Confessionalization theory gives a valuable focus to the analysis of the court preacher’s role in these sermons. It states that because of the synergy that arose when religious and political interests met, religious formation was also a political and social formation in this period. By this synergy, religious formation contributed not only to social discipline, but also to social and political integration.1 An example of religion’s potential for social and political integration was shown in the previous chapter’s account of confession as that which formed the bond between duke and estates. When seen in this perspective, the funeral sermons may be analyzed as a result of the preacher’s weighing the duke’s interest in disciplining his subjects and securing his authority against the church’s interest in forming congregants to true faith and securing its own position.The form and function of the funeral sermon genre makes it especially suitable for this kind of investigation. For the theologians, the genre’s primary purpose was to promote the Christian faith and way of life as well as a secure hope of salvation to congregants facing death. For the audience, the foremost concern was to be comforted and assured of the deceased’s salvation and to have his or her honour confirmed. The genre of the funeral sermon lets these interests meet in its composition. The interests of the preacher representing church doctrine met those of the audience, of whom the next of kin were the most important and which on several occasions included the territory’s highest secular authority, the duke. A special trait of the Lutheran funeral sermon genre was the emphasis on the biography of the deceased as part of the sermon and as presenting his or her official memory. The biography was constructed in cooperation with the next of kin and presented by the preacher, and it was meant to serve the sermon genre’s primary purposes of promoting true faith and a Christian life and, as far as possible, also comforting the bereaved and confirming the honour of the deceased. In this way the funeral sermon involved a formative activity and a pedagogical activity resembling the one that has been discussed under the concept “collective 1 See

Introduction, section 1.

68

3. Funeral Sermons

memory”. It was a pedagogical activity which entailed a negotiation of a common memory intended to guide individual memory and to promote certain values. One could claim that the funeral sermon was a medium mediating between collective and collected memory, presenting a version of the past that brought with it values and norms and concepts for identity, and influencing listeners’ and readers’ view of truth and of how one should remember. Theories on collective memory claim that negotiations about the form of media hold social and political relevance. For the funeral sermon’s part, such negotiations may be traced in the funeral sermon’s composition and in how the individual funeral sermons utilized genre conventions.2 In order to be able to trace these socially and politically relevant negotiations, it is necessary to take a closer look at the funeral sermon genre before turning to the concrete sermon analysis. By discussing the funeral sermon genre in its theological and rhetorical context both as a memorial object and as a ritual, this chapter aims at establishing premises for an analysis of Osiander’s role as the duke’s funeral preacher and of the religious instruction it involved.

3.1 A Survey of the Funeral Sermon Genre 3.1.1 The Funeral Sermon as a Textual Object In Lucas Osiander’s time the funeral sermon as a text in a booklet was meant to document the funeral as it had been held. It may therefore be seen as a window into a ritual practice. However, the text itself also conducted pedagogical operations.3 It did so because of its composition, which appended a short biography of the deceased to an edifying sermon on a biblical text. The sermon preached a biblical truth, but it employed the deceased’s biography to exemplify this truth. The shape of the biography was formed by its function in the sermon, and therefore the funeral sermon might be said to form the life of the deceased into an example of a biblical truth. This formative quality lent the funeral sermon a double function of both memorial object and edifying literature. Since it gave the deceased the honour of 2 Cf.

Introduction, section 3. doubts if the printed funeral sermons are always accurate accounts of the funeral sermon as it was presented in the funerals. Cornelia Niekus Moore, Patterned Lives, 109 and 115. In the funeral sermons of Lucas Osiander that will be analyzed in this chapter, however, it is an explicit and important point that they document the funeral sermon as it was presented in the funeral, and that the printed funeral sermon is a documentation of what took place in the funeral. This is especially the case in the booklet containing the funeral sermons for Duke Ludwig, where its connection to the concrete event is of great concern. The sermons might have been improved before they were printed, but it is very unlikely that the funeral sermon should have been presented without a manuscript which could form the basis for the printed version. See Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten. 3 Moore

3.1 A Survey of the Funeral Sermon Genre

69

being someone religiously important, funeral sermons were valued as small and mobile monuments by the next of kin. By testifying to the deceased’s identity as belonging to those who will rise to eternal life, they were memorial objects with a comforting and reassuring quality.4 At the same time, the funeral sermon was also well suited to be edifying literature for a wider audience. It presented an example to be followed, at least in the way it had expressed true faith, and this example would have been impressive also to a wider audience as a worldly life tied authoritatively to a world beyond.5 Since the preacher wrote and presented the funeral sermon, the sermon was the preacher’s product. Still, the preacher was not the only agent in the formative activity taking place in the funeral sermon. In the process of composing the funeral sermon, the preacher depended on the cooperation of the next of kin. They would gather, perhaps with the help of the local teacher, and present the material on which the preacher should base the biography, and they would often suggest a suitable biblical text for the sermon and could even have an informal right to approve the final sermon.6 This double origin of the funeral sermon is reflected in its use. When the sermons were published as small booklets, the family of the deceased would carry the printing costs and would treasure them as memorial objects in their homes and send them as gifts to relatives and other contacts. Since the printing costs for the funeral sermon normally had to be covered by the family of the deceased, there are very few funeral sermons preserved for people of limited means, but 4 Eberhard Winkler, “Zur Motivation und Situationsbezogenheit der klassischen Leichenpredigt”, in Leichenpredigten als Quelle historischer Wissenschaften: Erstes Marburger Personal­ schriftensymposion, Forschungsschwerpunkt Leichenpredigten, ed. Rudolf Lenz (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1975), 54. 5 Moore, Patterned Lives, 13 and 27–30. Moore cites Philipp Hahn, cathedral preacher in Magdeburg, from his funeral sermon for Barthold Huenicke (1542–1603), Die neunde Leich­ predigt: “Denn die Leichbegegnisse / Klag und Trawerpredigten uber de Verstorbenen / haben den heilsamen Nutzen und Vortheil vor andern Cermonien und Predigten in der Kirchen / das sie mehr afficieren und neher zu Hertzen gehen / indem sie gleichsam im Werck für Augen fürstellen was sonst mit Ohren geredt wird / Also / das wann man eine Leichpredigt thut / und mittlerzeit die Leich unter der Cantzel nieder setzet / so hören wir gleichsem … den Verstorbenen selbst aus dem Sarg herfür predigen unnd sagen: hodie mihi, cras tibi, Heut ists an mir / Morgen an dir / das ist so viel gesagt: gleich wie ich gestorben bin / also mustu auch sterben … Solche gegenwertige Exempel und Predigten treffen das Hertz / und bewegen dennoch manchen Menschen / das in sich schlegt / sein vorstehendes Stündlein bedencket / sein Leben bessert / und die hoffnung der frölichen Aufferstehung / zum seligen Abschied bereitet / und getrost ist”. See also Winfried Zeller, “Leichenpredigt und Erbauungsliteratur”, in Leichenpredigten als Quelle historischer Wissenschaften: Erstes Marburger Personalschriftensymposion, Forschungsschwer­ punkt Leichenpredigten, ed. Rudolf Lenz (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1975), 66–89; Winkler, “Zur Motivation und Situationsbezogenheit der klassischen Leichenpredigt”, 67; and Rudolf Mohr, “Der Tote und das Bild des Todes in den Leichenpredigten”, in Leichenpredigten als Quelle historischer Wissenschaften: Erstes Marburger Personalschriftensymposion, Forschungsschwer­ punkt Leichenpredigten, ed. Rudolf Lenz (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1975), 103. 6 Moore, Patterned Lives, 82–84.

70

3. Funeral Sermons

funeral sermons were probably presented for them as well, since church laws described the funeral sermon as an obligatory part of a Lutheran funeral.7 Sometimes ambitious or outstanding preachers would themselves carry the printing costs and use funeral sermons as parts of collections of sermons they would sell to a wider audience as edifying literature and as proofs of their preaching skills.8 These funeral sermons could be purchased by people who might have had little knowledge of the deceased, but who were attracted by the edifying potential of an account of a person’s way to salvation.9 During the genre’s 150 years’ lifespan in Germany, beginning in the middle of the sixteenth century, funeral sermons were the most popular of literary genres in the Lutheran part of the world. In private and public collections in Germany, more than 220,000 funeral sermons are preserved.10 They developed from modest publications in octavo format, as was customary in the time of Lucas Osiander, when it was an undisputed and important religious genre. Later they developed into luxurious showpieces in folio format, a form which, together with the pietistic demand for authentic piety and a growing distrust in the authority of the preacher among the higher circles of society, led to the dissolution of the genre in the beginning of the eighteenth century.11 Lucas Osiander’s funeral sermons are outstanding examples of the genre as it manifested itself at the end of the sixteenth century, not only because they portray people of great significance and reach a wide audience, but also because they were exemplary sermons by an influential preacher who was one of the learned homilists of his time. Osiander promoted a traditional disposition inherited from Melanchthon in ordering the sermon in the sequences exordium, narratio, propositio, explicatio or epilogus. To these parts he added a fifth part, namely comfort.12 Another trait, however, appears far more important for the composition of a funeral sermon. The most prominent aspect of the funeral sermon’s composition is the way the biblical sermon is tied to the biography. As with most of his contemporary funeral preachers,13 Osiander does this by  7 Moore, Patterned Lives, 104–105; and Theodor Eisenlohr, Sammlung der württember­ gischen Kirchen-Geseze, pt. 1: Enthaltend die erste Reihe der Kirchen-Geseze vom Jahre 1418 bis zum Jahr 1802 = vol. 8.1 of Vollständige, historisch und kritisch bearbeitete Sammlung der württembergischen Gesetze, ed. A. L. Reyscher (Tübingen: Fues, 1834), 58–59; and Sabine Arend, Baden-Württemberg II: Herzogtum Württemberg = vol. XVI/2 of Die evangelischen Kirchen­ ordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts, ed. Eike Wolgast and Gottfried Seebass (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), 121 and 274.  8 Moore, Patterned Lives, 111–112.  9  For a discussion on the funeral sermon as edifying literature, see Zeller, “Leichenpredigt und Erbauungsliteratur”. 10  Moore, Patterned Lives, 13. 11 Moore, Patterned Lives, 277–282. 12 Sabine Holtz, Theologie und Alltag, 45. See also Introduction of this book and Lucas Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 37–43. 13 Moore, Patterned Lives, 97 and 27.

3.1 A Survey of the Funeral Sermon Genre

71

placing the biography at the end as the sermon’s conclusion, but the deceased and his or her biography is often also included in other parts of the sermon. The circumstances surrounding a particular death may be mentioned at the outset of the sermon, stating the reason for being gathered and the motivation behind a particular sermon. It may also be mentioned during the narratio part as the reason for the choice of text, and it may be referred to by the indication of similarities between text and biography. In the propositio it may be referred to the aspects of the departed’s life or the circumstances of death that are tied to specific dogmatic themes. The actual formation of a person into an example, and therefore the most obviously pedagogical operation of the sermon, takes place in the biography which concludes the biblical sermon. Also, the biography is composed of several set parts, the most important of which is the account of a peaceful and blessed death and the testimony of the deceased’s faith and the salvation following thereof.14 The instructions Lucas Osiander offers in his own homiletics concerning the speech genre genus demonstrativum might be seen as relevant principles for the composition of the funeral sermon’s biography. This speech genre is intended for speeches that present someone as laudable or blameworthy,15 and Osiander advises his reader to use the genre soberly and stick to the facts in presentations of a person’s deeds. One should always take the circumstances surrounding a life into account, and one should always search in the Bible to decide how someone is to be presented.16 Still, the shape of the biography would have been most strongly influenced by the theological framework surrounding the funeral sermon and by its intended edifying function. The main intention of a Lutheran funeral sermon was not only to encourage a Christian life, but to preach the mercy, comfort, and hope connected to true faith. Therefore, if an account of the deceased’s life should have a place in a sermon, it had to end positively. The fact that exemplary lives had to end with salvation and blessing challenged the funeral preacher to balance the edifying and the credible in his exposition of the deceased’s life. To be edifying, the biography had to portray a life that was compatible with an exemplary faith, but for this rhetoric to do its work in an audience and a circle of readers who may have known the deceased while alive, and who may have heard other accounts of him or her, the exemplary life also had Patterned Lives, 27–28. De ratione concionandi, 29: “Res enim laudamus, quæ sunt honestæ, vtiles, iucundæ, &c. Et eas vituperamus, quæ sunt inhonestæ, perniciosæ …” Melanchthon also saw biographical speeches as part of the genus demonstrativum, see Moore, Patterned Lives, 36. 16 Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 30: “Et cum facta diligenter describere volumus, recensemus ferè has Circumstantias: Quid factum sit, quis fecerit, vbi, quibus auxilijs, cur, quando, quomodo, factum sit … Sed rursus monendi sunt iuniores, ne singulas has circumstantias, aut omnes hos locos inuentionis in textu Biblico quærant, eas enim elegit Spiritus Sanctus quæ ipsi ad rem præsentem commodæ sunt visæ.” 14 Moore,

15 Osiander,

72

3. Funeral Sermons

to be a real life and resemble the life as it was remembered by others.17 Present in the funeral sermons is therefore the preachers’ careful inclusion and omission of elements in the life of the departed and a choice of perspective and emphasis which let a real and recognizable life end in eternal bliss. Though it is intimately connected to Lutheran culture and practice, this set form of the genre was probably not firstly a result of conscious theological consideration. Luther had replaced the requiem mass with a service that had a vernacular sermon as its main component. The sermon should treat a biblical text suited to enforce hope of resurrection. Gradually, as was the case in Luther and Melanchthon’s funeral for Elector Friedrich18 and in Bugenhagen and Melanchthon’s funeral for Luther,19 a second speech which commemorated the life and work of the deceased had been added to the biblical sermon. In both cases the second speech had been delivered by Melanchthon, who was not an ordained priest and therefore did not give regular sermons. This second speech continued the tradition of giving memorial speeches about the deceased, the socalled oratio funebris which honoured a life’s achievements, and it was intended as something different from the regular sermon’s preaching of the biblical truth and faith.20 The separation between the two forms of funeral speech was not as clear as it might seem, however. The biblical sermons of Luther and Bugenhagen have numerous references to the deceased and relate their message to the biography of the deceased, even though their sermons contain no formalized biography. In the following years the two different forms of speech would merge to become the Lutheran funeral sermon. Initially, Lutheran preachers combined the biblical sermon and the biography in several possible ways, but the solution of appending the biography as the conclusion of the funeral sermon eventually became dominant.21 With the popularity of the genre in Lutheran areas, there arose a demand for it also within Catholic territories, but Catholic authorities made conscious efforts to prevent the genre from spreading. In 1567, the Synod of Konstanz forbade funeral sermons if a written manuscript for the sermon had not been approved 17 Winkler, “Zur Motivation und Situationsbezogenheit der klassischen Leichenpredigt”, 57. Moore sees that the solution for the preachers was to praise what was praiseworthy in a deceased’s life and to omit and leave to God that was not. If someone’s entire life had been a desert of sin, one should rather preach God’s goodness; Moore, Patterned Lives, 38. 18 Winkler, “Zur Motivation und Situationsbezogenheit der klassischen Leichenpredigt”, 61; and Moore, Patterned Lives, 94. See also Philipp Melanchthon, “Oratio dicta in funere Friderici Saxoniae Ducis (1525)”, in CR 11, 90–98; and Martin Luther, “Zwo Predigt uber der Leiche des Kurfürsten Herzogen Friedrichs zu Sachsen: Anno 1525”, in WA 17/1, 196–227. 19 Bugenhagen, “Eine christliche Predigt / vber der Leich vnd Begrebnis / des Ehrwirdigen D. Martini Luthers” and Philipp Melanchthon, “Oratio in funere D. Martini Lutheri” (1546), in CR 9, 726–734. 20 Moore, Patterned Lives, 95–96. 21 Moore, Patterned Lives, 97. This combination of biography and biblical sermon is what separates the Lutheran funeral sermon from those of other confessions from the same period.

3.1 A Survey of the Funeral Sermon Genre

73

by the bishop prior to the funeral. Soon similar regulations were established throughout Catholic Europe.22 Numerous funeral sermons were produced in Catholic areas in the time following the Reformation, however, and Jesuits seem to have especially favoured the genre out of pastoral concerns.23 In addition, Catholic funeral sermons for prominent deceased persons, such as outstanding clerics, can also be found.24 The general rule, however, was that the funeral sermon should be omitted in Catholic funerals,25 even though the short homily following the reading was allowed to have a short reference to the deceased, though without undue praise of the dead.26 The reason for Catholic antipathy towards the funeral sermon might have been a wish to delimit their own practices from those of the Lutherans, as well as to secure church control with the selection of those who were to be praised as Christian role models. A more important reason for this reluctance was probably the original ritual context of the funeral sermon, which represented a clear break with Catholic piety. When the Lutheran funeral sermon honoured the deceased, it did so in a funeral directed at a congregation aware that nothing could be done for the dead after his or her death. The Catholic 22 Friedhelm Jürgensmeier, “Leichenpredigt in der katholischen Begräbnisfeier”, in Leichen­ predigt als Quelle historischer Wissenschaften: Erstes Marburger Personalschriftensymposion, For­ schungsschwerpunkt Leichenpredigten, ed. Rudolf Lenz (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1975), 132–133. 23 Mendicant friars were permitted to give funeral sermons; Jürgensmeier, “Leichenpredigt in der katholischen Begräbnisfeier”, 129. 24 Jürgensmeier, “Leichenpredigt in der katholischen Begräbnisfeier”, 136. 25 Jürgensmeier, “Leichenpredigt in der katholischen Begräbnisfeier”, 140. 26 Birgit Boge and Ralf Georg Bogner have tried to show that the Leichpredigt may have been an equally important Catholic genre as a Lutheran one by pointing out that the Catholic source material has been relatively unavailable and scarcely catalogued. They state that its significance and frequency therefore are unsettled, but that the strict regulations against it are signs of how widespread it was; Birgit Boge and Ralf Georg Bogner, “Leichenpredigtforschung auf Abwegen? Zu den Gründen für die bisherige Ignoranz gegenüber einer Gattung frühneuzeitlicher katholischer Gebrauchsliteratur”, in Oratio funebris: Die katholische Leichenpredigt der frühen Neu­ zeit, ed. Birgit Boge and Ralf Georg Bogner, Chloe: Beihefte zum Daphnis 30 (Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi, 1999), 4. Even though they have shown that there existed numerous Catholic Leichpredigten, they are unable to establish as probable that Leichpredigten were an equally important genre for Catholics as for Lutherans. From the perspective of this study, theirs lacks an awareness of the Leichpredigten’s ritual context, a difference of context which has been shown by Jürgensmeier, “Leichenpredigt in der katholischen Begräbnisfeier”, 125. Though Catholic Leichpredigten resemble Lutheran Leichpredigten, they differed in function since they were presented at the beginning of the service, before the main ritual took place, whereas the Lutheran funeral sermon in itself constituted the main ritual. Johann Anselm Steiger, “Oratio panegyrica versus homilia consolatoria: Ein exemplarischer Vergleich zwischen einer römisch-katholischen Trauerrede (Wolfgang Fuchs) und einer lutherischen Leichenpredigt (Johann Gerhard)”, in Oratio funebris: Die katholische Leichenpredigt der frühen Neuzeit, ed. Birgit Boge and Ralf Georg Bogner, Chloe: Beihefte zum Daphnis 30 (Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi, 1999), especially 130, seems to confirm that Lutheran and Catholic Leichpredigten are different genres and to support Moore in her argument that the Lutheran funeral sermon was a result of the merging of the traditional (also Catholic) oratio funebris (funeral speech or eulogy) and the Lutheran vernacular sermon based on a biblical text. Moore, Patterned Lives, 97.

74

3. Funeral Sermons

funeral, on the other hand, which from the thirteenth century included the requiem mass, had intercessions for the dead as its primary objective. The piety of the Catholic funeral expressed itself in a wish and an effort to help free the dead from remaining penalties for sins committed in life, and in this piety there was less room for a funeral sermon designed to comfort the living.27 Though the genre might not have been the result of deliberate theological consideration, the disputes surrounding it show that it was linked to theological and religious changes and embedded in a ritual practice. The disputes point to the special characteristics of the funeral sermon, and the genre’s complex origins testify to their great value as historical sources. In them one may study theological change and ritual change, as well as how both are connected with social and political processes. 3.1.2 The Funeral Sermon as Ritual The funeral sermon’s double function as memorial object and edifying literature indicates how memory was a part of its communication. The deceased was remembered not only to be honoured, but also in order to bring comfort and let readers and listeners learn from his or her example and be helped towards salvation. In this way the remembering which the funeral sermon facilitated involved learning how to live and how to relate to God and the world beyond. Thus, the preaching that took place in the funeral gave shape to memory and had the formation of believers as its objective. This remembering activity took place not only in the composition and reading of the funeral sermon as a text, but was an intended function of the funeral sermon’s original context, which was the funeral ritual. Berndt Hamm has shown that the Reformation’s change in the customs surrounding death and burial was also a change in memorial culture, and he described this as a change in the perception of the past.28 According to him, Christianity may generally be described as a community of remembering and hoping, since it is directed towards the future by anchoring its hope in the past, understood as the history of salvation. To tie the inner-worldly to that which is beyond by memory is a general characteristic of Christianity,29 but the way Lutherans did this in their funeral practice was different from how it was done in the catholic religion they had left. The funeral sermon’s portrayal of the deceased as an example of true faith and as someone safe and beyond the care of the living took place in a radically changed ritual. The sermon became the central and largest part of a funeral ritual designed to comfort and teach the living about Christian hope. At no point in the ritual were the 27 Jürgensmeier,

“Leichenpredigt in der katholischen Begräbnisfeier”, 127–128.  Berndt Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung: Jenseits‑ und Diesseitsorientierungen in der Memoria des 14. bis 16. Jahrhunderts”, Jahrbuch für Biblische Theologie 22 (2007): 197–251. 29 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 201. 28

3.1 A Survey of the Funeral Sermon Genre

75

dead addressed, neither with prayers nor with blessings, in order not to awaken uncertainty of the fact that his or her eternal destiny rested solely in God’s hands. In the requiem mass which had preceded the Lutheran funeral, care for the dead on their way through purgatory towards salvation was a main concern, and uncertainty towards death was a necessary backdrop. Included in this backdrop was an understanding of time which allowed living and dead to relate to each other in a caring community across the border of death. According to Hamm, this form of relationship between living and dead existed in a culture which remembered by keeping the past alive as something present and consequential, and which valued as worth remembering only what could be made present.30 Since everything that happened was remembered by God,31 it never really disappeared, but remained present in purgatory, heaven or hell. These places represented the active conscience of God, where He judged each human individually at the end of their lives, according to his memory of all they had done, and then imposed on them the appropriate punishment or reward. Therefore, everything that had been done in life was present in purgatory, heaven or hell even if one had forgotten the deeds that had caused this existence. Hamm describes the memory of the dead as a judging and diagnosing memory, which kept all the good and bad qualities of an ended life present, so that purgatory, heaven or hell came to function as memorial places. It was a punishing and tormenting or a cleansing and redeeming form of remembering. God was the main subject of this remembering, but the believers took part in it.32 It was a view on time and memory which also made remembering an important part of everyday religious activity. By forgetting, one risked entering the awaiting judgment unprepared, but if one made the past present by remembering one’s own sins in confessions and if one remembered the redeeming deeds of Jesus and the saints, one could stop the flow of time and get a share in the saving power of memory, a power which was just as useful as one’s own good deeds.33 This system tied living and dead to each other in the sense that it let them benefit from each other’s deeds. Deeds the dead had performed while alive could help the living, and the prayers of the living could help the dead. A mutuality of caring concern existed between the living and the dead, a system where “I give so that you shall give” (do ut des). The establishment of foundations was an example of how this mutuality worked, where a rich man or woman would establish a trust for the poor and needy so that those who benefitted would pray for them and they would be helped by prayers more effectively, since they were the prayers of the suffering and meek. All Christians were called to take part in the remembering of prayer and also the remembering of those whose name no 30 Hamm,

“Normierte Erinnerung”, 209. “Normierte Erinnerung”, 202. 32 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 203. 33 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 209. 31 Hamm,

76

3. Funeral Sermons

one remembered any longer. The suffering and poor had an especially significant and privileged responsibility for this prayer. They could thereby ease their stay in purgatory even though they did not have the means to establish a foundation for themselves. In the circle of caring remembering which effected grace and salvation, remembering someone always involved praying for their protection to Christ and the saints, in order that they pass on this prayer to the Father.34 Hamm states that in this religious practice, it was as if time on earth dissolved and contemporaneousness arose in which the saints and the living and the dead and coming generations could communicate with each other.35 When the Lutheran funeral sermon and its ritual collapsed this circle of remembering and care, it happened as an indirect, but necessary consequence of Lutheran teaching. Lutheran funeral ritual was intended to serve the new understanding of faith and the certainty of salvation belonging to it. Salvation could be certain because it rested not on one’s actions, but on God’s mercy, which was acquired by faith alone. Even though it had taken some time before Luther himself explicitly rejected purgatory,36 it should be regarded as basically foreign to Lutheran belief which saw faith as getting a share in God’s righteousness despite one’s own sinfulness. To ease death’s insecurity and threat was a major concern of Lutheran religion, and purgatory came to disappear from the Lutheran conception of the world. A part of the old motivation remained, though, since the Lutheran funeral sermon was not only intended to comfort, but also to motivate to a Christian life by reminding individuals of the finality of life and the grave consequence of dying without faith. Still, a didactic of hope and faith directed the composition of the Lutheran funeral and rendered intercessions and masses for the dead as undesirable, since they could weaken true hope and faith.37 The changed ritual thus enforced a Lutheran conception of faith and salvation, but also weakened Catholic culture’s community of living and dead and its experience of the past as present. Since everything was decided by faith, one’s eternal destiny, whether it be eternal salvation or condemnation, was decided already at 34 Hamm,

“Normierte Erinnerung”, 204. “Normierte Erinnerung”, 207. 36 Luther’s reformation started with the rejection of the church’s jurisdiction over the dead in 95 theses against indulgences in 1517, and continued with a rejection of all contact between living and dead in Vom Mißbrauch der Messen in 1521, before he completely rejected the idea of an intermediate state in Ein Widerruf vom Fegfeur in 1530. See Craig M. Koslofsky, The Ref­ ormation of the Dead: Death and Ritual in Early Modern Germany, 1450–1700 (Houndmills and New York: Macmillan Press/St. Martin’s Press, 1999), 34–38. 37  Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 236. On how the focus on hope of salvation also came to guide the selection of motives in Lutheran church art and make the Christ’s resurrection the dominant motive, see also Doreen Zerbe, “Memorialkunst im Wandel: Die Ausbildung eines lutherischen Typus des Grab‑ und Gedächtnismals im 16 Jahrhundert”, in Archäologie der Reformation: Studien zu den Auswirkungen des Konfessionswechsels auf die materielle Kultur, ed. Carola Jäggi and Jörn Staecker, Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 104 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2007), 129–130. 35 Hamm,

3.1 A Survey of the Funeral Sermon Genre

77

the time of death. Earlier this had been the case only on the rare occasion of the death of an extraordinarily sinful disbeliever or an extraordinarily holy person; all others got a second chance in purgatory. The concept of an individual judgment after death, sentencing to further punishment or reward, became superfluous. Instead, final judgment was anticipated in the faith or disbelief with which one had met death. Following these changes, death was no longer perceived as a transitional stage, but as a deep form of sleep. Therefore, Lutherans wanted their churches not to be places where the living and dead prayed for each other, or, as Luther stated, they should not be houses of mourning, but rather be regarded as sleeping chambers, and the sarcophagus be seen as a place to rest until God calls to new life on the day of the resurrection.38 The disappearance of the traditional system of mutuality changed the way the dead were remembered. When the dead no longer could offer protection from the beyond, they were reduced to witnesses of faith and role models. This change can be observed in Lutheran foundations. Trusts were still being established, but those who contributed to them expected nothing from the dead and were not expected to do anything for the dead in return.39 The dead were present among the living only as sleepers of a deep sleep from which they could not be woken. They were silently awaiting resurrection on the last day, a resurrection they, however, would experience together with the faithful congregants taking part in the funeral.40 In a funeral where one was isolated from contact with the deceased, the funeral sermon offered teaching, hope, and comfort to the bereaved, and it did so with the use of the deceased as an example of a saving faith. Cornelia Niekus Moore has described this as a transition from a situation where the living helped the dead with their prayers, to a situation where the dead helped the living with their examples,41 whereas Hamm sees it as more fitting to describe this change as a collapse of a circle of mutuality and as a transition to a horizontal way of remembering the dead. Still, Moore makes an important observation in noting that the Lutheran funeral sermons created a new form of religious examples. Connected to the funeral sermon’s way of producing examples was a new definition of what it was that should be regarded as exemplary in a person. It was no longer ascetic achievements or wondrous deeds. According to Luther, a person’s firm faith and 38 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 236. Hamm cites Luther’s foreword to his funeral hymns from 1542: “Demnach haben wir in unsern Kirchen die Bepstlichen Grewel, als Vigilien, Seelmessen, Begengnis, Fegfewr und alles ander Gauckelwerck, fur die Toten getrieben, abgethan und rein ausgefegt. Und wollen unser Kirchen nicht mehr lassen Klagheuser und Leidestete sein, sondern, wie es die alten Veter auch genennet, Koemiteria, das ist fur Schlaffheuser und Rugestete (Ruhestätten), halten.” See also Zerbe, “Memorialkunst im Wandel”, 122–123. 39 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 245–246; and Zerbe, “Memorialkunst im Wandel”, 139. 40 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 250. 41 Moore, Patterned Lives, 26.

78

3. Funeral Sermons

trust in God made him or her exemplary.42 The archetype should be changed from being exemplary lives with exemplary deeds to examples that witnessed a faith that could exist without impressive deeds, even though their description had to be balanced against practical and moral considerations and therefore in practice depicted relatively good lives. The changed function of the examples was accompanied by a narrowing of the selection of examples. They now had to be found among biblical figures and not in the rest of the history of the church. This restriction had the same reasons behind it as the ritual change. Since true faith was anchored in the Bible, it was also here that true religious authority and the reservoir of authoritative examples was to be found.43 But at the same time the selection of examples was narrowed, it was also expanded, since everyone who had the right faith, which turned out to be most Lutherans, could become examples resembling biblical examples. In accordance with the new perception of time, the biblical past remained different and at a distance,44 but across this difference a form of presence could still arise, resulting from similarities in the situations surrounding the biblical examples and contemporary examples and from similar responses to these situations. The distance from the biblical examples seems to have allowed a freedom to point out new examples. Typical of this tendency are the reformers who took the place of the apostles in Lutheran church art, and who were depicted in funeral sermons as new versions of apostles. They were connected to each other by having a share in the same history of salvation. Though they were separated by hundreds of years, the reformers’ situation resembled that of the apostles because they lived in a time with a clear division between followers and enemies of Christ. On both sides of the separating years, Christians were situated in a time before Christ’s final return, when Satan and the antichristian powers were to be conquered.45 The similarity of situation made it possible for the biblical examples to reappear as types in new moments of God’s history of salvation.46 Contemporary witnesses of faith could therefore take the shape of biblical examples.47 42 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 245. Hamm refers to Luther’s “Martyr Hymn” in Archiv zur WA, Bd. 4 (1985). 43 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 239. Hamm calls this a biblical centering connected to the soteriological centering of Lutheran theology. On biblicality as a governing rule in the Lutherans’ choice of motifs, see Zerbe, “Memorialkunst im Wandel”, 135. 44 According to Hamm, around the time of the Reformation memory goes from being directed towards the present time to being directed towards the past. He finds the background for this change of direction in the humanist movement. Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 233. 45 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 241. Leading clerics in the time of Lucas Osiander were also portrayed as new versions of apostles; see, for example, this chapter’s analysis of the funeral sermon for Jacob Andreae, who was portrayed as a new version of Paul. 46 Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, 240–244. 47 See, for example, the analysis of Lucas Osiander’s funeral semon for Duke Ludwig in Chapter 3.2.4.

3.1 A Survey of the Funeral Sermon Genre

79

3.1.3 Funeral Sermon Homiletics The aim of this short survey of the funeral sermon genre was to point out the conventions governing Lucas Osiander’s composition of funeral sermons. The section has described the formation of the deceased into religious examples as the most distinguishing feature of funeral sermon rhetoric. It was rhetoric with a religious origin. The Lutheran funeral avoided all concern for the deceased in order to reduce the fear of death. Instead it focused on preaching hope and comfort. Since it held that the deceased’s eternal destiny was settled at the time of death and that the deceased therefore was out of reach for human concern, the funeral ritual did not address the deceased, but focused on a preaching that could strengthen the faith of those present in the funeral. In absence of the deceased, the funeral sermon would teach and comfort the living by employing the deceased’s biography as an example of a life lived in a saving faith. The concrete method for reaching this theological objective was to tie a biography of the deceased to an exposition of a biblical text as its conclusion and actualization. The example rhetoric of the Lutheran funeral sermon followed some basic rules. First, the composition of the biography involved several parties, which sometimes was also the case with the choice of Bible text for the sermon. The next of kin helped gather material for the biography and let the preacher know their expectations for it. Neighbours and others who were expected to take part in the funeral also contributed to the composition of the biography with an implicit demand that it should be realistic and recognizable. Second, the connection to a Bible text guided how the biography was to be composed and what parts of it should be emphasized. The Bible text could provide a type as a key to the biographical account, so that the life of the deceased would emerge as a new version of a biblical person. This guiding could also work the other way, since the nature of the biography and the circumstances surrounding death would govern the preacher’s choice of biblical text. Third, the demand that the biography should fulfil an edifying function guided how the biography could be composed. It had to end by describing a blessed ending and a death in faith. Even though there are exceptions to this rule, there is a demand inherent in the genre that a life’s blessed ending should be the biography’s main perspective. There were different interests surrounding a funeral sermon, whether it was those represented by the preacher who wanted to impart true faith and strengthen the church’s position, those represented by the listener who wanted to be comforted and have the eternal destiny of his or her loved ones confirmed, or those of secular authority desiring order, loyalty, and trust. These interests could be met by the funeral sermon’s use of examples. They could be met in various ways, and a description of how and why they were met in a certain way in a certain funeral sermon is also a description of the funeral preacher’s pedagogy. This pedagogy

80

3. Funeral Sermons

may point out how the funeral sermon combined politics and theology, or social disciplining and religious formation. The genre had theological and religious origins, and it held religious consequences in the form of a changed pious practice in the face of death, an altered relationship to the dead, and a changed perception of time and authority, with an increased focus on the inner-worldly relevance of the memory of the dead. The deceased’s role as religious examples, however, point to an even more direct connection between theology and politics, for the examples were portraits not only of lived lives, but also of Lutheran faith. Therefore the examples were not simply conveyors of a pure faith, but also contributed to the shape and form of this faith in a way that differentiated between estates, gender, and educational classes. The examples could thus lend faith a social and political relevance. Within the funeral sermon genre, the court preacher stands out as a special funeral preacher, not mainly because he was a prominent preacher, but because his office was so closely tied to the duke’s reign. He presented funeral sermons for distinguished members of the duke’s family and for his important servants and distinguished subjects, and in the composition of his funeral sermons he often related to the duke as a next of kin or a part of the audience. This chapter will primarily deal with funeral sermons given for members of Duke Ludwig’s family or for his distinguished servants or subjects. The funeral sermons will not be presented chronologically, but rather according to a thematic logic. Since the relationship between church and secular authority and the combination of faith and politics is an important theme in this study, the funeral sermon for Duke Ludwig will be treated first and present a point of orientation for the rest of the sermons. The sermons for Duke Ludwig’s mother and wife will be presented next, followed by sermons for some of his servants, before the chapter ends with the sermon for one of the territory’s most distinguished preachers, Jacob Andreae. By analysing Osiander’s conscious use of genre conventions, the following section aims at describing his intentions, both how they were associated with a certain theology and a certain homiletical style as well as how they related to political interests.

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig The four funeral sermons for Duke Ludwig (born 1554, ruled from 1568– 1593) were published in an illustrated book of 120 octavo pages documenting everything that happened to the duke from his death bed to his burial. The process surrounding his death was worthy of a Lutheran duke. After a memorial service in the ducal chapel, conducted by Lucas Osiander’s son Andreas, one of two subordinate court preachers at the time, the duke was carried through Stuttgart, where the new duke taking part in the procession distributed charitable gifts

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig

81

to the poor.48 The procession lead to another memorial service in the collegiate church (Stiftskirche) of Stuttgart, conducted by the country’s highest ranking cleric, Diocesan Dean (Stiftsprobst) Johannes Magirus. Afterwards, the funeral procession proceeded towards Tübingen and the duke’s family tomb. On the way they stopped overnight at the monastery of Bebenhausen, where another memorial service was held by Prelate Eberhard Bidembach, the brother of the former court preacher Balthasar Bidembach. In Tübingen, Lucas Osiander conducted the funeral which was followed by a gathering at the Tübingen castle.49 During the two weeks from the duke’s death on 8 August until his burial on 24 August, four official funeral sermons were held for him by outstanding Württembergian theologians, but funeral sermons for the duke were also given in all other churches of the territory as well, and prayers were prayed and bells tolled in all villages where the funeral procession passed through.50 The ritual that was used for the funeral was fairly simple and similar to other funerals in Lutheran Württemberg, perhaps with an exception for the song from a choir of school boys led by the schoolmaster. After the bells had tolled and the congregation had found their seats in the Tübingen Stiftskirche, the boys sang the first hymn Mitten wir im Leben sind (While in the Midst of Life), before first court preacher Lucas Osiander held the funeral sermon and concluded it with a prayer. The boys then sang another hymn, Mit frid vnnd frewd ich fahr dahin (I Go There With Peace and Joy), while the dead body was put down in the grave. The congregation stood up while the body was let down, except for the widow and the other women, who remained sitting. At the end, the congregation left the church in the same order as they had entered.51 The simple ritual was in accordance with Duke Ludwig’s own church order, which for funerals took its regulations from the church order of Ludwig’s predecessor Duke Christoph. Here it is underlined that according to true doctrine the dead cannot be helped in any way, not with vigils, prayers, or offerings, nor is there any merit which may change the salvation of the dead. At the funeral one was requested to direct gratitude and respect towards family and friends, and wish peace and quietude for the dead. The funeral ritual was not intended to further the salvation of the dead, but to strengthen the faith and hope of those who had come to the funeral and who faced the horrors of death. By taking part in the funeral, they were given an opportunity to show the love they felt for the deceased and their faith in the resurrection. The funeral should serve the con48 In each of the districts, the duke’s officials were instructed to hand out 50 gulden to the poor, and in some of the cities they were instructed to hand out 100 florins. See Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, Vol. 1, 585. 49 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten. 50 Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, Vol. 1, 585. 51 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 157–158.

82

3. Funeral Sermons

gregation and not the dead since his or her salvation had been settled by the faith with which they met death and which it was too late to change.52 This ritual was very similar to the one which had been introduced with the Reformation in Württemberg. In his church order of 1536, Duke Ulrich promoted a revision of the old ritual for funerals and a cleaner ritual to replace “the many heathen and unchristian customs” which “up until now” had been in use. The ringing of church bells was still allowed, but not for the sake of the soul, only in order to let those who desired to do so gather to light candles and conduct a funeral. The purpose should be to manifest the public knowledge of the resurrection and to be reminded of death in a way that would lead to a Christian form of life. Only a simple ceremony was necessary for this purpose. When the dead body had been carried to the grave, the preacher or a helper should stand up and read from 1 Thessalonians 4 about those who died believing in Christ. He should then give a short instruction on death and resurrection, before the ritual ended with the Lord’s Prayer and the preacher saying the blessing to those attending, but not to the dead.53 More than this was not necessary for a respectful and ordered funeral. In this way the changes from a Catholic to a Protestant ritual were discernible in the Württembergian funeral. Whereas the Catholic funeral strengthened the community of living and dead and had the care for the dead as its main concern, death had now become so final as to leave the dead out of sight, at least in theory. The prayer was aimed at the bereaved and at those present in the congregation. The church order emphasized that the sermon, which constituted the main part of the ritual, should be edifying and instructive and deal with the Christian truths about life and death, but not with the life of the departed. The deceased was still very present at the core of the ritual, however, because of the funeral sermon. When Duke Ludwig died, funeral sermons were presented in multiple churches in the territory, as was the custom when Lutheran rulers died.54 Funeral sermons were not limited to the actual funeral, and the English translation of the German Leichpredigt is therefore slightly misleading. It was a sermon held on the occasion of someone’s death; it dealt with the life and death of the deceased and had the funeral as its main setting, but it was also presented on other occasions besides the funeral. The custom of conducting many services for a dead duke, as well as the custom of distributing charitable gifts to the poor on the occasion of the duke’s death, were remnant traditions from Catholic times when masses would have been held to aid the Duke and his transition to the next state on his way to final salvation, and the charitable gifts to the poor would have engaged the poor in prayer for the dead duke’s soul. By the time of Duke Ludwig’s death, his death had instead become an important occasion for teaching and edification.  Eisenlohr, Sammlung der württembergischen Kirchen-Geseze, 145–146. Sammlung der württembergischen Kirchen-Geseze, 58–59. 54 Moore, Patterned Lives, 215 and 220. 52

53 Eisenlohr,

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig

83

No return was expected for the charitable gifts handed out as the procession with his casket left the capital, other than probably gratitude and appreciation of the duke’s benevolence. Similarly, the sermons in the memorial services for the duke tried to transform the function of mourning and crying from taking place out of pity and compassion with the duke to expressing sorrow and even remorse over having lost a good duke.55 The religiosity surrounding his death was no longer related to the continued existence of the duke, but to the attitudes and feelings that should prevail among his subjects. The four sermons which constituted the official funeral sermon booklet for Duke Ludwig were given on different occasions and had different characteristics. The sermon given in the court chapel by court preacher Andreas Osiander, Lucas Osiander’s son, and Prelate Eberhard Bidembach’s sermon given in the monastery of Bebenhausen both had a friendly and comforting tone. In Stifts­ probst Johannes Magirus’ sermon given in the Stiftskirche of Stuttgart, the main church of the territory, and in Lucas Osiander’s sermon given at the funeral in the Stiftskirche of Tübingen, a more severe and admonishing tone dominated. 3.2.1 Court Preacher Andreas Osiander’s Sermon in the Castle Chapel Court preacher Andreas Osiander gave his sermon in the castle the fourth day after the duke’s death and to a smaller congregation of the nearest family and servants. During the previous days, the servants had washed, embalmed, and dressed the duke’s body with the clothes and jewellery they knew he favoured and had placed him in his room and watched over him. The next day they laid him in his wooden coffin with his dagger and shield before representatives of the nobility carried him into the court chapel, where they had placed him on stools in front of the altar. Here his guardsmen stood beside his coffin and watched over him, and here Andreas Osiander conducted a memorial service the following Sunday.56 Andreas Osiander based his sermon on the description of the human being man as grass in Psalm 103: As for man, his days are like grass; As a flower of the field, so he flourishes. For the wind passes over it, and it is gone, And its place remembers it no more. But the mercy of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting On those who fear Him, And His righteousness to children’s children, To such as keep His covenant, And to those who remember His commandments to do them.57 et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 36–37. et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 121. 57 Psalm 103:15–18, New King James Version. 55 Bidembach 56 Bidembach

84

3. Funeral Sermons

It is a sympathetic text which awakened recognition in its description of the frailty of man as well as hope in its description of the Lord’s mercy. Andreas Osiander used this description to show how Duke Ludwig and his subjects were tied together in a shared humanity. Since all men are weak and sinful, they all perish regardless of class or estate and therefore there is no difference between men in death.58 This teaches rich and poor alike that since they are made of flesh and not of iron, they should not love what is earthly more than what is heavenly, and that those who have received great gifts in this life should not become arrogant, for these gifts are perishable also.59 Andreas Osiander also pointed to the comfort contained in the Psalm’s description of man. As happens to the flower and the grass, man also dies and arises as God wishes him to. Even if the world were filled with devils, this would still not be decisive for whether one should live or die. Everything happens because God wants it to, and just as He lets flowers grow up again every spring, He will also let man arise from death.60 In Andreas Osiander’s brief funeral sermon there was also room for a short biography of the duke where the duke’s piety and the scene of death was described with compassion. Initially, the court congregation would see the biography connected to the biblical text by the duke’s frailty. This would also let them see the duke as connected to them in a shared relationship with God. In Andreas Osiander’ sermon, however, the duke not only resembled the frail flower dependent on God, he also resembled God the caring Father. According to Andreas Osiander, losing the duke had been to the servants like losing a caring father and being left as orphans, which was the worst thing a human being could experience. To the people the duke had been like a head of a family since he had provided for them both spiritually and materially and let them live under his grapevine and fig tree. The duke was described as father and his widow as the mother of the land, and the duke’s death made orphans of the subjects. For them, losing him is like losing a limb of one’s own body, Andreas Osiander said, or like feeling the heart melting in one’s chest.61 In other words, the relationship between subjects and duke had been similar to that between the grass and the Lord. The funeral sermon for the court household had a pronounced focus on family. In the familiar intimacy between duke and subjects, Andreas Osiander placed the duke somewhere between God and the subjects. He resembled the subjects in his human frailty and God in his fatherly care and providing for his subjects. As a human he depended only on God, whereas the subjects also depended on the duke in their human lives. The prayer concluding the sermon was probably the standard prayer written to be prayed for the duke around the territory and was probably used for the first time in this service. It aimed at redirecting the emoet al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 6–8.  Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 10–11. 60 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 12–13. 61 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 2–3. 58 Bidembach 59

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig

85

tions the sermon had evoked for Duke Ludwig as hope and trust and obedience to his successor Duke Friedrich.62 3.2.2 Prelate Eberhard Bidembach’s Sermon in the Monastery of Bebenhausen on the Night Before the Funeral On its way to the funeral, the cortege with Duke Ludwig’s casket stopped for the night at the monastery of Bebenhausen, which is situated just outside of Tübingen. Upon their arrival, Prelate Bidembach gave a short sermon to a congregation consisting of the household of the monastery, which would have included some clergy as well as the nobility accompanying the casket.63 Bidembach also wanted to bring comfort with his sermon and he also focused on the picture of the duke as a father. The biblical text from John 12,64 on which Bidembach based his sermon, deals with being a servant of Christ and was linked to Ludwig’s biography in order to show that the duke had truly been a servant of Christ. He had lived in faith and had had to suffer the cross and distress, but those aspects of his life also proved that he now rested with God.65 Bidembach concluded his sermon with a prayer different from that of Andreas Osiander. In his prayer, Bidembach, on behalf of his congregation, prayed God for help to be obedient subjects so that 62 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 21–22: “Laßt vns hierauff mit Mund vnd Hertzen eifferig vnnd andächtiglich also mit einander beten. Allmächtiger, Ewiger / Barmhertziger Gott / vnd Vatter vnsers lieben HERrn Jesu Christi: Wir bekennen demütiglich / daß wir deinen gerechten zorn / mit vnser vilfältigen grossen vndanckbarkeit / auff vns geladen / vnd mit diser vnd andern schweren Sünden wol verdient / daß du vns vnsern frommen lieben Landsfürsten / vnd Landsvattern / so früe vnd vnuersehens entzogen. Dieweil du aber nicht von hertzen die Menschen plagest vnnd betrübest / sondern dich wider erbarmest / nach deiner grossen Güte / Daher du vns widerumb ein Christlich Haupt auß dem Fürstlichen Würtembergischen Stammen / vnsern lieben Gnädigen Landsfürsten vnd Herrn / Herrn Friderichen / Hertzogen zu Würtemberg  … erhalten vnd geben hast: So bitten wir dich von hertzen / du wöllest mit deiner mächtigen Hand ob J. F. G. [Ihrer Fürstlichen Gnaden] vnnd derselben angehörigen / vätterlich halten / selbige schützen vnd schirmen mit deinem H. Geist / in allem Jhrem thun vnd lassen / regieren / ein fridlich / glückselig / vnnd langwürige Regierung verleihen. Auff daß wir vnder J. F. G. löblichem Regiment / bey deinem heiligen / allein seligmachenden Wort / vnnd reiner heilsamer Lehr des H. Euangelij / erhalten / vnd selbiges auch auff vnsere Nachkommen vnuerfälscht gebracht werden möge. Wöllest auch dises gantze Fürstenthumb / in deinem Göttlichen / vätterlichen Schutz vnnd Schirm haben vnnd halten / damit wir vnder vnser jetzigen Christlichen Obrigkeit / ein gerühiglich vnd stilles Leben führen mögen / in aller Gottseligkeit vnd Erbarkeit. Erbarm dich vber vns Gnädiger Himmlischer Vatter  / vnd erhöre vns deine Kinder / vmb deines lieben Sohns / vnsers lieben Mittlers Jesu Christi / willen. / So wöllen wir von dir nicht weichen / sonder dich zeitlich vnd ewiglich / vmb deiner Güte willen / loben vnnd preisen / Amen / Amen. Sprecht auch das H. Vatter vnser.” 63 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 138; and Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorialstaat, 7. 64 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 48: “Wer mir dienen will / der folge mir nach. Vnd wa ich bin / da soll mein Diener auch sein. Vnd wer mir dienen würdt / den würdt mein Vatter ehren.” 65 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 73; and Magirus, Leichpredigt, 48–74.

86

3. Funeral Sermons

they thereby may praise God in eternity together with Christ’s servant the duke who was now praising God in heaven. Similar to the sermon for the court household in the castle, this sermon also focused on the duke as a father and pointed to a community with the duke. Not only by being a servant of Christ may one be united in heavenly praise, but also by being a servant of the duke. The preacher presented the duke as an example and a role model as a servant of Christ. He was implicitly placed in the sharing concern of the household, underlining the bond between lord and subjects. He had a share in eternity because of his pious service, but he was also different from the congregation seated in Bebenhausen, since he was a servant of Christ in his own right, whereas the subjects served Christ by being servants of the duke. 3.2.3 Stiftsprobst (Diocesan Dean) Johannes Magirus’ Sermon in the Stuttgart Stiftskirche Earlier the same day, 23 August, the duke’s casket had been carried from the ­castle to the Stiftskirche, where Stiftsprobst Johannes Magirus had given his sermon before the congregation had accompanied the duke’s casket out of the church to the city gates, where a smaller group of noblemen, counsellors, relatives and friends of the family had formed a cortege to bring the casket to Bebenhausen and Tübingen.66 According to Magirus, a humble carriage would bring the duke to be buried and laid to rest with his ancestors in a regular funeral with little pomp and ceremony, as the duke himself had prescribed in his will.67 In addition to those later forming the cortege, the congregation at the memorial service in the Collegiate Church, which could seat up to 2000 congregants,68 would have consisted of a multitude of servants and citizens unable to take part in the funeral in Tübingen the following day. The congregation hearing this sermon was different than the smaller congregations in the Castle and in Bebenhausen and this resulted in a different choice of text and message for the sermon. The last chapter of the Pentateuch was the basis for Magirus’ sermon. Deuteronomy 34 describes how the people of Israel wept for 30 days and how rule was transferred to Joshua when Moses died and was buried. Magirus dedicated a part of his sermon to each of these incidents and connected them to the life of the duke and to the circumstances surrounding his death. The text tells that the death and burial of Moses happened according to the word of God. Magirus explained that this was also a general truth. Death is a basic condition of human  Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 137. et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 122. 68  Sabine Holtz, “Seid untertan der Obrigkeit? Stuttgarter Stiftskirchenprediger im konfessionellen Zeitalter”, in Tradition und Fortschritt: Württembergische Kirchengeschichte im Wandel; Festschrift für Hermann Ehmer zum 65 Geburtstag, ed. Siegfried Hermle, Norbert Haag, Sabine Holz, Jörg Thierfelder, Quellen und Forschungen zur württembergischen Kirchengeschichte 20 (Epfendorf: Bibliotheca Academica, 2008), 85–101. 66

67 Bidembach

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig

87

life occurring independent of personal qualities. The death of Moses confirmed that death is the way of all flesh (via omnis carnis), since Moses had led a good life and still had had much vitality left when he had died.69 The same held true for Duke Ludwig who had died young and with his vigour intact.70 The sermon’s coupling of biblical text and biography was probably intended to advance the duke’s good memory by refuting possible suggestions that the duke had died as a result of having led a dissolute life. Instead, this coupling of biography with the biblical text emphasized that, as had been the case with Moses, the duke had died because it had been God’s will to let him die.71 The parallel was also relevant for how the relationship between duke and subjects should be understood. When the people of Israel cried over the death of Moses, it was not out of empathy with Moses suffering death, but because they had lost a great leader, who had ruled justly, guaranteed true religion, and on several occasions averted God’s punishment on the people.72 The same was the case with Ludwig, who had also ruled justly, protected true religion, and been a mediator between God and the people in the same way Moses had been. The loss of him was therefore equally great as the loss of Moses had been to the people of Israel, and therefore the duke also ought to be mourned in the same way Moses had been.73 In this way it seems that Magirus tried to direct the function of the mourning away from expressing compassion for the deceased, as was appropriate in a Lutheran funeral genre using a didactic of hope. In Magirus’ sermon, compassion was transformed in a way that could fulfil a certain social function, so that the duke’s memory was able to serve an earthly usefulness. Magirus retold the testimonies about Moses being received by God in his death and showed how these testimonies also applied to Duke Ludwig and how they guaranteed that in death he also had been received by God in complete happiness, and that no mourning was necessary on his part.74 When the people of Israel had cried over the death of Moses, it had been to show the proper gratitude which they had failed to show him while he had still been alive, as well as in fear of what might await them after his death, for they knew that God sometimes removed pious men when he was about to punish his people, as had happened with both Lot and Noah.75 The mourning was therefore a delayed form of remorse for the grudge they had often met Moses with while he had still been alive. Magirus showed how this example applied directly to the congregation of servants and subjects gathered et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 29. et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 33. 71 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 29–34. 72 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 34. 73 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 37. 74 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 37. 75 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 36. 69 Bidembach 70 Bidembach

88

3. Funeral Sermons

in the Stiftskirche in Stuttgart. They too should cry over the death of their leader, not only out of empathy with his surviving family, but also to show remorse for the ingratitude they had showed the duke while alive and by this remorse express recognition of the duke’s death as God’s punishment for this ingratitude.76 Crying and mourning should not be seen as an expression of compassion, but as an act of penance, recognizing one’s sin and softening God. Thus the function of crying was adapted to the Lutheran conception of the relationship between living and dead and to the duke’s position as situated between God and his subjects. The sermon’s social function was rooted in the theology which was the genre’s origin, which altered focus from a community with the dead to focus on the inner-worldly relevance of the memory of the dead. In this case, the congregants’ compassion for the deceased duke was transformed to gratitude and remorse in a way that could form a basis for the transfer of power and loyalty to the new duke. The third and last part of Magirus’ sermon drew a parallel between Joshua and Duke Ludwig’s successor Duke Friedrich. Just as Joshua had been filled with wisdom because Moses had laid his hand on him before his death and the people of Israel had obeyed him, so also had Friedrich, a pious and God-fearing man, been appointed by Ludwig as his successor, and therefore the people of Württemberg ought to obey him just as much as the people of Israel had obeyed Joshua.77 This third part of the sermon would obviously have been the proper way to end a sermon marking the last farewell of the old duke with his capital. It was a sermon presented to help protect the capital from falling into anarchy or rivalry when its ruler left it and the cortege with the duke’s casket travelled towards Bebenhausen and Tübingen, as bells tolled from the churches and funeral sermons were held in all churches they passed on the route. 3.2.4 Lucas Osiander’s Funeral Sermon in Tübingen Having stayed overnight in Bebenhausen, the cortege with the Duke’s casket arrived in Tübingen at seven o’clock in the morning on 24 August, the day of the funeral, which was the day of St. Bartholomew. Entering the city, the cortege was received by the mayor of Tübingen and as they approached the church they were accompanied by Duke Ludwig’s widow and Duke Friedrich.78 The casket was left unburied on the church floor in front of the altar and the Landhofmeister, the master of the court and the territory’s highest ranking official, remained standing in front of the altar during the funeral.79 Lucas Osiander gave his funeral sermon to a congregation of officials and noblemen seated on appointed places, many of them with specific assignments et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 38.  Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 41–46. 78 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 139. 79 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 157. 76 Bidembach 77

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig

89

during the funeral; some of them would carry the casket to the grave and lower it, while the others would stand while it took place. In this way Lucas Osiander’s sermon had an even more public character than the sermon of Johannes Magirus even though it had a smaller audience. Its intention and function still resembled Magirus’, and the focus on the ingratitude and disobedience of the servants and subjects was even more pronounced.80 In the case of the duke’s funeral, it might have had a special meaning when the casket remained unburied on the church floor during the funeral service and when men in the congregation stood while the casket was lowered in the grave. The funeral sermon was in many ways the old duke’s last instruction to his subjects. In the funeral his people were confronted by the duke to receive his instructions one last time before his government was passed on to the next duke. The official interpretation of the public mourning over the duke’s death was part of this instruction. To comfort those present at the funeral was not as important a concern in this funeral sermon as it had been in the sermons presented by Andreas Osiander and Eberhard Bidembach. Rather it was important to let the congregants learn from what had taken place when the duke died. The premise for this learning presented at the outset of the sermon was common sense. Since God was a just judge daily threatening with sword and arrow, it was necessary to know what had brought such a punishment as the death of the duke on them.81 For Lucas Osiander, the fact that the duke had died so young confirmed that the duke’s death had been an act of God’s punishment.82 To enlighten this situation, Osiander chose a text, Psalm 7, about one of the kings in the Old Testament. In the psalm, King David prayed to God to be freed from the tormentors chasing him. David is surrounded by enemies sharpening their swords and threatening him, but he prays that the just God must protect him and let his enemies fall in their own trap. Osiander’s homiletic theory emphasized the need for the preacher to choose a Bible text for the sermon according to the situation surrounding his sermon.83 In his funeral sermon for Duke Ludwig, Osiander not only follows his own instructions by choosing a text suitable to the situation, but he also gives an explicit explanation of his choice of text. The reason for this choice of text, he explained, was the fact that Duke Ludwig’s untimely death was God’s punishment on the people of Württemberg. His death was a punishment resembling the one God had reserved for the enemies of King David in the text from Psalm 7, and the relationship between David and his enemies had its parallel in the relationship between Duke Ludwig and his subjects. Just as God in the psalm let the aggression of David’s enemies strike themselves, the grudge and disobedience that the subjects had showed the duke et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 122–158. et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 77. 82 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 95. 83 See Introduction. 80 Bidembach 81 Bidembach

90

3. Funeral Sermons

now came down on themselves, when God as a result had taken the good duke away from them.84 In accordance with convention, David was seen as the epitome of a just and pious ruler, and Lucas Osiander identified Duke Ludwig with King David as an extraordinarily good, pious, and moral duke as well as a competent ruler of territory and church. In respect of the truth, Osiander admitted that the duke may have enjoyed ample drink on perhaps too many occasions, but he had never done so out of ill will, but always as a result of his generosity and joyful spirit.85 This is an example of the art necessarily involved with the genre, namely the balancing of the credible aspects of an account against the edifying aspects. It was a necessary requirement of the funeral sermon genre to also mention the less favourable aspects of the life of the deceased, especially when they were obvious, which they would have been in this case. Many commentators mention the duke’s reputation for notorious drinking, and some of them mention this as connected to a lack of respect for him among his subjects.86 In a situation like this, a credible account would have been an especially important concern for the preacher, if his sermon were to reach listeners with what they would perceive as relevant learning. The genre’s requirement that the portrayal of the deceased had to have some degree of credibility to be able to function as an example for the living was especially necessary in this sermon, where the audience had to recognize the preacher’s presentation of their situation and be willing to learn from it. Though acknowledging the demand for credibility, Osiander’s sermon still gave an overwhelmingly positive description of a duke who had been good all through his life. He had been raised well by the legendary and pious Duke Christoph and his wife Anna Maria and had undertaken scrupulous studies of that which was necessary for church government and for the government of state.87 He had learnt languages and studied Holy Scripture and theology, and would have liked to become a preacher himself if he had had the opportunity.88 He had gained such knowledge of theology that he as duke was never mistaken in theological questions.89 Even when confronted with Calvinist and papist writings and persons, he had never been in doubt, but remained grounded in true faith.90 His steady prayer for a calm and patient heart had resulted in a mildness which, for example, had been evident on one occasion, when a subject had stepped on his foot without the duke making any fuss about it.91 Generally, due to his et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 76–94.  Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 87. 86 See Chapter 2.3. 87  Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 83. 88 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 83. 89 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 83. 90 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 84. 91 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 86. 84 Bidembach 85

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig

91

friendly speech to even simple people and his obvious concern for the needy, his subjects had loved him as a father.92 He had been passionately concerned with righteousness and had hated indecency, adultery, and other shameful vices, and had showed his chastity in his honourable conduct as a spouse.93 The portrayal and judgment of the duke’s character in light of his faith and piety fell within court preacher Lucas Osiander’s area of competence, and to present the public portrait of the duke as a Christian was one of his important tasks as court preacher. His portrait of the duke would have been composed in cooperation with the princely family. The fact that Lucas Osiander was the author and orator lends him the role of being a judge of character and morals. Here his judgment seems to have been carried out very much on the duke’s and his family’s premises. It is a portrait of the ruler’s character designed to suit the ruler’s interests. In Osiander’s portrait of the duke, his intemperance was overshadowed by other known qualities of the duke, such as his mildness towards his subjects. The accusation reported by some commentators that his intemperance had made him unable to beget an heir,94 was put in the background by the description of his devout chastity and his pious patience; the duke himself had grown to accept the fact that God had not intended for him to have an heir.95 The moral qualities which Lucas Osiander attributed to Duke Ludwig were qualities required of everyone, whether of high or low birth, but in Osiander’s portrayal they were not there to encourage imitation among the subjects, but as signs of the duke’s closeness to God. Lucas Osiander also described how the duke, as the territory’s highest ranking nobleman, had mastered the knightly skills.96 Here one may also sense an intention of rehabilitating the deceased duke in the implicit references to the accusations of a disinterested and absent duke97 and in the description of his efficient style of rule. He had made sure to give his servants the necessary orders even when out hunting and had never forgotten anything of importance, but had also made sure to never take up more of his servants’ time than necessary.98 Osiander proved the success of Ludwig’s style of rule with a reference to its results. Under his rule, fortresses had been built, attacks averted, and visitations in different parts of the territory had been undertaken when it had been necessary.99 As Osiander presents it, another important element for the duke’s posthumous reputation was his accomplishments as protector of the church. In his governet al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 86. et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 84. 94 See Chapter 2.3. 95 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 84. 96 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 85. 97 Chapter 2.3. 98 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 89. 99 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 90–91. 92 Bidembach 93 Bidembach

92

3. Funeral Sermons

ment, the duke protected true doctrine, supervised his clerical servants, and supported the education of clergy. With the export of Lutheran clergy to other parts of the Empire and with his diplomatic efforts to spread true teaching to other parts of the Empire, he had helped Christ’s kingdom unfold many miles outside of his own land.100 This was a point of the sermon where Osiander implicitly included himself as one of the theologians the duke employed in this effort. The portrayal of the duke, which covered all the important aspects of his life, became part of the sermon’s theological and pastoral message. With the background of this portrait, Osiander concluded that Duke Ludwig was not to blame when subjects disobeyed him. What had happened with Duke Ludwig corresponded to a common phenomenon for great rulers expressed in a saying by Philip of Macedonia: “Regium est male audire cum facias bene”, or, as Osiander translated it, “great lords often experience that when they do well, people speak ill of them”. The obvious reason for this phenomenon was that it is not possible to administer a large household without someone holding a grudge.101 Conflicting interests are presented as surrounding the duke’s biography, and with his account of them, Osiander sides clearly with the duke. The quote from Philip of Macedonia explained the situation which the sermon described as surrounding the duke, but it also supported Osiander’s portrayal of the duke. In view of this common phenomenon, the complaints and disobedience against the duke could not disprove the favourable portrait. In this way, the quote sharpened the sermon’s focus on an existing opposition between the duke and his subjects, who also happened to be the informed congregation which made up the sermon’s audience. As the sermon proceeded, this opposition between the one described by the sermon and those addressed by the sermon, corresponding to an opposition between sermon and listeners, created a dynamic interplay between ducal portrait and the interpretation of the duke’s death. The better Ludwig appeared when he was remembered, the more obviously his death was to be understood as a severe punishment on the people that had lost him as their ruler. Osiander explained the mechanism thus: When God wants to punish country and people severely, he first of all clears it of all noble, pious and eager people, since they, so to speak, stand him in the way with their prayers and pious lives and keep Him from punishing since he spares them.102

Osiander’s interpretation of the duke’s death as punishment allowed for a bio­ graphy where the descriptions of the duke’s benevolence and of God’s punishet al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 88.  Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 92. 102 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 94: “Dann wann GOtt Land vnnd Leut hart straffen will / so raumbt er zuuor fürneme / fromme vnnd eiferige Leut auß dem weg: dann sie stehen jhm ettlicher massen / mit jhrem Gebet / vnnd gottseligem wandel / im weg / vnnd halten jhn gleichsam auff / daß er nicht straffen kan: weil er jhrer darunder verschonet”. 100 Bidembach 101

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig

93

ment strengthened each other. The greater loss the duke’s death represented, the worse a punishment was his death. The more severe the offence which caused this punishment had been, the more reason there was for the subjects to repent. According to Osiander, the offence was that what the duke commanded was not respected, and what he did well had been maliciously dismissed.103 According to Osiander, the present situation and the dynamic interplay between subjects and duke, and now between audience and deceased, corresponded to the situation which King David had found himself in, in the psalm which was the sermon’s text. The sermon’s portrait of Duke Ludwig was designed to fit the psalm’s compact description of King David. Like David, Ludwig had been a just ruler surrounded by enemies, and God had punished these enemies by letting them taste their own medicine. Just as God would let the enemies of King David fall in their own trap, the people of Württemberg’s hostility had triggered God’s punishment so that Duke Ludwig had died. Though the duke’s death was a punishment on the people, however, it was not a punishment on the duke, for he died blessed and spared of all the worries and torments of this world.104 This perspective was strengthened by the insertion of another story into the general story of David and his enemies. This was the story of King Josiah in 2 Kings 22; Josiah was a well-known king of the Old Testament and established as a role model for Protestant kings.105 The parallel between the duke and King Josiah had also been mentioned in two of the other funeral sermons for Duke Ludwig, that of court preacher Andreas Osiander106 and that of Stiftsprobst Johannes Magirus.107 The use of the text about King Josiah and the interpretation of the death of the ruler as God’s punishment seem to have been fairly common in funerals for Lutheran rulers. Luther employed the text in this way in his funeral sermon for Elector 103 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 92–93: “… vnd  / vmb mehrers ansehens willen  / mit eigen Handen vnderschriben: in welchem Jhre F. G. [Fürstlichen Gnaden] das fluchen vnd schweren / die Fällerey / Vnzucht vnd Leichtfertigkeit / das vnnutz verschwenden vnnd schwelgen / grosse vbermaß in Gastungen vnd Hochzeitten / allzu köstliche vnd vppige Kleidung / mit grossem ernst verbotten: hat es doch (laider) bey dem grösten Hauffen so vil erschossen / als wann einer in ein kalten Ofen bliese. Vnd ist man in solchen Sünden (…) fortgefahren / gleich als ob man von solchen Gebotten vnd Befelchen nichts gewüst oder gehört hette. Da auch Jhre F. G. offtermals mit wolbedachtem raht / vnnd dem gemeinen Nutzen zum besten / ettwas guthertziger meinung fürgenommen / ist solches von vndanckbaren Leuten letz verstanden / vnd vbel gedeutet worden: also / daß Jhre F. G. wol hetten mit Philippo / dem König in Macedonia / sagen mögen: Regium est, malè audire, cùm facias bene. Das ist: Es geschicht gemeinlich den grossen Herren / wann sie recht vnd den Leuten guts thun / daß man jhnen darfür vbel nachredet: welches vnserm frommen lieben Herren seligen offt begegnet ist.” 104 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 82: “Jhren F. G. ist durch dises schnell abscheiden auß diser Welt kein schad noch vbels geschehen: sondern Jhre F. G. seind von allem vbel erlöset / vnnd in die ewige ruh eingangen.” 105 As was also seen in the negotiations between duke and estates in the Landtagsabschluss in 1565, when the reference to King Josiah had been of decisive significance, see Chapter 2.2. 106 Magirus, Christliche Leichpredigt, 9. 107 Magirus, Christliche Leichpredigt, 33 and 39.

94

3. Funeral Sermons

Friedrich the Wise of Electoral Saxony in 1525, and Polykarp Leyser, stepson of Lucas Osiander and a Saxon court preacher, employed the text similarly in a funeral sermon for Duke August of Saxony in 1586.108 Lucas Osiander would probably have met understanding in his audience when he claimed that it was no coincidence when Duke Ludwig had died at exactly the same age as the biblical prototype of a Protestant ruler. The story about King Josiah is the story about the king of Judah who rediscovered the Law and reinstated true worship after years of idolatry during the reigns of his predecessors. Yet, despite his great merit, the gravity of the sins of his people and his predecessors had made God’s punishment unavoidable. Josiah was allowed to die before God’s punishment hit the land, however, because of his piety. Thus, when Josiah and Ludwig both had to die in their thirty-ninth year, it had been the consequence of a parallel course of life. After having lived as pious rulers who protected true religion, they both had been saved by death from the punishment about to hit their peoples.109 This parallelism pointed to similar situations where the two rulers stood in the same relation to God and to their subjects. In this way, the story about King Josiah applied the story about David and his enemies to a situation where it was obvious that the ruler’s enemies were his own subjects. It involved the king himself in God’s punishing activity, since it was the ruler’s death which got the enemies caught in their own trap. They lost the good ruler who mediated between them and God and who protected them from God’s punishment. The image of the just ruler who died a blessed death was confirmed by Duke Ludwig’s death scene, which was described as harmonious and free from pain, and which involved all necessary confessions and expressions of faith.110 In Osiander’s funeral sermon, the deceased resting in the casket and the subjects gathered in the church were placed in a certain relationship to each other. The sermon made the dead duke part of the message of the Bible text from Psalm 7. The relationship between duke and biblical text also functioned the other way around, however, as the biblical text became a governmental instrument for the dead duke in his dealings with his subjects. The sermon made clear that the duke’s life had been an expression of God’s dealings with the subjects, since peace and true religion had been secured during the duke’s reign. Now it showed that his death was also part of God’s dealings with the subjects, namely His punishment of them. The change in the way attention was directed which resulted from the introduction of the Lutheran funeral sermon genre was a clear premise for the 108 Martin Luther, “Zwo Predigt uber der Leiche des Kürfursten Herzogen Friedrichs zu Sachsen. Anno 1525”, in WA 17/1, 196–227; and Moore, Patterned Lives, 220. 109 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 95. 110 Bidembach et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 93–94.

3.2 The Funeral Sermons for Duke Ludwig

95

teaching Osiander undertook in his sermon. Here it was not the congregants who were engaged to communicate helpfully for and with the dead. It was rather the deceased duke who communicated a message to the living. The certainty of the deceased’s salvation was a basis for this shift in the direction of communication and the foundation that made possible the transformation of sorrow and concern for the deceased into a teaching for the living. The same change as was observed in Magirus’ funeral sermon for Osiander also took place here. The principal overcoming of sorrow by the help of theological statements made possible a pure focus on the earthly usefulness of the deceased’s memory. It is quite obvious that Osiander in his sermon was not addressing the sorrow and sympathy for the deceased that the congregation might have felt. To the extent he stretched out to touch his audience’s feelings, it was to call them to feel struck by the dead duke’s example in order to remorse and repent. Since it was God who had been working in the life of the duke, the right way to relate to him had also been the right way to relate to God. Osiander’s funeral sermon was therefore a sermon urging a penance and amendment that should be lived in a trustful and respectful and obedient life as a subject of Württemberg. This intention appears even more clearly when the sermon in its final part turns to the future in a section which deals not primarily with the subjects’ relationship to God through the dead duke, but with their continued relationship to God. The final part of the sermon points to Duke Ludwig’s successor Friedrich as a proof of God’s mercy and compassion.111 It explains how God’s punishment may be averted if the people recognize their ingratitude, show remorse, pray for forgiveness, and improve. In this way religious conversion implies a conversion to the new duke. If it turns out that this conversion succeeds and God shows mercy and holds back His punishment, it will result in a long life with healthy days and a healthy government for the new duke. Thus, since the duke was God’s tool and since God’s blessings came to the territory through him, people and duke were united in a shared destiny. If the people were pious and penitent, the new duke and his family would live long, and land and people would fare well. The concluding prayer is the same as the one which was used in the service in the castle chapel and probably was the official prayer for the many funeral sermons to be held throughout the territory in connection to the death of the duke. By praying it, Osiander did what the sermon had urged. He confessed the sins deserving punishment, prayed for the duke and his family and for the territory, and he could therefore at the end ensure the congregation of God’s trustworthiness.112 Thus the funeral ended happily by reconciling the congregation with both God and the two generations of dukes.

111 Bidembach 112 Bidembach

et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 96–97. et al., Vier Christliche Predigten, 98–100.

96

3. Funeral Sermons

3.2.5 Concluding Remarks The funeral sermons presented by Johannes Magirus and Lucas Osiander at the official occasions marking the duke’s death, present their communications as part of a disciplining from above. Their support of the duke is without reservation, and they find nothing in the Bible texts or the theological tradition that can create tension in their use of the duke as an example in their sermons. In the way they smooth out both the duke’s biography and the biblical examples, they appear as very faithful to their secular ruler. However, there is also another aspect of their role as funeral preachers for the duke. For a preacher to be able to present the duke’s funeral sermon would also have been a privilege and an expression of a certain form of influence. In this role, they could present themselves as persons who could pass moral judgment on the duke’s character, accept his accomplishments as protector of church and religion, and identify a divine will behind the duke’s reign by recognizing ­similar situations in the Bible. This recognition took place according to a reading that was typical for the genre, namely by a typology which saw biblical types as corresponding to contemporary persons. Finally, they would present the duke’s message to those gathered in church. Thus, they could hold an instrumental role in the transference of loyalty to the next ruler. The funeral sermons analyzed in this part of the chapter were presented for a duke who gave elite preachers and theologians considerable influence and who invited them into the wider field of politics. The conflicts that arose between Osiander and this duke’s successor, Duke Friedrich, confirm that Osiander had held a priveleged position during Duke Ludwig’s reign. Because of these conflicts, we know that Osiander could not have presented the same type of funeral sermon for an absolutist duke. He would have been thrown out of court long before he would have gotten the opportunity to do so. The preachers’ ability to take on this role of moral judge in a ducal funeral rested on some religious preconditions. A changed way of relating to the dead which was inherent in the funeral sermon genre made possible the changed focus which characterized their preaching. Concern was directed from the deceased to the bereaved; instead of prayers by the living for the dead, the funeral focused on teaching the living with the help of the deceased’s example. The change involved a transfer of feelings especially useful in ducal funerals, where there was a pressing need to instruct those gathered and awaken their loyalty. By the way they utilized the genre in their funeral sermons for Duke Ludwig, Osiander and Magirus were able to promote a new and close connection between the secular and the religious sphere. On a theological level, this was done when faith was described in their sermons to assure others of the duke’s salvation and God’s presence in his rule and death so that his life could be a reminder of sin, promoting repentance to be lived in a loyal relationship to the new duke. On an organizational level this

3.3 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s First Wife Duchess Dorothea Ursula

97

happened when the preacher assumed the task of presenting the duke’s will and instructions, while at the same time he appeared as an important foundation for the duke’s power. It seems that Osiander had this role in the proceedings surrounding the duke’s death because of his role as the leading court preacher. The different mode of preaching seen in the funeral sermons presented by Andreas Osiander and Eberhard Bidembach confirms this view. The two sermons held for small congregations of those closest to the duke had the most in common with regular funeral sermons. They held biography and Bible text together in a way that promoted Christian faith and hope, since the deceased was presented as an example of a saving faith. Court preacher Andreas Osiander’s sermon given at the castle chapel to a small congregation of family and close servants emphasized the similarities between the listeners and the duke, and these similarities served to strengthen the community between the dead duke and the bereaved. It addressed a situation where there existed a caring community between the deceased, as described by the sermon, and the sermon’s audience. In this sermon, the duke almost became a role model for piety. Since the presentation of the duke’s piety confirmed his salvation, it also comforted those present by meeting their worry and confirming their closeness to salvation. A similar intention was present in Eberhard Bidembach’s funeral sermon to those accompanying the duke’s casket and to the representatives of the monastery household of Bebenhausen. The different characteristics of these sermons would hardly have been seen as contradictory when they were read in the same funeral sermon publications. They complemented each other as presenting different dimensions of the same person. The image they presented of the duke was compatible with the view that he had represented God’s rule in the land. In addition to having been a powerful ruler in his secular rule and as protector of the church, he was also a mild and pious man, a devoted husband, and a caring father to his subjects.

3.3 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s First Wife Duchess Dorothea Ursula After the death of Duke Ludwig, his first wife Dorothea Ursula, who had died ten years before him, was placed in a casket the duke had commissioned for her in the same style as his own.113 They came to rest beside each other as a couple in the part of the choir closest to the altar, in baroque monuments of alabaster elevated above the caskets of the other dignitaries in the tomb and surpassing them in adornment. Though the caskets of Duke Ludwig and Duchess Dorothea 113 Christoph Jedin’s letter to Duke Ludwig on 10 March 1593, “… dieselben dero geliebten Gemahelin Monumentum, auch gleicher gestalt zuvertigen …” cited from Raff, Hie gut Wirtem­ berg allewege, vol. I, 592.

98

3. Funeral Sermons

Ursula stand out as a pair from the others in the tomb, there are also significant differences in the material memories of them. In a way, the portrait of the duchess is less ambiguous than that of the duke, since hers makes no attempt at combining authority and piety in its portrait, but expresses her pure piety quite simply. The duchess is dressed in a beautiful dress befitting a woman of the highest nobility. She is portrayed with handsome features and a peaceful gesture. Like Duke Ludwig, she is also surrounded by angels in her death, though at her feet rests not the stag as a symbol of the duchy, but a good-natured dog symbolizing fidelity. There are no images of Old Testament kings or battles on her casket as there are on Duke Ludwig’s. Instead all of the images illustrate God’s acts of salvation throughout history. From the Old Testament there is a picture of the scene when Moses presents the bronze snake to the people of Israel and a picture of Jonah appearing from the jaws of the great fish. From the New Testament there is a picture of Jesus flanked by the two robbers on the cross and surrounded by his friends, a picture of him being carefully taken down from the cross by his friends, a picture of the powerful moment of the resurrection, as well as a picture of the day of the final judgment. The inscription on the duchess’ casket also differs from that of the duke in saying nothing of her life and deeds, except in pointing out whose daughter and husband she had been.114 The way she was remembered in her material memory is indicative of the way she was depicted in her funeral sermon. Few elaborate descriptions of her life can be found among commentators. As daughter of Karl II, count of neighbouring Baden-Durlach, one of the ducal guardians of Duke Ludwig in his early years as duke, and of Anna von Veldenz, who had been born the countess of Pfalz, Dorothea Ursula was a woman of the highest nobility.115 At the age of sixteen years old she married Duke Ludwig. In her wedding, over which court preacher Lucas Osiander presided,116 one of the sermons described her as in truth more beautiful and pure than gold and gemstones, her face coloured like milk and blood in a way that no painter could possibly do justice.117 After eight years of marriage to Duke Ludwig and in her twenty-fourth year, the duchess died in Nürnberg while on her way home with Duke Ludwig from a journey to Saxony, where they had been guests at the wed114 “ILLVSTRISS. PR. AC. DNA D. DOROTHEAE VRSVLA ILLVSTRISS. PR. AC. DIN D. LVDOVICI WIRTEMBER  / GENSIS ET TECCEN. DVCIS CONIVNX PRIMA ILLVSTRISS. CAROLI  / BADEN MARCHIONIS. F. QUAE A. M. D. LXXXIII.XIX. MAII. PIE DECESSIT. CVM VIXISSET AN. XXIII.  / IN MATRIMONIO AN. VII. M. VI. D. VIII. HIC TUBAM DIN. EXPECTAT”, cited from Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 589. 115 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 116. 116  Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 37–38. 117 Nicodemus Frischlin, Sieben Bücher / Von der Fürstlichen Würtembergischen Hochzeit / Des Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürsten und Herrn / Herrn Ludwigen / Hertzogen zu Würtemberg und Theck (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1578), 128–129, cited from Raff, Hie gut Wirtem­ berg allewege, vol. I, 593.

3.3 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s First Wife Duchess Dorothea Ursula

99

ding of Sophie, Duke Ludwig’s youngest sister. Sophie had been wed to Duke Friedrich Wilhelm of Saxony, and her wedding service also had been conducted by Lucas Osiander.118 The journey was exhausting to the duchess, who had been suffering from illness and is reported to have been frail during the last part of her life.119 After the company’s return to Württemberg, Duke Ludwig led the casket with the duchess to Tübingen for its burial in the choir of the Stiftskirche, in a funeral conducted by Lucas Osiander, who presented the funeral sermon which was published in a modest octavo booklet the following year.120 The funeral sermon contained a very short biography of the duchess, describing her life and character so briefly as to make the duchess almost invisible. This obviously posed a challenge to the sermon’s example rhetoric. In addition to mentioning that she had died in the flowering of her youth,121 which was obviously true of a young woman of twenty-three, the funeral sermon’s biography restricted itself to describing the duchess’ faith, piety, and the final hours of her life. Osiander explained that in her relation to God, Duchess Dorothea Ursula always saw herself as a poor sinner, and that she had always prayed to Him for mercy and forgiveness before receiving Holy Communion. She knew Christ well as her saviour and redeemer and put all her trust in Him. Though she led a Christian and honourable life through diligent prayer, reading of the Scriptures and singing of hymns, she still continuously strove to improve and live even more according to God’s will. A few days prior to her death, one could hear her praise God by singing hymns in her room. Just as the duke in his funeral sermon was described as having cared for the poor, the duchess was described as a woman who had shown compassion with the sick and needy,122 a description again emphasizing weakness as a positive attribute of her character. During the last days of her life, her speech was disabled by her illness, which had probably been a stroke, but she still had been able to express her recognition and appreciation of the true Christian comfort, until she passed away content with this comfort. Osiander explained that during her deadly illness she had never been impatient or disheartened, but showed God the patience of a little lamb. Therefore Lucas Osiander could also assure his audience that the duchess in her death had been  Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 38. Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 117; and Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 590. 120 Lucas Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula / Hertzogin zu Würtenberg / &c. Gebornen / Margräuin zu Baden vnd Hohenberg  / &c. (Tübingen: Alexander Hock, 1584); and Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere”, 38. 121 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 21: “… welche in jhre blühenden jugendt auß diesem zergenlichen leben …” 122 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 22. 118

119 Lorenz,

100

3. Funeral Sermons

relieved of all bodily pain and had been led to eternal bliss with all the saints, where she now peacefully awaited the resurrection of her body.123 The short biography at the end of the funeral sermon for the duchess was linked to a text from Ecclesiastes 7, which was presented at the beginning of the sermon: A good name is better than fine perfume, and the day of death better than the day of birth. It is better to go to a house of mourning than to go to a house of feasting, for death is the destiny of every man; the living should take this to heart. Sorrow is better than laughter, because a sad face is good for the heart. The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning, but the heart of fools is in the house of pleasure.124

The explanation of this text made up the main part of the funeral sermon; only after twenty-one pages were the two pages of biography describing the duchess. On first sight there seems to be no obvious parallels between the message of the biblical text and the duchess’ course of life. According to Osiander, the text teaches that death is something good, even though human reason sees it differently.125 The day of death is better than the day of birth, he explained, because with birth one enters a vale of tears filled with bodily pain, shame, scorn and the infidelity of this world.126 He saw this view of life confirmed in the Bible. The book of Job describes life in this world as resembling the existence of a day-labourer who works long and hard for weeks to find his salary very scarce. A human being’s life is short and filled with hard labour.127 Those who remain in life may still want 123 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Fra­ wen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 22–23: “Vnnd nach dem sie der Allmechtig mit einem schnellen zufahl angegriffen / daß jhre F. G. von wegen der Kranckheit / mit deren sie vberfallen worden / nicht viel reden können. Haben sie sich doch / mit wenig worten / vnnd hernach biß an jhr end / mit gegebnen Warzeichen / auff den Christlichen trost / so jr offtermals fürgehalten worden / also erkleret / daß sie selbigen trost recht angenommen / vnnd darmit Christlich wol zufrieden gewest / auch in selbigem seliglichen im HErrn eingeschlaffen. Wie auch jhre F. G. so lang sie in diser tödtlichen kranckheit  / vnnd todsnöten gelegen  / kein anzeigung einiger vngedult  / oder kleinmütigkeit gegeben / sondern jhrem getrewen GOTT gedultig (vnd / in der warheit / wie ein Lämblin) still gehalten / biß sie seliglich von jhrem Creutz erlöset worden. Derwegen auch jhren F. G. durch solchen Christlichen Abschid auß diser Welt / nichts arges widerfahren: sondern seind dardurch auß jrem trübsal (dann sie etliche Jar her ein krancke schwache Fürstin gewesen) seliglich entlediget / vnnd also aller fernen leibsschmerzen vberhebet worden. Vnd ist also auß diesem Jammerthal in ewige freud eingangen / vnd in die Schoß Abrahams / zu allen Heiligen / die im Herrn rhuen versamblet worden: allda sie der herrlichen Aufferstehung jhres Leibs mit freuden erwartet.” This imagery gives the impression of a waitingplace where the saved wait together. It is different from imagery Osiander employs elsewhere and indicates that the Lutheran concepts of an existence after death were not fixed. 124  New International Version. 125 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 2. 126 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 5. 127 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 6.

3.3 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s First Wife Duchess Dorothea Ursula

101

useful men and women to continue living, but God is sovereign in His wisdom when He decides to grant one of His servants a holiday in the pleasant existence hereafter.128 When God takes away young people, He does so to protect the vulnerable youth from being poisoned by bad examples or tempted by the world to fall in sin.129 The audience may have found this a sympathetic reason for the death of such a pure and vulnerable creature as the funeral sermon describes the duchess to have been. Despite this understanding of death, a Christian may still cry when someone dies, Osiander explained, but he or she may not cry like the heathens do, who think that both body and soul are destroyed in death. True Christians, meaning Lutherans, know that the day of death is better than the day of birth, and since they know that there is no purgatory, but that paradise is open to believers when they depart and that the fires of hell are prepared for unbelievers, there is also no need for vigils or masses for departed souls.130 The connection between the funeral sermon’s biblical text and its biography of the duchess could seem random to an accidental reader. If one presupposes, however, that the duchess was not simply an example in her own right, but only as the wife of the duke, a certain form of logic appears in the sermon. In the sermon, Lucas Osiander seems to be primarily addressing the duke on the occasion of the loss of his young wife, and only secondarily was the funeral sermon intended for a wider audience. The most explicit reference to this situation of preacher addressing the duke, which included this address in the sermon’s message, occurred when Osiander, at the point when he came to the biographical part of the sermon, stated that as much as “we should feel sympathy with the duke now that the Almighty has taken away his beloved helper and wife so early, we should still find comfort in the fact that no harm has come to her and that the faithful God has done so out of His wisdom and fatherly will”.131 Thus the sermon presented the duke as its first addressee on the occasion of the loss of his wife. The sermon’s explicit rejection of vigils and requiems was intended as a strengthening and confirmation of this comfort.132 The Lutheran teaching about 128 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 9. 129 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 10. The listeners would have thought of Duchess Dorothea Ursula when Osiander spoke of those God let die young; with this argument Osiander therefore implicitly confirms the picture of the duchess as a frail person. 130 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 13: “So bedürffen die verstorbenen Christen auch keiner Vigilien oder Seelmessen / Requiem vnnd dergleichen / dann wir vns keines fegfewrs in jener Welt zubefahren / weil der Baum ligt / wie er fellet / vnnd also den Gläubigen / so seliglich abscheiden / das Paradiß offen stehet / den Vngläubigen aber das Hellische Feuwer bereitet ist.” 131 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 21. 132 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 13, see n. 130.

102

3. Funeral Sermons

death made concern or compassion for the dead redundant, since it guaranteed the deceased’s salvation as long as he or she had died in faith. For Osiander, a consequence of this teaching was that the death of the faithful should not be seen as an evil destiny, but as a natural part of God’s acts in the world and of being in the hands of God. A stoic and sober way of relating to the occurrence of death in life and to losing one’s beloved might not be obligatory, but mourners’ cries should not be like the desperate cries of heathens or the activist rituals of Catholics. It was a way of mourning that maintained a Lutheran perspective on life and world, a perspective which emphasized that this world was not everything and that there were heavenly values of far greater worth. It maintained a strict divide between this world and the next, and this divide, in which the next world had the priority, was sustained by faith in God’s almighty hand in this world. In her funeral sermon, the duchess exemplified this teaching with her beauty, her faith, and her death. Her example was there to help prepare for death by reminding that no one escapes death, that it comes when it is least expected,133 and that for the faithful the day of death is better than the day of birth. To the duke the young duchess was the utmost expression of his blessings and of the wealth that was his in earthly life. By the way the beautiful duchess met death, she showed him that even this wealth was nothing compared to what awaits in life hereafter. With her beauty, which turned out to be perishable, and with her faith, which connected her to eternal bliss, she taught the duke about the strength of faith’s hope and the real values in life. This corresponded to the conclusion of the biblical exegesis in Osiander’s funeral sermon. Death is an important teacher to the wise because it prevents them from ending up in carnal security, which destroys a human being and makes it unfit for death. Death thus teaches the wise not to lose themselves in pleasure and only strive for happy days in a way that could risk their salvation.134 In this way the funeral sermon was not only a monument to the life of the duchess, but also an implicit portrait of the duke. He was a wealthy and powerful man who was willing to be taught about the relativity of his wealth and power, and 133 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 21: “Damit wir aber vnsern Todt desto fleissiger / öffter vnd nutzlicher betrachten / auch vns zu demselben Christlich bereitten / hat vns der Allmechtig ewige GOTT ein Exempel fürgestelt  / an der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnnd Frawen … Dorothea Ursula / Hertzogin … Christseliger gedechtnus: welche in jhrer blühenden jugendt auß diesem zergenglichen leben / vnnd ehe dann wir vns dessen besorget abgefordert worden. Dabey wir vns billich erinnern sollen / vnnd daß der Todt niemands verschonet / er sey hoch oder niders Standes: Daß vns auch der Todt hinderschleiche wann wir vermeinen / wir haben noch etwo vil Jar lang zuleben / vnd daß wir nicht wissen mögen / an welchem ort er auff vns warte / vnd den angriff thun werde / eben so bald in der frembde / als daheimen.” 134 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula, 15–16: “… Fleischliche sicherheit (…) tauget nichts / sondern verderbet den Menschen / machet jhn täglich ärger / vnd zum sterben vngeschickter …”

3.3 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s First Wife Duchess Dorothea Ursula

103

who was willing to be reminded of where the real values were. He was the kind of man who in his farewell with what was most precious to him saw that he could not put his trust in the joys and riches and beauties of this world, but had to put his trust in God to be connected to the real values of the hereafter. This implicit portrait described the duke as a man who was taught by his preacher even on the saddest occasions and who was likely to base his rule on real and eternal values. To summarize, in this funeral sermon as well, the use of examples was important for the way the funeral communicated its message. Though it was described more vaguely than the duke’s example was in his funeral sermon, it could still function on two levels. Her example had a rhetorical function within the sermon composition, and it filled a function in the situation where the sermon was presented and to which the printed funeral sermon testified. Within the sermon, the duchess’ life was an illustration of the biblical truth treated in the sermon, namely that a good name is better than wealth and beauty. The second level was more pragmatic. It let the duchess do what the Bible text instructed by bringing the duke to the house of mourning and thereby to wisdom. In the sermon, the duchess led the duke to mourning, but it was a controlled sorrow being sensibly transformed to a reminder of the fact that the beauty of this world is nothing compared to eternal values. The turning of concern from the deceased to the living described earlier was an important premise also in the way this sermon communicated. Confessional doctrine was activated as a cure against excessive sorrow, and the blessed existence was postulated as so certain that it needed no further negotiation. Instead it was life before death that was targeted. Since her eternal destiny was certain, the duchess was thematized not as someone one should express concern or love for, or long for, but as an example of the perishable wealths of worldly life. Instead of calling for intercessions, she could remind the duke of how temporal the beauty of this world is and teach him not to place his trust in power and wealth. One might expect the presentation of this sermon to have been a challenging task for court preacher Osiander. How would he who was responsible for pastoral care for the duke, administering meaning and interpreting the will of God, address the tragedy of his superior and employer who had lost his young wife? It is somewhat surprising how little attention Osiander spends at comforting the duke in his sermon, and how boldly he employs the death of the duke’s young and beautiful wife as a means to teach him about life and faith. It is a way of preaching that may not be described as subservient and humble. Rather it gives the impression of an independent preacher not unduly concerned with the needs and feelings of his audience, of whom the duke was the most prominent member. The will of the duke and the preacher’s intention appear to not be coinciding the way they did in Osiander’s funeral sermon for the duke. Seen from the perspective of the congregation and later readers of the funeral sermon, the sermon could still allow the preacher’s interests meet the duke’s

104

3. Funeral Sermons

interests. Only when it was read as preached to the duke was the sermon’s example rhetoric completed and the example of the deceased properly connected to the biblical truth. When this happened, the duke became part of the sermon’s message. Since the sermon presented a preacher who assured the duke of the comfort of Lutheran doctrine and taught him the truth about life and faith, the funeral sermon could promote trust in a duke who was willing to be taught by his preacher on the occasion of the loss of his wife. In this way Osiander could preach a confessional truth and at the same time tie this truth and himself as its messenger to the duke.

3.4 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s Mother Duchess Anna Maria In 1589, six years after the death of Duchess Dorothea Ursula, Duchess Anna Maria, the wife of Duke Christoph and the mother of Duke Ludwig, died aged sixty-two years old. She was laid to rest in a casket beside Christoph in the tomb of the Tübingen Stiftskirche. Like Dorothea Ursula, the inscription for Anna Maria also tells very little about her life, except stating whose daughter and whose faithful wife she had been and how many children she had given birth to, among them Duke Ludwig.135 Her casket was kept in the same simplistic Renaissance style as her husband’s and was commissioned from the same artist, Leonhard Baumhauer, but some held that the casket had to have been made by some of his less talented pupils, claiming it gave a rather coarse impression and, with an unintended humour, that the dog who rested at Duchess Anna Maria’s feet symbolizing fidelity looked like it had been cross-bred with a pig.136 Court preacher Lucas Osiander conducted Duchess Anna Maria’s funeral and presented the funeral sermon, which consisted of a biblical sermon followed by a biography. For Anna Maria’s funeral sermon, the biography was far more extensive than it had been for Dorothea Ursula. Whereas Dorothea Ursula’s was presented in a mere two pages, Anna Maria’s biography spanned almost six pages. The primary reason for this was not that Anna Maria had been the wife of the legendary Duke Christoph and that she, according to the funeral sermon, lived peacefully and faithfully with him, but rather the fact that she was a mother.137 135 “ILLUSTRISS. PR. ET DNAE D. ANNAE MARIAE GEORGII BRENDENB. MARCH. F. AC OPT. PR. / CHRISTOPHORI WIRTEMB. DVCIS CONIVGI / FIDELISS. XII. LIBEROR. MATRI LVDOVICVS DVX WIRTEMB. FILIVS M. H. P. E.ME.P. OBIIT / A. M. D.LXXXIX. DIE XX MAII. AET. LXII”, cited from Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 532. 136  “ILLUSTRISS. PR. ET DNAE D. ANNAE MARIAE GEORGII BRENDENB. MARCH. F. AC OPT. PR.”, cited from Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 536. 137  Lucas Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuch­ tigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria / Hertzogin zu Würtenberg / … Gehalten zu Tübingen / den 9. Junij / Anno / &c. 89 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1589), 15–16.

3.4 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s Mother Duchess Anna Maria

105

To the house of Württemberg, Duchess Anna Maria was like a fruitful grapevine, Osiander claimed. Blessed richly by God, she gave the house of Württemberg many lineal descendants and thereby contributed to sustaining the family. She bore eight sons and four daughters.138 According to Osiander, she herself was the best and most diligent of tutors (Hofmeisterinnen) and raised her children to fear God, to confess the true faith, partake in true worship, and to have all the proper Christian and princely virtues.139 According to some commentators, there were rumours that Anna Maria let herself be controlled by her chamber maid, who put her up against her husband and diverted her from her obligations for the upbringing of her sons. The same commentators claim that this diversion contributed to the fact that her son Ludwig and his elder brother Eberhard ended up as intemperate men lacking discipline.140 If such rumours existed, Osiander probably intended his description of the duchess as a mother to counter these accusations. The description of the Duchess as a good mother by the way she had raised her children, however, was there not only to counter rumours. The portrayal of Anna Maria as mother and educator was also central to the purpose of Osiander’s funeral sermon. Her role as the transmitter of society’s basic values to a new generation of rulers made her an outstanding member of the house of Württemberg. This role connected her to a succession of good mothers, for the duchess herself had been raised by a mother who was an example of a Christian woman and who had been highly respected as such among rulers in the Empire.141 Her mother passed on to her the blessing of being born with the Gospel, baptized, receiving right knowledge, and learning to fear God, and Anna Maria in turn passed on this blessing to her own children.142 The description of how Duchess Anna Maria raised her own children, and her position in a succession of mothers, gave her dignity as a mother of the territory. Osiander claimed the territory was still benefitting from the discipline she imparted to her children when she raised them. As a mother of the territory imparting deeper values through succeeding generations she discretely took part in the government of the territory. She oversaw the passing of government to Ludwig in due time after her husband died, and she kept house for her son the duke. At the 138 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 16. 139 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 16. 140 Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 532. Osiander’s view of her as an important educator of Duke Ludwig is, however, confirmed by modern commentators. See Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 114. 141 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 16. 142 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 15.

106

3. Funeral Sermons

same time, she ensured that justice and discipline still prevailed in the territory, and that true teaching and justice remained uncorrupted.143 Anna Maria functioned as guardian for Duke Ludwig together with Lutheran sovereigns from neighbouring territories and is reported to have played a crucial role for the government of the territory,144 as Osiander claimed in the funeral sermon for her.145 This was not the whole story of her role at court, however, and Osiander probably downplayed the other part of that story quite intentionally. For the last seventeen years of her life, Duchess Anna Maria had been locked up in a room in a castle in Nürtingen, more than thirty kilometres south of Stuttgart, because of her alleged madness. Osiander’s great emphasis on the duchess’ role in government probably relates to a princely mother’s status in official ideology. She was an anchor of values and tradition in the ruling family. This status was probably also a major motivation behind the proceedings surrounding Duchess Anna Maria’s death, manifesting her nearness to the court. When Anna Maria died in Nürtingen, Duke Ludwig sent over his physicians and surgeons to take out her viscera and embalm her and keep her in a cold vault until a grand funeral could be held for her in the Tübingen Stiftskirche. He then organized a proper ducal funeral for his mother. Her casket was escorted to Tübingen by twenty representatives of the nobility, as well as by the duke and his household, his ministers, the university, the city council as well as numerous women, students, armed citizens, and knights.146 And when the funeral sermon later was published, the presence at the funeral of the duke, his wife and their court was included in the booklet’s title.147 Towards the end of the funeral sermon, Lucas Osiander described the duchess’ last days, probably based on reports from Nürtingen clergy. A few days before she was struck by corporal disease and lost the ability to speak, and with gestures showed that she was meeting death with neither fear nor impatience,148 the duchess had a dream, as, according to Osiander, was often the case with those who are about to die. The duchess dreamt that her beloved husband, Duke Christoph, 143 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 17. 144 Lorenz, Mertens, and Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon, 114. 145 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 18. 146 Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 536 (note 14). 147 The full title of the booklet is as follows: Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria / Hertzogin zu Würtenberg / &c. Gebornen Marggräuin zu Brandenburg / &c. Christseliger Gedechtnus / in beyseyn des auch Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürsten vnd Herrn / Herrn Ludwigen / Hertzogen zu Würtenberg vnnd Teck / Grauen zu Mümpelgarten / &c. Jhrer F. G. Herrn Sohns / auch S. F. G. hochlöblichen Christlichen geliebten Gemahelin vnnd des Fürstlichen Würtenbergischen Hoff­ gesinds. / Gehalten zu Tübingen / den 9. Junij / Anno / &c. 89.” 148 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 18.

3.4 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s Mother Duchess Anna Maria

107

came to meet her and led her by the hand to a beautiful garden.149 In his sermon, Osiander used this dream to confirm and describe the duchess’ salvation and also as a comfort for the audience, who should rejoice in the face of death so that they too may enter the beautiful garden of which the duchess had dreamt.150 Still, the dream was mentioned not only as an example of salvation to comfort the audience. The dream from the duchess’ death scene connecting her to her husband and family in a true Christian faith was very welcome also to help repair the scandal that had taken place in the ducal family eighteen years earlier.151 In May 1571 in Stuttgart, Anna Maria’s daughter Eleonore wed Prince Joachim Ernst of Anhalt.152 After the wedding, Anna Maria accompanied her daughter to her new home in Dessau, the residential city of her new son-in-law, to take part in the celebration of the newly-wed couple’s homecoming.153 During these celebrations, Duchess Anna Maria, who at the time was forty-four years old, fell in love with Count Georg of Hesse-Darmstadt. He was described as a very handsome young man of twenty-two and would eighteen years later, a few days after Anna Maria’s death, become Eleonore’s second husband.154 During the celebrations in Dessau, Anna Maria offered Count Georg her hand for marriage, but to Anna Maria’s great disappointment, he declined. Shortly thereafter the duchess herself wrote about this disappointment in a letter to her son Duke Ludwig, stating that “if he doesn’t become mine, I am certain that I have to die or turn mad”.155 It seems her own prediction soon became true, for shortly after the celebration, Duke Ludwig wrote home to his Landhofmeister and councillors informing them that his dear mother had been afflicted by severe illness and melancholy,156 Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 19. 150 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 19. 151  Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 534. Raff cites Christian Heinrich Günzler, Akten betreffend die auf der Rückreise von der Heimführung ihrer Tochter Eleonore nach Dessau in Kassel ausgebrochene Geisteskrankheit der Herzoginwitwe Anna Maria, 98–100. 152 Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 570. 153 Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 533. 154  Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 570. 155 Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 534; Paul Friedrich Stälin, Wirtembergische ­Geschichte, vol. 4, 779: “Bei der Herzogin-Mutter, mit welcher sein Vater friedlich gelebt hatte, trat nach dessen Ableben Schwäche, Einfalt, am Ende Irrsinn zu Tage … verliebte sich die 44jährigen Wittwe  … in diesen erst 22jährigen, allerdings bildschönen Georg, welcher späterhin ihre Tochter Eleonore heiratete; sie trug ihm ihre Hand an, welche er verschmähte, ‘Wenn er mir nicht zu theil wird’, schrieb sie am 28. Mai 1571 ihrem Sohne Herzog Ludwig, ‘so weiß ich wohl, daß ich sterben muß oder würde von Sinnen kommen.’ Bei merklichen Zeichen des Blödsinns wurde sie am 20. Juli d. J. im Kirchengebet der Gnade des heiligen Geistes empfohlen”. 156 Duke Ludwig to the ‘Landhofmeister, Cantzler vnd Räth zu Stuttgart’, 28 May 1571, cited from Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 534: “Wir khönnen Euch gleichwol bekhüm149 Osiander,

108

3. Funeral Sermons

an illness his chamberlain Balthasar von Karpffen157 and his court preacher Balthasar Bidembach, Lucas Osiander’s colleague at the court, described in a report as not having affected her physical strength, but having given her nonsensical thoughts and great insanity.158 The government therefore decided that a prayer for the duchess’ recovery should be composed and included in the o ­ fficial church prayer.159 Lucas Osiander probably took part in the composition of this prayer, and in his funeral sermon he mentioned that Anna Maria had been prayed for in official services in the territory,160 thereby confirming how widespread the knowledge of the duchess’s condition had been and how seriously it had been perceived. The duchess’ madness was a serious political matter which had to be dealt with on the highest level. It was a scandal which seems to have received much attention among the ruling families within the Empire. Eleonore herself described this atmosphere, in a letter to her brother Duke Ludwig in June 1571, when she wrote of how it pained her to hear how shamefully their mother was being spoken of even in foreign cities.161 Duke Ludwig himself corresponded with Margrave Karl of Baden162 and Landgrave Wilhelm of Hesse on the matter. After the celebration in Dessau ended and Duke Ludwig returned to Württemberg, it seems Duchess Anna Maria was left in the care of the landgrave of Hesse, since the celebration had taken place within his territory. Towards the end of June, the landgrave wrote to Duke Ludwig to inform him that they had had to give up helping the duchess recover, since she, instead of recovering, was deteriorating every day. She kept striking out wildly as well as shouting and screaming, and the landgrave explained that this made it hard for him to sleep at night and almost made him lose his mind himself. She spoke strangely and berlichen, nicht verhalten, das Gott der Allmechtig am verschinen uffartag Jn der nacht vnser freuntliche geliebte fraw Motter mit einer beschwerlichen Kranckheit, auch solcher melancolj haimgesucht”. 157  Jacob Andreae, Christliche Predig bey der Begräbnuss  / Weyland deß Edlen vnd Vesten Balthasarn von Karpffen / seligen (Tübingen: Alexander Hock, 1586), 29. 158 Balthasar von Karpffen and Balthasar Bidembach, “Bericht von der Herzog wittib zustand”, 17 June 1571, cited in Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 534: “Bei zimlich giuter Leibsgesundheit vnd crefften … grosser blödigkeit vnd Jrrigen gedanckhen”. 159 “Formular des verordneten Kirchen Gebets zur Genesung der Herzoginwitwe”, cited in Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 534. See also, Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 13. 160 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 13. 161 Eleonore von Anhalt to Duke Ludwig, 16 June 1571, cited in Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 534: “So ist es mi ein herzlichs leid das wir alererst an vnser fraw muotter erleben solen dan ir kennt selbs wol gedencken was es für ain schand ist wo mans an fremden orten hert”. 162  Duke Ludwig to Margrave Karl of Baden, 12 June 1571, cited in Raff, Hie gut Wirtem­ berg allewege, vol. I, 534: “Mit ainer Leibs vnd Haubts plödigkeit dermassen angegriffen vnd heimbgesucht”.

3.4 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s Mother Duchess Anna Maria

109

tried to jump out of the window, thereby giving the servants caring for her a very hard time, since the chamber in which she was kept had so many different windows and doors and stairs.163 In the end, Duke Ludwig took the duchess back to Württemberg and brought her to the castle at Nürtingen, where she would be kept for the rest of her life,164 but the story of her scandal would not be easily forgotten. The public image of Duchess Anna Maria was presumably unlike that of Duchess Dorothea Ursula. The illness and scandals surrounding her required another sort of funeral sermon than one emphasizing the innocence and purity of the young Dorothea Ursula. Therefore, even though he was speaking in general terms, Osiander referred fairly directly to Duchess Anna Maria’s condition in his funeral sermon: … even if we lose our mind, not only because of age, but also from other incidental illnesses and weakness, and we therefore, towards the end of our lives, become as children, such weakness and childishness should not hinder our salvation. If some bodily illnesses bereave a Christian of his intellect and make him childish, it does not mean that the illnesses also take away the Christian faith from his heart.165 163 Landgrave Wilhelm of Hesse to Duke Ludwig, 20 June 1571, cited in Raff, Hie gut Wirtem­ berg allewege, vol. I, 534: “Nun können wir E.l. aus beschwertem gemut nit verhelen, das sich die sachen sider dem zue besserung schickhen, sondern von tag zue tag Je beschwerlicher werden, Dermassen, das Jch leyder gar aus dem schlaff vnd per consequens aus der vernunfft khommen, vnd solche hendell mit ruffen, schreyen vnd vmb sich schlagen angefangen, die nit wol zu schreyben”; and Landgrave Wilhelm of Hesse to Duke Ludwig, 26 June 1571, cited in Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 534: “Gar selzame Reden vnd reymen getrieben, auch zum fenster hinaus gewollt, also das allen Jhren 1. dienern vnd dienerin auch den frawen, so wir J. 1 zugeordnet, ganz beschwerlich gewesen, J1. in dem gemach, darin sie gewesen, dergestalt zue verwaren, dieweyll solch gemach so weyte fenster vnd so viel thüren vnd aufgenge hat … angefangen greulich zueruffen vnd zueschreyen”. 164 Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I, 533: “Als sie die Heimführung ihrer Tochter Aemelien (recte Eleonore ) 1571 beywohnte und zugleich ihre geliebte Töchtern, die beede Landgrävinen von Hessen, besuchte, verliebte sie sich in Landgrav Georgen von Hessen, welcher ihr etwas freundlich begegnete. Und als diser ihro seine anderwertige Neigung entdeckte, überfiel sie eine Schwermuth, daß sie ganz blödsinnig wurde und zu Nürtingen in ihrem Zimmer verwahrt werden mußte, bis sie endlich den 20. maji 1589 in die Ewigkeit eingienge.” According to Midelfort, confinement of mad people to cells was normal from the Middle Ages onwards; H. C. Erik Midelfort, “Madness and Civilization in Early Modern Europe: A Reappraisal of Michel Foucault”, in After the Reformation: Essays in Honor of J. H. Hexter, ed. Barbara C. Malament (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1980), 253. 165 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 13: “Wann wir auch gleich nicht allein die gesundtheit unsers Leibs / sondern auch hohes Alters / oder ander zufälligen Kranckheiten vnd Schwacheiten halben / vnsern verstand verlieren / vnd widerumb / vor vnserm end / zu Kindern werden / soll vns doch solche Schwacheit vnd Kindheit an vnser Seligkeit kein schaden bringen … Vnd ob wol ettliche leibliche Kranckheiten einem Christen vnderweilens den scharpfen verstand nemen / daß sie jne widerumb kindisch machen / so nemen sie jhm darumb nicht auch den Christlichen Glauben auß dem hertzen.”

110

3. Funeral Sermons

Osiander’s reference to Anna Maria’s condition occurred in the part of the sermon which tied the biography to the biblical explanation. The biblical text connected to Anna Maria’s biography was taken from Romans 8: Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? Just as it is written, ‘FOR YOUR SAKE WE ARE BEING PUT TO DEATH ALL DAY LONG; WE WERE CONSIDERED AS SHEEP TO BE SLAUGHTERED.’ But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, will be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.166

Osiander stated early in his sermon that his intention was to let the audience, confronted with the duchess’ dead body, hear a vigorous comfort that could help them through the temptations of this world so that they in time may say a blessed farewell to this world.167 The text from Paul’s letter to the Romans, arguing strongly that there is nothing that may separate the believer from the love of Christ, could serve the central concern of the Lutheran funeral to strengthen the certainty of salvation. This would have been comforting in many a funeral, but was especially so in the funeral for Duchess Anna Maria. Her life was an extra powerful example of the truth in this text, since her implicit biography contained obvious elements that could potentially be seen as separating her from the love of Christ. In order to show how Anna Maria’s life was encompassed by the love of Christ, Osiander delivers a polemic against the papal understanding of this passage in Romans 8. According to Osiander, the pope saw this passage as an expression only of Paul’s nearness to Christ and not as a general expression about all Christians. But, as Osiander would have expected his audience to know, the pope was wrong. By mobilizing a Lutheran understanding of Scripture, Osiander could emphasize that it was the Holy Spirit who spoke through Paul and who speaks to all through Scripture and that Paul’s statement therefore was valid for all Christians.168 Thus Osiander extended the words of Paul from being simply an 166 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 1–2: “Wer will vns scheiden von der Liebe Gottes? Trübsal oder Angst? Oder Verfolgung? Oder Hunger? Oder Blösse? Oder Fährligkeit? Oder Schwerdt? Wie geschriben steht: Vmm deinen willen werden wir getödtet den gantzen tag: wir seind geachtet für Schlachtschaaffe. Aber in dem allen vberwinden wir weit / vmb des willen / der vns geliebet hat. Dann ich bin gewiß / daß weder Tod noch Leben / weder Engel noch Fürstenthumb / noch Gewalt / weder gegenwertigs noch zukünfftiges / weder hohes noch tieffes / noch keine andere Creatur / mag vns scheiden von der Liebe Gottes / die in Christo Jesu ist / vnserm HERrn”. The translation here is from the New American Standard Bible. 167 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 2. 168 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 4–5.

3.4 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s Mother Duchess Anna Maria

111

expression of his own experience to being a general truth for Christianity. By testing it to the utmost, Anna Maria’s biography became a vigorous illustration of this truth. When her madness was tied to Paul’s words, it strengthened both her salvation and the general truth in Paul’s words. Although the biblical text was not explicitly connected to Anna Maria’s life until Osiander introduced her biography, her life was an implicit part of the biblical explanation from the outset of the sermon, as it was the obvious reason for the choice of biblical text. Her madness was an example of the things that cannot separate us from the love of Christ. When Osiander introduced Job in the sermon’s explanation of Paul, it had a similar purpose. Anna Maria resembled Job because they both had to suffer undeservedly. Job had been a rich and pious man who was struck by ill fate, but nothing of what he had to experience could separate him from the love of God. Not even the fact that he in his suffering came to bear a grudge against God.169 This description would have reminded the audience of the duchess. She also had been a rich and pious person who had to suffer and who in her suffering, meaning her madness, probably came to have a grudge against God or behave impiously. In this way, Osiander implicitly interpreted the madness and scandal in the duchess’ life as suffering and not as sin or unbelief in a way that let her fit the example of Job. The conclusion of the story of Job would have been well known to the congregation at the funeral and listeners would have known that it was Job who was vindicated in the end and that his friends were put to shame. Osiander explicitly attacked Job’s friends and implicitly the duchess’ slanderers in order to emphasize that suffering in life was not a sign of being cursed or abandoned by God.170 Suffering and misfortune on earth stem not from bad faith, but are incidents that strengthen faith.171 Thus Osiander’s description of the duchess’ life as a new version of Job’s confirmed Paul’s words that nothing that we experience may deprive us of our salvation,172 not even insanity.173 When Osiander applied the story of Job to his explanation of Paul, he presented a view of life different from the one he attributed to the pope. Whereas the pope connected faith to a visible piety, with the result that salvation could not be universal, Osiander saw Paul as describing salvation as a universal consequence of the love of Christ. Madness and the connected unseemliness could be forms of Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 9. 170 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 8. 171 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 10–11. 172 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 12. 173 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 14. 169 Osiander,

112

3. Funeral Sermons

suffering connected to reward in the life hereafter. They were aspects of life that could point to the strength of the love of Christ.174 The exemplary piety of Duchess Anna Maria blurred the connection between human piety and the love of God as well as that between this life and life hereafter, since this life and life hereafter were paradoxically connected by the love of Christ. Still, the distance between the two spheres of reality did not render piety superfluous, but saw it expressed in an endurance which included suffering which appeared as a lack of piety or as unseemliness. With another quote from Paul, Osiander emphasized the great contrast between this life and life hereafter by stressing how little value that has which should be renounced in this life compared to what awaits in the next life.175 Initially in his sermon, Osiander summed up Paul’s message by encouraging his audience to offer resistance to all of life’s misfortunes, ordeals, and death.176 During the sermon it became evident that it was the perspective of this world imposed by misfortunes, ordeals and death that should be resisted. One should not be overwhelmed or swallowed by the insistent perspective of the visible world, which claims that madness and illfate come from bad faith, but should counter this perspective by remembering the promise of Christ’s universal love for His believers. In this way, the explicit argument in Osiander’s funeral sermon coincided with the argument implicit in its composition. His explicit argument was to show how suffering strengthened faith and how the heavenly reward differed from the earthly in a way that was linked to the Lutheran confessional view of salvation. The implicit argument was to show how Anna Maria’s life tested and confirmed this argument. This argument was further emphasized in the description of Anna Maria’s faith towards the end of the funeral sermon. It was a description which started with the outer aspects of her religiosity and saw her faith as something being received passively from God’s mercy. It was because He had bought her with His precious blood and had made her His child in baptism that Christ led her as her shepherd through the many temptations of her life. “… He had held her in true faith until her life’s end, so that no resistance or pain or any particular condition could separate her from the love of God which they 174 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 9 and 12. Midelfort has pointed out that madness through the Middle Ages and early modernity often was considered a consequence of sin or a test of one’s virtue, but that the norm was to relate mental disturbances to underlying somatic conditions. See Midelfort, “Madness and Civilization in Early Modern Europe”, 254 and 258. 175  Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 9; 2 Corinthians 4 and 2 Timothy 2. 176  Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 3: “… / wie wir allem vnglück vnd widerwertigkeit / vnd dem Tod selbsten / sollen den trutz bieten”.

3.4 The Death of Duke Ludwig’s Mother Duchess Anna Maria

113

have all those who belong to the Lord Jesus Christ.”177 If one ended up senile, it did not harm faith, for faith may exist without intelligence, as proved by the baptism of children.178 To sum up, the dynamic of the rhetorical use of example in the funeral sermon for Duchess Anna Maria was both explicit and implicit. The explicit description of her example in the biography, which made up the six last pages of her funeral sermon, called attention to her role as duchess and mother. In this role, she secured territory’s foundation in faith and tradition. This motif also appeared as a major concern in her funeral. The report of pompous proceedings and official representation assures readers of the funeral sermon booklet that she was given a funeral worthy of a duchess. It was a ritual intended to manifest strong family traditions and the family’s foundation in Christian faith. This description, however, is not explicitly tied to the Bible texts or to the sermon’s message. The connection is to be found in Osiander’s references to the duchess’ infatuation and madness. Even though this part of the duchess’ biography is only hinted at in the sermon, it still sets the theme for the sermon’s message and unites the duchess’ life with the message of texts and sermon. When the Bible texts are combined with the duchess’ implicit example, her life then becomes an example of Pauline faith and a new version of Job’s life. The combination of text and biography reinterprets her madness as suffering and lets the duchess’ life appear as an example of the faith which the biography claimed that she had rooted in the duchy in her role as duchess and mother. Thus the implicit example, with the help of the Bible texts, confirmed the explicit example. This confirmation of the explicit and official example enabled the funeral ritual to fulfil its intended function, which was to ensure the ducal family’s role in anchoring faith and tradition in the duchy. It is possible to describe Osiander’s sermon as an elegant cover-up story which solved once and for all the problems that the locked doors at Nürtingen castle solved only temporarily. With the help of confessional doctrine, which was explicitly referred to as such in the sermon, Osiander transformed Anna Maria from a threat to the family’s honour to an example of true faith. Thereby he could present the duke and his family as firmly rooted in the same true faith. 177 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 14: “Also auch / geliebte im Herrn Christo / hat vnser lieber getrewer Hirt Jesus Christus / weilund die Durchleuchtige Hochgeborne Fürstin  / vnsers Gnädigen lieben Landsfürsten vnnd Herrn Fraw Mutter  / als sein geliebtes Schäfflin (welches er mit seinem Blut erkaufft / vnnd im heiligen Tauff zu einem Kind Gottes gemacht) in diser Welt durch mancherley trübsal geführt: aber nichts desto weniger jhre F. G. in wahrem Glauben / biß ans end erhalten / daß sie kein widerwertigkeit oder schmertz / oder einiger zustand / hat mögen scheiden von der Liebe Gottes / die da ist in Christo Jesu / vnserm Herrn”. 178 Osiander, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria, 13.

114

3. Funeral Sermons

Again, Osiander’s homiletical practice allowed the interests of duke and preacher to meet. The ducal family which saw its honour restored also saw confessional theology confirmed in its role as a foundation for their rule.

3.5 The Death of a Nobleman and Some of the Duke’s Servants 3.5.1 The Death of Hans von und zu Stamhaim Lucas Osiander was also assigned to present funeral sermons for several of the duke’s servants. Usually he would do so in Stuttgart, but for some reason the duke sent him to Geysingen in 1575 to honour the local nobleman Hans von und zu Stamheim with a court preacher’s funeral sermon.179 Osiander responded to the task by giving a sermon on the virtues of a nobleman and by portraying the deceased as having lived the life of an ideal nobleman. Job’s presentation of himself and his righteousness in Job 29:12–25 formed the sermon’s starting point: Because I rescued the poor who cried for help, and the fatherless who had none to assist him. The man who was dying blessed me; I made the widow’s heart sing. I put on righteousness as my clothing; justice was my robe and my turban. I was eyes to the blind and feet to the lame. I was a father to the needy; I took up the case of the stranger. I broke the fangs of the wicked and snatched the victims from their teeth. I thought, “I will die in my own house, my days as numerous as the grains of sand. My roots will reach to the water, and the dew will lie all night on my branches. My glory will remain fresh in me, the bow ever new in my hand”. Men listened to me expectantly, waiting in silence for my counsel. After I had spoken, they spoke no more; my words fell gently on their ears. They waited for me as for showers and drank in my words as the spring rain. When I smiled at them, they scarcely believed it; the light of my face was precious to them. I chose the way for them and sat as their chief; I dwelt as a king among his troops; I was like one who comforts mourners.180

In accordance with Job’s self-description, Osiander gave Job an almost opposite function of that which he had in the sermon for Duchess Anna Maria. Whereas Osiander in the sermon for Anna Maria used the story of Job’s misery to prove that the duchess’ miserable life had not led to her condemnation, but rather confirmed her salvation, Osiander now pointed to the righteous and respectable Job as a virtuous role model for the nobility.181 This was an equally plausible ap179  Lucas Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden. Gehalten zu Gey­ singen / den 23. Januarij Anno 75. Vber der Leich des Edlen vnnd Vesten Hansen von vnd zu Stamhaim &c. (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1575). 180 The translation here is from the New International Version. 181 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 2: “Derwegen hab ich diesen Text zuerkleren jetzmals für mich genommen / dieweil in selbigen die fürnembste adeliche Tugenden eines Regenten (in des heiligen Hiobs Person) gleich als in eim Spiegel abgebildet vnd

3.5 The Death of a Nobleman and Some of the Duke’s Servants

115

plication of the story of Job, since at the outset he stated that Job was a righteous man, and since he confirms this view of Job in his conclusion by reporting God’s blessings on him. According to Osiander, Job had not only been rewarded for his virtues in this life, but also in the hereafter.182 The funeral for Hans von und zu Stamheim commemorated a nobleman, and Osiander explained that Job had himself been a nobleman who ruled his land and people, not unlike the German rulers who, though they did not have the formal title of a king, still governed their peoples and lands as sovereigns.183 Thus Osiander tied the lower nobility to the duke’s office and confirmed a form of collegial community between them and him. Osiander did not mention Job’s suffering in his funeral sermon, but the fact that he used a biblical hero who suffered as a role model for his nobility would have been very welcome to his employer the duke, who relied on a loyal and cooperative nobility for his government of the territory, and who could be severely hindered by wilful and self-interested noblemen. In Osiander’s sermon they were presented with a Job who had been righteous in ­suffering, and who always remembered that when God had made him an a­ uthority, it was for the specific reason that he should rule his subjects righteously and with noble virtues.184 Job therefore exemplified that the divine office of a nobleman was to preserve justice and that righteousness was a nobleman’s most precious adornment.185 With divinely rewarded virtue, Job’s example was well suited to measure the life of a deceased nobleman.186 Both in what he did and what he refrained from doing, Job distinguished himself as a virtuous nobleman. He willingly advised those who sought his advice and he had been like a father to the poor, an especially important point, since the office of a nobleman was very much like that of a housefather,187 and he continuously sought to know the truth and not pass

fürgehalten werden: dergleichen die abgestorbene adeliche Person an sich gehabt / vnd herrlich mit selbigen geschmückt gewesen.” 182 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 15. 183 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 3. 184 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 4: “Das ist / ich habe mich erinnert / daß mich der Allmechtig darumb andern leutten zu einer Obrigkeit fürgesetzt / daß ich meine vnterthonen recht regiren / sie bey Recht vnd Gerechtigkeit handthaben soll.” 185 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 5: “Warlich / die Gerechtigkeit an einem vom Adel (vnd andern Regenten) ist die allerherrlichst kleidung / diese ist der beste schmuck / die rechten güldene Ketten / Ringe / vnd Mäntel / von Sammet vnd Seiden / mit silbern vnd güldenen porten verbrembt.” 186 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 2, see n. 181. 187 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt  / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 6: “Denn die vnderthonen seind sehr vngleich  / vnd muß auch ein Haußvatter vnterweilens  / nach gestalt der sachen / das rauch gegen seinen kindern herauß keren / aber gleichwol soll das vätterlich hertz gegen den vnterthonen bleiben / welches die sachen hertzlich gut meine / vnd der armen leut zeitliche vnd ewige wolfart suche.”

116

3. Funeral Sermons

uninformed judgments.188 At the same time he refrained from chasing virgins or other men’s wives and from taking part in dubious financial transactions, since he remembered that the same standards applied to him as to any other man, and that God would judge him accordingly. He did not reject those who were thirsty, and he did not take malicious pleasure from others’ misfortune or put his trust in his wealth. Seen against the measure of Job it turned out that Hans von und zu Stamhaim embodied many of the same virtues, even though he obviously had his human weakness and could not really be compared to Job. All of Stamhaim’s virtues had their roots in his faith, his trust in Christ, and his obedience to God’s Commandments.189 Some of Job’s virtues were omitted in the description of Stamhaim, such as the seemliness towards virgins and other men’s wives, perhaps to maintain a distance between moral ideals and the concrete example of Stamhaim’s life. Still, most of the virtues are included in the description and lead naturally to the description of a pious death scene and the concluding declaration of Hans’ salvation,190 as well as the prayer for the continued well-being of his noble family.191 As was common in Lutheran funeral sermons, Osiander gave Stamhaim the role of teacher for the living. His salvation followed from virtues that stemmed from faith. Just as virtues were part of a respectable nobleman’s life, so was the humble piety which was aware of authority as given by God and of the need to Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 4–8. Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 18–19: “Nachdem wir nun gehört / was fürtreffliche Tugenden vnd Gaben der heilige Hiob von Gott gehabt / vnd gegen dem Nechsten erzeigt / auch für was Sünden vnd Lastern er sich fürnemlich gehütet / vnd wie jme Gott seine löbliche guthertzige Regierung auch zeitlich belohnet / wollen wir der abgestorbenen Adelichen Person auch gedencken / vnnd vns jrer Gaben vnd Tugenden erinnern. Dann ob wol dem heiligen Hiob (…) keiner aller dings zuuergleichen / vnd mehr gedachte abgestorbene Adelsperson auch jre Menschliche Gebrechen vnd Mängel gehabt: welche jme der Allmechtige Gott vmb Christi willen / durch den Glauben gnediglichen verzigen vnd vergeben hat: jedoch ist er auch mit vielen herrlichen Tugenden vnd Gaben (deren in diser Predig von dem heiligen Hiob gedacht worden) geziert vnd geschmückt gewesen. Dann zum ersten vnd vordersten / hat er seinen Gott vnd Herrn / den Vatter / Son vnd heiligen Geist / auß seinem heiligen Wort vnd Euangelio recht erkennen lernen / all sein vertrawen auff den einigen Mittler Christum gesetzt / vnd sich in den gehorsam Göttlicher Gebot ergeben. Recht vnd Gerechtigkeit hat er geliebt / vnd wie ein kleid angezogen / für seinen besten schmuck gehalten / vnd seinen vnterthonen zu Recht vnd Billigkeit geholffen.” 190 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 20: “Derwegen seiner Person halben wir vns nicht zubekümmern vrsach haben / seitenmal wir (auß gehörten vrsachen) nicht zweiflen sollen / der Allmechtig hab jne durch den zeitlichen Todt auß diesem zergencklichen Leben vnd Jammerthal / in die ewige freud vnd Seligkeit gebracht.” 191 Osiander, Ein Christliche Leichpredigt / Von Adelichen Tugenden, 21: “Der Allmechtig Gott vnd Vatter vnsers Herrn Jhesu Christi wölle disen Adenlichen Stammen vnd Namen gnediglich vnd vätterlich erhalten / segnen / vermehren / vnd mit seinem heiligen Geist laitten vnd führen / damit desselben vnterthonen Christlich / löblich / weißlich vnd glückselig regiert / geschützt vnd geschirmet werden / zu der ehr Gottes deß Allmechtigen / vnd der Obrigkeit vnd Vnterthonen zeitlichen vnd ewigen wolfart. Amen.” 188 Osiander, 189 Osiander,

3.5 The Death of a Nobleman and Some of the Duke’s Servants

117

trust God in the execution of this authority. By describing Stamhaim in view of Job in his funeral sermon, Osiander achieved several of the intentions of the Württembergian funeral ceremony.192 He admonished the congregation to improve and live virtuously, he comforted them with his description of Stamhaim’s virtuous life and blessed death, and he contributed to Stamhaim’s honour with the favourable portrait giving him a religious function as an example of a Christian nobleman. By sending his court preacher to present Stamhaim’s funeral sermon, the duke emphasized the connection between the rural nobleman and the central authority. Court preacher Osiander represented both the highest secular authority as well as the ecclesiastical leadership when he gave Hans von und zu Stamhaim an honourable and Christian funeral and reminded Stamhaim’s posterity not to put their trust in their own power, but ultimately in God. With his person and office he also reminded them of the fact that the God who was to be trusted expressed Himself through the duke’s theologians of the state church. 3.5.2 The Death of Ducal Secretary Frantz Kurtz In his funeral sermon for ducal secretary Frantz Kurtz held later the same year, Osiander also intended to give the deceased an honourable and respectable funeral and at the same time transform the sorrow of the bereaved into comfort and useful instruction.193 The court preacher was probably assigned to present the funeral because Frantz Kurtz had been an important servant of the duke. In contrast to Hans von und zu Stamheim, Kurtz was not a nobleman, but was part of the capital’s educated citizenry in important public positions, an environment Osiander belonged to himself and of which he had intimate knowledge.194 The funeral sermon for Frantz Kurtz also focused on virtues, but here Osiander did not promote the appropriation of virtues as a preparation for death, a theme he felt he had explained sufficiently in earlier sermons, but rather focused on the importance of acquiring a good name and reputation for oneself.195 To elaborate on this theme, Osiander chose a text from Proverbs 22:1, which states, “A good name is more desirable than great riches; to be esteemed is better than silver or  On this point, see Chapter 3. Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurtzen / Fürstlichen Wirttenbergischen Secretarii. Gehalten zu Stutgarten in dem Stifft / den 30. Augusti / Anno 1575 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1575). 194 Cf. Schorn-Schütte, “Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit”, 275–337. 195 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 1: “Dieweil aber sonst zu ander zeiten in Leichpredigen / von Christlicher bereittung zum Todt / auch von der Aufferstehung der Todten / vnd andern gläubigen Sachen / offt weitleufftig vnd nach notturfft gehandelt würdt / wöllen wir jetzmals selbige stück beruhen lassen / vnd an diser fürnemen Person vrsach nemen / auß Gottes Wort zulehrnen / vnser Leben also anzurichten / daß wir in disem Leben / ein guten Christlichen vnd ehrlichen Namen haben / vnd selbigen mit auß diser Welt bringen mögen.” 192

193 Lucas

118

3. Funeral Sermons

gold”.196 Though a good name is desirable, Osiander explained, it cannot be taken for granted, and to be remembered is not enough for a good name. For example, infamous people are remembered for their evil deeds and grave mistakes. Still, a good name is desirable for several reasons. It is beneficial in life by giving ease of mind persisting even if one loses all else. More important is that it is significant beyond one’s own life. To have a good name is an important religious concern.197 It involves being a good Christian, and since people are more easily moved by good examples than they are by exhortations, having a good name honours God and the true religion.198 In death one is better served by a good name than any expensive tombstone, for whereas the tombstone may be destroyed by people of ill-will, the good name of a deceased, on the other hand, may not be easily destroyed, but will continue to bring favour and respect to the surviving family.199 However, Osiander continued, there are no short cuts to a good name. Pretending to be a good person does not bring a good name, nor will calculated effort to build one’s reputation. All lies will eventually be uncovered to the disgrace of one’s name,200 and then all pretension will have been for the worse.201 A 196 This translation is from the New International Version. Cf. Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurtzen, 1: “Das Gerücht ist köstlicher dann groß Reichthumb / vnd Gunst besser dann Silber vnd Goldt.” 197 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 5: “Es seind aber wichtige vrsachen / vmb welcher willen sich ein Christ zubefleissen hat / daß er ein guten Namen in diser Welt hab / vnd denselbigen mit jm auß diser Welt bringe. Dann erstlich / gereicht solches zum Lob vnd Ehr Gottes / vnd zu weitterer außbreitung der reinen Religion”. 198 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 6–7: “Es dienet auch solcher guter Nam / zu erbawung vnd besserung vnsers Nechsten. Dann die Leut lassen sich offt mehr bewegen / durch gute Exempel / daß sie sich Christlicher Tugenten befleissen / dann durch lange vnd ernstliche vermanungen.” 199 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 8: “Es ist aber auch ein guter Nam nach deß Menschen Todt bestendig / vnd nützlich / vnd hilfft den verlassenen Erben vnd Freundtschafft nicht wenig. Wann man einem gleich ein köstliche Begrebnuß oder Grabschrifft machet / können doch mutwillige Leut dasselbige leichtlich zerschlagen vnd verderben / daß man vber wenig Jar nicht mehr weiß / wer alda sey begraben worden. Ein guter Nam aber laßt sich nicht also vertilgen / sondern bleibt für vnd für. … Der gute Nam aber vnd Gunst deß Abgestorbenen mögen offt viel Jar lang / der verlassenen Freundtschafft zu gutem kommen. Dann man nimbt sich solcher Leut an (wann sie anderst auch Gottselig vnd redlich seind) vnd thut jnen guts vmb jrer verstorbnen ehrlichen Freund willen.” 200 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 7–8: “Ja sagstu / man kan aber dannoch mit lügen einem sein Ehr abschneiden / vnd jn umb sein guten Namen bringen. Antwort: Es ist ein alts vnd feins Sprichwort: Hüt dich vor der That / Der Lügen würdt wol rath. Vnnd es heißt: Tandem veritas victrix: Es würdt doch zu letst die warheit an den Tag kommen / vnd sich eines frommen Menschen unschuld finden / vnd er also sein guten Namen wider bekommen.” 201 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurtzen, 9–10. “Ein guten Namen aber bekompt man nicht durch Gleißnerey / wann man sich etlicher Tugenten / zum schein / befleißt / biß man (wie das Sprichwort lautet) die Schlüssel findet. Dann solchen Leuten würdt man nur desto feinder / wann man hernach jre Schalckheit erkennet.”

3.5 The Death of a Nobleman and Some of the Duke’s Servants

119

good name does not come from self-praise or feigning or flattering,202 but from true Christian virtues, and it must have its root in one’s heart. Consequently it can only be given by God, since He has all hearts in His hand and can bend them the way He wants.203 The core of a good name is the piety of a God-fearing person,204 from which flow a truthful and stable mind, a good, honourable and law-abiding life, and which makes up a hard-working, trustworthy and skilled professional.205 The personal qualities necessary for a good name and reputation are not restricted to noblemen or distinguished persons, but apply equally to simple craftsmen.206 In the last pages of the sermon, Osiander pointed to the deceased Christian person, whom they were now accompanying to his burial, as an example of someone who had a good name and reputation. He was well known, both in the fatherland and abroad, and by both high and low, as a pleasant person who combined his great wisdom with humility and friendliness, who in his service had been obliging, hard-working and skilled, as well as unselfish, trustworthy, loyal and patriotic.207 In this way, the short biography of Frantz Kurtz mirrored Osiander’s intention in other funeral sermons. It confirmed the deceased’s reputation and honour in a way that would have comforted and pleased the bereaved. Thereby it also emphasized the truth in Osiander’s biblical sermon, namely that a good name was worth more than gold. Kurtz was also declared to be saved at the end of Osiander’s funeral sermon, but it was his pious death and not his good name that connected him to salvation. 202 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 9–10. 203 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehernvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 9: “Zwar Gott der Herr muß es geben / daß wir recht thun / ein guten Namen bekommen / vnd die Leut vns günstig werden. Dann Gott hat aller Menschen Hertzen in seiner Handt / vnd neigt sie / wahin er wil.” 204 Osiander, Ein Predig Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 10: “Wardurch erlangt man dann ein guten Namen vnd Gunst bey den Leuten? Erstlich durch ware Gottseligkeit / Wann sich ein Christ also helt / daß bey jm ware Gottsforcht gefunden vnd gespürt würdt. Darumb spricht Paulus zu den Römern am 14. Cap. Das Reich Gottes ist Gerechtigkeit / vnd Frid / vnd Freud / in dem Heiligen Geist: Wer darinnen Christo dienet / der ist Gott gefellig / vnd den Menschen werth. Das ist: Ein Gottseliger Mensch / ist Gott vnnd der Welt angenem.” 205 Osiander, Ein Predigt Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 10–12. 206 Osiander, Ein Predigt Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 12–13: “Jedoch kan auch ein geringer Handtwercks Mann vnd Taglöhner / in seinem Stand ein guten Namen bekommen / wann er Gottselig / redlich / erbar vnd fleissig ist / also daß er auch lieb vnd werth gehalten würdt. Dann guter Nam vnd Gunst / würdt den jenigen von Gott verlihen / welche Gott förchten / eins ehrlichen Gemüts seind / erbar leben / vnd in jrem Beruff fleiß vnd geschicklichkeit erweisen. Diser stück sollen wir vns befleissen / auff daß wir einen guten Namen / vnd redlicher Leut Gunst bekommen / behalten / vnd auß diser Welt bringen.” 207 Osiander, Ein Predigt Vber der Leich / deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 13–15.

120

3. Funeral Sermons

On the second-to-last page of the funeral sermon, Osiander described how Kurtz received God’s mercy passively when he humbly took communion and when he was not frightened by death, but met it as a Christian.208 These few facts from the very last part of his life were what confirmed his salvation. Unlike many other funeral sermons, the deceased’s salvation was not an integral part of the argumentation or a necessary part of the sermon’s plot. Instead the biblical sermon preached a form of inner-worldly immortality. Piety led to a good name which did not need salvation to be meaningful. A good name was desirable because it enforced a memory that was stronger than a tombstone, because it promoted respect and favour for the bereaved and because it enforced true religion and honoured God, thereby positioning the deceased as someone important in the religion of the living. As an example of a good patriot, his good name also supported the fatherland. The biblical sermon might have tied Frantz Kurtz to an inner-worldly immortality that was linked to life in and around the court, as a part of a class of educated public servants in an evolving bourgeoisie.209 In the same way as salvation, this immortality was also achieved not through pretence or self-conscious effort, but through humble confidence in the almighty God who alone could cause anything. 3.5.3 The Death of Two of the Duke’s Knights In 1593 and 1595 Lucas Osiander held funeral sermons for two of the duke’s knights. The young nobleman Hans Jörg Brand, who died in a shooting accident in 1593, was commemorated with a sermon on Matthew 10,210 whereas the former head of the duke’s knights, Joachim Quast, died of illness in old age and was commemorated with a sermon on Ecclesiastes 7,211 the same text which was also used in the funeral for Duchess Dorothea Ursula. Though the two knights died in different stages of life and were commemorated with different texts, their funeral sermons promoted a very similar devotion and awareness of life.

208 Osiander, Ein Predigt Vber der Leich / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten / Herren Frantzen Kurt­ zen, 16. 209 See section 3.1.2. of this chapter and Hamm, “Normierte Erinnerung”, on humanist memorial culture. 210 Lucas Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber der Leich / Des Edlen vnnd Vesten Junckern / Hansen Jörgen Branden / &c. Fürstlichen Würtenbergischen Kammer jungen / Gehalten zu Stutgarten / den 17. Iunij. Anno, &c. 93 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1593), 1: “Kaufft man nicht zwen Sperling vmb ein Pfenning? Noch fält derselben keiner auff die Erden / ohn ewern Vatter. Nun aber sind auch ewre Haar auff dem Haupt alle gezehlet. Darumb fürchtet euch nicht: Ihr seidt besser / dann vil Sperling”. 211 Lucas Osiander, Ein Predigt / Uber der Leich des Edlen und Vesten Junckern Joachim Quast / &c. gewesnen Fürstlichen Würtembergischen Reitterhauptmans  / Uber die Wort des Predigers Salomonis am 7. Capitel. Der Tag des Tods ist besser / dann der Tag der Geburt. Gehalten zu Stutgarten / den 24. Septembris, Anno, &c.95 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1595).

3.5 The Death of a Nobleman and Some of the Duke’s Servants

121

In the case of Hans Jörg Brand, the text from Matthew 10 was probably chosen because of the special circumstances surrounding his death. The funeral sermon does not mention his exact age, but it seems he must have been very young. His death was quite violent. After a few hours of suffering, he died of injuries resulting from a shot which had gone off accidently while he was operating a cannon.212 The text from Matthew 10 about the sparrows which do not fall to the ground without God’s knowledge pointed to God’s great knowledge of and concern for life that may seem frail and dispensable. When God has such great a concern for the little sparrow, how much more does He not remember a young man who dies, and whose hair He has counted? Still, Osiander stated that the special circumstances of the young knight’s death were quite insignificant. For no matter how or when one dies, it always happens according to God’s predetermination and precognition. Everything has its set time and God has set an end point for each life which no one may exceed, Osiander explained.213 The different ways to die are only incidental means leading to the heavenly goal God has set for each human being. Though Hans Jörg Brand died a sudden death after a short life, his life had still been complete. His life was meaningful exactly as a short life ending with a sudden death. By dying young he was preserved in the saving faith and not led astray by Calvinism or papism, as so often happened, even to young Christians who were brought up in true faith.214 Brand’s death taught repentance to the living since he died so young, virtuous, and in true faith. When sinners saw that even as pious and virtuous a man as Hans Jörg Brand was taken away from this life so early, they were strongly reminded of how much more likely it was that they themselves may be taken away one day soon, and they would then feel the need to repent.215 For Brand’s sake, 212 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber der Leich / Des Edlen vnnd Vesten Junckern / Hansen Jörgen Branden, 10: “Dieweil aber Gott der Allmächtig in seinem Göttlichen Raht darfür gehalten / daß es jetzt eben die rechte zeit sey / dise junge Adelsperson auß diser verkehrten Welt abzufordern / so hat sein Allmacht verhenget / daß er durch einen Gellschutz (da die Büchse vnuersehens vnnd ohne einiges Menschen schuld / vnzeitlich abgangen) sein Leben in ettlich stunden hernach seliglich geendet”. 213 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber der Leich / Des Edlen vnnd Vesten Junckern / Hansen Jörgen Branden, 3–4: “Auß disen Worten [Job 14] haben wir klärlich zuuernemen / daß Gott der HErr einem jeden Menschen sein gewisses Zil gesteckt hat (welches Zil wir gleichwol mit vnsern leiblichen Augen nicht sehen künden / wie weit oder nahe wir zu demselbigen haben) dasselbig Zil kan kein Mensch vbergehen: vnd so lang der Mensch noch nicht bey demselbigen Zil ist / so kan jhm auch der leiblich Tod keinen Abbruch thun. Wann aber der Mensch dasselbig Zil erreicht / so kan er dem Tod nicht mehr entweichen. Die Zuständ aber / durch welche des Menschen Tod befürdert würdt / seind allein Mittel vnnd Weg / durch welche der Himlisch Vatter die Menschen zu dem fürgesteckten Zil führet.” 214 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber der Leich / Des Edlen vnnd Vesten Junckern / Hansen Jörgen Branden, 6–7. 215 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber der Leich / Des Edlen vnnd Vesten Junckern / Hansen Jörgen Branden, 7–9.

122

3. Funeral Sermons

on the other hand, those who mourned him need not worry, for he had died in faith, and Osiander declared him to be saved. In this way, Osiander transformed sorrow into learning. When the congregants were relieved of their anxiety for the young dead Hans Jörg Brand, the focus was turned on themselves and their own life, which could end at any time, but which would end with salvation if it was lived in faith. Just as Brand’s life stood in the hands of God, so did theirs. As believers they therefore did not need to worry for themselves either, but should rest assured that the merciful God had planned all for the best in advance. When Osiander gave the funeral sermon for Joachim Quast, he was no longer court preacher, but had been sent out of court by Duke Friedrich and instead held the office of Stiftsprediger (city preacher) in Stuttgart. As a renowned court preacher for many years, Osiander might still have represented the duke’s presence and interest in the funeral for someone who had been the duke’s distinguished and faithful servant during Osiander’s years of service as court preacher. Though he had suffered illness in the last part of his life, Quast’s death had been more harmonious than that of Hans Jörg Brand, and his funeral sermon, though a little longer, had a more relaxed mood. The text from Ecclesiastes 7 states that the day of death is better than the day of birth, and Osiander explained that this was not because birth is evil, but because death is even better than birth, at least for true Christians. Whereas birth is good because it brings life in this world,216 death is better because it brings life in a world far better than this.217 A Christian should therefore not resist death and be like a shy horse jumping whenever something unusual comes in its way.218 Death is not as evil and terrifying to a Christian as it is to human reasoning.219 This firm perspective on death was made possible by the didactic of hope guiding the Lutheran funeral. A secure salvation awaiting all Christians was confirmed in the conclusion of the funeral sermon in a way that made possible, and even urged, a reconciled attitude towards one’s own destiny, as well as a firm trust in fate. In their funeral sermons, these noblemen stood out as examples of biblical truths. Hans Jörg Brand’s life and death exemplified God’s concern for even the smallest sparrow’s death, whereas Joachim Quast’s life and death confirmed that for a Christian the day of death is better than the day of birth. As examples of biblical truths, their lives and deaths expressed a piety which connected their professional ethos and their faith. For Quast’s part, his faithful service through all dangers had a parallel in the way, towards the end of his life, he humbly bore his  Osiander, Ein Predigt / Uber der Leich des Edlen und Vesten Junckern Joachim Quast, 2–13.

216

217 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Uber der Leich des Edlen und Vesten Junckern Joachim Quast, 15–20.

218  Osiander, Ein Predigt / Uber der Leich des Edlen und Vesten Junckern Joachim Quast, 1: “… daß wir ab dem Tod nicht also scheuhen sollen / wie ein scheuch Pferd scheuhet / wann es ettwas / das jhm vngewohnlich fürkompt / ansichtig würdt / zu ruck weichet / oder auff ein seiten ein absprung nimbt.” 219 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Uber der Leich des Edlen und Vesten Junckern Joachim Quast, 2.

3.6 The Death of Theologian and University Chancellor D. Jacob Andreae

123

disease and in the way he trusted his Lord Jesus Christ when facing death.220 For Brand’s part, he had been a loyal and faithful servant who pleased the Duke, and at the same time a believer who accepted communion and confessed Christ.221 The characteristics Osiander attributed to Hans Jörg Brand and Joachim Quast as knights continued in the description of their lives as Christians. Their loyalty and observance as the Duke’s servants had a parallel both in the way they received Christ and in the way they accepted their destiny.

3.6 The Death of Theologian and University Chancellor D. Jacob Andreae Jacob Andreae died at the age of 61 on 7 January 1590 and was buried the next week in Tübinger Stiftskirche, a church he had presided over as dean for 28 years as a part of his office as chancellor of the University of Tübingen. Andreae had a remarkably rapid career; already at the age of twenty-six he was one of the leading clerics of the territory. Therefore, though he was Osiander’s elder by only six years, Andreae was still a major mentor and supporter for Osiander at the outset of his career. Later the two had been close allies in religious politics. Osiander now conducted his colleague’s funeral and presented his funeral sermon. As the senior court preacher and as a representative of the duke’s court, he could present his dead colleague with an honour rooted in the highest authority of the land. Andreae was one of the most influential theologians of his generation and an important servant of the duke. He had contributed to the writing of Württemberg’s church order and been a general superintendent and a visitor of the church in Württemberg. He had been an important contributor to the writing and acceptance of the Book of Concord and had played a major role in the duke’s religious diplomacy. An honourable image of him is preserved in an epitaph which still hangs in the church and reads: Jacob Andreae of Waiblingen, a doctor of theology, a man of great power of judgment and a shining talent, with an outstanding piety and education and admirable skills of persuasion, who was ordained minister of the church at the age of eighteen and who, with his tireless eagerness and useful sermons and writings, served Christ’s church for 48 years, and who, with the sword of the Word of God, fought bravely against the ungodliness and errors of the Roman antichrist and other heretics, and who, called by pious officials, made many and long journeys to reform the church, settle disputes and re-establish concord, which he preserved faithfully as counsellor for the most illustrious dukes of Württemberg, as a dean of the church and as chancellor of the university for 28 years, slept in peace with Christ and 220 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Uber der Leich des Edlen und Vesten Junckern Joachim Quast, 21–22.

221 Osiander, Ein Predigt / Vber der Leich / Des Edlen vnnd Vesten Junckern / Hansen Jörgen Branden, 10.

124

3. Funeral Sermons

was here buried to the sorrow of all pious people in Christ’s year 1590, after having lived for 61 years, 0 months and 13 days.222

Several of the epitaph’s formulations use references from Osiander’s funeral sermon. The sword Andreae is attributed with was a set attribute of St. Paul, the central biblical figure of the funeral sermon,223 and the description of Andreae as a fighter who travelled long journeys is an explicit reference to the particular text of St. Paul which formed the basis for the funeral sermon. The text was taken from 2 Timothy 4:6–8, regarded as a Pauline letter and a classic text in funeral sermons for preachers. Johannes Magirus would later use the text in his funeral sermon for Lucas Osiander as one example of many in what would turn out to be a convention for how Württemberg funeral sermons for preachers were to be written.224 Württemberg preachers held the text to be an expression of St. Paul’s spiritual will, his life’s final testimony in the face of death: For I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time has come for my departure. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day – and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for His appearing.225

In his funeral sermon, Osiander explicitly stated the reasons for this choice of text. It should bring comfort to the mourners, but most of all it should teach the congregants how and why teachers of the church were to be respected. It should

222 About the epitaph for Jacob Andreae, see Stephanie A. Knöll, Die Grabmonumente der Stiftskirche in Tübingen, Beiträge zur Tübinger Geschichte 13 (Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss, 2007), 107. JACOBVS ANDREÆ WAIBLINGENSIS, D. THEOLOGUS VIR IVD(I) CII MAGNI. INGENII DEXTERRIMI, PIETATIS ET ERVDITIONIS EXIMIÆ ELOQVENTIÆ ADMIRANDÆ: QVI AD MINISTERIVM ACCLESIASTICVM ANNO ÆTATIS XVIII LEGITIME VOCATUS ECCLESIÆ CHRISTI CONCIONIBVS ET SCRIPTIS VTILISSIMIS TOTOS XLVIII. ANNOS INDEFESSO LABORE INSERVIVIT: ANTICHRISTI ROMANI ET ALIORUM HÆRETICORUM IMPIETATEM ET ERRORES GLADIO VERBI DEI FORTITER PROFLIGAVIT PEREGRINATIONES MULTAS ET LONGINQVAS, VOCATUS A PIIS MAGISTRATIB(VS) REFORMANDIS ECCLESIIS SEDANDIS DISSENSIONIB(VS) ET CONSTITUENDÆ PIÆ CONCORDIÆ IMPENDIT: CONSILIARIVS ILLVSTRISS(IMORVM) DVCVM WIRTEMBERG(ICORVM) PRÆPOSITUS ECCLESIÆ ET CANCELLARIVS ACADEMIÆ TVBINGENSIS ANNOS XXVIII FIDELISSIMVS FVIT: PLACIDISSIME IN CHR(IST)O OBDORMIVIT. ET OMNIVM PIORVM LVCTV HIC SEPLVTVS EST. ANNO CHRISTI MDXC CVM VIXISSET ANNOS LXI. MENSES O DIES XIII. 223 Knöll, Die Grabmonumente der Stiftskirche in Tübingen, 108: “… Der Verweis auf seine Reisen und seinen Kampf gegen Häretiker, den er ‘mit dem Schwert des Wortes Gottes’ führte, erinnert an seine Leichenpredigt, in der er mit Paulus – dessen Attribut das Schwert ist – verglichen wird”. 224 Magirus, Christliche Leichpredigt. 225 This translation is from the New International Version.

3.6 The Death of Theologian and University Chancellor D. Jacob Andreae

125

point out to them that what they lost when a servant of the church passed away,226 according to the Prophet Daniel’s description of the teachers of the word of God,227 was a shining star and a captain in the battle against heresy.228 Thus the concern of Lutheran funerals that they should bring honour to the deceased229 could here be utilized to promote the honour and respect of a profession, namely preachers. Since it was a funeral for a leading cleric who had been chancellor at the university, with many students and preachers in the congregation, Osiander pointed to the text’s special usefulness. St. Paul wrote his spiritual will as an elderly and renowned theologian to the young and inexperienced Timothy, also a theologian according to Osiander,230 and in his will Paul presented himself as an example for Timothy. In the same way as he was to Timothy, Paul was also useful as an example for the students and future theologians, who could be helped by his example to one day become the shining stars Daniel, according to Osiander, had described theologians to be.231 As Magirus later did in his funeral sermon for Osiander,232 Osiander structured the funeral sermon for Jacob Andreae according to the three headings with which the text summed up Paul’s life. He had fought the good fight, finished the course, and kept faith. And because of this funeral’s specific situation, the natural focus in Osiander’s explanation of the text was on Paul as an example for the future generation of preachers. In the same way Paul fought ferocious animals, though mainly heretics, in his struggle for Christ’s kingdom, so also the students ought to use their future offices as preachers to fight heresy. In the same way Paul fought vices, so should they. When Paul said that he had finished his race, it was because his service had involved travelling thousands of miles. Therefore the students should not be lazy, but be willing to be sent wherever God might send them. As Paul kept faith even in the face of the greatest dangers, the future preachers also should make sure not to lose faith from all the dangers that awaited them, such as hate, lust, heresy and misery.233 It was because his life could be 226 Lucas Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des Ehrwürdigen vnd Hochgelehrten Herrn / Jacobi Andreae, der heyligen Schrifft Doctorn  / Probsts und Cantzlers bey der Vniuersitet zu Tübingen … (Tübingen: Alexander Hock, 1590), 3–4. 227  Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 2: “Die Lehrer werden Leuchten wie des Himmelsglantz …”. 228 Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 7. 229 Cf. Friedemann Merkel, ”Bestattung”, in TRE 5, 743–749. 230 Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 4. 231 Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 4: “Dann solches der heylig Apostel Paulus an dem Exempel seiner Person / lehret: Wie dann auch auß dem selbigen Exempel / die Studierende Jugent / so zur Theologi vnd dem Predigampt erzogen würdt / erlehrnen kan / wie sie sich in die sachen schicken sollen / das sie auch mit der zeit / helle vnnd klare sternen werden / deren sich die Kirch Gottes zuerfrewen habe.” 232 Cf. Chapter 1.2. 233 Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 18.

126

3. Funeral Sermons

summed up this way that Paul could be sure to receive the crown of righteousness. Osiander explained that this reward was not only awaiting those who were to live as preachers, but all Christians who completed their lives in their different vocations.234 The crown of righteousness was thus not only given to servants of the church, but also to those who resembled the servants of the church in their faithfulness and endurance. Paul was an example and a role model for preachers, but through them he was an example also to all other professions. When Osiander later in the funeral sermon summed up Jacob Andreae’s life, he could do so with the same headings that had summed up Paul’s life. With his great intelligence Andreae had been a fighter against sins, vices, and heresy in favour of true doctrine.235 In this fight he spared no one and cared not whether it brought him friends or enemies.236 His many and long travels in Germany and abroad as a theological envoy of his land let him finish his course in a similar manner as Paul, and by never being frightened by any dangers or tricked by any sophistry, he had also kept faith like Paul.237 Osiander’s description of Andreae’s independence, contentiousness, and importance in light of the life of Paul was one of several potentially useful images of him, designed to confirm one of several possible perspectives on him. Andreae was a preacher like Paul, and as such he held significant positions involving specific functions in church and politics. According to Martin Brecht,238 nearness to the ducal church government was a main factor in Andreae’s career. In addition to his great talent as a preacher, he was characterized as a theologian by his abilities as a leader and diplomat and his connection to the ruling family. In 1550, when Andreae was 22 years old, he administered the last Eucharist to Duke Ulrich, and when Andreae three years later was promoted doctor of theology, the same year he was appointed a general superintendent in Göppingen, it had been due more to the strong support of Duke Christoph than to his learning as a theologian. In the position as chancellor of the university, he saw himself mainly as a servant of the duke and only secondarily as an academic. The theological faculty had come to play a key role in Württemberg’s foreign policy239 and Andreae strove to keep both it and the other faculties under ducal control and to extend the duke’s authority and ability to intervene in the affairs of the university. This ambition of Andreae had led to numerous conflicts. As chancellor he considered it his responsibility to supervise discipline in church and university and on occasions therefore hindered the appointment of several scholars at different  Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 18–19. Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 21. 236  Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 22. 237 Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 21–26. 238 See Martin Brecht, “Andreae, Jacob”, in TRE 2, 672–680; and Siegfried Hermle, “Andreae, Jacob”, in RGG4 1, 470. 239 Ehmer, “Württemberg”, 185. 234

235 Osiander,

3.6 The Death of Theologian and University Chancellor D. Jacob Andreae

127

faculties and even forced professors to retire on suspicion of heresy. His view of the duke’s authority exceeded even the duke’s expectations. In 1588, the duke therefore wanted Andreae to retire from his office as chancellor, but failed in this wish. Though Andreae stressed the importance of the ruler’s authority in society, church, and education, Osiander’s description of him as an independent fighter might still have held some truth. Andreae did not simply teach the ideology and attitudes of the ruler, but promoted and administered a system which gave the ruler a very strong position, even when this was contrary to the ruler’s own wishes. Brecht therefore concludes that Andreae’s belief in authority was not an effect of submissiveness, but an essential part of his thinking.240 This ambiguous view of Andreae as a leader might have been implicitly addressed by Osiander’s description; it might have been intended to adjust the perception of him as tied to secular authority by picturing him as a church fighter of St. Paul’s mould, who stayed with the truth even while under pressure. The funeral sermon insisted that when he was being disputed and contested, Andreae also resembled St. Paul. To mention the deceased’s human frailty seems to have been a convention of the Lutheran funeral sermon, and this was done in the description of Andreae’s death. Even in his final sickness and weakness Andreae resembled Paul. When facing death he remained a teacher, surrounded by colleagues from the university and addressing the young with his admonitions.241 In his conclusion, Osiander showed how Andreae’s life was an example that brought near and animated the example of St. Paul. As a theologian in his own time and place, Andreae had lived a life which turned out to have been a new version of Paul’s, and which brought the example of Paul into the congregants’ own context. Thus Osiander positioned Andreae somewhere between Paul and the congregants. As St. Paul had been an example to Timothy, Andreae now was an example to the young students and indirectly to everyone else. In the funeral sermon’s concluding prayer, Osiander let the life of Andreae take Paul’s place. Here he prayed: Since this noble person, who earned great merit from his contribution to this church and school, as well as to all other evangelical churches, fought a good fight as an honest spiritual warrior, and completed his long and wide course as a good Christian, and also kept faith in Christ his Lord to the end, he is given the crown of righteousness, the one which the Lord, who is a righteous judge, will give to him and to all those who with love have longed for his appearing.242 240 Brecht,

“Andreae, Jacob”, 676–678. Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 26. 242 Osiander, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych des … Jacobi Andreae, 27: “Dieweil dann dieser thewer / vnd vmb diese Kirchen vnd Hoheschul allhie / ja auch vmb andere Euangelische Christliche Kirchen wolverdiente Mann / einen guten Kampff / als ein Geistlicher redlicher Kriegßmann gekämpffet: vnd seinen langen vnnd weitten Lauff Christlich vnnd wol vollendet: Auch seinem HErrn Christo biß ans End / glauben gehalten / So ist jhm auch hinfort beygelegt die Kron der 241 Osiander,

128

3. Funeral Sermons

In the same way as in other funeral sermons, the proclamation of Andreae’s salvation was a consequence of the faith with which he met death. In his case, however, the description of faith was not self-supporting, but was parallel to the faith of St. Paul. Andreae’s salvation was therefore strengthened by St. Paul’s salvation, which was proclaimed in the Bible text. Osiander proclaimed Andreae to be saved with a syllogism of salvation. The text from the Bible confirmed that Paul was saved because of the faith with which he lived. Now it turned out that Andreae had lived as Paul, and thus Andreae also was saved. It was a syllogism designed to include the congregants, and which would help the congregants enter into a community where they would resemble Andreae when they were saved. At the outset of the sermon, Osiander stated that his intention with his choice of text was to bring comfort and to teach how a servant of the church ought to be respected. It is an intention in harmony with the situation in which it was presented, namely Osiander presenting the funeral sermon for a colleague who had held a similar position to his own, where he was given the opportunity to convince his listeners about how to regard and respect this position. It is a sermon well-suited to shed light on how Osiander regarded his own position in relation to the duke’s interests. Again Osiander employs examples to reach his audience. As in the case of Duchess Anna Maria, Paul is the biblical example, but here they are connected differently. Paul and the deceased relate to each other not because the deceased is reached by and illustrates Paul’s message, as was the case in the sermon for Anna Maria. Here they resemble each other as persons. Paul and Andreae lived similar lives, and this assures Andreae’s salvation. In this way, faith and life, works and salvation are connected far more clearly in Andreae’s case than in any of the previous funeral sermons. Andreae’s life is an example of true faith, and by resembling him others may also feel secure about their salvation. Even though people of all callings are encouraged to find inspiration in the lives and faith of Paul and Andreae, the encouragement is especially directed at preachers and theology students. In the sermon there is a clear sense of the special role and esteem that belong to the office of preacher. Osiander was not just promoting a general view of preachers’ position in society, but also addressing it as a theme that needed to be discussed when Andreae’s memory was to be presented. His role as a strong advocate for secular authority’s influence in matters of church and theology, and theology’s cooperation with and influence in politics, would have been well known and disputed among his colleagues at the university. Osiander was clearly taking a side in his sermon, and he was especially clear about his standing in his account of Andreae “having fought the good fight”. Regarding this part of Paul’s text, the sermon described Paul’s Gerechtigkeit / welche jhm geben wirdt / der HErr / der gerechte Richter / Nicht allein aber jhm / sondern auch allen denen / die sein Erscheinung lieb haben …”

3.6 The Death of Theologian and University Chancellor D. Jacob Andreae

129

example as a life which led to salvation by having been governed by nothing but faith. Paul’s example was connected to a description of Andreae’s profession as a theologian as one that was governed solely by the Word of God and which was therefore independent of other interests. The emphasis on the theologian’s independence confirmed a certain perspective on Andreae’s career, namely that, in the conflicts in which he was involved, he had not served the duke in order to gain favour for himself, but that he had served the faith and God’s Word, even though it had turned out also to be beneficial for the duke. Osiander’s sermon was well suited to counter suspicions that Andreae had submitted to the duke in questions of theology and morals. Though aware of the close relationship to secular authority, the sermon still insisted on another interpretation of this authority. It presented the example of the preacher Andreae as someone whose service had been characterized by a close cooperation between secular and church authority, but which still resembled Paul in life, work, and faith. When Osiander presented this sermon, he did so in an office which expressed the same close cooperation between church and state, namely as court preacher and the duke’s representative. In this way, in his account of Paul and Andreae he could present himself as a truly Pauline and independent preacher. To a new generation of students, Osiander employed Andreae’s example to promote the preacher’s office as useful and important to the duke, but which at the same time was a truly Christian office.

Chapter 4

Osiander as Funeral Preacher

The situation that framed Osiander’s service as funeral preacher allows his funeral sermons testify to theology’s and religion’s political function in Württemberg towards the end of the sixteenth century. In light of their historical context, these sermons help describe an aspect of the confessionalization process and the preacher’s role in it. The introductory chapter of Part One of this book described how Lutheran preachers appeared as a third estate protecting church interests against the ruler and finding allies among the estates to balance the ruler’s power. That preachers could negotiate the interests between duke and estates was especially evident in Württemberg, where the basic constitutional agreement regulating the relationship between duke and estates was one that tied the duke to true religion and secured the role of the church. Within this system, the court preacher played a central role. A mutual dependence connected duke and court preacher in a close relationship. In his position at court, the court preacher’s influence rested on his ability to be useful for the duke and his rule, a usefulness he could choose to withhold. Thus, he could balance the duke’s influence on church matters, which in Osiander’s case meant a rather wide field of politics. The funeral sermons analyzed were characterized by this preaching role. ­Osiander’s employer Duke Ludwig has been described as a sovereign who allowed his counselors, especially the elite theologians, considerable freedom and influence. The conflicts that arose between Osiander and Duke Ludwig’s successor, Duke Friedrich, confirm the reality of this influence. Duke Friedrich was a sovereign who sought to establish a more absolutist form of government, allowing the estates less power and gaining tighter control over his counsellors. How then, are Osiander’s sermons to be understood in light of his role at court? Can we find in them the ideal court preacher as he was described in Polycarp Leyser’s classic text, as someone who did not stay in good grace with his audience or superiors, but remembered his duties to admonish? How was such independence expressed in Osiander’s sermons? What should be understood as being in the preacher’s interest? To trace this interest, this analysis explored the sermons’ confessional intent. Confession was inscribed in the territory’s laws and presented a basic premise for how Osiander could fulfil his role. Therefore another way of asking how different interests were balanced in these sermons is to ask the ques-

132

4. Osiander as Funeral Preacher

tion of confession and genre. What happens to the funeral sermon as a Lutheran genre when it is given the function of serving a court preacher’s preaching? Württemberg’s church order prescribed a two-fold function for the funeral sermon. It was meant to comfort the bereaved, awaken their faith, and lead them to a Christian life. This two-fold function was a consequence of basic aspects of Lutheran faith. First, that everything regarding someone’s eternal destiny was settled at the moment of death by the faith with which one met death, and second, that salvation followed from faith alone. In order to affirm this faith, the funeral should contain nothing that could raise doubts about the security of salvation connected to faith, as had been the case with the old ritual’s prayer for the deceased. One should trust that the deceased was safe and in the hands of God, but unreachable by communications from the living. From this premise it followed that the preacher in the funeral addressed his audience and not the deceased. The funeral should teach the living, but not help the deceased. Therefore, the funeral sermon changed the role of the deceased in the funeral. From having been the object of the bereaved’s concern, he or she now became a helper for the bereaved and the rest of the audience. The deceased did so by a teaching that resulted from his or her example. This teaching was guided by the funeral sermon’s genre conventions, which let biblical teaching be followed by a short biography exemplifying the biblical message. In this way, descriptions of secular lives could serve as examples of truths of faith and of how one should live and believe. The form of remembering induced by the genre has been described as a form of horizontalization. From being remembered as part of a negotiation with the beyond, the deceased were now remembered because of their relevance for life in this world. Osiander built upon these theological and homiletical premises in his funeral sermons. He employed a genre which lent him the possibility of combining teaching the truths of faith with descriptions of worldly lives. From his position, the genre offered a useful tool to be employed for confessionalization, in the formation of believing subjects to support the growth of a confessional state. The analysis of Osiander’s funeral sermons has therefore investigated how Osiander in his use of secular lives as examples of faith could serve the duke’s interests and how he could lay down theological premises for secular rule. In all of the sermons, we have seen a preacher who placed himself close to the duke and agreed with the duke in a way that made him important to the duke. This was found most plainly in Osiander’s funeral sermons for different noblemen, in the way they let the noblemen’s loyalty to the duke appear as aspects of their faith. In some other sermons, the preacher served the duke’s and his own interest in a confessionally influenced way. A confessionally influenced theology let Osiander present Duchess Anna Maria as an example of Pauline faith. He did so in a way that brought the duchess’ portrait back to the family’s gallery of venerables and helped restore the family’s honour. He did so, however, in a way that at the same time also confirmed the family’s ties to Lutheran teaching and Lutheran

4. Osiander as Funeral Preacher

133

teaching’s role as a support for their rule. The funeral sermon for Duchess Dorothea Ursula had the doctrine of the security of salvation as a premise for its communication. The premise let the preacher turn unambiguously to the living without sentimental concern for the destiny of the deceased. Despite the tragedy of a beautiful duchess dying at the age of twenty-three, the preacher was undaunted by the duke’s grief and saw no need to dwell unduly on sorrow. Instead he focused on what the duke could learn from the duchess’ death, namely not to trust earthly wealth and beauty. This situation, where the preacher employed the deceased wife as an example to teach the husband about the truths of life, could at the next level of dissemination be employed to aid confessionalization by presenting to a greater audience a duke who was willing to be taught by his preacher on the occasion of the death of his wife. In the funeral sermon for the duke, the genre’s focus on certainty of salvation and the way it directed concern towards the living enabled a way of remembering the dead duke that could serve confessionalization. The certainty of salvation was employed together with the identification with Old Testament kings to describe how God had been at work in the duke’s rule and how God was acting in his death. Since he focused on teaching the living instead of mourning the dead, Osiander could present his funeral sermon as the duke’s last instruction to his subjects. In this situation, one can observe how Osiander in his sermon took on several roles compatible with contributing to confessionalization. He appeared as the moral judge of the duke’s life and government, he approved of the duke’s role as protector of the church, he identified a divine will behind what the duke accomplished in life, and he redirected the subjects’ loyalty to the next duke. The analysis of Osiander’s funeral sermons showed Osiander as a preacher who sided unambiguously with the duke and supported his interests. That does not mean that he subjected his interests as a theologian to those of the duke. Osiander’s support and loyalty rested on the premise that the duke was a ruler who offered the court preacher real influence. Osiander could hardly have presented a similar sermon as he did for Duke Ludwig for an absolutist ruler. Osiander’s confrontation with Duke Friedrich, who threw him out of court before he could present the duke’s funeral sermon, seems to confirm this. The way Osiander preached in funerals for ducal servants and the ducal family positioned him in a central political and social role. Osiander’s funeral sermon for preacher and university chancellor Jacob Andreae contained an implicit self-presentation very much in accordance with this role. The sermon described a preacher who resembled Paul in the way he was governed solely by faith and its concerns, but who served the duke and was useful to him without compromising his primary, theological concern. The preacher’s role apparent in Osiander’s funeral sermon brought with it a certain form of homiletics. Some rhetorical devices proved especially efficient for Osiander in fulfilling his role as court preacher at the height of the confessionalization era.

134

4. Osiander as Funeral Preacher

The theological system which took the certainty of salvation for granted led to a homiletics in which examples became the most important rhetorical device. It was a system which let the preacher focus on the significance of contemporary examples for life in this world. Examples from different professions and estates were employed in an estate specific system which offered diverse implications for the relationship between life and faith. As such, it was well suited to serve a disciplining that supported the interests of confessionalization. Osiander’s use of examples rested on a development in the Lutheran preaching culture of preceding generations. Compared to how first generation Lutherans had employed examples, Osiander’s generation became very bold. First generation Lutherans had prescribed that the exemplary in the life of a deceased person should be found solely in his or her faith and trust in God. Johannes Bugenhagen’s funeral sermon for Luther is a good example of the great caution with which they treated examples in their sermons. Only faith was seen as the permissible connection between biblical teaching and biography in a funeral sermon. Osiander’s homiletical style expanded considerably the definition of the exemplary. Not only did Osiander find similarities in situations between biblical text and the life of the deceased, as first generation Lutherans had done, but he also found similarities in character and biography of biblical persons and contemporary examples and let these similarities tie biblical teaching with biographical account in a funeral sermon’s composition. From a situation where the biblical text was tied to a biography solely by its message, the connection was expanded to involve resembling motifs. Not only faith and teaching connected the example to that which it exemplified, but also the example’s course of life, character, deeds, and actions. This enhanced example rhetoric gave Osiander new possibilities for contributing to a confessionalization process with his sermons. When the noblemen resembled Job, they did so with a piety that not only connected them with salvation, but which also expressed nobility and endurance befitting men of their estate. When Anna Maria resembled Job, it was because her madness was a suffering compatible with the faith of a duchess. When the duke resembled Josiah it was because he had protected faith as a Lutheran duke should. The first generation of Lutherans restricted exemplarity to that which pointed to faith and trust. They did so in order to avoid questioning the certainty of salvation by descriptions that could imply that works contributed to salvation. This reluctance seems to have disappeared in Osiander’s sermons. To protect the certainty of salvation does not stand out as an urgent issue in these sermons. Perhaps the urgency of the issue had declined over several generations through innumerable funeral sermons which had guaranteed the salvation of more or less all Lutherans? Osiander also seems to have taken this salvation for granted, as he stated most boldly in his funeral sermon for Duchess Dorothea Ursula. Instead of arguing at length in favour of the salvation of believers, he soon turns to descriptions of lives to be remembered and honoured and instructions for how one

4. Osiander as Funeral Preacher

135

should live. The way Osiander thus lets the certainty of salvation be a background premise that aids a focus on the inner-worldly is a confessional characteristic of his homiletical style. The change that had taken place compared to former Lutherans is observed most clearly in funeral sermons for preachers. The funeral sermons for Andreae and Osiander were designed almost identically. They both explained a Pauline text, and this text was combined with a biography of the deceased preacher not simply because a Pauline teaching was connected to the preacher’s faith, as had been Johannes Bugenhagen’s way of connecting Bible text and biography in his funeral sermon for Martin Luther in 1546. Bugenhagen’s sermon resisted the exemplary and was cautious not to make Luther’s life a role model to be imitated by Lutheran believers.1 In Osiander’s sermon for Andreae and in Magirus’ sermon for Osiander, very little hesitation can be found in describing the lives of deceased preachers as exemplary lives. Rather, the sermons insist on describing the lives of Andreae and Osiander as new versions of Paul. In these sermons, it is the likeness with Paul’s life with regards to works as well as character that confirms the preacher’s share in a heavenly reward. Helped by this sermon concept, funeral preachers could contribute to confessionalization in a way that suited their interest. They could show how preachers held an independent office while at the same time being pillars of society. This possibility rested on a development in the interpretation of Lutheran doctrine. Theologians of Osiander’s generation had found new ways of describing how good works were compatible with the principle of justification by faith alone. Osiander was not responsible for this development, but took part in a way of reasoning and thinking on theology that was shared by his generation of Württemberg theologians. In 1570, Wilhelm Bidembach presented a funeral sermon for Johannes Brenz, the central figure in Lutheran theology in sixteenth century Württemberg. Here he compared Paul’s life with the biography of the deceased preacher, Brenz, in a funeral sermon which followed almost identically the same concept as the sermons analyzed here. Bidembach was obviously aware of the problems this way of preaching could raise in a Lutheran context. Therefore he had argued in favour of his way of describing a life with its characteristics and accomplishments as connected to salvation, and he did so with the following argument: Even though salvation is given by God’s mercy and received in faith, and though it is not the imitation of holy lives that saves, the significance of the virtues described is still very great, for they are signs of the faith and salvation which the funeral sermon wants to preach. The lives described in funeral sermons witness to faith and therefore contribute to the listeners’ salvation. The described lives do so not by 1 Bugenhagen, Eine Christliche predigt / vber der Leich vnd begrebnis / des Ehrwirdigen D. Mar­ tini Luthers, Cii.

136

4. Osiander as Funeral Preacher

encouraging imitation, but by testifying to the good conscience offered by faith, Bidembach claimed.2 Thus Bidembach clearly recognized an urgent problem in his sermon and defended his sermon against it by rejecting imitation as a motivation for the use of examples. His defense, however, is not quite convincing, since his sermon’s rhetoric is clearly designed to encourage imitation of Johannes Brenz. This way of employing the life of Paul as a motif connected to descriptions of the lives of deceased preachers was soon established as a tradition in Württemberg, and the way this practice was justified seems to have evolved in succeeding generations. Jacob Andreae, who was remembered with a sermon of this type, presented several sermons following the exact same pattern. In one of them, a sermon for his colleague Primus Truber, he argued in favour of this way of describing preachers as having lived exemplary lives connecting them to heavenly reward. He claimed that there existed no contradiction between the doctrine of salvation by grace received in faith and the fact witnessed several places in Scripture, namely that after having made us His children, God will reward our good deeds in life eternal.3 In Andreae’s thought, the true understanding of the doctrine of justification allowed for a preaching that promoted a lived life as an example to be imitated. It was an understanding which saw justification by faith alone respected by an ordering of the sequences in salvation that gave priority to grace without diminishing the significance of the works that followed. Osiander obviously agreed with this view of the usefulness of examples in funeral sermons and allowed much of his sermons’ impact rely on this rhetorical device. The opportunity for this way of using examples was given to him by a Württemberg theology which stressed the ordering of sequences in someone’s process of coming to faith and on the following process of sanctification as involving good works. This theology will be discussed in greater detail in Part Two of the book.

2 Wilhelm Bidembach, Ein Christliche Leichpredig / Bey der Begrebnuss weilundt des Ehrwür­ digen vnd Hochgelehrten Herrn / Johann Brentzen / Probsts zu Stuttgarten / Gehalten in der StifftsKirchen allda / den Zwölfften Septembris / Anno 1570 (Tübingen: Ulrich Morharts Wittib, 1570), 5–6: “Fürs dritt / souil Sanct Paulus Leben vnnd Wandel bey den Ephesern betrifft / wiewol er abermals den verdienst seiner Gerechtigkeit und Seligkeit gar nicht in sein ehrlichs Leben vnd erbarn vnergerlichen Wandel setzt / sonder solches alles vor dem Gericht Gottes für lautter Rath achtet / jedoch zeucht ers vor der Menschen Gericht vnd Vrtheil / als ein zeugnuß eines guoten vnbeschwerten Gewissens herfür / Dann wir eins guoten Namen vnd Leümbds vmb vnsers Nechsten willen bedörfen / wie Augustinus sagt / auff das derselbig nicht durch vns geergert / der Nam Gottes vmb vnsert willen nicht verlöstert / dem Euangelio kein Schandtfleck angehenckt / den Guothertzigen kein Bekümmernuß / den Feinden kein Frewd vnnd Frolocken angerichtet / sonder in allweg die Lehr vnsers Heilandts Jesu Christi mit guoten Wercken von vns geziert werde.” 3 Jacob Andreae, Christliche Leichpredig bey der Begräbnus des Ehrwürdigen vnd Hochgelehr­ ten Herrn / Primus Trubern … Pfarrer zu Derendingen / bey Tübingen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1586), 38–39.

Part Two

Forming Young Lutherans: Lucas Osiander as Catechist in Esslingen (1598–1603)

Chapter 5

Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

In this part of the book we shall study Osiander as city preacher and catechist in Esslingen, where he found himself in 1598 after he had been exiled from Württemberg due to his confrontation with Duke Friedrich in the Landtag. The city was situated only fifteen kilometres southeast of Stuttgart, but since it was an imperial city it was not formally under the duke’s authority. Here we shall study Osiander with the same interest as in the previous part of the book and view his preaching in light of the confessionalization theory. Which interests did he serve as an educator and preacher? Was he an agent for a disciplining from above or did he support interests from below? We shall study his theological style, his strategies for learning, and his theological concepts, and see how they are connected to the historical processes of which his preaching activity was a part. The discussion of Osiander’s contribution to confessionalization should be informed by a description of the city as the context for his preaching. In early modern imperial cities, interests from above and below meet in a way that is very relevant for the analysis of Osiander’s sermons and the interests negotiated in them.

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization Recent research has shown how early modern cities were unique meeting grounds between feudalism and what has been labelled communalism by historian Peter Blickle.1 The fact that imperial cities were the emperor’s own property, but at the same time were spread over great distance throughout the Empire as islands within other territories, had resulted in a special political organization. As his property, they were embedded in a feudal system with the emperor as their lord, but as spread out over great distances, they were difficult to control. The emperor therefore trusted the city councillors to maintain control on his behalf. The cities could therefore develop considerable autonomy, an autonomy that accepted a more communalist and republican form of rule than what existed in territorial states.2 1 Peter Blickle, Kommunalismus: Skizzen einer gesellschaftlichen Organisationsform, vol. 1: Oberdeutschland (München: Oldenbourg, 2000). 2 Volker Press, “Stadt‑ und Dorfgemeinden im territorialstaatlichen Gefüge des Spätmittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit”, Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991): 428–430.

140

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

This form of rule has been claimed to have had some common features. City council and city elite ruled on the basis of a negotiation resting on an alliance between the city’s different public bodies. Guilds of craftsmen and property-owning patricians made up the sides of this negotiation. Blickle characterized communalism as a phenomenon where political legitimacy is not derived from lordship. He showed that this form of rule was especially prevalent in South-German cities during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. Communalism was associated with the so called third estate, comprising those who work, and it was connected with the interests of guild organizations, who used it to secure a certain influence over the government of the city. Rule was legitimized in an assembly of all citizens, the so called communal assembly, in which every house had one representative, and which supported the council’s policies because they served the common good, gemeiner Nutzen, meaning peace and prosperity. Blickle sees the fact that guild revolutions can be observed in all centuries from the fourteenth to the eighteenth as a confirmation of the strength of this phenomenon in the history of the cities.3 Researchers have emphasized that this communalism existed within and together with a feudal system. City autonomy rested on the fact that city councillors could have better control within the city than the emperor, which also meant that the city councillors were subject to the emperor in a feudal system. From the emperor’s perspective, they had their authority in the city because it was given to them by him and not because it was legitimated in a communal assembly. The alliance that made up a city was therefore one that gravitated between communalism and lordship as opposite poles.4 In this political framework, Blickle finds that Reformation theology may be described as a form of communalism theory, even though this holds true to a lesser extent for Lutheran theology than for Zwinglian theology. This theology was promoted in the cities by guild interests; it translated ecclesia with commune and supported increased influence for the local community. It did so by insisting on the parish’s right to choose their pastor, decide confession, and administer the ban.5 5.1.1 Communalism: Political Structures and Social Common Sense Compared to church historian Bernd Moeller’s classic study on imperial cities and the Reformation from 1962, Blickle’s description of Reformation theology as communalism theory offers a different perspective on the cities’ role in the spread of Reformation thought. Moeller’s point was that cities were especially nutritious  Blickle, Kommunalismus, 131–145. Isenmann, “Die städtische Gemeinde im oberdeutsch-schweizerischen Raum (1300–1800)”, Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991): 203, and 245–249. 5 Peter Blickle, “Begriffsbildung in heuristischer Absicht”, Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991): 29–30. 3

4 Eberhardt

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization

141

soil for Reformation theology. The combination of relative autonomy, humanistically oriented elites, printing presses, and a republican form of government meant that the new thoughts could take root more easily in these surroundings. In addition, city mentality would influence the form of Reformation theology as it was received in the cities. Early modern cities traditionally regarded themselves as salvation communities and saw religious unity as crucial for the city’s unity. Moeller claimed that this resulted in a theology that emphasized how salvation was linked to community, as well as the connectedness of city organization with church organization and of church doctrine with civil morality. Therefore, though Luther’s writings had been widespread in the cities in the first years after the Reformation, it was Zwinglian theologians that gained support in the cities from the 1530s and onwards.6 Thomas Brady argued that Moeller saw greater harmony and community in the cities than what would have been the case, and claimed that Reformation thought would also have been employed as a governmental tool for city elites.7 An advantage of Blickle’s concept is the way it ties observations on city religiosity to greater structures. In it, the question about the spread and influence of Zwinglian theology in cities is seen not only as a question about religion as a governmental tool for the elite or an expression of the city as a salvation community, but as part of the ongoing political negotiations between guilds and patricians, city councils and emperor, as well as that between emperor and territorial princes. It is within this political perspective that Blickle sees Zwinglian theology as a form of communalism theory, as a form of faith and theology that could justify and legitimize communalism. Communalism is thus seen as a concept that may connect the question of large scale political interests with questions of faith and values, and thus with discourses on theology and confession. Wolfgang Kaschuba has pointed out that communalism should not only be regarded as an organizational principle or a movement fighting for the rights of the third estate. It should also be described as social common sense as it may be studied in the codification of worldviews and social conditions in laws and orders. Here one may find customs and relational patterns with roots in the ground level of society, but which have to relate to a feudal framework. Ethical maxims and religious motifs describe patterns of actions which produce norms and regulate the everyday life of individuals and groups. It is a production of norms that is both formal and informal and in which one may trace conflicts between the claims of citizens and city authorities. The ethical maxims and religious motifs therefore express a form of inner lordship in city community regulating political and economic power, but also social and confessional conformity. Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1987). A. Brady, Ruling Class, Regime and Reformation at Strasbourg, 1520–1555, Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought 22 (Leiden: Brill, 1978). 6 Bernd

7 Thomas

142

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

Kaschuba observes that communalism as social common sense is a production of norms that takes place according to some common principles. It supports rejection of external claims of authority, it has an ability to develop a principle of mutuality, and it facilitates an exchange of interests between lordship and community. In this way communalism may be described as a discourse system which relies on common sense and which is made up by binding together everyday experiences and interpretations, as well as by structures of order and values. The binding of everyday experiences incorporates some experiences as homely and separates those who are inside the community from those who are outside it, thus drawing a sociocultural borderline. Only a communalism containing such common sense elements would be sustainable, according to Kaschuba.8 By describing how religion, in our case as it is expressed in sermons, contributes to regulate this social common sense, one may also show how it is politically influential and how it takes part in the negotiation of interests from above and below. 5.1.2 Shifting Premises for Political Influence The basic premises for the relation between the opposite political forces of a city varied throughout history. When the constitution based on Charles V’s constitutional charter was sent to the cities in 1558, it resulted in a major shift in the balance between lordship and community, or feudalism and communalism. After decades with guild revolts and advancing Protestantism in the cities, the emperor had won the Schmalkaldic War and seen the Swabian League collapse, and he now had the power to regain stricter control over the imperial cities. The charter was written to serve this goal by removing guild representation in city councils and by overriding the cities’ own regulations of crafts and trade. Thus it put an end to guilds’ political influence and restricted their activity to what was relevant for working life in a strict sense.9 The shift dramatically altered the conditions and possibilities for communalism in the cities. A city’s existence rested on the basic agreement that it received protection in return for loyalty. When a communalist basis for city rule was explicitly rejected in 1558, city councils no longer saw themselves as a representative government for the citizens, but as a magistrate and authority installed by God and deserving the citizens’ obedience. They had their authority solely on authority delegated by the emperor, their offices were eternal, and the social difference between ruler and subject was regarded a premise for legitimacy of 8 Wolfgang Kaschuba, “Kommunalismus als sozialer ‘Common Sense’: Konzeption von Lebenswelt und Alltagskultur im neuzeitlichen Gemeindegedanken”, Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991): 67–69, and 76. 9  Eberhardt Isenmann, “Die städtische Gemeinde im oberdeutsch-schweizerischen Raum”, 196, 246, and 249; and Eberhard Naujoks, “Latente Zunfttradition in den schwäbischen Reichsstädten”, Vierteljahresschrift für Sozial‑ und Wirtschaftsgeschichte 49 (1962): 187.

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization

143

rule.10 One observes that in practice, however, councils still had to admit guilds a certain freedom. The idea of lordship as representative did not simply disappear, but citizenry and commune remained constitutional bodies with the right to some form of participation. Communalism persisted in a muted form, ready to be actualized when conditions allowed it, and still existing within feudalism as its relative opposite.11 Another important observation from research on imperial cities in the second half of the sixteenth century is that the surrounding territories came to constrain the cities’ economic power and develop at their expense. Territorial states increasingly employed their military and economic power to gain political influence in the cities. It has been observed that in this period the decisive impulses for confessionalization in the cities originated from territorial states. It was territorial states that benefitted from confessionalization, and they did so by employing confessional control to discipline communal autonomy.12 5.1.3 Esslingen The tendencies pointed out in recent historiography are easily recognizable in Esslingen’s history. From its beginnings, the city had been governed by a group of patricians stemming from the nobility, but during the fifteenth century guilds gained influence in the city councils and balanced the power of the noble citizens as an important political factor in the city.13 Whereas the patriciate’s power had its roots outside of the city, the situation for the guilds, which represented the majority of the citizens, was quite the opposite. Their power base was local, and lay, by their popular support, in the ability to set the agenda for local politics.14 Authority lay with a great council elected by the communal assembly and with a small council with representatives from patrician families and from the great council. It was a system that lent citizens and guild organizations formal political influence, and which made possible the election of a crafts master from one of the guilds as mayor in 1532. 10 Isenmann,

250.

“Die städtische Gemeinde im oberdeutsch-schweizerischen Raum”, 244 and

11 Eberhardt Isenmann, “Obrigkeit und Stadtgemeinde in der frühen Neuzeit”, in Einwohner und Bürger auf dem Weg zur Demokratie: Von den antiken Stadtrepubliken zur modernen Kom­ munalverfassung, ed. Hans Eugen Specker, Forschungen zur Geschichte der Stadt Ulm 28 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1997), 123. 12 Press, “Stadt‑ und Dorfgemeinden im territorialstaatlichen Gefüge des Spätmittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit”, 435–440; and André Holenstein, Beat Kümin, and Andreas Würgler, “Diskussionsbericht”, Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991), 497. 13 Tilman Matthias Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen: Grundlagen, Geschichte, Organisation, ed. Walter Bernhardt, Esslinger Studien 8 (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1987), 25–27. 14 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 141–142.

144

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

The guild mobilization that took place from 1531–1551 was an important basis for the introduction of the reformation in Esslingen. Guild interests united with the interests of Protestant clergy, so that the introduction of Protestant services in the city was decided by a vote in the communal assembly, and the election of a guildsman as mayor was helped by the support of the first Protestant city preacher Ambrosius Blarer. This role of Protestant theology corresponds well with Blickle’s characterization of it as communalism theory. It was a religious reform promoted by guilds and citizens, who were attracted by the idea of the priesthood of all believers, trying to organize an independent church regiment where authority rested locally, and struggling to gain control of the means of discipline.15 The fact that the city council saw it necessary to ban clergy membership in guilds already in 1533 to forestall a threat to the council’s influence in the church testifies to the close connection between Protestant theology and guild interests in Esslingen.16 Still, guilds and citizens never gained full control of the city’s church regiment, which remained a battleground for the interests of citizens and elite, in a fight over the means of discipline and the education of the young. Among patrician families, many kept to the old faith. They still tried to gain control of church property,17 but their loyalty to the emperor restricted their options. Their church politics were conservative in an attempt to respect their loyalty to the emperor, but flexible enough to permit the citizens of the city freedom to develop their new faith.18 The Protestant clergy seem to have formed a corporation within the city, even though they formally were servants of the council which financed their salaries. The ministry, which consisted of the collegium of preachers and was led by the superintendent who administered his clergy and organized church services, seems to have had the character of a corporation among others within the corporative city society.19 They were a group of servants representing the citizen’s religion and were allowed some freedom within the Catholic elite’s government. 15 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 140, 65. 137. See page 91 on the referendum on religion among the guilds. See also page 112. Moeller sees the fact that the Reformation often was introduced by referenda in the cities as confirmation of the fact that cities had a far greater element of public rule than was the case in ducal territories. See Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 26–29. 16 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 139; and Eberhard Naujoks, Ob­ rigkeitsgedanke, Zunftverfassung und Reformation: Studien zur Verfassungsgeschichte von Ulm, Esslingen und Schwäbisch Gmünd, Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg B 3 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1958), 87–96. 17 On the roots of the city council’s fight for influence over the city’s church, see Moritz Freiherr von Campenhausen, Der Klerus der Reichsstadt Esslingen 1321–1531: Das Verhältnis des Rates zu den Geistlichen von der Kapellenordnung bis zur Reformation, Esslinger Studien 19 (Esslingen am Neckar: Stadtarchiv, 1999). 18 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 139. 19 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 155–156.

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization

145

5.1.4 The Emperor’s Intervention As a result of the emperor’s intervention in the imperial cities’ constitution in 1558, political power in Esslingen shifted from guilds to a small number of wealthy citizens. Authority was transferred from the guild dominated great council to the smaller council with representatives from families wealthy enough to hold unpaid full-time positions.20 Seen from the elite’s perspective, there was some logic in this intervention. An estate within the Empire, the city was part of a feudal system where the same form of loyalty was expected of it as of other estates. On the other hand, due to its republican constitution which allowed a community of citizens’ influence over its politics, the city appeared as potentially unstable or unpredictable to its feudal partners. Through his envoys to the imperial cities, the emperor restricted almost completely the guilds’ constitutional influence in the imperial cities and strengthened further the patriciate’s representation in the government. In Esslingen, guilds were forbidden, guildhouses sold off, and the city’s disciplinary institutions were laid in the hands of the small council dominated by the patriciate. In this way, the patriciate’s power within the city came to be solely grounded in the emperor’s power.21 To the patriciate, the emperor was therefore not only the city’s protector, but also a guarantor of their local influence.22 Still, even though the guilds had lost formal political influence, guild traditions prevailed which the city council had to take into consideration. A study by Eberhard Naujoks showed how the emperor’s new regulations for crafts and trade in imperial cities had to be adjusted in Esslingen. Though the instructions were issued by the emperor, it was still up to the local authority to find a negotiable implementation of these instructions, and the city council in Esslingen chose to do so in a way that allowed guilds some autonomy. Naujoks saw this as a sign of prevalent guild traditions in the city; the council had to make such concessions to craftsmen and guild masters in order to be able to exercise any influence over them. These concessions therefore testify to existing forces of resistance to the elite’s rule.23 Another sign of such prevalent traditions is the fact that fined punishments had to be announced through the guild masters if they were to be communicated at all. Since guilds were granted more freedom and autonomy in Esslingen than in comparable cities such as Ulm, one should assume that guild traditions were strong in the city. Some form of franchise and representation for

Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 69–75. Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 61–63 and 139–141; Ehrenpreis and Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter, 31; and Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 59–64. 22 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 139–141. 23 Naujoks, “Latente Zunfttradition in den schwäbischen Reichsstädten”, 178. 20 Schröder, 21 Schröder,

146

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

citizens seems to have remained, and the council seems to have been cautious not to arouse mistrust and suspicion in the citizenry.24 A similar tendency can be observed in the city’s church politics, where the emperor’s intervention did not result in a transition to the elite’s Catholic faith. Protestant faith had been associated with guilds, citizens, communalist interests, and opposition to the city council. In their dealings in religious politics, the council balanced concerns for their local power base with their interests in foreign politics. They therefore allowed for Protestant services to be held in the churches that were under the city’s control and for a Protestant church regiment to be established, while they at the same time respected their obligations to the emperor and the Catholic Church. When the city accepted Protestant teaching in 1531 and invited the Zwinglian theologian Ambrosius Blarer to serve in the city, it was partly because this teaching was widespread among the citizens and because his form of leadership was tolerant towards the city’s religious diversity, but also because it was the form of religion that had been adopted by the majority of the surrounding South-German cities.25 At the same time, in accordance with their imperial loyalty, the patrician city council took care to let services in the old faith continue in the city’s main church, which formally, according to imperial law, still belonged to the chapter of Speyer.26 During the time of the Interim, the city council was cautious to have those inclined towards Protestant thinking respect the regulations of the Interim, and it also respected the rulings of the Interim longer than most.27 It seems that, for fear of appearing disloyal to the emperor, the city never formally abandoned the rulings of the Interim before they signed the Lutheran Formula of Concord in 1577.28 5.1.5 The Expansion of the Territorial State The described expansion of territorial states’ influence at the expense of cities towards the end of the sixteenth century also operated in Esslingen. Throughout history the city had held considerable wealth. Its city walls protected it from external threats and within the walls were terraced wine fields yielding high quality wine. On the riverside below the hillside there was a bridge over the Neckar River controlled by the city. The city was situated on the road from Ulm to Speyer, one 24 Naujoks,

“Latente Zunfttradition in den schwäbischen Reichsstädten”, 192–193. Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 88–89. This description fits the general tendency described by Moeller, namely that the introduction of the Reformation in the cities was characterized by public initiative and had a firm rooting within the guilds. See Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 19–25. Moeller maintains this position in his summary of the research that had been accomplished by 1985. Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 78. 26  Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 32. 27 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 147. 28 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 155–159. 25 Schröder,

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization

147

of the main routes between the Danube and the Rhine, making Esslingen a major trade centre for Neckar wine.29 At the end of the fourteenth century, the fortunes of the city are claimed to have equalled those of Augsburg and Bern.30 Until sculptures and most images were removed from the city’s churches in 1532, as a consequence of the introduction of Zwinglian teaching, the city’s many churches and monasteries had given an overwhelming impression with their expensive collections of art.31 However, the source of their wealth had also made the city vulnerable, since their wine production and their trade depended on open routes of transportation and market access. Throughout history they had been involved in several disputes with the neighbouring territory of Württemberg over taxation which led to military blockades by Württemberg. In 1557 a long-term trade war between Esslingen and Württemberg ended in an agreement where Württemberg promised to protect Esslingen.32 This event marked a shift in Esslingen’s foreign policy. It seems Württemberg to some extent took the place of the emperor as the main point of reference and the determining political factor. Towards the end of the sixteenth century, the city’s economic superiority over the duchy was challenged by Württemberg’s political power and by advancing Württemberg cities, and there were even voices within the council that no longer held the politics of independence to be in the interests of the city.33 Earlier in its history, the city had drawn on other alliances than the emperor, such as that of other southwest German imperial cities.34 Later it established relations with the estates of Württemberg. In the conflict between estates and Duke Eberhard II over the Esslinger Vertrag in 1498, Esslingen refused to support the duke and thereby forced him to flee from his capital to the imperial city of Ulm. When Duke Ulrich in 1514 agreed with the estates on the Tübinger Vertrag, the estates insisted that the treaty should be kept in Esslingen to be safe from the duke’s interference, with the result that an official political document of Württemberg for the first time was kept outside of Württemberg territory. While the city maintained good relations with the estates, their relations to Duke Ulrich were tenser, and when Ulrich in 1519 launched his assault on the imperial city of Reutlingen, Esslingen contributed to the Swabian troops that forced him out of his territory.35 In the second half of the sixteenth century, however, under the rule Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 22. Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 23. 31 See Gudrun Litz, Die reformatorische Bilderfrage in den schwäbischen Reichsstädten, Spätmittelalter und Reformation N. R. 35 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007), 190; and Helmut Feld, Der Ikonoklasmus des Westens, Studies in the History of Christian Thought 41 (Leiden: Brill, 1990), 180. 32 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 147. 33 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 24; and Naujoks, Obrigkeits­ gedanke, Zunftverfassung und Reformation, 170–177. 34 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 20–21. 35 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 21. 29 Schröder, 30 Schröder,

148

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

of Duke Christoph, the city met a stronger Württembergian duke and eventually had to accept him as a major political reference point.36 This shift in the city council’s power base in foreign policy from the emperor to the duke of Württemberg altered the premises for the council’s deliberations on religious politics. These new premises were enforced by the fact that most of Esslingen’s neighbouring cities in southwest Germany were at this point turning towards Lutheranism. As a result, the city council’s political challenges were transformed. From having to balance a Protestant opposition with a foreign policy that demanded loyalty to the Catholic Church, the strongest pressure now came from neighbouring powers favouring Lutheranism.37 Württemberg pressured the city to accept the Augsburg Confession, but the council, loyal to the emperor and the Catholic faith, kept refusing. Württemberg steadily used all the opportunities their increased influence gave them to exercise confessional pressure, and in the end, partly helped by coincidence, turned out victorious. In 1571, Tübingen was struck by plague, and Duke Christoph of Württemberg decided to move the entire university to undisturbed Esslingen. The city council probably felt the pressure from their stronger partner, and possibly also saw business opportunities opened up by such a move, and answered a request from the duke positively. After the university’s arrival in the city, the council offered the vacant position as city preacher to university chancellor Jacob Andreae, who accepted and introduced a distinctively Lutheran teaching in the Esslingen church. His service as city preacher was characterized by a clear front against Calvinist and Anabaptist teaching which still prevailed in the city. After steady political pressure from Württemberg, Andreae’s efforts led to the religious and confessional integration of Esslingen with Württemberg, when the mayor, clergy, and teachers of Esslingen signed the Formula of Concord in 1577 and the entire Book of Concord in 1579.38 In this way the questions about confession, religious 36  Ulrich Rosseaux, Städte in der frühen Neuzeit, Geschichte kompakt (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2006), 86. Rosseaux sees the rise of more absolutist territorial rulers as one of the reasons for the confessionalization that takes place in the cities in this period of history. 37 Rosseaux, Städte in der frühen Neuzeit, 147 and 152. 38 Rosseaux, Städte in der frühen Neuzeit, 158–159; and Naujoks, Obrigkeitsgedanke, Zunft­ verfassung und Reformation, 177. Johann Michael Reu, Quellen zur Geschichte des Katechis­ mus-Unterrichts, vol. 1: Süddeutsche Katechismen, Quellen zur Geschichte des kirchlichen Unterrichts in der Evangelischen Kirche Deutschlands zwischen 1530 und 1600 1 (Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1904), 296 shows how this development from Zwinglian teaching prior to the Interim to Lutheran teaching after the Interim was typical for southwestern German imperial cities, as do Moeller (Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 64–65) and Brady (Brady, Ruling Class, Regime and Reformation at Strasbourg, 1520–1555, 295). Andreae’s sermons in Esslingen were published: Jacob Andreae, Drey vnd dreissig Predigten von den furnembsten Spaltungen in der Christlichen Religion, so sich zwischen den Bäpstischen, Lutherischen, Zwinglischen, Schwenckfeldern und Widerteuffern halten. In wölchen jedes theils Meinung und Grund trewlich gesetzt und ein einfaltiger Bericht und Anleittung auß den sechs Hauptstucken christlicher Lehr

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization

149

education, and disciplining was embedded in a negotiation between opposing interests within the city, but also in the power system which the city as a whole was subjected to in its relations with emperor and duke. It will become evident that Osiander’s contribution to religious education in the city was embedded in the same political processes. 5.1.6 Osiander and City Politics When Osiander arrived in the city, one senses the tension between city autonomy and the territorial duke’s influence lurking in the background. Esslingen should have been the perfect refuge for an independent cleric forced to flee after having fought secular authority in the form of the duke of Württemberg, since it was protected by the emperor and formally independent of the surrounding territory. Since Württemberg now had become the city’s most influential protector,39 however, one would assume that when Osiander arrived in the city he was not primarily escaping the duke, but that he settled with the duke’s permission. After Osiander in 1598 lost his office and the right to live in his house in Württemberg, he sent a letter to the city council of Esslingen and asked them for permission to settle in the city. The request was approved by Duke Friedrich and Osiander was welcomed to live in the city on doctoral terms, meaning he was given the privilege of being exempt from taxation.40 The fact that the duke allowed Lucas Osiander’s son Andreas to take over the lucrative office of prelate in Adelberg testifies to a duke who was not only interested in punishing Osiander, but who recognized his significance and found a more suitable way to make use of him.41 The power base of higher Württemberg clergy could also have meant that the duke had been unable to dispose quite freely of Osiander. Presumably Osiander continued some form of relationship or alliance with his former employer also in his new existence as a free preacher in a free city. As a high profile representative of the Württemberg church, Osiander would have appeared as a clear spokesman for Lutheran faith and doctrine. He had been present in the background in Esslingen’s process of turning to Lutheran doctrine. In 1563, the city council had offered him the position as the city’s superintendent, in order to forestall accusations of Calvinism from Württemberg. On this occasion, Duke Christoph intervened to keep Osiander in his service gegeben würdt, wie ein jeder einfaltiger Lay in solchem allem die Warheit erkennen und sich Christlich darein schicken soll, daß er in kein Sect verfüret werdt. Allen frommen Christen und einfaltigen Pfarrern nuzlich zulesen. Geprediget zuo Eßlingen durch Jacobum Andree, D. Probst zu Tübingen und bey der Vniversität daselbsten Canzlern, 5 pts. (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1568, 1573). 39 On “Schützvertrag”, see Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 18. 40 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 162. 41 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 162.

150

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

in Württemberg.42 Later, Osiander had helped obtain the city’s signature on the Formula of Concord, and as court preacher for Duke Ludwig of Württemberg he supervised the actual signing of the document.43 Osiander’s arrival in the city in 1598 was that of a wealthy and distinguished gentleman. On his arrival, Osiander deposited the considerable fortune of 3000 gulden, to be kept safe in the city.44 In the city he came to enjoy the company of the noble city councillors, who welcomed a celebrity from the ducal court in Stuttgart in their midst. As part of their circle, Osiander probably led a pleasant life of which he was soon bored, for after only a month’s stay in the city, he requested permission from the city council to preach in the churches of Esslingen. The council saw the service of the experienced and competent preacher as a welcome relief for the city clergy and as an interesting change for the congregation. They granted him the right to preach, but asked him to agree on the concrete arrangements with the city’s superintendent Christoph Hermann. Instead of an agreement between superintendent and visiting cleric, however, there arose a heated conflict between the two. Hermann was a considerable cleric in his own right. He was the leader of the Esslingen church ministry and had held his position as superintendent for nearly twenty years after having been installed in it on the advice of his predecessor Jacob Andreae.45 During the first years of his service to the city, Hermann disagreed with the city council over the question of private confession, which Hermann wanted to reinstall in the church, but which the council saw as an attempt to gain church independence in the question of church discipline and which they therefore did not accept. This might be taken as a sign of Hermann’s wish to strengthen church independence, or it could be seen as a sign of the council’s awareness of such a danger to their church influence. The conflict between Hermann and Osiander seems to have reanimated the dispute between council and ministry over influence in the church. By agreeing to the arrangements for Osiander’s church service over the head of the city’s superintendent and formal church leadership, the city council laid the foundation for a long and irreconcilable conflict. When Osiander addressed the superintendent and, appealing to his friendship with city councillors and the council’s decree, requested to be given responsibility for the main services in the city church, the superintendent was surprised and upset. He would not accept being outmanoeuvred by the visiting cleric from Stuttgart or having his authority in the church of Esslingen questioned by the city council. Hermann therefore answered that the Esslingen clergy were perfectly capable of fulfilling their preaching obligation without external help, and suggested that Osiander could Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 153.  Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 159. 44 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 163. 45 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 162. 42 Schröder, 43

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization

151

preach in the scarcely visited Friday services instead of the Sunday services he had requested. In this conflict, one may see confirmed that the Esslingen church ministry was part of a functioning corporate system.46 Thus the conflict between Hermann and Osiander probably related to the classical conflict between communalism and feudalism. The question is whether the conflict thereby also might be said to have been a conflict between Zwinglian and Lutheran theology, as Osiander seems to have insisted on as one who saw himself as fighting for true Lutheranism against the Zwinglian tendencies he claimed prevailed among the city clergy. Osiander was not prepared to subject himself to the superintendent or the church ministry of Esslingen. He could not accept being contradicted and appealed to the city council to perform their duty as true Christian authorities and pass a decision that both he and superintendent Hermann should comply with. To prove their authority over the superintendent, the city council decided in favour of Osiander, even though Hermann, according to the Esslingen church order, had been right in his disposal of Osiander. As a result, and despite protests from superintendent Hermann and his clergy, Osiander took over responsibility not only for the main sermons on Sunday morning, but also for the sermons on Mondays, the catechism services on Sunday evening, weddings and funerals, as well as eagerly delivering the sacrament at home to the sick and elderly, thereby probably emphasizing a Lutheran view on the elements of the Eucharist, in opposition to Zwinglian thinking. He also offered the city council unsolicited expert opinions on how the church regiment of Esslingen might be improved, which in his view would mean adopting a system similar to that of Württemberg. Though he claimed to serve the church of Esslingen freely and already was a very wealthy man, the council still paid him a generous salary for his counsels and services.47 Osiander could feel the growing resistance towards him among the city clergy, and complained about this to the council, as well as over Calvinist tendencies which he claimed to observe. When Osiander obtained a copy of Hermann’s catechism in 1601, which Hermann had composed in 1592 and now had been able to publish in Stuttgart, Osiander turned to the council to have it banned for containing traces of Calvinism. The council refused to do so and answered with a reference to the approval of it by Württemberg censors. Their answer did not satisfy Osiander, who brought new allegations to back his claim. According to him, Hermann, like many Calvinists, never took off his hat when the name of Jesus was mentioned. Sometimes he used Calvin’s Bible commentary in preparing his sermons. He rarely attacked Calvinism in his catechism sermons, and he even spoke of the Eucharist in a way that resembled too much that of the Calvinists,

46 Schröder, 47 Schröder,

Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 163. Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 163.

152

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

namely as nourishment for the soul.48 While Osiander sent his allegations to the council, however, Hermann secretly sent his sermons to be judged by the consistory in Stuttgart, who found them to be orthodox. Hermann could therefore maintain that he was in his right and that Osiander was unjustly acting as inquisitor to the city’s clergy.49 Still, Osiander would not give up. He claimed that Hermann had misled the consistory and sent them other sermons than those he had delivered in Esslingen. As a response, the city council invited two distinguished members of the consistory in Stuttgart, court preacher Felix Bidembach, son of Osiander’s old colleague at the court, and Stiftsprobst (Dean) of Stuttgart Johannes Magirus, who was Osiander’s old friend and colleague, to come and judge the controversy. They could not find any traces of false teaching in Hermann’s sermons or writings, but still decided that he had to present them anew for the censorship in Stuttgart, if he were to have them printed. Both Hermann and Osiander accepted this decision, but it seems that the elderly Osiander at this point had spent his last strengths. He soon withdrew from all his obligations to the council and received Duke Friedrich’s permission to return to Stuttgart, where he died in less than a year.50 Osiander’s zealous attack on traces of Calvinism in Esslingen and his correspondingly eager defence of Lutheranism held political implications. His attack on the local superintendent Hermann neutralized the local church government and strengthened the city council’s authority over the church. His good relations with the ruling elite were accompanied by a wish to put church government more directly under the secular authority in a way that resembled church government in Württemberg. The effort to subject the church government of Esslingen more directly to secular authority was in accordance with Osiander’s conscious intentions. He probably saw that the church and its most prominent representatives thereby gained increased influence over secular authority. Tilman Schröder observes an unintended effect of this effort. When the local secular authorities had been incapable of solving the dispute between the distinguished clerics, Esslingen had as a result become even more obviously tied to the religious authority of Württemberg, who had been invited in to settle the disputes. It seems likely, however, that the councillors’ dealings with Osiander were guided also by their own interests. At a time when the council relied on Württemberg in foreign policy, there arrived an influential theologian who could help them show their loyalty towards their territorial partner while at the same time gain influence over the church locally. Instead of having to balance the interests of foreign and domestic policy, as had traditionally been the order of the council’s rule, the council now had the opportunity to see both interests met at the same time.  Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 164. Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 164–165. 50 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 166. 48

49 Schröder,

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization

153

5.1.7 City Reformation The conflict between Calvinism and Lutheranism described in the conflict between Hermann and Osiander also has been a classic theme in historiography on urban reformation. The classic 1962 study by Berndt Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, described how the imperial cities played a central role in the success of the Reformation within the Holy Roman Empire. The cities’ combination of relative independence, their humanistically oriented and educated elite, their printing presses, and their participatory form of government contributed greatly to Reformation thought taking root and gaining impetus. It was in the cities that Luther gained his first followers and it was here that Zwinglian thinking was later formed and adopted.51 Moeller claimed that at the outset, Luther’s teaching on the priesthood of all believers found a great following within the cities. It offered a theological basis for the corporative thinking that already prevailed in the cities, emphasized the holiness of worldly callings, permitted church offices to be integrated into city government, and gave city corporations influence over the choice of preachers. Other parts of Luther’s teaching, however, represented a break with traditional city culture and found fewer footholds. The focus on the believer as confronting God alone and the insistence on church community as different from city community did not conform well to the emphasis on community prevalent in the cities, Moeller claimed.52 The cities therefore came to choose Zwinglian teaching instead of Lutheran, even though this choice in many ways held greater political risks. Instead of Luther, it was Zwingli and Bucer who came to be the main theological figures in the churches in the South-German imperial cities. Moeller held that the reason for this was to be found in the way these theologians promoted a religion that suited city community and mentality. Zwingli emphasized the importance of the visible church and its organization and pointed to the unity made up by church congregation and city community. Not only did he, like St. Paul, see the Christian congregation as composed of different members like limbs on a body, but he also held that the relationship between church congregation and city community could be described by the same metaphor. Both had the same goal in promoting God’s kingdom and glory and together they could be described as a church-civic community led by the Spirit.53 Moeller found a similar motive in Bucer’s teaching and in his thought that church and secular authority share in the same task of leading people to Christ, even though they have different roles, 51 Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 18–30 and 89. A similar view of the cities is presented in Berndt Hamm, Bürgertum und Glaube, 77–118. See also Ehrenpreis and Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter, 29–39. 52 Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 32–33. 53 Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 35–38.

154

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

since secular authority only rules externally and has no authority over peoples’ hearts. The church community still appears as encompassing the city community in being characterized by unity and love. Different from Luther, who described secular authority as being free from the church, Zwingli explicitly rejected any ruler who was not responsible to his subjects and who would not be ruled by the word of God.54 While Luther’s ecclesiology, based only on the doctrine of the justification by faith, was one that could break up the unity of the late medieval city, Zwinglian theologians could supply a teaching that respected the cities’ mentality and spirit and their concern for unity. They did so by giving this concern a new justification. They underlined the importance of loyalty to the community as a necessary part of a new life as Christians and pointed to the church congregations’ connectedness with the city community. In Zwingli’s thought, this connectedness was intended to be secured by an office of prophet which should guarantee secular rule’s basis in true doctrine, whereas Bucer wanted it secured by the concept of “Regnum Christi”, seeing Christ as governing both areas by the word of God. ­Moeller saw the fact that it was cities characterized by a corporative spirit that chose Zwinglian doctrine as a confirmation of the city communities’ great significance for religious change in this period of history.55 Moeller claimed that the reason why so many South-German cities turned to Lutheranism in the second half of the sixteenth century was partly because corporative government was being set back by the emperor’s intervention after his victory in the Schmalkaldic War and the resulting loss of guild influence, and partly because of increased pressure from Lutheran territorial princes. Moeller claimed, however, that the transition was also made possible by the fact that Lu54 Moeller,

Reichsstadt und Reformation, 44–47.

55 Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 49 and 58. Though Moeller’s study marked a new ep-

och in its impact on Reformation research, it has also been criticized. The criticism that appears most relevant for this study is the one raised by Thomas Brady in his Ruling Class, Regime and Reformation at Strasbourg, 1520–1555 from 1978. He claims Moeller put too much emphasis on unity and too little on tensions and conflicts within the cities. Thereby Moeller came to overlook that the religious discourse in the cities also expressed relations of power and dominance between different layers of city society. According to him, the harmonious city ideal present in the writings of classical city reformers should also be evaluated according to their use within these relations of power and dominance. In his investigation, Brady found that a harmonious city ideal was employed by city theologians to conceal conflicts in a way that served the ruling elite and pacified opponents. This was the case with the visions of unity promoted by Zwingli and Bucer, who served the ruling elite in a time when their influence over the middle layers of city society was limited. However, this same mechanism was even more evident in the second half of the sixteenth century when most cities were inclined towards Lutheran doctrine. When this most feudal of the evangelical religions was established in the cities, it was an expression of the fact that the most aristocratic layers of society now had regained dominance and no longer needed a doctrine that could conceal conflicts, Brady claimed. Brady, Ruling Class, Regime and Reformation at Strasbourg, 1520–1555, 5, 292, and 295.

5.1 Cities and Confessionalization

155

theranism had changed over the years and now was more compatible with city mentality in its view of church and secular authority and community. Moeller still admitted that the transition to Lutheran religion coincided with a decline in the communal mentality and the corporative organization in the South-German cities.56 This observation seems to be confirmed in more recent research which sees Zwinglian theology as a clearer example of communalism theory.57 In Osiander’s case, the accusation of Calvinism targeted purely theological issues such as the understanding of sacraments and correct ritual practice,58 but the accusations also came to involve questions of authority and government. His accusations were therefore part of a theological discourse which was also about political influence, and which therefore can be viewed as part of the ongoing negotiation between communalism and feudalism. Since it employed confessional arguments in a fight over religious ritual and upbringing, it could be described as a fight over the city’s social common sense, the inner lordship of a society where interests from above and below meet. Hermann, who belonged to the citizenry, was accused of continuing the Zwinglian tradition of the guilds, whereas Osiander was affiliated with the patriciate and their foreign ally the duke of Württemberg and promoted a Lutheranism of the Württembergian version. Osiander’s teaching had to fulfil the expectations of a congregation of citizens possibly inclined towards the form of teaching Hermann and his colleagues were accused of representing. If Osiander’s teaching was to meet the interests of the council, it could not merely appear as a contrast to what had been and to what citizens demanded, but rather as a teaching that could combine this demand with the council’s interest for securing their local influence. It remains to be tested whether these assumptions about the confessional aims of Osiander’s teaching hold true. The analysis of Osiander’s sermons in Esslingen will examine these interests and see how they are connected to homiletical style and theological concepts. In order to be able to do so, however, we will first need to take a closer look on the genre Osiander employed, the catechism sermon, in order to understand the theological tradition he partook in and how he continued them when he took up work as a catechist.

56 Moeller,

Reichsstadt und Reformation, 60–65. Rublack cited in Holenstein, Kümin, and Würgler, “Diskussionsbericht”,

57 Hans-Christoph

503.

58 In looking back at the research his little book had inaugurated over the years, Moeller in 1985 concluded that his book had oversimplified matters a bit on this point. In retrospect he saw that also North German Lutheran cities emphasized the communal aspect of religion, and that the real difference between the two confessions was not to be found in their view on the relationship between church congregation and city community, but in their doctrines and practices regarding church service and sacraments. Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation, 92–93.

156

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position Though Osiander presented himself as a very Lutheran catechist, his catechetical position deserves further examination. He defended Luther and used him as a weapon for attacking Hermann, but he did not base his own teaching of the young on Luther’s catechism, but rather on the catechism of Johannes Brenz. How is this to be understood, and what does it say about Osiander’s position in the conflict with Hermann? In 1599, during the initial years of controversy with Hermann, Osiander published a book which expressed his great concern for Lutheran catechetical teaching. As a defence against Jesuit attacks on Luther’s catechism, he published Luther’s Small and Large Catechisms together, in order to let people see for themselves that the Jesuit accusations against Luther’s catechisms were groundless. Osiander’s foreword to the book emphasized the uniqueness of Luther’s catechism and stated that those who read it for themselves would find a true and pure teaching useful for both body and soul.59 Still, in his own catechism sermons presented in Esslingen the same year and published in Tübingen the following year, Osiander did not base his teaching on Luther’s catechism, but on that of Johannes Brenz.60 To clarify this paradox, it is necessary to take a step back to consider the catechetical tradition Osiander and Hermann shared. 5.2.1 The Protestant Catechism Genre The Protestant catechism was not Luther’s invention and his catechisms did not simply establish a universal norm for catechetical teaching within the Lutheran 59  Lucas Osiander, Der kleine vnd der grosse Catechismus / Herrn D. Martini Luthers / seliger gedächtnus. Auß welchem ein Christ fein kurtz vnd gründlich erlernen kan / was D. Luther seliger von allen vnd jeden Articuln vnd Stucken der christlichen Religion geglaubt vnd gelehret. Vnd wie ein jeder Christ / dem sein ewige Seligkeit hertzlich angelegen / recht glauben / christlich leben / gedultig leiden / selig sterben / vnd endtlich ewiglich selig werden soll. Sampt einer außfürlichen Vorred D. Lucas Osianders / in deren gründtlich angezeigt würdt / wie vnbillich die Jesuitter / vnd jhres gleichen päpstliche Scribenten / die reine christliche Lehr / vnd die Person Luthers / mutwillig calumnieren / verkehren / vnd verlästern. Darumb dann ein frommer Christ durch solche / der Je­ suitter / Lästerungen / vo der reinen euangelischen Lehr sich nicht soll abhalten / noch von derselben abwendig machen lassen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1599), 18: “Da werdet jhr befinden / daß D. Luther hat rein / lauter vnd klar gelehret / glauben an die heilige Dreyfaltigket / an Gott Vattern / seinen einigen Sohn / vnsern Erlöser Christum / vnd an den heiligen Geist / den rechten Tröster: Vnd hat dabei auch gelehrt / wie ein Christ sol ein recht Gottselig vnd Gottgefällig Leben (in aller Zucht / Erbarkeit / vnd Christlicher Liebe) führen: Vnd was man von den heiligen Sacra­menten / dem heiligen Tauff vnd Abendmal / halten / glauben / vnd wie man sich derselben trösten soll: Auch wie ein Christ / durch ein recht Gottgefällig Gebet / alles was jhm zu Seel vnd Leib nutzlich vnd notwendig / erhalten vnd erlangen möge. Da würdt gewißlich der heilig Geist (…) in ewrem Gewissen bezeugen / daß dises die rechte / reine / seligmachende Lehr des heiligen Euangelij sey …” 60 Lucas Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum.

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

157

world. Catechetical teaching had been a widespread and important practice in the Catholic Church and Luther himself had taken part in catechism teaching already during his service as a Catholic priest. He gave his first catechism sermons no later than 1516 or 1517. Before he would take part in transforming it into a characteristically Protestant tradition, Luther was part of a Catholic catechetical tradition which was already widespread in Europe. One part of this tradition had been the catechism recitations, which in many areas had been given as a weekly service and which taught the Credo and the Paternoster, the two set parts of the catechism.61 All Christians had been expected to be able to recite the Credo and the Paternoster, especially when they stood as godparents.62 An important context for catechetical instruction had been preparation for the traditional yearly confession of the young. When the young had been instructed in the proper practice of penance and confession, the instruction had contained catalogues of sins and virtues, and the Ten Commandments had gradually become more important as the expression of the divine standard of conduct and as a mirror of sin and a basic rule for a proper Christian life. During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the Ten Commandments had come to make up a third set part of the catechism.63 With the introduction of the art of printing in the second half of the fifteenth century, catechisms had also become widespread popular literature.64 61 Ferdinand Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, vol. 4: Undatierbare Katechismusversuche und zusammenfassende Darstellung, Monumenta Germaniae Paedagogica 23 (Berlin: A. Hoffmann & Comp., 1902), 234; and Robert James Bast, Honor Your Fathers: Catechisms and the Emergence of a Patriarchal Ideology in Germany 1400–1600, Studies in Medival and Reformation Thought 63 (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 3–6. 62 Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, 269. 63 This was probably also the original context for Luther’s catechetical teaching. See Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, 235 and 272. The Credo and the Lord’s Prayer had been set parts of the catechism since antiquity, and the Ten Commandments had become an important part when the genre was revived during the fourteenth century. See Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 3–6. In his catechetical reform Jean Gerson had focused on the importance of the Ten Commandments as necessary knowledge for the people: “… nothing other than the knowledge of the Law of God and his Commandments, which are necessary and useful for salvation” (cited from Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 16). In his catechism, Gerson placed the commandments as the fourth part following his explanations on the three parts of the Credo, and followed by catalogues of sins and virtues and a presentation of important prayers. See Jean de Gerson, Opusculum tripartitum eiusdem De preceptis decalogi, De confessione & De arte moriendi (Paris: J. Petit, 1515). During the fifteenth century the Ten Commandments were the most popular and widely used form of moral teaching; Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 36. Luther refers to this function of the Ten Commandments and the Lord’s Prayer as a mirror of sin to replace other existing (Catholic) mirrors of sin in his preface to his Betbüchlein, in WA 10/2, 375. 64 Cohrs, Die evangelischenn Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, 270; and Michael Sievernich SJ, “Gesetz oder Weisheit: Zum theologischen Prinzip der Katechismen Martin Luthers und Petrus Canisius’”, in Petrus Canisius SJ (1521–1597): Humanist und Europäer, ed. Rainer Berndt (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2000), 402. Bast claims catechetical teaching had become urgent on several instances of crisis throughout the history of the church, such as among

158

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

The Reformation challenged the catechetical tradition and assigned to it an even more crucial role. In the political field, the joint ambition of church and secular authority to root the new faith in the population resulted in a more effective visitation practice. The visitations revealed scant knowledge of faith among people and a pressing need for a systematic teaching of the new faith. Thereby they inaugurated a renewed motivation for an improved catechetical practice.65 The new religious practice with its altered understanding of the sacraments also stimulated a need for a new form of catechetical teaching. In Switzerland, Zwingli wanted to transform Catholic confirmation into a course in the catechism leading to anointment,66 whereas Lutherans saw the need for new catechetical instruction for youth who were to be admitted to the Eucharist. When the sacrament was understood as a promise of God creating faith, receiving it should to a greater extent involve understanding.67 Lutheran catechisms came to function as instruction that prepared the young for the Eucharist, and they established a tradition that would substitute the traditional preparation for the confession of the young.68 From having been part of the instruction for penance and confession, the catechism eventually became a preparation for partaking in the Eucharist. The fact that the Protestant catechism had its background in old traditions69 and arose out of practical concerns let it emerge concurrently in several places and in several forms within Protestant Germany. The many services for youth initiated in the many cities which had turned to Protestant teaching brought the need for new teaching material. Protestant church orders needed a description of the form and content of religious education, and thus pointed to the composition of Protestant catechisms. The catechisms’ practical background can be traced in their composition history. As preachers gained experiences of their catechisms’ usefulness in the practical instruction of the young, they were gradually improved through new editions, and changes were made on the basis of how easily the young could understand them and of how well they were able to keep the interest of the young.70 the nonconformists of the fifteenth century and after the council on heresy in Konstanz; Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 17–18. An example of this post-Konstanz initiative was Bishop Wolff ’s effort in Frankfurt; Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 23. 65 See for example, Philipp Melanchthon, Unterricht der Visitatorn an die Pfarhern ym Kurfur­ stenthum zu Sachssen (1528), in Melanchthons Werke, ed. Robert Stupperich, vol. 1 (Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1951), 215–271. 66 Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, 236–237. 67 See for example, from Luther’s preface to his Deutsche Messe on teaching and knowledge as part of the Lutheran service reform; Martin Luther, Deutsche Messe und Ordnung des Gottes­ dienstes (1526), in WA 19, 76–78. 68  Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, 251 and 275–278. 69 Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 1–53, shows how Protestant catechists were indebted to their fifteenth century predecessor in most aspects of their catechetical program. 70 In the development of Brenz’s catechism in its different stages, this form of compositional process can be observed. See Reu, Quellen zur Geschichte des Katechismus-Unterrichts, vol. 1:

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

159

Ferdinand Cohrs has shown how a plurality of Protestant catechisms arose relatively independent of each other, and how Luther’s catechisms in their final form appeared relatively late.71 The first catechisms appeared in the cities, where the proximity between governing bodies and population let changes take effect quickly and new church orders be implemented effectively. They appeared as results of the teaching of the young in the churches. In Württemberg also, several catechisms were used initially; in addition to those of Gräter and Brenz, Joachim Camerarius’ Capita Christianismi of 1536 was used in the catechism services in the Tübingen Pädagogium.72 The catechism genre’s origin marked its composition and style. All the catechisms contained the three conventional parts of the Credo, the Lord’s Prayer, and the Ten Commandments.73 New in the Protestant catechism genre were the two parts treating the two sacraments recognized by the Protestants, namely baptism and the Eucharist. The catechisms were written in the form of questions and answers, probably inspired by the popular catechism of the Bohemian Brethren from the beginning of the sixteenth century.74 This form was employed differently than in academic books, where the questions and answers could have the form of an intellectual disputation between equals. Here they were written as a dialogue between master and pupil, where the starting point was an ignorant person asking the learned basic, but central, questions about Christian faith, which the learned answered precisely and completely. The roles could then be reversed in a teaching situation when those being taught had to reproduce the learned answer to prove their knowledge. Süddeutsche Katechismen, 284. Luther also points to practice and the terrible state of Christian knowledge he had observed as a visitor as the reason why he wrote a catechism. Martin Luther, Der Kleine Catechismus (1529), in WA 30/1, 264 and 346. 71 In 1525 a poster catechism was produced in Zürich by Leo Jud on Zwingli’s request. In 1526 in Landau, Johannes Bader composed his Gesprächsbüchlein vom Anfang des christlichen Lebens in Schwäbisch Hall in 1528/29, but mentioned in his church order of 1526, Johannes Brenz published his Catechismus maior & minor; and in 1527, Capito published his Kinderbericht in Strasbourg; in 1528, Konrad Sam published his Christliche Unterweisung in Ulm. Wenzeslaus Linck published his Unterrichtung der Kinder, so zu Gottes Tisch wollen gehen, in Nuremberg 1528. In 1527 in Lemgo, Petrus Schulz published his Büchlein auf Frag und Antwort, and in 1529 in Basel Oecolampadius published his Frag und Antwort. The instruction in the schools also was part of this confessional project and school instruction resulted in a multitude of catechisms, such as the 1526 works by Johann Agricola in Eisleben, Johann Toltz in Plauen, and Otto Braunfels in Strasbourg, and the 1529 works by Valentin Ickelsamers in Rothenburg, Christoph Hegendorfer in Leipzig, Johannes Pinicianus in Augsburg, Bartholomaeus Urerius in Neustadt a.d. Orla and Kaspar Gräter in Heilbronn. Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Lu­ thers Enchiridion, 250–256 and Reu, Quellen zur Geschichte des Katechismus-Unterrichts, vol. 1: Süddeutsche Katechismen, 283. 72 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 228. 73 See n. 63. 74 Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 16.

160

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

The catechisms were supposed to be rehearsed at home and in schools as well as in the churches, whereas the catechism sermons were mostly given during catechism services in the churches as elaborate explanations of each question and answer. They were meant to enhance young peoples’ understanding of the basic parts of the catechism. In Esslingen, the church order of Jacob Otther, the city’s first leading Protestant preacher after Blarer, had ordered that the short form of the catechism be learnt by heart at home, while the longer form should be taught in the catechism services. This regulation seems to correspond to a common custom and was also seen in Württemberg and Saxony.75 From the process of composing a catechism out of their catechism instruction, some preachers reported that the attention of their pupils was easily lost when they treated complicated dogmatic themes. The catechisms were therefore intentionally kept as free as possible of intricate formulations and advanced themes, and focused instead on practical aspects of the teaching and on useful stories from the Bible. They restricted their polemics against other doctrines and confessions and employed them only to the extent it was of direct practical consequence.76 Since catechisms were not dogmatic textbooks written in a context of learned controversy, but intended for simple people as tools for rooting faith in the bulk of the population, they aimed to avoid excessive polemics and convey true doctrine in a way which did not involve advanced theological arguments or understanding. Rather than being presented in each single part of the catechetical text, the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith was therefore built into the pedagogical operation of the catechism as a whole. In this way the central doctrine could guide the catechism’s mode of communication and present a true picture of Christian identity. 5.2.2 Luther’s Catechisms The development of Luther’s catechisms took place within this historical context. In his foreword to his Large Catechism of 1528, Luther claimed that he had only followed the old tradition of the church when composing the cateDie Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 534; and 717: “Sed nunc, quod fœlix faustumque sit, accedamus ad Catechismum, & ad explicationem eius. Distinximus autem capita Catechismi Erotematis seu Interrogatiunculis: partim, ut hoc quasi dialogo, pueri inter se ipsi de Catechismo colloquerentur, & conferrent: partim, ut hac occasione uerus usus singularium partium Catechismi aliquo modo significaretur, ne, quod hactenus siue incogitantia, siue superstitione factum uidimus, omnes Catechismi partes pro precatione indiscriminatim usurparentur.” Cf. WA 30/1, 132. 76  Seen in Osiander’s preface to his Sermons for Farmers; Lucas Osiander, Bawren Postilla; and Martin Luther, Deudsch Catechismus (Der Grosse Catechismus) (1529), in WA 30/1, 132: “Denn darümb thuen wir den vleis den Catechismum offt furzupredigen, das man solchs yn die iugent blewe, nicht hoch noch scharff sondern kurtze und auffs einfeltigst, auff das es yhn wol eingehe und ym gedechtnis bleibe.” 75 Weismann,

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

161

chism,77 but in reality the principle behind his composition, which placed the Decalogue before the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer, was an innovation of his. This compositional principle reflected his catechism’s practical background, but it also let him shape his basic theological concept into an effective pedagogical operation. Luther had developed this compositional principle during his service as a Catholic priest. Since 1516, Luther had regularly preached on the Ten Commandments during Lent, which was traditionally the time for the confession of the young accompanied by a preparatory instruction. His lectures on the Ten Commandments from 1516 and 1517 had been published in 1518 as “A short explanation of the Ten Commandments” (Eine kurze Erklärung der zehn Gebote) and his lectures on the Lord’s Prayer from 1517 had been published in 1519 as “A short version on how to understand and pray the Lord’s Prayer” (Eine kurze Form, das Paternoster zu verstehen und zu beten). In 1520 these publications were combined with a new explanation of the Credo and published together in Luther’s “A short version of the Ten Commandments, the Credo and the Lord’s Prayer” (Eyn kurcz form der zeehen gepott. D. M. L. Eyn kurcz form des Glaubens. Eyn kurcz form deß Vatter unszers),78 which in 1522 he would publish, in a slightly revised form, as the first part of his “Little Prayer Book” (Betbüchlein), considered by many as the first or original form of Luther’s catechisms. Many of the characteristics from these early writings were kept in Luther’s catechisms. Most important was the placement of the Commandments as the catechism’s first part. In his “A short version of the Ten Commandments, the Credo and the Lord’s Prayer” of 1520, Luther stated his intention with this composition very plainly and he kept this formulation nearly unaltered in his “Little Prayer Book” from 1522: To be saved, a person needs to know three things. First, he needs to know what to do and what not to do. Second, when he realizes that he is unable to do or not to do this out of his own strength, he needs to know where to find help in order to be able to do or not to do this. Third, he needs to know how to search and get this. … In this way the Commandments teach human beings about their sickness, so that they see and experience what it is they can do and cannot do, and what they can abstain from and what they are unable to abstain from, and let them realize that they are sinners and evil people. Thereafter they are shown faith and taught where remedy is to be found, namely grace, which will help them become pious so that they keep the Commandments. They are also shown God and His mercy, which is presented and offered in Christ. Finally, they are taught by the Lord’s prayer how to request and get these things with a decent, humble, and comforting prayer, 77 Cf. Luther’s first catechism sermon; Martin Luther, Katechismuspredigten (1528), in WA 30/1, 2. 78 K. Knake and P. Pietsch, “Eine kurze Form der zehn Gebote, eine kurze Form des Glaubens, eine kurze Form des Vaterunsers”, in WA 7, 194; and Martin Luther, Eyn kurcz form der zeehen gepott. D. M. L. Eyn kurcz form des Glaubens. Eyn kurcz form deß Vatter unszers (1522), in WA 7, 204.

162

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

in order that it all shall be given to them and they be saved through the fulfilment of the Commandments …79

In his description of the knowledge that his catechism should promote, there is also a description of the learning involved when this knowledge is obtained. Luther drew on an old tradition when he divided this knowledge and learning into three parts, a similar division as was employed in the traditional preparation of young for confession.80 The ritual’s three traditional parts were remorse (contritio cordis), confession (confessio oris), and the satisfactory deeds, and absolution was an implied fourth part of the ritual, understood as following the three parts or as given prior to the satisfactory deeds on the condition that they were to be carried out.81 The purpose present in Luther’s division was also in accordance with this traditional preparation for confession, namely to give a framework on how to be saved. But in Luther’s framework, the three parts underwent a transformation. He described the first part as a hearing and learning of the Commandments which was necessarily connected to an experience of not being able to fulfil them. The second part taught where one may find help to fulfil the Commandments, and the third part how one might obtain this help. Absolution was an implied part also in Luther’s scheme, not as a fourth part, however, but rather as that which made possible the transition between the parts and secured the inner logic of the sections. The satisfactory deeds no longer made up a separate part, but were implied consequences of the catechism’s pedagogical operation, no longer as satisfaction, but as fulfilment of the Commandments. According to its theology, this pedagogy was described as consisting of only two parts, namely 79 Cited (in my translation) from Martin Luther, Eyn kurcz form der zeehen gepott. D. M. L. Eyn

kurcz form des Glaubens. Eyn kurcz form deß Vatter unszers (1522), in WA 7, 204–205, but almost identical with Martin Luther, Betbüchlein (1523), in WA 10/2, 376–377: “Dann drey dingk sind nott eynem menschen zu wissen, das er selig werden muge: Das erst, das er wisse was er thun und lassen soll. Zum andern, wenn er nun siehet das er es nit thun noch lassen kan auß seynen krefften, das er wisse, wo erß nehmen und suchen und finden soll, damit er dasselb thun und lassen muge. Zum dritten, das er wisse, wie er es suchen und holen soll … Alßo leren die gepot den menschen seyn kranckheyt erkennen, das er sihet und empfindet, was er thun und nit thun, lasszen und nit lassen kan und erkennet sich eynen sunder und boßen menschen. Darnach helt yhm der glawb fur und leret yhn, wo er die ertzney, die gnaden finden sol, die yhm helff frum werden, das er die gepott halte. Und tzeygt yhm gott und seyne barmhertzickeyt, ynn Christo ertzeygt und angepotten. Zum dritten leret yhn das vater unßer, wie er die selben begeren, holen und zu sich bringen soll, nemlich mit ordenlichem, demütigem trostlichem gepett, ßo wirts yhm geben, und wirt alßo durch die erfullung der gepot gotis selig. Das sind die drey dingk yn der gantzen schrifft. Darumb heben wyr am ersten an den gepotten an zu leren und erkennen unßere sund, boßheit, das ist geystliche kranckeyt, da durch wyr nit thun noch lassen, wie wyr woll schuldig seyn.” 80 See, for example, the preface to Gerson, Opusculum tripartitum eiusdem. 81  Ernst Bezzel, “Beichte III”, in TRE 5, 421–422. Cf. Volker Leppin, “‘Omnem vitam fidelium penitentiam esse voluit’: Zur Aufnahme mystischer Traditionen in Luthers erster Ablaßthese”, Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 93 (2002): 7–25.

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

163

confession and grace, or confession and faith, which meant it involved a human and a divine action.82 In this way, Luther’s compositional principle could be an expression of the doctrine of justification by faith.83 Within this division in three, the Commandments might be said to come both first and last, initially displaying one’s sinfulness and the need to seek help, and at the end reappearing as that which may now be fulfilled with divine help. Their function resembles that of a mirror of sin in the traditional preparation for the confession of the young. Though the references to this situation disappeared when Luther published his Large Catechism in 1529, the function of the Commandments still put the listener in a similar situation and continued to function as the motive power in the catechism’s pedagogical operation.84 The Commandments’ position at the beginning of the catechism not only referred to a situation of confession, but also made this situation central to the catechisms’ structure. The Commandments were not only a starting point, but also the problem to be solved, sending the reader and listener on to faith and prayer, before reappearing as that which was repaired by the remedy of faith and mercy. Implicitly the compositional principle of Luther’s catechism described a teaching situation continuing its original context of confession and penance, namely someone seeking the catechism to request salvation. The circle accompanying the catechetical plot, which repeatedly confronted the listener or reader with the Commandments, resembled a traditional confessional practice, which also had to be repeated infinitely. It promoted a pedagogical operation which portrayed Christian identity as born out of this situation, and it described the life of a Christian as an extended version of the confessional practice.85 82 “Das erste ist unser Werk und Tuen, daß ich meine Sunde klage und begehre Trost und Erquickung meiner Seele. Das ander ist ein Werk, das Gott tuet, der mich durch das Wort, dem Menschen in Mund gelegt, losspricht von meinen Sunden, welchs auch das Furnehmste und Edelste ist, so sie lieblich und tröstlich machet.” Martin Luther, Großer Katechismus cited from Bezzel, “Beichte III”, in TRE 5, 422. A similar view on the pedagogical operation of Luther’s catechism can be found in Sievernich, “Gesetz oder Weisheit: Zum theologischen Prinzip der Katechismen Martin Luthers und Petrus Canisius’”, 406. 83 Such a description of penance as consisting of two parts, of what God demands and what God gives, is explicitly present in Luther’s Large Catechism. WA 30/1, 182. 84 Though references to the confessional situation are subdued in the Large Catechism, the situation is still very much present in the background. The Commandments are still the starting point as a mirror of sin, and their fulfillment is still a primary function of the other catechetical parts, and in this way they continue to function as the dynamic principle for the catechism’s composition and its teaching situation. WA 30/1, 180–181. In his brilliant biography of Luther, Volker Leppin argues that confession and penance represent a basic situation and a starting point for the development of Luther’s theology. Volker Leppin, Martin Luther (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2006). 85 “Darümb wenn ich zur Beichte vermahne, so tue ich nichts anders, denn daß ich vermahne, ein Christen zu sein.” Martin Luther, “Vermanung zu der Beicht”, in WA 30/1, 238 following as the last part of Luther’s Large Catechism. Cited in Ernst Bezzel, “Beichte III”, in TRE 5, 421.

164

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

5.2.3 Brenz’s Catechism When Luther’s catechisms were published in 1529, Johannes Brenz’s catechism was already part of the functioning pedagogical system of the imperial city of Schwäbisch Hall. His catechism sprang out of a religious practice that was probably not identical with the original context of Luther’s catechisms. Whereas Luther had been involved with catechetical instruction from no later than 1516, Brenz first started his work in Schwäbisch Hall in 1523, after the religious situation in the Empire had been changed by Luther’s reformation. The post as city preacher in Schwäbisch Hall was his first church position after he was expelled from the University of Heidelberg because of the Lutheran character of his teaching. His prior experience with traditional Catholic instruction of the young would therefore have been scant compared to that of Luther.86 His catechism was probably meant originally as an instruction for those who prepared to be admitted to the Eucharist,87 which would have involved a compulsory confession, but the preparation Brenz conducted seems to have lost the character of being an instruction for confession.88 Brenz’s teaching experiences seem to have been integrated in his catechism’s composition. In the foreword to his revised version of 1535, Brenz referred to these experiences as a basis for his writing. Some of his listeners had found his previous version too long, others had found it unclear and difficult, and Brenz stated that this feedback was the reason why he gave the catechism an updated form.89 In this same passage, where Brenz placed his catechism in its practical Martin Estes, Christian Magistrate and State Church: The Reforming Career of Jo­ hannes Brenz (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982), 3–17; and Weismann, Die Katechis­ men des Johannes Brenz, 41–43. 87  The first trace of a catechism from Brenz is found in Schwäbisch Hall’s first Protestant church order. It was written by Brenz during his years as city preacher in this city which was surrounded by the territory of Württemberg. The first printed versions of his catechism appeared during 1527 and 1528 before Brenz, on the background of his own and others’ teaching experience with the first version, revised and published a version of it in Württemberg in 1535. See Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 687–688. 88 Preparation for confession and the Lord’s Supper would have been the original context for the Lutheran catechism; Ernst Bezzel, “Beichte III”, in TRE 5, 423. Prior to be given access to the Lord’s Supper one traditionally had to register with the priest, be tested in knowledge and conduct and make confession, as it is prescribed in Luther’s Formula missae et communionis (1523) and made compulsory in 1524. Luther had been responsible for this instruction in Wittenberg until Johannes Bugenhagen had taken over as city preacher in 1523. See Martin Brecht, Martin Luther, vol. 2: Ordnung und Abrenzung der Reformation 1521–1532 (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1986), 267; and Paul Pietsch in WA 7, 194. Brenz arrived in Schwäbisch Hall as city preacher in 1523 and began his catechism instruction for the city’s youth. One gets the impression that his instruction was not meant as a preparation for confession, but it may still have been a preparation for the youth’s participation in the Lord’s Supper, as Ferdinand Cohrs claims. Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, 414. 89 Johannes Brenz, Fragstück des Christlichen glaubens für die Jugendt, in Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 687–688: “Es seien vor iaren ettlich kinderfrag vnder meinem 86 James

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

165

context, he also stated his intentions in a way that hints at an implied pedagogical operation. The catechism should not only provide his readers and listeners with necessary Christian knowledge, but also show them the way to eternal bliss.90 It was an intention which resembled that of Luther, but it was not identical. When Luther had answered the question of how to be saved, he had started with the right understanding of the Commandments. The answer to Brenz’s question, on the other hand, was to be reached via a traditional composition principle. The way to eternal bliss in Brenz’s catechism followed the traditional order of sections and let the Creed be followed by the Lord’s Prayer and the Decalogue. Its special characteristic was how the three traditional parts were framed by the explanation of the two sacraments of baptism and Eucharist. It started with baptism before it proceeded with the traditional parts leading to the explanation of the Eucharist, which was the end point of the catechism, just as the partaking in the celebration of the Eucharist was the goal of the catechetical learning. Even though the Commandments’ function was described in a similar way as in Luther’s catechism, namely as holding a double function as a mirror of sin and a moral instruction,91 its part in the catechism’s pedagogical operation was different, corresponding to its altered ritual context. Instead of confession, the ritual context of his catechism was baptism, as having established the baptized’s Christian identity, and the Eucharist, as about to take place. Brenz confirmed the connection between his intentions and the ritual context in his preface to the 1551 version of his catechism. It was published with an introduction by Jakob Gräter and written in Latin with Brenz’s explanation of each single part and was probably aimed at students. Here he explained that when we baptize children, they are not themselves able to express true and pious Christian teaching. So even if they believe in their own way and receive the blessings of the Holy Spirit, they still have to express faith when they become adolescents and begin to understand.92 The task of the catechetical instruction was to help namen im truck außgangen / in welichen / ob ich wol ettlich fragstück von mir gestellt / erkenne / so hab ich doch in vielen kleynen gfallen / yetz seien sie dem jungen Leerschüler zu lang / yetz zu vnuerstendig / yetz zu vngeschickt. Darumb hab ich mit radt vnd verwilligung vnsers pfarhers vnd anderer kirchendienern / diesen gegenwürtigen Catechismum / vff dz kürtzest vnnd klarist / so mir jmmer müglich gewesen / gestellt. Den beuellen wir euch / von wort zu wort außwendig zu lernen / vnnd alleyn darfür zuhalten / das er die haubtstück des Christlichen glaubens / vff das kürtzist begreiffe / sonder auch das er euch den rechten weg zur seligkeyt vff das getreülichst anzeyge. / Hiemit Gott beuollen.” 90 Brenz, Fragstück des Christlichen glaubens für die Jugendt, 688: “… das er die haubtstück des Christlichen glaubens / vff das kürtzist begreiffe / sonder auch das er euch den rechten weg zur seligkeyt vff das getreülichst anzeyge …” (as quoted above). 91 Brenz, Fragstück des Christlichen glaubens für die Jugendt, 691: “Warzuo seind die gebott Gottes geben? Ant. Zum ersten darzu / das wir darauß lernen vor Gott vnser sünd erkennen. Zum andern das wir darauß lernen guote werck thon / vnd eyn gottlich leben füren.” 92 Brenz, “Catechismus pia et utili explicatione illustratus. Praefatio (1551)”, 708: “Nunc autem postquam infantes, qui uocalis doctrine nondum sunt capaces, baptisantur, uocamus

166

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

the adolescent gain and to express a faith accompanied by the appropriate understanding. Instead of seeing his catechism and its doctrine as something that could be compressed to the situation of confession, Brenz saw it as a development taking place between baptism and Eucharist, forming the hearer into a member of Christ and thereby edifying and preserving the church and promoting Christ’s kingdom among the peoples.93 The religious upbringing in homes was coupled to this concept in a way that saw the church as a community composed of and preserved by families.94 As a result, the pedagogical operations taking place in his catechism was different from those of Luther’s. It had baptism as its first part and took the listeners’ identity as baptized as a starting point for its teaching, and recognized baptism’s significance for their status as Christians,95 before it treated the Creed as a basic characteristic of Christian faith. Faith was then described to create a human being which acted justly and according to the Commandments, not out of his or her own strength, but from the power of God which was given to him or her in prayer.96 Like Luther, Brenz also communicated the doctrine of justification primarily through the catechism’s compositional conception. The starting point in Brenz’s catechism, namely a Christian who needed to be shown the way to eternal bliss, was also its plot. In this plot, where a baptized Christian needed something more to reach the goal, justification by faith functioned as the means that solved the plot. This happened similarly in Luther’s catechism, where the doctrine of justification by faith made possible the transition between the different stages of repentance. In Brenz’s conception, the doctrine of justification made possible a transition between the different stages in the life and growth of a Christian. The explanation of the Credo showed how faith created a new human being. In the transition to the Lord’s Prayer it was shown how this human being draws God’s power from prayer. In the transition to the Commandments it was shown how this human fulfils God’s demands not out of his or her own power, but from the

catechumenos eos, qui cum post acceptum in infantia baptismum adoleuerint, in uera & pia doctrina Christi erudiuntur, ut quod in infantia suo modo crediderunt, & beneficio spiritus sancti acceperunt, hoc in adolescentia reuelate credere, & intelligere incipiant.” 93 Brenz, “Catechismus pia et utili explicatione illustratus. Praefatio” (1551), 710–711: “… commemorat Petrus in prima sua concione bonam partem symboli Apostolici, quod cum sit praecipua pars nostri Catechismi, res ipsa testatur spiritum sanctum ipsum commendare nobis hunc Catechismum, & iudicare eum ad aedificationem & conseruationem salutis Ecclesiae necessarium esse. … Cum igitur Paulus dicat: Si quis non habet spiritum Christi, hic non est eius, dubium esse non potest, quin omnes, qui cupiunt esse uera membra Christi, necesse habeant sese Catechismo erudiendos obedienter exhibere.” 94 Brenz, “Catechismus pia et utili explicatione illustratus. Praefatio” (1551), 712–716. 95 Brenz, Fragstück des Christlichen glaubens für die Jugendt, 688–689. 96 Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 87.

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

167

power he or she receives from God.97 In a way, it was a pedagogical operation less dramatic than the one found in Luther’s catechism. In Luther’s catechetical instruction, the young were confronted with God’s unattainable demands and their own sinfulness, whereas in Brenz’s conception the most dramatic part of the teaching was already realized when the young had been baptized and attended the catechism service. Instead it described and contributed to the growth of a Christian. 5.2.4 Osiander’s Position as a Württembergian Point of View Lucas Osiander seems to have been relatively blind to the differences between Luther and Brenz and seems to have interpreted Luther’s catechisms in light of Brenz’s catechetical conception. In his preface to Luther’s Large and Small Catechism published in 1599, Osiander stated that his intention for publishing Luther’s catechisms was to support true Christians living under the papacy and being held back from true knowledge of Christ by Jesuits who he claimed deceived them with their malicious interpretations of Luther’s catechisms. When they were allowed to read Luther’s catechisms themselves, Osiander was certain people would be able to see through the Jesuits’ deception. In addition to appealing to his readers’ reason, Osiander also offered them a hint at what they should expect to find in Luther’s catechisms. Firstly, they would find a true and clear teaching on the three articles of faith. Secondly, they would find instruction on how to lead a just, pious, and God-pleasing life. Finally, they would be shown how one may obtain all that is necessary for body and soul through prayer pleasing to God. When people read or heard or were taught these parts, the Holy Spirit would testify in their consciences that this was a true, pure, and saving teaching leading to eternal bliss.98 Thus Osiander presented Luther’s catechism within the traditional ordering of sections that had been employed by Brenz. Though his preface was not meant to be an explanation of Luther’s pedagogy, but rather an argument for its orthodoxy, it still revealed how Osiander understood the pedagogy of Luther’s catechism. In Osiander’s view, the pedagogy of Luther’s catechism did not rest on the recurring incident of confession and absolution. Instead, Osiander seems to have seen it as initiating a progress towards eternal bliss and thereby to have attributed to Luther’s catechisms a pedagogical intention closer to that of Brenz’s. The reason for this shifted pedagogical focus and the mixing of Luther’s conception with that of Brenz was probably that in Osiander’s context, Luther’s 97 Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, 284. For a presentation of the historical relation between Luther and Brenz, see Hermann Ehmer, “Johannes Brenz und Martin Luther”, in Luthers Wirkung: Festschrift für Martin Brecht zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Wolf-Dieter Hauschild (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1992), 97–109. 98 Lucas Osiander, Der kleine vnd der grosse Catechismus / Herrn D. Martini Luthers / seliger Gedächtnus, 18. See quote in n. 59.

168

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

catechisms had lost their original function as textbooks for the young. Instead, they had become a distinctive mark of Lutheranism as an expression of the true doctrine that should guide the teaching of the young. Their inclusion in the Lutheran Book of Concord of 1577, defining the limits of orthodox Lutheranism, might be regarded as a sign of the shifted function of Luther’s catechisms from educational textbooks to markers of confessional identity.99 In Württemberg, Luther’s catechisms coexisted with that of Brenz as the distinctive mark of orthodox Lutheranism, and they could do so harmoniously because they operated on different levels. Whereas Luther’s catechisms were signs that documented the territory’s status as belonging to the Lutheran bloc within the Empire, Brenz’s catechism was an integrated part of Württemberg’s constitution and educational system securing the population’s confessional identity. When Brenz’s catechism had come to hold this position in Württemberg, it was partly due to a historical coincidence. Brenz had been part of the humanistic oriented elite in Heidelberg, but was under investigation for giving illegal lectures in the New Testament when he was called to Schwäbisch Hall to become their first Protestant city preacher.100 Here he was noticed for his success with the city’s Protestant church order and was selected to become Landgrave Georg of Brandenburg-Ansbach’s theological counsellor. It was probably in that context that he was introduced to Duke Ulrich of Württemberg, who on his return to Württemberg asked for Brenz’s help to write a Protestant church order for Württemberg.101 Brenz therefore spent the summer of 1536 in Württemberg to help the duke organize uniform Protestant religious ceremonies and institutions in the country, before he returned to Schwäbisch Hall, where he continued his Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 164–165; and Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 534; Hermann’s Büchlein was introduced during the 1560/70s, after Hermann had taken office as superintendent in Esslingen. When Brenz’s catechism was later introduced, Württemberg’s influence on the Esslingen church increased, but Weismann can point out when this happens. He refers to Osiander’s catechism sermons as an indication that Brenz’s catechism had already been introduced towards the end of the sixteenth century. The city’s earlier church order by Otther prescribed an ordering of sections in accordance with Otther’s and Luther’s catechisms, and stated that the short version of the catechism should be learnt by heart at home, whereas the long version should be explained in sermons or lectures. Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 531. A similar function was ascribed to Luther’s catechisms in Aegidius Hunnius’s sermons on Luther’s catechism, when he stated that his sermons should teach a true Lutheran doctrine, lead to a God-pleasing life, and encourage the listeners to seek happiness and comfort in God’s presence. Austra Reinis, “Piety and Politics: Aegi­ dius Hunnius’s Sermons on the Lutheran Catechism (1592)”, Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 102 (2011): 221. On Lutheran catechisms as expressions of true doctrine in the second half of the sixteenth century, see Andreas Ohlemacher, Lateinische Katechetik der frühen lutherischen Orthodoxie, Forschungen zur Kirchen‑ und Dogmengeschichte 100 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010). 100  Estes, Christian Magistrate and State Church, 3–4. He had been a student under Oecolam­ padius and had himself taught Martin Bucer. 101 Estes, Christian Magistrate and State Church, 10.  99 Schröder,

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

169

service until he was forced to flee during the Interim in 1548. In 1550 he was allowed to return to Württemberg as Duke Ulrich’s advisor. After Ulrich’s death in 1550, Duke Christoph took him in his service, and when the Interim was lifted in 1552 Duke Christoph invested him in the territory’s highest clerical position as dean of Stuttgart and a senior church advisor to the court.102 During the years from Brenz’s first appearance at the court in Stuttgart until he was established as the leading force in the territory’s church, Brenz saw not only an improvement of his position and career, but also a shift in the function of his catechism. The church order Brenz helped write in 1536 ended up having his catechism appended at the end.103 It is not known precisely how this happened, but in a territory where Zwinglian and Lutheran theologians tried to cooperate in the government of the church, his catechism might have offered a welcome compromise.104 Luther’s catechisms would have been unacceptable to the Zwinglian camp, and the Lutherans could not accept the catechism of Martin Bucer,105 but Brenz’s seems to have met little opposition in either camp. Its classical composition and description of the sacrament as a word-sign, as well as its emphasis on good deeds as a confirmation of faith and gratitude to God, probably appealed to both schools without provoking any of them unduly.106 When Brenz took part in the writing of the order for Württemberg’s church services in 1553, he was no longer a visiting advisor, but the undisputed leader of the territory’s church, and the territory was no longer divided between the two Protestant confessions, but had decided unambiguously in favour of Lutheran teaching. Here, Brenz’s catechism changed from being an appendix to becoming a central part as an expression of the true faith and of the compulsory content of religious teaching in the church. In 1559, the order for the church services was included in Württemberg’s great church order as its central section.107 The catechism’s central position was due not only to the church order’s form, but also its content. The catechism was referred to in several parts of the church order,108 and the description of the catechism resembled a purpose that could Christian Magistrate and State Church, 13 and 16.  Estes, Christian Magistrate and State Church, 12; and Sabine Holtz, Theologie und Alltag,

102 Estes, 103

29.

104 Blarer

headed the church in the southern part of the territory, whereas the church was headed by Schnepf in the northern part. Ehmer, “Württemberg”, and idem, “Erhard Schnepf (1495–1558): Reformator in Nassau, Hessen und Württemberg, Professor in Marburg, Tübingen und Jena”, in Heilbronner Köpfe 5, ed. Christhard Schrenk, Kleine Schriftenreihe des Archivs der Stadt Heilbronn (Heilbronn: Stadtarchiv Heilbronn, 2009), 209–232, 288. 105 And neither could they, according to Holtz, accept the Zwinglian catechism by Leo Jud. Holtz, Theologie und Alltag, 29–30. 106 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 228–229. 107 Holtz, Theologie und Alltag, 30. 108 Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 425–431.

170

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

unify the concerns of the order. The territory’s church order therefore not only made Brenz’s catechism the undisputed and universal norm for religious teaching, but also described it as a basis for a good society.109 The purpose of the order was to secure in the country a temporal and eternal well-being that rested on a proper knowledge of God and Jesus Christ, as well as the way of life that followed from this knowledge.110 Thus the catechism was not only seen as promoting the individual salvation of each subject, but also the collective well-being of society. Osiander later, in his catechism sermons, described this connection between faith and welfare as a major focus for his catechism teaching. Since it brought salvation, the teaching of the catechism was a matter of individual welfare for all the citizens,111 but its teaching was also deemed vital for the common good of society. The knowledge of God which it promoted eased people’s distress and qualms and helped them see through false teaching. Those who had been taught the catechism would raise their children in the fear of God and thereby contribute to a lasting blessing for society. If, on the other hand, the teaching were to be omitted, it would result in a godless new generation that would bring chaos and damnation.112 109 Holtz, Theologie und Alltag, 23. The connection between the doctrine of justification by faith and the organization of society is visible in the church order: “SO nun ein jeder, wölchen dise unsere Ordnungen berüren, souil jme darinn aufferlegt, seinem Ampt getrewlich vnd fleissig nachsetzen wurdet, stellen wir in keinen zweifel, der Allmächtig güttig Gott, werde seinen segen reichlich hierzu verleihen und geben, damit hie in zeit, mit zeitlicher Wolfart, Christenlichem leben vnd zucht angefangen, vnnd in täglicher besserung, mit gnad des heiligen Geistes, durch unsern Herrn Christum, vnd seinen Verdienst erbawen werden möge, zu künfftigem ewigem leben.” Cited from “Große württembergische Kirchenordnung”, in Theodor Eisenlohr, Sammlung der württembergischen Kirchen-Geseze, pt. 1: Enthaltend die erste Reihe der Kirchen-Geseze vom Jahre 1418 bis zum Jahr 1802 = vol. 8/1 of Vollständige, historisch und kritisch bearbeitete Sammlung der württembergischen Gesetze, ed. A. L. Reyscher (Tübingen: Fues, 1834), 284; and Sabine Arend, Baden-Württemberg II: Herzogtum Württemberg = vol. XVI/2 of Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts. Edited by Eike Wolgast and Gottfried Seebass (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004), 243–246. Holtz asks if the church order was more important to the duke as a program for public instruction in piety than for the church’s own preaching as such. She sees as characteristic of this order its combination of the doctrine of justification with its thinking of institution (Ordnungsdenken). 110 Brecht and Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte, 337–338. 111 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 4–5: “Den Kindern und jungen Leuten ist auch notwendig zu jhrer seligkeit / dass sie Gott recht erkennen lernen. … Dann ohn wahren Glauben vnd rechte Erkanntnus Gottes können die Menschen nicht selig werden.” 112 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 5: “… Wo das geschicht / da würdt dem HERren Christo immerdar fort und fort / ein fromme Christliche Gemein erzogen / die jhne erkennet / liebet / lobet vnd preiset / vnd jhm von hertzen dienet. Da wächßt auch auff ein fromme / erbare gehorsame Burgerschafft vnd Underthonen / welche Gott der HErr mit zeitlichen vnd ewigen Güttern segnet / vnd dieselbige in seinem vätterlichen Schutz und Schirm erhelt. Dagegen aber / wa die Jugent vnd Kinder nicht in der Lehr des Christlichen Catechismi vnterrichtet vnd aufferzogen würden / so hette man sich anderst nicht zuuersehen / dann daß in kurzzen Jaren / ein newe gottlose und verruchte Welt auffwachsen würde / welche weder nach

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

171

In accordance with this connection between religious knowledge and society’s welfare, the duke, by being given responsibility for the well-being of society, was also responsible for securing true teaching. Accusations that this would give him undue influence over the church were countered with a reference to the kings of the Old Testament who had been responsible for both of the Law’s two tablets as they were expressed in the Ten Commandments, and who had therefore instituted true worship as well as peace and justice.113 The duke should also secure true doctrine in his territory as well as guarantee peace, unity, and welfare for his people. The reference to Old Testament kings in the description of the role of the ruler had been absent in the church order from 1536. Still, when it was employed in the church order of 1559, it echoed ideas Brenz had expressed already during his years as city preacher in Schwäbisch Hall.114 According to Sabine Holz, the church law’s connection between Christian doctrine and organization of society points to the idea that a unified religion was the basis for the unity of society.115 As shown previously, this concern for unity also expressed itself in the wider political processes of which church politics were a part. The reforms of Duke Christoph and the agreements reached at the Landtag in 1565 secured ducal control over the territory when the estates were subjected to a common legislation under the duke, though only after the estates had negotiated an order they could agree with. The ecclesiopolitical agreements reached established a relatively independent church hierarchy that could strengthen the integration and control of the church throughout the territory. A guaranteed confessional identity had been the basis for the integrative agreements reached between duke and estates at the Landtag in 1565.116 Gott fraget / noch sich durch die weltliche Obrigkeit ziehen und regieren liesse. Da würde dann Gottes Fluch und Zorn / mit zeitlichem und ewigem verderben / häuffig auff ein solches Gottloses Volck fallen.” 113 Cf. the use of Josiah in the negotiation between duke and estates in the Landtagsabschluss of 1565 mentioned in Chapter 2.2 where Josiah was described as a role model for the duke in being religion’s protector but still dependent on the estates. See also Osiander’s funeral sermon for Duke Ludwig and its description of the duke as an ideal duke in resembling Josiah (Chapter 3.1.4). 114 Holtz, Theologie und Alltag, 20–22; Eisenlohr, Sammlung der württembergischen KirchenGeseze, pt. 1, 70; and Arend, Baden-Württemberg II: Herzogtum Württemberg, *iiii in Duke Christoph’s preface to “Großen Württembergischen Kirchenordnung”. See also Bast, Honor Your Fathers, 209–210. In a sermon presented on election day in Schwäbisch Hall while he was still the city’s preacher, Johannes Brenz argued that “The whole purpose of government was to protect and promote the interests of the community of faith.” He concluded that the secular government was also responsible for the first of the Law’s two tablets, and therefore should guarantee pure teaching and worship and prohibit false teaching, heresy, and idolatry, such as Catholic tendencies, the religions of the Turks and the Jews, as well as witchcraft. Among their responsibilities under the second tablet was that of preventing public sin, such as the organization of brothels. He saw the city magistrates as a form of disciplining fathers. 115 Holtz, Theologie und Alltag, 27. 116 Cf. Chapter 2.2.

172

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

In Brenz’s move from city preacher in the imperial city of Schwäbisch Hall to central reformer and church organizer in the territorial state of Württemberg, one may observe how a church organization that was conceived in a city and which retained its strong focus on the connection between doctrine and church organization and on the unity and commonality between church and secular authority,117 was now applied to the organization of a territorial church. Religious life in the duchy thus came to be moulded in the form of the religious life of a city with its strong emphasis on community and common interests.118 The church order mandated that practical religious teaching should promote this unity in the form of Brenz’s catechism. It was the undisputed religious textbook for schools and homes,119 and it was the basis for the instruction that should take place in the churches. The teaching should reach the majority of the people and have the form of catechism services, which replaced the Lutheran form of Vespers that had been prescribed in the first Lutheran church order in 1536. The explanation of the catechism played the dominant role in the services. They would start with a German hymn and continue with the pastor’s explanation of a part of the catechism, the so-called catechism sermon, before some of the children in the congregation, presumably boys, would be examined, to motivate the young in their learning and to let the others present learn from the answers the young would give.120 Towards the end the congregation would pray both the Lord’s Prayer and another prayer suitable for the occasion before the service concluded with another hymn and a blessing.121 The local preacher was responsible for holding these services according to the set order and for checking parishioners’ attendance at them, and eventually punishing those who failed to attend. During regular visitations, the church hierarchy would check if the local preacher met his responsibility. The schoolmasters’ catechetical teaching would also be inspected during the visitations. The congregation attending catechism services were motivated not only by the threat of punishment, but also positively by future prospects. They could show their knowledge of the catechism during the services or present themselves for the preacher once a year to be examined by him. Those who passed and were found Reichsstadt und Reformation, 47. Bürgertum und Glaube, 57–63, emphasizes the idea of “Gemeiner Nutzen” (common interests) as a motive force in the organization and legislation of the cities, and also in the religious politics of the cities. 119 Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 446–450; and Reu, Quellen zur Geschichte des Katechismus-Unterrichts, vol. 1: Süddeutsche Katechismen, 289. 120 Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 423: “… das dardurch nicht allein derselben jungen geschicklichkeit erfaren werde, sonder auch die andern den catechismum von jnen lernen mögen.” See also Reu, Quellen zur Geschichte des Katechismus-Unterrichts, vol. 1: Süddeutsche Katechismen, 286–287; and Eisenlohr, Sammlung der württembergischen KirchenGeseze, pt. 1, 185. 121 Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 424. 117 Moeller, 118 Hamm,

5.2 Lucas Osiander’s Catechetical Position

173

to have sufficient knowledge of Christian faith were allowed to take part in the Eucharist, to marry, and to hold public office.122 During his career, Lucas Osiander took part in this catechetical system of Württemberg on several levels. At the outset of his career he himself was responsible for teaching the catechism as preacher, teacher, and special superintendent to the monastery school of Blaubeuren from 1558 to 1563. Later he functioned as a visitor as superintendent in Stuttgart from 1563 to 1569 before he finally was receiving, evaluating, and responding to visitation reports and taking part in the formation of central church regulations as member of the church council at the peak of his career (1569–1594). From his service in Württemberg, Osiander was familiar with catechism instruction as an important arena for the confessional development of a society, and his Württemberg background coloured his stance and role in the Esslingen catechetical controversy. Osiander’s effort to reform Esslingen’s school system, which he undertook from 1598 onwards by writing a new school order to replace the order written by superintendent Hermann, testifies to this. He secretly had the draft for a new school order written in his old monastery Adelberg, inspired by Württemberg monastery schools and intended to prepare the pupils for studies at the University of Tübingen. He made sure that learning the catechism remained an important task for the pupils.123 122 When the superintendent conducted visitations to parishes, one of his important obligations was, according to the visitation order, to check the standard of the catechism teaching including if the preacher had a satisfactory understanding of the subject, if catechism services were conducted regularly, and if all parts of the catechism were taught and tested properly. According to the church law of Württemberg, knowledge of the catechism had been mandatory for the admittance to the Eucharist since 1553. In Württemberg this knowledge was tested yearly in what came to be known as the spring exam, held every year after Pentecost: “… den catechismum mit der kinderfrag nach innhalt unser kirchenordnung angericht, mit was fleiß er den selben und ob er auch järlichen mit den kindern die exploration unser ordnung nach halte. Item ob er auch die eltern, so jre kinder nit fleisig zům catechismo schicken, vermög der ordnung adhortier und ermane.” (Cited from Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 426.) Not only children were obligated to attend catechism services, but so was the rest of the household: “… nicht allein die kinder, sonder auch die ehehalten [= Gesinde], knecht und mägd (welches sie in einer verzeichnuß und guter ordnung haben können) in die kirch erfordern und sie nacheinander aus dem catechismo und den fürnembsten stücken unserer christlichen religion examiniren und erlernen, was sie darinnen proficirt und außgerichtet, und welche guten bericht und antwort geben künden, selbige also in jrem fleiß fürzufahren vermanen, die andern aber, die ungeschickt befunden, freundtlich unterrichten und erinnern, fürter zu jrer seelen heil und wolfahrt bessern fleiß zuthun. …” (Cited from ibid., 428) Parents were held responsible for this attendance: “die Strafbestimmungen für Katechismusversäumnisse … reichen von der Geldstrafe bis zur Haftstrafe für Eltern, die ihre Kinder beharrlich nicht zum Katechismus schicken und dadurch an der Jugend reine Lehre und christliche, ehrbare Zucht verhindern” (ibid., 427). Similar regulations were connected to catechism teaching in Esslingen; see Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 112. 123 Otto Mayer, “Geschichte des humanistischen Schulwesens in der Freien Reichsstadt Eßlingen 1267–1803”, in Geschichte des humanistischen Schulwesens in Württemberg, vol. 2: Ge­

174

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

5.3 Catechetical Traditions in Esslingen Catechetical instruction had been important for Esslingen’s confessional development. The disciplinary regulations that accompanied the introduction of Zwinglian teaching in 1531 closed the brothels and installed five gentlemen as lords of discipline to supervise the regulations. They would check that no one refrained from taking part in the services in the city, especially not for religious reasons. If that happened, offenders would be led to the preacher to be interrogated.124 A special part of the regulations concerned the young, who were subjected not only to the pedagogical authority of the householders and the schoolmasters, but also to that of the city. All youth of more than ten years of age were obliged to take part in the catechism services,125 and anyone who was seen in the streets or in public places during the services had to expect a visit from the lords of discipline.126 5.3.1 Otther’s Catechism A major concern of these regulations was to protect and promote catechetical teaching, which at this time had the form of Jacob Otther’s catechism. In 1532, Otther succeeded Ambrosius Blarer as leader of the church in Esslingen and wrote Esslingen’s first Protestant catechism.127 It revealed a pronouncedly Zwinglian teaching, especially in its sections about the sacraments. In them it was emphasized that baptism was only an outward sign which did not guarantee the identity of the baptized as God’s child, since only the Lord knew if one had really been baptized with the Holy Spirit.128 The Lord’s Supper also was described in contrast to a Lutheran or Catholic understanding. Its elements should not be regarded as the body and blood of Christ, but as words to faith and as outer reminders of the fact that Christ gave his body and blood as food and drink for the soul and its eternal life.129 According to Otther and Zwinglian theology, this schichte des humanistischen Schulwesens in den zu Beginn des 19. Jahrhunderts württembergisch gewordenen Landesteilen von 1559–1805, pt. 1: Geschichte des humanistischen Schulwesens der Reichsstädte (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1920), 247–255. 124 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 109, 111, and 125. 125 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 112. 126 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 125. Cf. Sabine Arend, Südwest­ deutsche Reichsstädte, pt. 2: Reutlingen, Ulm, Esslingen, Giengen, Biberach, Ravensburg, Wimpfen, Leutkirch, Bopfingen, Aalen = vol. XVII/4 of Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahr­ hunderts, ed. Eike Wolgast and Gottfried Seebaß (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009). 127  Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 114; and Reu, Quellen zur Ge­ schichte des Katechismus-Unterrichts, vol. 1: Süddeutsche Katechismen, 360. 128  Jacob Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen” (1532), in Reu, Quellen zur Geschichte des Katechismus-Unterrichts, vol. 1: Süddeutsche Katechismen, 379. 129 Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen” (1532), 380.

5.3 Catechetical Traditions in Esslingen

175

was the only logical way to understand it, since Christ after his ascension was no longer bodily present on earth.130 But though the theological differences to Luther’s catechisms were obvious in these single parts of Otther’s catechism, it resembled Luther’s catechisms in its composition and thereby also in its pedagogical operation. After two minor articles on Christian anthropology and the relationship between law and gospel, which also presented a doctrine of justification,131 it treated the Commandments as its first major part132 before it proceeded to the Credo133 and the Lord’s Prayer, with several other prayers,134 and ended with the treatment of the two sacraments.135 Otther described his intentions for his catechism in the same way as Luther had done in his catechism services,136 namely as contributing to the growth of a moral new generation respecting God’s commands.137 The catechism promoted a double function of the Law, which came into play when the Commandments displayed one’s sin in a way that led to faith and promoted a life where the Commandments were held with a light heart. Though Otther described the theology of baptism differently from Luther, he gave baptism a pedagogical function that was not entirely different. On this point, he appears as a middle way between the catechisms of Luther and Brenz. As Luther had done in his catechisms, Otther described baptism as something that should be rehearsed the whole life through, but he also described it as an identity marker resembling Jewish circumcision as Brenz and later also Osiander did.138 Otther’s catechism was written to serve the city and improve the citizens’ good morals. It would be the city’s single dominant catechism before the city turned to Lutheranism. Its pedagogical conception, 130 Otther,

“Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen (1532)”, 382. 131 Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen (1532)”, 363–364; and Weismann, Die Kate­ chismen des Johannes Brenz, 532. 132 Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen (1532)”, 365–370. 133 Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen (1532)”, 371–374. 134  Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen (1532)”, 374–379. 135 Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen (1532)”, 379–382. 136 WA 30/1, 22. 137 Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen (1532)”, 361. 138 Johannes Brenz, Catechismus pia et vtili explicatione illvstratus (Wittenberg, 1553), 41; and Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 22–23. This comparison was also employed by Zwingli, see Steven Ozment, The Age of Reform 1250–1550: An Intellectual and Religious History of Late Medieval and Reformation Europe (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1980), 331.

176

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

probably in the form of Luther’s catechism from the 1570s on, was probably employed in the city’s catechetical instruction until Osiander arrived.139 5.3.2 Andreae’s Catechism Esslingen’s definitive turn towards Lutheranism took place when Jacob Andreae was invited to function as the city’s leading preacher in 1567. During his short service in the city he gave a series of sermons written to rid the city of all false teaching, especially papism, Calvinism, and Schwenckfeldianism.140 He also gave a sermon to explain to simple people how to keep free from heresy and remain loyal to true teaching, which was by learning and respecting the proper Christian

139  According to Weismann, Otther had moderated the Zwinglian formulations of his original catechism to make it more acceptable for the conditions in Esslingen. Weismann claims that by 1579, when the city signed the Formula of Concord, it was probably Luther’s catechism that was in use, since Otther’s catechism already in 1573 had been labeled sectarian. Luther’s catechism would have been used together with Hermann’s, which Weismann calls a Betbüchlein, but which is probably more precisely described as a Kommunikantenbüchlein. Weismann is unable to point out when Brenz’s catechism would have been introduced in the city, but believes it could have been around 1580, after the signing of the Formula of Concord. Luther’s Small Catechism would still have been used in the city’s Latin schools after 1580. Another possibility, according to Weismann, is that both Brenz’s and Luther’s catechisms were first introduced around 1580. Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 532–534. In my view, this view on the course of events in the introduction of catechisms in Esslingen is implausible on some points. First, it is not easy to distinguish between traces of Otther’s catechism and Luther’s catechism, since they share the same composition principle and follow a similar concept, even though they have clear theological differences. As I see it, it is possible to think that Hermann was requested to write his short catechism as a supplement to mend the most obvious doctrinal shortcomings of Otther’s catechism. It is also possible that Hermann’s catechism was used together with Luther’s and presented more material on a point of doctrine that had been disputed in the city. Second, Brenz’s catechism would not necessarily have been introduced already in 1580. The catechism sermons which Andreae presented in the city were clearly based on a catechism following Luther’s composition principle (Jacob Andreae, Drey vnd dreissig Predigten von den furnembsten Spaltungen in der Christlichen Religion, so sich zwischen den Bäpstischen, Lutherischen, Zwing­ lischen, Schwenckfeldern und Widerteuffern halten. In wölchen jedes theils Meinung vnd Grund trewlich gesetzt, vnd ein einfaltiger Bericht vnd Anleittung auß den sechs Hauptstucken christlicher Lehr gegeben würdt, wie ein jeder einfaltiger Lay in solchem allem die Warheit erkennen vnd sich Christlich darein schicken soll, daß er in kein Sect verfüret werdt. Allen frommen Christen vnd einfaltigen Pfarrern nuzlich zulesen. Geprediget zuo Eßlingen durch Jacobum Andree, D. Probst zu Tübingen vnd bey der Vniversität daselbsten Canzlern (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1573), and Hermann, who followed in Andreae’s tradition, seems to have adapted his catechism booklet, first published in 1592, to follow the same composition principle (Christoph Hermann, Einfältiger Bericht Von des Herren Abendtmal, auss den worten des Catechismi genommen. In frag und Antwort gestellet / für die Jugent und Schulkinder zu Eßlingen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1600). In my view, Osiander’s appearance in the city was probably important for the introduction of Brenz’s catechism in the city. 140 Andreae, Drey vnd dreissig Predigten von den furnembsten Spaltungen in der Christlichen Religion.

5.3 Catechetical Traditions in Esslingen

177

catechism.141 The sermon seems to have been based on the catechism sermons Andreae had delivered in Lauingen six years earlier.142 Though in his preface he praised the catechisms of both Luther and Brenz and described them both as holy men, his sermons seem to have been clearly based on the catechism of Luther and to follow Luther’s framework and composition.143 Andreae presented his catechism sermons with a similar intent as Luther had presented his. They should promote the right fear of God, in which wisdom and eternal life could be found, as well as the outer discipline that followed from this fear.144 Andreae also presented the law with a double function that lent the composition its dynamic, but the drama from the situation of confession present in Luther’s catechisms was softened and domesticated.145 Instead of focusing on the situation where the person seeking salvation was confronted with the Commandments’ impossible demands and was saved by God’s mercy presented in the Creed and attained through prayer, Andreae described God as having compassion with the human weakness that hindered fulfilment of the law.146 It was out of this compassion that the catechism had been given in a few easily comprehensible and attainable parts. In the Creed, God had shown that he is a trustworthy and steady father, saviour, and consoler, and in the Lord’s Prayer he had shown how one may turn to him with all the concerns of both body and soul.147 Instead of describing his catechism instruction as an existential situation of someone seeking salvation, Andreae transformed this situation into a manageable situation of learning. 141 Andreae, Drey vnd dreissig Predigten von den furnembsten Spaltungen in der Christlichen Religion, Part 4, 192–201. 142 Jacob Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr (Catechismus genannt) allen christlichen Haußuättern nutzlich zuolesen / gepredigt zu Lawgingen / durch Jaco­ bum Andree / der Heiligen Schrifft Doctorn (Tübingen: Vlrich Morharts Wittib, 1561). 143 See Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr, vij. There might be several reasons for this. In Lauingen, where his first series of catechism sermons were held, Luther’s Small Catechism was probably the standard textbook, as seems to have been the case to a larger extent in the Bavarian cities than it was in Württemberg. See Aubrey Gwin, Roman Education from Cicero to Quintilian (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1926), 419–420. Another reason might have been that it took some time between when Brenz’s catechism was established as the standard textbook in the great church order of Württemberg of 1559 to when it came to dominate instruction throughout the territory. See also Andreae, Drey vnd dreissig Predigten von den furnembsten Spaltungen in der Christlichen Religion, 198. 144 Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr, j; and WA 30/1, 142. 145 Andreae, Drey vnd dreissig Predigten von den furnembsten Spaltungen in der Christlichen Religion, 198. The formulations are sharper in Andreae’s sermon’s in Esslingen than they had been in Lauingen. 146 The description of the function of the Law is a bit more dramatic when Andreae describes it as a reminder of death and our own weakness and as a lord of discipline promoting humility and the recognition of sin and thereby leading to Christ and the justification by faith. See Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr, xix–xxi. 147 Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr, vij–viij.

178

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

This altered intention can also be traced in Andreae’s presentation of the sacraments. No longer were they primarily described as dramatic events expressing a situation of confession and effecting salvation, but were rather seen as instances strengthening a Christian’s faith on his or her way through life. More than being a basic situation of penance and salvation to be repeated,148 baptism was a seal of God’s promise and a proof of his salvation. In the Eucharist, the focus was not so much on the forgiveness and justification of the sinner as on its power to strengthen faith and improve life.149 Luther’s emphasis on confession and penance was eased in Andreae’s presentation of his catechism. Instead, he strengthened the focus on the catechism as necessary knowledge for those who were to be called Christians and on the benefits of this knowledge for a Christian life.150 It is difficult to see that Andreae’s catechetical teaching would have appeared to the parishioners as a clear break with the tradition from Otther. He continued the same ordering of sections, and his pedagogical intentions were not that different from Otther’s. One might still assume that Luther’s Small Catechism was introduced in the city’s religious teaching during Andreae’s stay. 5.3.3 Hermann’s Catechism If Andreae and the introduction of a Lutheran catechism had not been perceived by the citizens as a clear break with Otther’s catechism, it might explain some of the controversy surrounding Hermann’s catechism. Just after the second edition of Hermann’s catechism had been printed, Osiander obtained a copy which he complained about to the city council. As a response, Superintendent Hermann, who on Andreae’s recommendation had followed him as the city’s leading cleric, reminded the council that it was they who had requested him to write the catechism nine years earlier. Their motivation for doing so had been a wish to restore faith among the parishioners. An important part of this was to reinstall the right attitude towards the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, and they had therefore requested that the catechism should contain an instruction for the confession of sin to be used with private absolution that had been instituted to accompany 148 Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr, viij; and WA 30/1, 256–257. 149 Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr, viij; and WA 30/1, 261. These elements in Andreae’s teaching may very well have been inspired by formulations in Brenz’s catechism and will appear as even more prominent in Osiander’s teaching which is presented in the next chapter. 150  Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr, viij. In his sermon in Esslingen, Andreae resembles Luther most when it comes to expressing the catechism’s intention, and in the description of the function of the Law as well as of the articles of faith and the Lord’s Prayer. He also sums up the catechism’s usefullness in a similar way as Luther, noting that its six parts contain the most important Christian doctrines which are necessary for a Christian to know for his or her salvation. Andreae, Drey vnd dreissig Predigten von den furnembsten Spaltungen in der christlichen Religion, 199.

5.3 Catechetical Traditions in Esslingen

179

the celebration of the Lord’s Supper as a means to increase respect for the sacrament.151 Hermann’s catechism was not a full catechism, but an instruction to prepare the young for receiving the Eucharist. It was probably used together with Luther’s catechism, on which Andreae had based his sermons. Osiander had two complaints about Hermann’s catechism. First, he found it to be intricate and unpractical.152 This seems like a very biased point of view, since Hermann’s catechism is a very modest booklet of eleven pages. Compared to the catechism of Brenz it is a little shorter. If it is compared to the single page where Brenz explains the Lord’s Supper, however, it is many times as long.153 It is also shorter than Luther’s Small Catechism, but has a lengthier treatment of the Eucharist since Luther’s Small Catechism does this in approximately two pages.154 Osiander’s second complaint was that Hermann’s catechism revealed traces of a Calvinist teaching on the Eucharist. He claimed it lacked the necessary polemics against the Calvinists, which is true, since it only contained polemics against the Catholic sacrifice of the Mass,155 but which it had in common with many other catechisms, including that of Luther. Osiander also accused it of employing Calvinistic formulations, especially the description of the Eucharistic elements as food for the soul (Seelenspeisung).156 If one compares Hermann’s questions and answers on the Lord’s Supper with those in Luther’s Small Catechism, however, it seems Hermann borrowed many of his formulations from Luther. The booklet as a whole bears obvious resemblance to Luther’s paragraphs on the Eucharist.157 The description of the elements as food for the soul is absent in Luther’s catechism and can be found in Otther’s Zwinglian catechism,158 but it might also have been inspired by Andreae, who described the elements as food for the strengthening of faith in his catechism sermons.159 Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 165. Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 164. 153 Brenz, Fragstück des Christlichen glaubens für die Jugendt (1535). 154  WA 30/1, 258–259. 155 Hermann, Einfältiger Bericht Von des Herren Abendtmal, auss den worten des Catechismi genommen, iiij. 156 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 164; and Hermann, Einfältiger Bericht Von des Herren Abendtmal, auss den worten des Catechismi genommen, v: “So ist es nicht ein Speiß des Bauchs / sonder der Seelen / vnnd das Vnterpfand vnserer Seeligkeit / dadurch Christ Gutthaten / vnd der gantze verdienst seines bittern Leidens / Sterbens vnd Auferstehens / vnd was er damit erworben hatt / einem jeglichen / der es mit gläubigen Herzen empfahet vnd annimpt / besonders zugeeignet wirdt.” 157 Page 2 in Hermann’s book is almost identical to WA 30/1, 258; his page 3 corresponds to pages 258–259, his page 4 corresponds to 258–259 (combining questions one and five), and his page 5 corresponds to 260, while page 6 resembles 260–261. 158 Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechtgeschaffner / Christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen” (1532), 380. 159 Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr, viij: “Da vns furgetragen wurt die lebendigmachende Speiß vnd Tranck / durch wölche warhafftig vnnser Glaub in aller Widerwertigkeit gesterckt / …;” and ibid., lxv: “das jr mit der Himmlischen Speiß vnnd 151 Schröder, 152 Schröder,

180

5. Lucas Osiander in Esslingen

5.4 Concluding Remarks This chapter has described how the conflict between Hermann and Osiander ended as well as the political interests involved in it. In Esslingen’s history, the conflict between Catholic and Zwinglian teaching, and later between Zwinglian and Lutheran teaching, was not only about conflicting theology, but also about the conflicting political interests of patriciate and guilds within the city corporation and about the city’s foreign alliances. The conflict between Osiander and Hermann also involved several dimensions. In studying the form and content of the two theologians’ catechisms, it is difficult to describe exactly what the conflict was about when it comes to theology. Osiander obviously saw a Calvinist threat lurking in Hermann’s teaching, but it is not so easy to find this view justified. One may suspect Osiander for having had other motives than those he stated explicitly. He probably saw Brenz’s catechism and catechetical conception as the only proper practical application of true Lutheran teaching and insisted that this view should be respected also in Esslingen.160 Parallel to his struggle for the introduction of a Württembergian church order, which gave increased influence in the church to the city’s secular authority, he probably also fought for a Brenzian catechetical conception as he had known it in Württemberg and for the associated inclusion of religious interests and discipline in secular laws and government.

Tranck zuo dem ewigen Leben gespeiset vnd getrenckt werden.” See also Thomas Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur: Lutherischer Protestantismus in der zweiten Hälfte des Reformations­ jahrhunderts, Spätmittelalter und Reformation N. R. 29 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 199. 160  Gerhard Bode, “Instruction of the Christian Faith by Lutherans after Luther”, in Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550–1675, ed. Robert Kolb, Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 11 (Leiden: Brill, 2008), 177–179.

Chapter 6

Catechism Sermons In order to investigate Osiander’s role as preacher in Esslingen and the way he utilized his theological tradition in this role, let us now turn to the catechism sermons Osiander presented in Esslingen. According to his spiritual testament, as it was presented by Johannes Magirus in the funeral sermon, Osiander regarded the Fifty Sermons on the Christian Catechism among the most valuable part of his work and as representative of his teaching.1 Published in 1600 as one of the first extensive commentaries available on the catechism of Johannes Brenz,2 it consisted of sermons presented at Sunday evening catechism services in the city church of Esslingen. In his preface to the book, Lucas Osiander tells of a congregation of both young and old. The sermons seem to confirm this, but one gets the impression that the young made up the majority.3 The series of services would have been given during 1598–1599 in the second year of Lucas Osiander’s ministry in Esslingen.4 It opens with Osiander’s expressions of gratitude to the city council. According to Osiander, the council had requested that he should give and publish the series of catechism sermons to strengthen true faith in the city, and its members had themselves attended the catechism services eagerly and diligently.5 Osiander dedicated his collection of sermons to the duke of Württemberg, as would have been natural for a book to be published in Württemberg.6 Perhaps Osiander in this dedication also greeted the duke on the occasion that Württembergian religious teaching was established as the basic instruction of new generations in the city of Esslingen.7 He thanked the duke for his favour and fatherly trustworthiness, but also affirmed that both the duke and the Christian congregation of Esslingen would be rewarded for their benevolence towards him, as God had promised those who were hospitable to one of His prophets. 1 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum; and Magirus, Leichpredigt,

31.

2 Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 535. The next commentary on Brenz’s catechism in Esslingen was published in 1644. 3 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum. 4 Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen, 163. 5 Preface to Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum. 6 Preface to Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum. 7 Mayer, “Geschichte des humanistischen Schulwesens in der Freien Reichsstadt Eßlingen 1267–1803”, 247–255 on Osiander’s instrumental role on pedagogical reforms.

182

6. Catechism Sermons

When Lucas Osiander presented these catechism sermons in the city church of Esslingen, he entered a situation resembling the one Martin Luther had been in seventy years earlier.8 In 1528 Luther had substituted for Johannes Bugenhagen as the city preacher of Wittenberg while Bugenhagen served as superintendent in Braunschweig, and he presented three series of catechism sermons from May to December in this year.9 The sermons would later be reworked into his Large Catechism and through it they came to establish the catechism sermon as a separate homiletical genre.10 Luther had addressed an audience similar to that of Osiander, consisting of young and old, householders and mothers, servants and children, and he had addressed them with a similar intent to make sure that faith was rooted in the population and given room in the lives of the future generation. Seventy years later it was the tradition from Luther that Osiander wanted to pass on to his congregation. However, though Osiander followed Luther relatively closely in the understanding of each dogmatic locus, a comparison between the two sets of catechism sermons shows that much had changed on the way from Wittenberg to Esslingen and during the years that had passed. This chapter will employ Luther’s catechism sermons as a contrast to Osiander’s, in an attempt to clarify the distinctive characteristic of Osiander’s catechetical position. It will analyze theological and pedagogical consequences that followed when Brenz’s concept was chosen instead of Luther’s and describe Osiander’s catechism sermons as a distinctive form of a Lutheran religious pedagogy. Then it will connect the distinctive characteristics of Osiander’s catechetical concept to the social and political situation which surrounded his sermons and which differed from that of Luther. Though such a comparison may shed light on the pedagogical situation of Osiander’s catechetical teaching, it involves some difficulties on a literary level. The different characteristics of Osiander’s and Luther’s catechism sermons make a neutral comparison of them impossible. They followed different pedagogical concepts which caused them to order and weigh the catechetical parts differently. In accordance with Brenz’s framework, Osiander organized the catechetical parts in the following sequence: baptism, the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, and the Eucharist. Luther, on the other hand, started with the Commandments before proceeding to the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, baptism, and the Eucharist.11 And while Luther used half of the pages in his Large Catechism, which was based on the catechism sermons he had given the previous year, on the explanation of the Commandments, Osiander used only a quarter of his on the same topic. The explanation of the Apostles’ Creed, on the other hand, takes  Martin Luther, Katechismuspredigten (1528), in WA 30/1, 2–122. Martin Luther, vol. 2: Ordnung und Abrenzung der Reformation 1521–1532, 268. 10  Reinis, “Piety and Politics: Aegidius Hunnius’s Sermons on the Lutheran Catechism (1592)”, 227; and Werner Jetter, “Katechismuspredigt”, in TRE 17, 748. 11 They both append a short sermon on penance at the end of their sermon corpora.  8

 9 Brecht,

6. Catechism Sermons

183

up about a third of Osiander’s book, whereas it is only an eighth part of Luther’s. Whereas Luther’s focus is on the Commandments, Osiander’s is on the Creed, as this chapter’s focus will be. Against this background, a direct comparison of the different catechetical parts and topics would be misleading. The different parts have their function and meaning within their respective corpus of catechism sermons, and an analysis of separate sections of the catechisms must be aware of the pedagogical operation of which they are a part. It is therefore inevitable to choose Osiander’s catechetical concept to guide this chapter’s exposition. Therefore, Luther’s sermons will not enter the analysis in the form of direct comparisons, but rather as contrasts displaying the distinctive features and the changed operations of Osiander’s catechetical instruction. The fact that the pedagogical concept is taken into consideration in the ­analysis of each catechetical part means that the composition of the two collections of sermons is significant for the understanding of the instructional ­situation. This might seem like an analytical strategy unaware of the historical situation where listeners would only hear one sermon at a time and therefore hardly be able to grasp the compositional principle. Still, there are good reasons to hold that the pedagogical and theological concepts linked to composition were both intended by the catechists and experienced in the instructional situation. One reason is that the catechism sermons were one of two co-existing catechism genres. The other was the short catechism which was to be learnt by heart and repeated regularly and which one should gain understanding of by attending the catechism sermons. The two genres were closely related to each other and followed the same compositional principles.12 The knowledge imparted to the young with the catechism sermons explained the sequences that were learnt by heart and were related to them. The knowledge gained in the catechism services was thus intended to enter the catechetical structure that was already established and maintained in the minds of the young with frequent repetitions of the short catechism. References given by the preachers in the sermons to other parts of the catechism also reminded listeners of the overarching composition of which the sermons were part and which helped them orient within it. In his introductory catechism sermon, Osiander expressed a similar view of how this learning took place. He compared young peoples’ acquisition of knowledge to the hen’s appropriation of grain. Hens take in more grain than they can digest at the moment, but store it in their necks ready to be digested in due time, Osiander explained. It should have a similar effect when small children learn the short catechism by heart. What was not understood at the moment of learning 12 Osiander’s catechism was linked to Brenz’s catechism as its explanation in the same way as Luther’s catechism sermons, and later his Large Catechism, were linked to his Small Catechism as its explanation.

184

6. Catechism Sermons

could be stored in the minds of the young, ready to be activated when more comprehensive instruction gave them a more thorough understanding.13 The parts of the catechism treated in this chapter will be analyzed quite closely as examples of Osiander’s preaching technique connected to a certain pedagogical function.14 The two parts that will not be subjected to detailed analysis in this chapter are sermons on the Law and on the Eucharist. Instead these catechetical parts will be employed as context and contrasts in the analysis of other catechetical parts, in order to shed light on these parts’ religious and pedagogical function. In the chapter which discusses the teaching situation (6.1), sermons on the Law and the Eucharist are employed to shed light on the two catechists’ different concepts, even though the teaching situation is mainly described on the basis of sermons on baptism. Sermons on the Eucharist are also employed in the section discussing the Creed (6.2), to show how the recitation of the Creed has a different function within the two catechists’ concepts. Osiander’s weighing of the catechetical parts and his mode of presentation will offer the premises for this analysis and govern its presentation.

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation This part of the chapter will examine Osiander’s catechetical conception by describing the catechism sermon’s implied teaching situation under four aspects: the catechist’s relationship to his audience, the opponents he contrasts himself with, his pedagogical use of baptism, and finally, the catechist’s relationship to God. 6.1.1 The Catechist as Shepherd Osiander presented his pedagogical conception at the outset of his catechism sermons. The catechism’s great significance was emphasized in the preface ad13 Osiander explains this in his book’s first catechism sermon. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 2–3. 14 Lucas Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 26–28. In this work Osiander gives advice for how a teaching sermon, belonging to the genus didaskalikon should be constructed. To find and present the theme to be taught in the sermon, Osiander recommends that the preacher ask ten questions on the text that is to be explained: 1. What does the word mean? 2. What is its thing? 3. What sort of a thing is it? 4. What are its parts? 5. What is its shape? 6. What are its reasons? 7. How does it work? 8. What are its surroundings? 9. How can they be perceived and understood? 10. Who are its opponents? A sermon should not be constructed to answer these questions, but the preacher should employ them as an aid to identify the theme and present it with clarity, just as Quintilian had recommended that the rules of rhetoric were not to be regarded as a law, but as useful tools. Osiander intended this advice for preachers writing sermons on biblical texts and they are not very useful as analytical tools to understand his catechism sermons, even though one can see that his choice of explanatory examples may have been inspired by the interests expressed in these ten questions.

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

185

dressed to the city council and intended as an instruction for readers. By explaining the six main parts of Christian doctrine, namely Baptism, the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, the Decalogue, the Eucharist, and the Keys to the Kingdom of Heaven, the catechism not only teaches how one may be saved, it also strengthens the citizens’ and subjects’ resistance towards heresy.15 Since the city council had now organized the proper teaching of the catechism, it could rest assured that the inhabitants of the city would not be easily turned towards competing traditions. Osiander used similar arguments when he introduced the catechism to his congregation in his first catechism sermon. This sermon’s three main parts dealt with why one should learn the catechism as well as the catechism’s content and use. In addition to giving salvation, he explained, the catechism made the youth part in a pious, honourable, and obedient community of citizens receiving timely and eternal blessings and protection from God.16 The catechism was useful in three ways for the congregation. It gave knowledge of God and of how to serve and please Him, it gave the comfort of having Him as Father in all the world’s tribulations, and finally, it gave the ability to discern right from wrong teaching.17 The most interesting part of the introductory sermon is perhaps the way it thematized the instructional situation. Of all his catechism sermons, this was the only one which was based on a biblical text and not on a sequence from Brenz’s catechism. The text was from John 21:15–17, where Peter is reunited with the risen Christ in a dialogue between the two: When they had finished eating, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me more than these?” “Yes, Lord”, he said, “you know that I love you.” Jesus said, “Feed my lambs”. Again Jesus said, “Simon son of John, do you truly love me?” He answered, “Yes, Lord, you know that I love you”. Jesus said, “Take care of my sheep”. The third time He said to him, “Simon son of John, do you love me?” Peter was hurt because Jesus asked him the third time, “Do you love me?” He said, “Lord, you know all things; you know that I love you”. Jesus said, “Feed my sheep”.18

Even if his sermon soon left the text to introduce the different parts of the catechism and their usefulness in the sermon’s main section, Osiander made sure to explain the biblical text thoroughly, making the biblical scene the sermon’s exordium,19 meaning the part of a sermon which points out its occasion and subject. The dialogue between Jesus and Peter was presented as the sermon’s theme in a way that tied the catechetical preaching situation to biblical times and to the activities of Jesus. The visual scene with perceptible images would aid the audience’s understanding of the sermon, but also tie the community gathered in to Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum. to Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 5. 17 Preface to Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 11. 18 John 21:15–17 (New International Version). 19 Cf. Osiander, De ratione concionandi, 38. 15 Preface 16 Preface

186

6. Catechism Sermons

church to a greater Christian community, since it let their preacher appear as part of an apostolic tradition and continued Jesus’ assignment to Peter. According to Osiander, the text about Jesus and Peter and the disciples was also about the relationship between catechist and pupils. As Peter had been given responsibility to care for the first flock of Christians and make sure they were nourished spiritually, so also was the catechist who was now presenting the sermon. Jesus had assigned Peter to take over his responsibility as shepherd, Peter had later claimed that Jesus remained the arch-shepherd for all Christians, and Osiander placed the catechist in this tradition of shepherds.20 The proper way to let oneself be led by Jesus the arch-shepherd, was to attend diligently the services in the church to hear the word of God. Osiander explained how the catechist acted as a spiritual shepherd. As a shepherd protects his flock and leads it to be properly fed, the spiritual shepherd leads the young in the right surroundings to all that is necessary to be saved and gives instructions for a life that avoids sin and evil. When properly explained, the catechism, as spiritual nourishment for all young Christians, resembles the fresh grass nourishing the lambs.21 This pastoral comparison let the shepherd appear as a pedagogue who leads and trains youth to live as favoured Christians: This arch-shepherd, the Lord Christ, sees happily and joyously to the young lambs walking in front of him in the pasture, when he sees that children and youth are gathering eagerly in church and wanting to be nourished by the word of God. The Christian catechism is the spiritual pasture for young children and young Christians, when it is explained and taught rightly and thoroughly.22

When they were taught the catechism by Osiander and entered his flock, the youth figuratively set out on a journey with him. The scene from John was an ex­ ordium to Osiander’s first catechism sermon, but as it was explained by Osiander, its imagery also became a story that could encircle the other forty-nine catechism sermons the young were about to hear. Each single part of the catechism would be presented and heard as part of a journey with the shepherd to lush fields that could nourish them to grow strong. This imagery was absent when Luther presented his sermons in the city church of Wittenberg. He did not take a biblical text as his point of departure when he 20 This connection between preacher/catechist and Jesus is also emphasized in Osiander’s sermon on the office of preacher. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 581–593. 21  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 2–3. 22 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 2: “Dieser Ertzhirt aber / der HErr Christus / sihet mit frewden vnd lust / die jungen Lämmer auff der Waid vor jhm gehen / wann er sihet / daß die junge Kinder vnd junge Leutlin fleissig in die Kirch zusamen kommen / vnd sich allda wöllen mit Gottes Wort weiden lassen. Der jungen Kinder aber / vnd jungen Christen Geistliche Weid ist / der Christliche Catechismus / wann derselbig recht vnd gründtlich außgelegt vnd erklärt würdt.”

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

187

introduced the catechism in his first catechism sermon in May 1528. Instead he went directly to a short explanation of the contents and significance of the catechism, an explanation that was continued and slightly expanded in his Large Cat­ echism. The three pieces of the catechism (the Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer and the Creed) which he claimed had been given by the apostles and the fathers of the church as a short version of Holy Scripture was presented as obligatory knowledge for all who were called Christians. The catechist’s religious role was not presented or explained in the sermon, and instead parents and householders, who had the means to punish and motivate, were given responsibility to ensure that this knowledge was passed on to the young.23 This first part of Luther’s introductory sermon, however, is relatively short and most of the sermon is spent on the explanation of the first commandment. In his two following series of catechism sermons the same year, this first part of the introductory sermon was reduced even further. In the introductory sermon to the second series of catechism sermons, there is a short version of the introduction in the first sermon,24 whereas this section is practically absent in the introductory sermon to the third series of sermons, which instead proceeds directly to the explanation of the first commandment.25 Because of its place in the overall composition and its thematic concentration, the explanation of the first commandment stands out as the actual introduction to the catechism and as its main motive. It expands the focus from the brief introduction to show that the catechism is not, as in Osiander’s introduction, important because it constitutes a Christian flock, but that it is made necessary by God’s presence in the world. When the first commandment commands that one should have no other gods than the Lord, it actually commands that one should have the right faith in God and the right fear of God. It is God’s presence in the world that demands this fear and love of Him, Luther explained. The youth should be taught the Ten Commandments not only because they contain the highest wisdom, but also because a society where the Commandments are not respected, and where there is no fear of God, will dissolve in chaos. Luther pointed out how his audience could see this with their own eyes in their own society. There is no obedience or faithfulness and they are surrounded by people who will not be bent by teaching or punishment and who therefore will become subjects of God’s wrath for despising His Commandments.26 On the other hand, if the 23 WA

30/1, 2. 30/1, 27. 25 WA 30/1, 57. 26 Luther’s Large Catechism, in WA 30/1, 142: “Derhalben sage und vermane ich wie vor, das man die kinder bey zeit an gewehne mit warnen und schrecken, weren und straffen, das sie sich schewen fur liegen und sonderlich Gottes namen dazu zufüren. Denn wo man sie so lesset hingehen, wird nichts guts draus, wie ytzt fur augen, das die welt boser ist denn sie yhe gewesen, und kein regiment, gehorsam, trewe noch glaube sondern eitel verwegene, unbendige leute, an den kein leeren noch straffen hilfft, welchs alles Gottes zorn und straffe ist uber solch mutwillige 24 WA

188

6. Catechism Sermons

Commandments are respected, great blessings follow, and if one is to respect the Commandments, one has to fulfil the first commandment. Luther’s introductory sermon also pointed to his corpus of catechism sermons, although not as a story that encircles the other sections, as the story of the shepherd’s journey with his lambs is described in Osiander’s sermon. Instead it pointed to a theme that lay at the heart of the other catechetical parts. The first commandment, and the fear and love of God it prescribes, was described as the sum and light that goes through all the Commandments and binds them together.27 Therefore all the wisdom of the world followed from this commandment.28 To this commandment God added a promise and a threat which apply equally to all the other commandments as well. If one does not fulfil the Commandments, one will be ruined, whereas if one does fulfil them, one will be richly blessed. The fulfilment of the Commandments was therefore a matter of life or death, wrath or mercy, blessing or curse, benefit or misery.29 This was true on an individual level as well as for society as a whole. The absence in Luther’s sermon of Osiander’s image comparing the catechetical situation to that of a shepherd and his flock is characteristic of the two different teaching situations. Both catechists were explicitly concerned to raise a pious and just new generation to benefit their respective societies, but the catechists’ different pedagogical conceptions met this task differently. Whereas Luther seems to have met the task with direct instruction without the detour of establishing a flock of Christians, Osiander’s solution involved the establishment and strengthening of a church community. And whereas Osiander drew attention to his own role as catechist to argue in favour of his catechetical teaching, Luther pointed to God’s threatening presence in the world as the main motivator. Within their different concepts, the catechists also pictured their audiences differently. Whereas Osiander’s audience appears as a distinct group in a close and well defined relationship to their catechist, Luther’s group seems to have been less sharply defined. verachtung dieses gepots. Zum andern sol man sie auch widerümb treiben und reitzen Gottes namen zu ehren und stetig ym mund zu haben ynn allem was yhn begegnen und unter augen stossen mag. Denn das ist die rechte ehre des namens, das man sich alles trosts zu yhm versehe und yhn darümb anruffe, Also das hertz (wie droben gehöret) zuvor durch den glauben Gotte seine ehre gebe, darnach der mund durch das bekentnis.” 27 WA 30/1, 62. 28 WA 30/1, 59 and 61. 29  WA 30/1, 85: “Iam wollen wir alle praecepta zusamen fugen ynn ein krentzlein, das letzste ynn das erste. Ubique haec duo invenies, ut timeas deum et fidas deo. Si deum times, non diffides, non blasphemabis &c., non eris inobediens parentibus &c. sed econtra, non occides nec laedes corpus eius, sed adiuvabis &c. Sic de reliquis praeceptis. Ad finem praeceptorum adde Commina­ tionem et promissionem. … Hinc venit, das die geschlecht also verderben et lender &c. quia hoc verum non quiescit. Et econtra ‘benefaciam’. Ibi proposita vita, mors, ira, gratia, segen, fluchen, wolthat, ungluck &c.”

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

189

6.1.2 The Catechists’ Opponents: Turks and Jews or Monks and Priests The difference in the two catechists’ teaching situations is apparent also in the different opponents the catechists establish around them in their sermons. For Osiander’s part this is especially obvious in his first sermon on baptism. Four sermons are dedicated to this theme, which is the first catechetical part in Osiander’s conception. The first sermon explained the following quotation from Brenz’s catechism: Question: Of what faith are you? Answer: I am a Christian. Question: Why are you a Christian? Answer: Because I believe in Jesus Christ and have been baptized in his name.30

In his introduction to the theme, Osiander combined the explanation of baptism with the question of what it meant to be a Christian, and his first sermon discussed baptism as an event that revealed insights into the roots and characteristics of Christian identity. Having been baptized was an experience Osiander had in common with his audience, and at the beginning of his series of catechism sermons, he called attention to this shared ritual experience as a sign of identity and implicitly presented it as a basic component for the catechetical teaching situation. Baptism was presented as the starting point of one’s Christian faith. Osiander reminded his listeners of it in a way that called attention not only to how the listener’s Christian faith was constituted, but also to the conditions that surrounded it. The memory of baptism thus described the believing person, but also his world and his position in it. Osiander described his audience’s position in the world by reminding them that their Christian faith was one of three possible faiths in the world. The other two were the Turkish and the Jewish faiths.31 To be baptized and Christian was to be different from other possible faiths and peoples in the world, and Christian knowledge therefore necessarily involved knowledge of the others’ faiths. The first of them to be explained in Osiander’s sermon were the Turks and their faith. 30 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 13. “Frag. Welches Glaubens bistu? Antwort. Ich bin ein Christ. Frag. Warumb bistu ein Christ? Antwort. Darumb daß ich glaub in Jesum Christum / vnd bin in seinem Namen getaufft.” 31 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 15. Brenz also had seen protection against the heresy of Jews and Muslims as an important purpose for catechetical teaching. See pages 5–6 in his preface to Brenz, Catechismus pia et utili explicatione illustratus, 711–712.

190

6. Catechism Sermons

Osiander explained to his congregation why they should be aware of the Turks by reminding them that for more than 600 years the Turks had dominated the eastern border of the Empire; 146 years ago they had consumed the holy city of Constantinople and had during the last years come to surround Hungary and stay no more than twenty miles from German borders. If they were ever to succeed and conquer Germany or the Christian empire, one should expect they would take German children from their parents to raise them in the Turkish faith, which would mean the children’s condemnation. It was therefore important also for the congregation in Esslingen to know something about the wrong faith of the Turks, so that they could pray to God for protection.32 The Turks’ prominent role in Osiander’s catechetical instruction was in accordance with contemporary views. Thomas Kaufmann has claimed that the Turks played a key role both as a real threat and as an imagined threat in the Reformation.33 As a military and economic force challenging Christian rulers, the Turks represented a real threat which was often high on the political agenda within the Empire.34 The Turks also represented an imagined threat which might have posed as the greatest religious challenge to Christian societies. Contemporary fear of the Turks was combined with admiration of their military and economic success and this brought another fear with it, namely the fear that Christians should too easily accept Turkish rule. This fear was exemplified in stories about Germans who chose to obey the Turkish emperor and thereby gained great wealth.35 Perceived this way, the Turkish threat gave theologians and educators a double task of encouraging popular support for the authorities’ defence against the Turks as well as strengthening the Christian community and persistence in the Christian faith. Johannes Brenz correspondingly saw it as a catechetical task to inform both about the Turkish heresy and about the Turks’ cruelty. He regarded willingness to be informed about the Turks as a Christian duty necessary for the raising of a firm bulwark against the Turks in the population. According to him, Christians who were not willing to do all they could to avoid being subjected to Turkish rule should be regarded as accessory to the blasphemous practices of the Turks.36 32 Osiander,

Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 18.

33 Thomas Kaufmann, “Türckenbüchlein”: Zur christlichen Wahrnehmung “türkischer Religion”

in Spätmittelalter und Reformation, Forschungen zur Kirchen‑ und Dogmengeschichte 97 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008), 66. 34 Kaufmann, “Türckenbüchlein”, 66–68. 35 Kaufmann, “Türckenbüchlein”, 46. 36  Kaufmann, “Türckenbüchlein”, 46, 71–72, and 156–157. In his early career, Luther had seen the Turkish threat as an expression of God’s punishment of heresy in the church, supporting his church criticism; Johannes Ehmann, Luther, Türken und Islam: Eine Untersuchung zum Türken‑ und Islambild Martin Luthers (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 2008), 45. He still saw them as a major threat to the Christian order of society; Adam S. Francisco, Martin Luther and Islam: A Study in Sixteenth-Century Polemics and Apologetics, The History of Christian-Muslim Relations 8 (Leiden: Brill, 2007), 233.

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

191

In his sermon, Osiander addressed all these threats of which his audience might otherwise be unaware. He reminded them of the political and military threat as well as the imagined threat associated therewith, namely the cruel prospects of living under Turkish rule. In this way he continued a tradition of informing about Turkish cruelty to mobilize resistance and preparedness for war.37 Just as important in the sermon, however, was his explanation of the Turkish faith. This was one of his well-known themes. In 1570, Osiander had published a theological and exegetical discussion of the Koran, where he had discussed its teaching on the basis of a Lutheran scriptural hermeneutic. He had concluded that the Koran failed to follow its own pretensions of biblicality, since it rejected Jesus’ death on the cross and his status as the Son of God. Osiander therefore felt safe to conclude that Muslim doctrine was a heresy leading to damnation.38 The book was probably intended to inform Christians living close to the Turks and infected by anti-Trinitarian doctrines, in order to warn them of the consequences of apostasy and of the fact that they would remain God’s children even if they were held captive by the Turks.39 In his catechism sermon, Osiander employed an explanation of the Turkish faith with a similar intent. In many respects Turks could be held to be good Christians, Osiander stated. They believe in the one true God and give alms more generously than many Christians,40 but since they do not believe in Jesus as the Son of God, it is all in vain, and even the most pious of the Turks belong to the devil with both soul and body.41 For, as Jesus Himself had stated in John 5:23, he who does not honour the Son, does not honour the Father either. Therefore, Osiander pointed out, all their services for God are worth nothing. It is not enough to see Jesus as an outstanding prophet, as Muhammad had done, for those who do not believe in Jesus as the Son of God remain under God’s wrath.42 The danger of apostasy would not have been great among Esslingen’s youth, but it could still be employed for educational purposes. It could aid the appreciation of faith which the youth were to be instructed in by reminding them that the faith that brought salvation also needed a Christian society to protect it. The wrong faith

“Türckenbüchlein”, 156–157. Osiander, Bericht / Was der Türcken Glaub sey / Gezogen auß dem Türckischen Al­ coran, sampt desselben Widerlegung; Türken (Tübingen: Ulrich Morhart Wittib, 1570). See also Kaufmann, “Türckenbüchlein”, 40. 39 See Kaufmann, “Türckenbüchlein”, 191, 211, and 229. According to Kaufmann, Osiander represents a unique voice among Lutheran authors on Islam and Turks in not settling with the reports of others about the Turks and instead discussing their doctrine on the basis of their own Scripture as well as in his rejection of the view on the Turks as God’s punishment for sin. 40 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 16. 41 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 17. 42 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 16. 37 Kaufmann, 38 Lucas

192

6. Catechism Sermons

of the Turks should encourage the congregation to pray to God for protection of the city and of the Christian society, Osiander explained.43 The rhetorical and pedagogical functions of the Turks in Osiander’s sermon on baptism are to be found in their potential for accentuating the religious identity of the people in a Christian society such as the city of Esslingen. Turkish presence, real and imagined, helped distinguish baptized Christians as a social group and emphasized that the youth needed to support and be loyal to the Christian society they were a part of in Esslingen. It was an instruction about the opponents of Christendom related to a concrete religious practice. When the young were later to witness baptisms in services, or when they were admonished to recall their own baptism, they would also be reminded of the Turks. The fact that they had been baptized into the Christian faith meant they had received an identity as part of a Christian society, but it also entailed being surrounded by another people and another faith threatening both their society and their salvation. Turks are mentioned also in Luther’s catechism sermons, but only sporadically. They are given no prominent rhetorical or pedagogical function in his sermons, but hold the very modest function of being examples of a wrong interpretation of one of the Commandments; Turkish builders serve as examples of someone who interprets the seventh commandment too harshly. Instead of leaving vengeance to God, they measure people only according to what they have done, and, for example, if someone has promised to build them a stable in three days, but fails to do so, Turks will demand that he be decapitated.44 Luther’s modest use of the Turks in his catechism sermons suits his different pedagogical conception, but it was probably also connected with the fact that he held a different view of the Turks than Osiander did seventy years later. Luther regarded them not as a major enemy of Christianity, but as God’s deserved punishment on a corrupted papal Christianity, which was true Christendom’s real enemy.45 A short period later, however, after the Turks had besieged Vienna in 1529, Luther modified his view and came to support a joint Christian military operation.46

43 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 18: “Darumb sollen wir Christen auch ettwas daruon wissen / was die Türcken für ein falschen Gottslästerlichen vnd verdamlichen Glauben haben / auff daß wir desto fleissiger vnd eiferiger beten / daß vns vnser Himlischer Vatter vor dem Türcken behüte / daß wir nicht vnter seinen Tyrannischen Gewalt kommen / sondern vnter vnser Christlichen Obrigkeit bey vnserm Christlichen seligmachenden Glauben / biß an vnser selig end mögen verharren.” 44  WA 30/1, 80: “Turca aedificat sic: Veni et hoc effice ynn den 3 tagen, gedencke, das der stall stehe, si non, den kopff hinweg. Man misset yns ab, so viel einer arbeiten kan.” On Luther’s rejection of the Koran and of the Turks’ doctrine as teaching justification by faith in a way that resembled papism, see Francisco, Martin Luther and Islam, 235 and Ehmann, Luther, Türken und Islam, 15, 266–267. 45 Kaufmann, “Türckenbüchlein”, 68 and 73. 46 Kaufmann, “Türckenbüchlein”, 69.

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

193

The Jews were the other group Osiander reminded his congregation of in his first sermon on baptism. Like the Turks, the Jews would not be saved because they did not believe Jesus to be the Son of God and the promised saviour of the world.47 Since they did not know the true God, they were in reality without a God, and all their service to God was useless.48 On this point the Jews turned out to be far worse than the Turks, for not only did they fail to see Jesus as the Son of God, but Osiander informed his audience that they also spoke maliciously of him. He claimed that Jews told their wives and children that Jesus had been a false and seductive prophet and a magician, and even that he had been the bastard child of a loose and indecent mother. From converted Jews who had been baptized, Osiander had information that when Jews gathered on their own, they described Jesus with the word “Thola”, meaning a damned man of the gallows.49 Even pious Jews therefore obviously belonged to the devil with body and soul, and Osiander instructed his audience that if any of them ever saw a Jew, they should know that they saw a damned man, a child of the disgusting devil, someone who could never become a Christian as long as he remained a Jew.50 Though Jewish presence in the area would have been slight on this point of history,51 Osiander was quite clear that because of their blasphemous practices directed at Christians, Jews were worse than Turks. Jews thus appear to have had a different function from the Turks in Osiander’s sermon. They pose no external threat to the city or the Empire, but function as an internal threat because of their religious practice. According to Thomas ­Kaufmann, a common practice among Protestant theologians since Luther’s later writings on the Jews from the 1530s and 1540s had been to describe the Jews as blasphemers of Christ who attacked the Christian faith that was the core value of Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 18. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 19. 49  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 19. “Galgenschwengel”, and “eienen gehenckten”. 50 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 19: “Darumb ist der frömbst Jud des Teuffels mit Leib vnd Seel: Vnd wann du ein Juden sihest / so solt du wissen / daß du sehest ein Kind des leidigen Teuffels / ein verfluchten Menschen / der keinen theil am Reich Gottes hat / so lang er ein Jud bleibt / vnd nicht ein rechter Christ würdt.” Kaufmann explains that a common attitude towards Jews among Protestants in the sixteenth century was that their existence should show how it was to live under God’s wrath. They should not be eradicated, but they should not be allowed to appear wealthy and successful either. Success for the enemies of Christ who were condemned by God would lead to qualms about God’s righteousness. If Jews did not suffer visibly it would pose a serious question to the nature of Christian society. See Thomas Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur, 150. 51 The ordinary exhibition in Esslingen’s city museum (visited November 2008) claims that Jews had been property owning residents of the city, though without citizenship, until in 1348 they were blamed for the outbreak of a plague and were chased out of the city. They returned in 1365 only to leave again in 1450 when they were outstripped by Christian bankers. From then until 1806 no Jews lived in Esslingen. 47 Osiander, 48 Osiander,

194

6. Catechism Sermons

society.52 During the 1570s, the openness towards the Jews that was common in the early phase of the Reformation was replaced by impatience. Old anti-Jewish traditions were revived. Since common views held Jews to be both deceitful and blasphemous, Jews were identified as a threat to society. This view of the Jews as an internal threat to society had a potential for aiding integration efforts of local societies. Kaufmann has pointed out that to have such an internal enemy threatening a common religion was useful for local communities ambitious to regulate life and integrate religious life in the city environment.53 In Luther’s catechism sermons, Jews, like the Turks, have a different function than they have in Osiander’s sermons. Just like Turks, Jews also appear as examples of people who are under the same demands from God as Christians, namely to fulfil His Commandments. Their problem is that they misinterpret these Commandments. There are a few direct references to the Jews in Luther’s catechism sermons. The first is to those who, by the time of Jesus, misinterpreted the third commandment and focused on the external actions instead of the intent and function of the Sabbath.54 The second is to those who are content with binding the first commandment to their head, as Moses had said they should do in Deuteronomy, instead of bringing the commandment with them in exercises to be done at home.55 More than pointing to differences between people of different religions, these examples emphasize that the Commandments apply to Turks and Jews and Christians alike and are the common measure for them all. The catechism sermons stem from a period in Luther’s writings when Luther was prepared for dialogue with Jews and when he still thought the reason why the Jews had not converted was that they had been presented with the pope’s false teaching. The 1530s would bring a change in Luther’s attitude towards the Jews. This was partly because his attempts to convince them of the truth of true Christianity failed, which led him to view them as stubborn and inaccessible to reason. According to Kaufmann, another important reason for the shift in Luther’s attitude was information about Jewish religious practice learnt from a book by the converted Jew Antonius Margaritha, published in 1530. The book had claimed that Jewish liturgical and cultic practice was based on hate against Christians and Christianity. Some of Luther’s statements about Jews in his later anti-Jewish writings were drawn directly from this book, such as the claim that the Jews’ continuous cursing of the Son meant that they also cursed the Father, a Konfession und Kultur, 117. Konfession und Kultur, 114 and 149. 54  WA 30/1, 143–144: “Wiewol sie [the Jews] es hernach all zu enge spanneten und gröblich misbrauchten, das sie auch an Christo lesterten und nicht leiden kundten solche werck, die sie doch selbs daran theten, wie man ym Euangelio liesset. Gerade als solt das gepot damit erfullet sein, das man gar kein eusserlich werck thete, welchs doch nicht die meinung war, sondern endlich die, das sie den feyer odder ruge tag heiligten, wie wir hören werden.” 55 WA 30/1, 60. The third reference is to them in the second article of faith as examples of those who do not believe in Jesus. 52 Kaufmann, 53 Kaufmann,

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

195

statement that was repeated also in Osiander’s catechism sermon. Still, the basic theological view on the Jews remained constant throughout Luther’s writings, namely the view that Jews were a chosen people by God’s promise, but that they kept renouncing salvation by rejecting Jesus. Together with the new “information” mentioned above, the changed social challenges which followed the Protestants’ growth from reform movement to established church let Luther and his contemporaries draw radically different consequences of a basic theological view.56 Whereas Luther’s catechism sermon stems from the first phase of Protestant attitude towards the Jews, attitudes from the next phase are continued in Osiander’s catechism sermons. While Reformed theologians were known for their positive attitudes towards Jews, and the Emperor tried to restrict anti-Semitic sentiments by banning Luther’s writings, hostility towards Jews came to be regarded as a Lutheran hallmark.57 Instead of Jews and Turks, Luther chose other opponents to serve as contrasts to true faith. In his sermons, the Catholic hierarchy of priests and the monks in the monasteries have this role. His explanation of the first commandment refers to the monks’ way of life as a form of idolatry. They trust in their special clothes and their rule instead of God.58 These opponents have an important function in Luther’s explanation of the Commandments’ use and function. The Commandments point to a superior form of holiness that should replace that of the monasteries and the priests. Whereas the Commandments come from God and therefore lead to actions willed by God, priests and monks have themselves invented the rules they boast of following and which they hold to be of a higher standard than the mere fulfilment of the Commandments.59 56 See Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur, 133–134. Lucas Osiander’s father, Andreas Osiander, who had been a well-known friend of the Jews and had defended them against some of Margaritha’s untenable and false accusations, also adhered to this basic concept viewing Judaism as an impossible possibility. See Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur, 137. 57 Martin H. Jung, Christen und Juden: Die Geschichte ihrer Beziehungen (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2008), 137–139, and 155; and Thomas Kaufmann, Luthers “Judenschriften”, 138. 58 WA 30/1, 60. 59  From his second series of catechism sermons, WA 30/1, 43: “… Ipsi monachi dixerunt se hoch uber die 10 gebott sein: mera sunt mendacia, quando alia docentur …”; WA 30/1, 44: “Ibi iterum damnata est praesumptio clericorum, qui altius volare volunt, quam decem praecepta ex­ igunt. Et tamen non vident, quod nemo tam hoch komen ist, das er die 10 gebot halten kunne.” “Academiae et clerici omnes docuerunt 10 praecepta esse rem levissimam. Ratio: quia nunquam in­ spexerunt, quid minimum mandatum praecipiat ac doceat. Christianus vero discat non opus esse, ut such ein höher leben. Er lege all sein macht und krafft dran, tum comperiet se non decimam quidem partem 10 praeceptorum servasse. … Videant ipsi clerici, an non sint avari, inobedientes &c.” WA 30/1, 44: “Dic igitur: hoher gepot non sunt quam in 10 praeceptis, et tam sublimia sunt, ut nemo ea possit praestare. Si ea facis exprimeremus, essemus angelis similes.” WA 30/1, 88: “Ego non possum dare non servare. Quare dedit et quare credis, quod dederit? Ut coenobia stifftest? Non, sed ut laudes, gratias agas. Multi dicunt illa verba ‘Credo’ &c. sed non intelligunt, quid sibi velint.”

196

6. Catechism Sermons

In his Large Catechism published the following year and based on his catechism sermons, Luther developed this example and pointed out that the difference between the invented rules of priests and monks and God’s commands also involves different aesthetics. The aesthetics of monks and priests serve the hollow and superficial outlook of the world. They choose to do that which gives them attention and admiration, such as difficult deeds they themselves have devised, and they boast of their ecclesiastic orders. But, at the same time they ignore God’s simple commands to love one’s enemies and to be mild and patient.60 In short, they prefer the sensational to what is useful. Instead of the ordinary duties they may help their neighbour with, they prefer to go about with pomp and circumstance and great expenses, and have an affinity for that which is superficially attractive.61 This attitude is in accordance with a worldly outlook. The world holds the singing and chanting and incense of a priest in a golden chasuble to be most worthy of praise, whereas a poor little girl, who watches a little child and faithfully does what she is told, is not valued at all.62 By giving the Ten Commandments the most prominent position in his instruction, Luther seems to have aimed at reversing this aesthetic. Rather than being a moral minimum that the more elevated church practice builds upon, he pointed to the fulfilment of the Ten Commandments as the goal of Christian faith, and he presented both the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer as tools to help fulfil the Commandments.63 60 WA 30/1, 178: “Las nu sehen, was unsere grosse heiligen rhümen können von yhren geistlichen Orden und grossen, schweren wercken, die sie erdacht und auffgeworffen haben und diese faren lassen, gerade als weren diese viel zugering odder allbereit lengist ausgericht. Ich meine yhe, man solt hie alle hende vol zuschaffen haben, das man diese hielte, sanfftmut, gedult und liebe gegen feinden, keuscheit, wolthat &c.” 61  WA 30/1, 178. 62 WA 30/1, 178–179: “Yhene aber sperren augen und ohren auff, dazu helffen sie selbs mit grossem geprenge, kost und herrlichem gebew und schmücken sie erfur, das alles gleissen und leuchten mus, da reuchert man, da singet man und klinget man, da zündet man kertzen und liechte an, das man fur diesen keine andere hören noch sehen könne. Denn das da ein pfaff ynn einer gülden Casel stehet odder ein ley den gantzen tag ynn der kyrchen auff den knyen ligt, das heisset ein köstlich werck das niemand gnug loben kan. Aber das ein armes meidlin eines iungen kinds wartet und treulich thuet was yhr befohlen ist, das mus nichts heissen. Was solten sonst Münche und Nonnen ynn yhren Klostern suchen?” 63 WA 30/1, 179: “… Und sehen nicht, die elenden, blinde leute, das kein mensch so weit bringen kan, das er eins von den zehen gepoten halte wie es zuhalten ist, sondern noch beide der glaube und das vater unser zuhülffe komen mus (wie wir hören werden), dadurch man solchs suche und bitte und on unterlas empfahe?” Though the Ten Commandments seem to replace monastery rules and religious practices as the goal of a Christian life, religious practice is still important, and Luther hopes that religious practice at home should replace the piety in the monasteries. The main element of this practice is prayer, and Luther urges the housefathers in his audience to take seriously their office as house bishops, which he sees as an obligatory task for any housefather. The practice he prescribes seems inspired by the rule and rhythm of a monastery. The housefather must make sure that those in his household take part in prayer in the morning and in the evening, as well as before

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

197

This revaluation of the Commandments led to an altered view of holiness. Only the Commandments should be the measure of what is good, irrespective of the believer’s lay or clerical status, for there is no teaching in the world as good as the Commandments. If anyone were to reach their standards, he or she would be a heavenly angelic human being, set high above all holiness of this world.64 The Ten Commandments are the source of all that is to be regarded as good deeds. Without them there is no deed or way of life which may be good or please God, no matter how much it may impress the world.65 This chapter section has compared Luther and Osiander on a thematic and a rhetorical level. The thematic comparison has described Luther as presenting Turks and Jews far more openly and mildly than Osiander. This thematic difference can partly be explained by the two catechists’ different rhetorical schemes, since Turks and Jews fill another function in Osiander’s sermons than they do in Luther’s. The difference, however, is also connected to a historical difference between the two catechists. When Luther chose Catholic monks and priests as his rhetorical opponents, he was teaching the catechism in a reformatory movement in the process of freeing itself from a dominant and powerful mother church. Osiander, on the other hand, chose Turks and Jews as opponents while teaching the catechism in a church that had become a key factor in the construction of a stable and integrated Lutheran society. Correspondingly, the different choice of opponents in the sermon corpus of each presents different teaching situations. Though Luther’s monks and priests perform the same rhetorical function as Osiander’s Turks and Jews, they still have a slightly different pedagogical function. When monks and priests are employed as opponents, it is to open up a church that has been held captive and to revalue ordinary worldly life, whereas when Turks and Jews are employed as opponents, it is to identify the church as a distinctive social and religious community. One may therefore conclude that there is a connection between rhetorical function of Turks and Jews in Osiander’s sermon and the social and political change Thomas Kaufmann finds embedded in the transformed discourse on Jews and after every meal. WA 30/1, 58: “Deus ideo constituit te dominum, dominam, das du dein gesind dazu halst. Et hoc potestis bene, ut orent mane, vesperi, ante et post prandium et coenam. Hoc modo educarentur in timore dei. Non frustra hoc dico, sed ne ynn den wind schlahet. Non putassem vos esse tam rudes, nisi quotidie audirem. Quisque pater familias in sua domo est Epi­ scopus, ipsa Episcopa, ideo cogitate, das yhr uns in domibus helfft das predigampt treiben ut nos in Ecclesia. Si fecerimus, propicium deum habebimus, qui defendet nos ab et in omni malo.” 64 WA 30/1, 179: “… und wer sie erlanget, ist ein hymlisch Engelisch mensch weit uber alle heiligkeit der welt.” 65 WA 30/1, 178: “… So haben wir nu die zehen gepot, ein ausbund Göttlicher lere, was wir thuen sollen, das unser gantzes leben Gott gefalle, und den rechten born und rohre, aus und ynn welchen quellen und gehen müssen alles was gute werck sein sollen, also das ausser den zehen gepoten kein werck noch wesen gut und Gott gefellig kan sein, es sey so gros und köstlich fur der welt wie es wolle.”

198

6. Catechism Sermons

in the sixteenth century. The change from dialogue and openness in the relationship with the Jews during the 1530s happened when the reformers themselves had to take responsibility for the Jewish question both socially and politically in confessional territories and cities.66 Protestant attitudes towards the Jews did not have their roots in social or economic conditions, but were grounded on experiences with independent Jews and what was believed to be information about their practices. These attitudes coincided with local Protestant communities’ struggle for stability. The Jewish prayer against Christians, which Margaritha had reported, endangered the foundation of society and let Jews appear as a constant threat. This changed evaluation of Jews coexisted with a strengthened focus on the boundaries of Christian society and on its religious uniformity. It could therefore strengthen a demarcation that could aid the establishment and organization of confessional societies. Kaufmann therefore holds that the study of Protestants’ relationships to Jews offer a heuristic key to understanding the connection between theology and society in early modern Protestantism. 6.1.3 Baptism’s Pedagogical Function: Engagement or Daily Conversion Luther and Osiander present a similar view on baptism as a sacrament where God gives the baptized a saving faith, but there are important differences in their teaching on baptism. These differences are connected to a different pedagogical function for baptism within their catechetical conceptions. The first difference can be found in their description of baptism’s sacramental element and of how its word is unified with its element. Luther stressed that the words used in the baptism ritual result in a change of the element itself, so that the baptismal water not only remains water, but is also turned into something else, namely holy water. An example of parents explained how this was possible. If you look at parents as they appear in the world, you will see that they consist of nose, skin, flesh and bones. If this was your only experience of them, you might treat them as simple flesh and walk right over them. When the words of God’s fourth commandment are added to them, telling you to honour them, however, they emerge as honourable persons, Luther explains. The honour mentioned by the commandment thus becomes a quality present in the parents themselves and the words of the commandment decorate them with crown and jewellery.67 Words 66 See

Kaufmann, Konfession und Kultur, 117, 144, and 150.

67 WA 30/1, 111: “Sic dico de parentibus, de proximo. Si inspicere volo patrem, nach dem er ein

nasen hat, est caro et sanguis, hat knochen, bein, haud und har, sic mater, si non aliter inspicio, So wil ich sie nicht ansehen, sed mit fussen uber sie lauffen. Wenn aber das 4. gebot kompt, Tum video eos ornatos mit einer herrlichen kron und guldenen ketten, qui est verbum dei. Et hoc ostendit tibi, wie du solt hanc carnem et sanguinem parentum ehren propter verbum dei. Hoc non perpendunt Schwermeri neque possunt, quia abominantur verbum. Der runde schirm, qui depingitur circum capita Sanctorum, ist umb die Eltern er umb &c. Der gulden schirm vel ein diadema venit a gentibus. Darnach ist ein krantz draus worden … Hoc verbum potestatis ist

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

199

were tied just as closely to the element in baptism, according to Luther. The word was connected to an element and the word’s reference was in the element itself. Faith in the word therefore involved belief in the holiness and effectiveness of the element.68 As a concrete thing located in space and time, the baptismal water had the capacity to be an external anchoring of an internal faith.69 Osiander’s teaching allowed for more distance between word and element. In accordance with Brenz’s catechism, he explained that the sacrament of baptism was a so called “word-sign”, and that it was so in the sense that it resembled a security deposit. The sacrament contains words of promise, but it also includes a sign that guarantees the promise, in the same way as someone buying a property gets not only a word, but also a signed letter guaranteeing the transaction and the resulting ownership.70 This sign has a long-lasting quality and may be compared to an engagement, where a man gives a woman his promise to marry her and to take on all the connected responsibilities and confirms this promise by the gift of a golden ring, or, if he is poor, by a sum of money or another gift worth some sum of money. Likewise, God gives the sacrament of baptism as a sign with which he institutes his relationship to the baptized.71 In order to explain the stability of this sign, Osiander reminded the young of the patriarchs of the Old Testament

parentibus umb den kopff herumb gemalt, ut diadema, das die majestet und Gotts wort gleich also auff yhren kopff gemalt wird. Sic est cum baptismo.” 68 On the nature of the sacrament and on how word and element meet, see WA 30/1, 112: “… Si demis verbum, est aqua eadem, qua ancilla potat vaccam. Adiuncto verbo est viva, sancta, divina aqua. Wer den worten nachdencket: ‘Salvus erit’ &c. der wirds finden”, and “… Nos non docemus fidendum aqua, sed sic docemus, quod aqua, si cum verbo dei fit una res &c.” 69 WA 30/1, 115: “[The devil says] … Si non credis, non es baptisatus. Non sequitur: Ego non sum obediens parentibus, ergo non habeo parentes.” See also WA 30/1, 22: “Si etiam homo cadit, habet tamen semper regressum ad suum baptismum”, and WA 30/1, 52: “Sed considera, quis hoc opus faciat, quis sit baptisator. Certe deus. Ergo omnes monachi cum suis votis nihil sunt ad baptismum.” 70 Cf. Brenz’s catechisms from 1535 and 1553, in Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz, 286. See also Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 27: “Ein Wortzeichen aber ist ettwas eusserlichs vnd sichtbars / darmit man einen Menschen versichert vnd vergwißt / dessen / das jm mit worten ist zugesagt worden … Wann einer einem andern gibt einen Weingart oder Hauß zukauffen / so redet er nicht mit worten allein so viel / dz er dem Kauffer hab seinen Weingart oder Hauss zukauffen geben / sonder er gibt jm auch Brieff vnd Siegel vber den beschehenen Kauff / dieselbige seind dem Käuffer ein Wortzeichen / dz der Weingart / oder das Hauß jetz sein eigen ist.” 71 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 28: “Wann ein Mansperson einer Jungfrawen oder Witfrawen die Ehe zusagt / und verspricht / so läßt er es gemeinglich nicht nur bey den worten bleiben / sonder / wann er reich ist / so schenckt er jr ein gülden Ring / oder ein Goldstück. Ist er arm / so schenckt er jr sonsten ettwas an Gelt / oder Gelts werth / zur bestettigung der Ehen: vnd das nennet man gemeinlich Hafftgelt. Und dasselbig ist ein Wortzeichen / dz der Man wölle dem Weib die versprochne Ehe halten / wölle sie zu Kirche und Strassen führen / und mit jr ehelich leben / wie einem ehelichen Eheman gebüret.”

200

6. Catechism Sermons

who had circumcision as a similar sacrament or sign.72 The term “word-sign” as an explanation of the sacrament thus came to denote a visible, stable, and secure sign of an invisible reality and a long-term relationship to God. Another interesting aspect of Osiander’s explanation of the invisible reality behind the sacrament is the way he emphasized that it rests on God’s voluntary action.73 The relationship between God and the baptized is not made out of necessity and does not apply to everyone. In this respect baptism is like a rich man’s adoption of a poor child. What takes place in baptism is like when a rich man without any children of his own takes on a poor child and regards it as his and gives to it all the privileges of a son or a daughter, including the right to inheritance.74 In the same way, God in baptism becomes a merciful God to the baptized,75 Osiander explained. As a sign, baptism was thus also a sign of God having chosen the baptized to be His adopted child. In Osiander’s conception, baptism was a sign that aids trust in the invisible reality of the baptized’s relationship to God, but this trust was not primarily anchored in the ritual and its water. It was rather anchored in the notion that God, who had given his promise in baptism and instituted baptism as a sign of this promise, was both good and almighty. In this way, and to the extent that it was believed, baptism as a sign brought with it a basic cosmology.76 As a distinct sign for all to see and remember, the ritual of baptism positioned the young in a world where the almighty God was favourable and trustworthy. God’s favourableness and trustworthiness were emphasized by the way Christ was placed on a central spot in this cosmology. Christ was identified with the almighty God who guaranteed baptism’s effectiveness, just as Christ’s own baptism command confirmed: “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye 72  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 22–23. Cf. Chapter 5.3.1’s section on Otther’s catechism. This comparison was also employed by Zwingli; see Steven Ozment, The Age of Reform 1250–1550, 331. Cf. Joar Haga, Was There a Lutheran Metaphysics? The Interpretation of Communicatio Idiomatum in Early Modern Lutheranism, Refo500 Academic Studies 2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012), 32. 73 This aspect also represents a parallel to Zwingli’s catechetical concept and his focus on describing the relationship to God in a way that respects His freedom and rests on His voluntary action. For an analysis of Zwingli’s teaching on this point, see Haga, Was There a Lutheran Metaphysics?, 33 and his discussion on Zwingli’s De vera et falsa religione (1525). 74 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 32. 75 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 30: “… daß er dem getaufften ein gnädiger Gott wölle sein …” 76 Osiander explains this with the following example: Since it is God who invites to baptism and promises in baptism, it equals seeing God as a bad host if one has doubts about the effectiveness of baptism. The bad host invites his guests, but when they arrive with joy and expectations, he throws them down the stairs and out of his house because of some secret hatred of his. This host fails to meet even the lowest requirements for a host and would have appeared absurd to the listeners. He would hardly be imaginable in real life, and would be even more absurd as a picture of God. Therefore, since God is not an absurdly bad host, baptism is effective. See Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 51.

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

201

therefore …” (Matthew 28:18). Christ, who had instituted the sacrament of baptism, had endless power in heaven and earth. Osiander and official Württemberg theology claimed that Christ had held this power all the way from the creation of the world. He brought the same powers with Him while in Mary’s womb, and still had them now that He resided at God’s right hand.77 When Jesus therefore commanded that people should be baptized and promised that salvation would be given in baptism, then that was exactly what would happen. He who had been given all power in heaven and earth also had infinite power in matters concerning salvation.78 The trustworthiness and effectiveness of the sacrament of baptism was thus anchored in Christ’s effective rule in all of reality. The baptismal sign tied the baptized to a Christ who had infinite power in the government of the world and placed the baptized in an existence where evil happened only so far and to the extent that Christ allowed it to happen.79 Whenever the young were to remember their own baptism, they should therefore also be reminded of the firm, stiff, durable, and powerful foundation of their own faith and religious identity.80 From the explanations of baptism as a sacrament, it followed that baptism was seen as differently present and effective in the two catechetical conceptions. 77 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 40. Cf. Hans Christian Brandy, “Brenz’ Christologie und ihre von Jakob Andreae vertretene Form: Das Maulbronner Kolloquium 1564”, Blätter für württembergische Kirchengeschichte 100 (2000): 74–77. 78  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 42: “Der ander vnendtlich gewalt unsers HErrn Christi / ist dieser / daß vnser lieber Bruder Christus / von seinem himmlischen Vatter / ein solchen vollmächtigen Gewalt empfangen hat / dz er mag zu gnaden auffnemen / wen er wil: … Er ist Gottes des Vatters geheimer Raht (…) der seines Vatters willen / in allen Sachen am besten weist. … Vnd wem der HErr Christus das ewig Leben verheißt / dem will es sein himmlischer Vatter gewißlich geben.” 79 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 41: “Daß aber auff Erden viel böses vnd unrechts geschicht / das geschicht auß seiner Göttlichen Verhängnus / vnd es köndte nicht geschehen / wann er es nicht zuliesse. Er laßt es aber nicht darumb zu / als ob er solches nicht wöhren köndte / sondern er laßt die Gottlosen ein zeitlang wider fromme vnd vnschuldige Leut wüten und toben. Dann er ist ein langmütiger Gott. Man sagt im Sprüchwort: Es müßte ein armer Wirth sein / der einem Gast nicht köndte ein Zech borgen: Also kan vnser HERR Christus auch wol seiner zeit erwarten / in deren er den Gottlosen jhr Boßheit mit dem hellischem Fewer bezahlen / den Frommen aber jhre Christliche Gedult mit ewiger Frewd belohnen würdt. Er setzt auch dem Teuffel ein Ziel und Maß / darüber er nicht schreitten kan oder darff. Gleich wie er dem Satan erlaubt hat / daß er gleichwol dem frommen Job seine Kinder vmbgebracht/ jhm auch Haab und Güter durch die Feind genommen vnd geraubt / vnd endtlich jhn auch mit bösen Geschweren / von der Scheitel an biß auff die Fußsolen / geplagt: Aber das Leben hat er jhm dannoch nicht nemmen können. Dann der Teuffel kan nicht weitters thun / dann so weit jhm vnser HERr Christus erlaubt / vnd den Zaum henget. Vnd vnser lieber HERr Christus liesse auch nimmermehr ettwas böses geschehen / wann er nicht wüßte nach seiner vnendtlichen Weißheit ettwas guts darauß zumachen. Darumb wann es gleich sehr vnrichtig in dieser Welt gehet / so hat vnd behelt dannoch der HERR Christus jmmerdar allen Gewalt im Himmel vnd auff Erden.” 80 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 43: “Darumb was im H. Tauff gehandlet vnd verheissen würdt / das ist alles vest / steiff / bestendig / vnd kräfftig / vnd läßt es jm der himlisch Vatter alles wolgefallen / daß es darbey bleiben soll.”

202

6. Catechism Sermons

Osiander saw baptism as effective for believers as a fact that had taken place and a proof of a Christian identity and a firm relationship to God. In Luther’s sermons, baptism was present differently in the life of the believer. In one of his sermons on baptism, the life of a Christian was described as a perpetual baptism81 and baptism was seen not simply as a sign of something that had taken place, but rather as a sign that was effective in the lives of the baptized in a way that destroyed the devil. Baptism’s immersing in water and baptism’s raising from the water signified the power and the effect of the sacrament. The immersion in water involved penance and mortification of the old Adam living in all humans, and the raising from water signified resurrection and new life.82 Therefore, Luther explained, baptism contained the power of a third sacrament, namely penance. One should make use of it every day in order to weaken the old Adam who desires what is against God’s Commandments, and in order to strengthen the new man who desires what is good.83 The different functions ascribed to baptism also arranged the relationship to God differently. Luther’s instruction claimed that baptism’s effect did not rest on one’s own belief or experience of a relationship with God, but rather on the ritual of baptism itself. Even if the devil were to tell the young differently, baptism would still remain a fact even if it was not believed. Just as one would continue to have parents even if one did not honour them as one was commanded, one would remain baptized even if one did not believe in God’s mercy, Luther stated.84 Therefore, baptism was something one could always return to and relive after having fallen.85 The effects of baptism were rooted in an external and physical thing. Faith as well as good deeds and the daily repentance that weakened the old Adam and strengthened the new man continued the physical ritual that took place once in the life of the baptized. In this way, Luther’s and Osiander’s descriptions of baptism as a sacrament were connected to different pedagogical strategies. When baptism’s words for Luther referred to something present in the thing itself, more than to an incident behind the sign or located in an invisible reality, it presented baptism as an effective thing that continued to be so as long as one kept returning to it and made use of it. Osiander’s emphasis on the description of baptism as an incident of the past 81 WA

30/1, 22: “Et Christiana vita nihil aliud est quam perpetuus baptismus.” 30/1, 21: “In baptismo fit opus, das das wasser uberher gehet, das der mensch unter das wasser kompt, et postea wird er ex aqua er aus gezogen. Haec duo significant vim et opus baptismi. Das erste stücke significat poenitentiam et mortificationem veteris adae, 2. significat resurrectionem et novum hominem.” 83  WA 30/1, 22: “Et quod in ea comprehendatur secundum operationem et vim Tertium Sa­ cramentum, quod vocatur poenitentia. Denn busse ist umbkeren et rew und leide haben und ein ander leben mit ernst anfahen. Cum ergo gehest in baptismo, es in poenitentia. In baptismo enim datur gratia, ut mortificemus veterem Adam, und komen jhe lenger jhe mher her fur in novam vitam.” 84 WA 30/1, 114 and 115. 85 WA 30/1, 22, see quote in n. 69. 82 WA

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

203

made baptism part of a collective and individual memory that defined the Christian community. The comparison of the two catechists’ explanation of baptism is complicated by the same problem as was the comparison of their references to Turks and Jews. Though the references are thematically similar, they fulfil different rhetorical functions within each sermon corpus. Apparent differences on a thematic level could therefore be deceiving, since they might be caused by different rhetorical functions. Osiander placed his treatment of the sacrament of baptism at the outset of his catechism sermons and as a starting point defining its teaching situation, whereas Luther’s treatment of baptism is placed towards the end as a tool to aid people in their lives as Christians. Though the two explanations serve different rhetorical functions, however, the differences between them on a thematic level are not coincidental or misleading. Rather, in them reappear the differences of intention apparent in the catechists’ compositional principles, as was shown in the comparison of Luther’s and Brenz’s catechisms. A close reading of their catechism teaching on a thematic level thus confirms that the catechists chose themes and illustrations for their teaching with the interests that also guided their rhetorical choices. 6.1.4 Concluding Remarks: A God Who Demands Faith and a God Who Demands Fulfilment of His Commandments The catechists’ presentations of their own role, their opponents, and baptism, established a teaching situation that related their listeners to God in slightly different ways. In Osiander’s conception, the way baptism was explained as an engagement or an adoption, and the way God’s omnipotence was tied to baptism’s words of promise, established a familiarity with God which framed a specific view of the world. God’s omnipotence was identical with the omni­potence of Christ, and Osiander encouraged his listeners to be so familiar with this omni­ potence as to trust that evil happens only to the extent that Christ allows it to happen, and therefore always according to Christ’s office as the arch-shepherd for his flock of Christians, or as the catechist behind the catechist, so to speak. Osiander started his teaching by establishing a relationship to God that would let all other concerns appear as less important. This form of familiarity with God was more or less absent in Luther’s teaching on the catechism. More than it referred to a hidden reality, baptism’s words of promise were tied to the baptismal water and ritual. In this way, God never became more familiar to the Christian than to keep demanding fulfilment of the Commandments which were tied to a promise of blessing and a threat of curse. In baptism there was grace and power which let the baptized meet God rightly, but the fulfilment of the Commandments continued to be the right fear of God and the right trust in God. Baptism, which was explained towards the end of his catechism sermon series, was presented as pointing in the same direction

204

6. Catechism Sermons

as the Ten Commandments that had constituted the starting point in Luther’s catechetical teaching. Whereas they required faith to be fulfilled, understood as fear and confidence in God, the faith that baptism gave caused the good deeds that fulfilled the Commandments.86 More than establishing a relationship to God that could render all other concerns less important, Luther’s baptism served other concerns by continuing in and effecting penance in a way that let Christians fulfil God’s Commandments. This study will not analyze Osiander’s teaching on the Law, but it might still be interesting to point out some characteristics in the pedagogical function Osiander ascribed to the Commandments, which was different from Luther’s in a way that corresponds to their differently perceived teaching situations. While it was the Commandments that established the teaching situation in Luther’s conception, and baptism was presented later and in light of them, one could say that the opposite was the case in Osiander’s conception. He presented the Commandments after he had explained baptism, the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer, and he explained them in light of the relationship to God established and maintained in faith.87 His definition of the function of the Commandments resembled Luther’s by noting the dual usefulness in both promoting recognition of sin and presenting the deeds that please God and lead to an honest (ehrlich) and honourable life.88 An obvious difference, however, is the emphasis Osiander put on this explanation of the Commandments’ function. Compared to Luther’s explanation, the way Osiander stressed that God has not given the Commandments in order for us to believe that it is possible for us to fulfil them,89 mitigated their challenge and instead drew attention to their religious function. The Commandments were rightly understood when they were seen as a mirror of sin that may help admit the need for mercy,90 whereas the wrong understanding was at work if someone believed it possible to meet their commands or to repent by doing 86  Compare Luther’s explanation of the function and effect of the Commandments to his explanation of the function and effect of baptism. WA 30/1, 85: “Iam wollen wir alle praecepta zusamen fugen ynn ein krentzlein, das letzste ynn das erste. Ubique haec duo invenies, ut timeas deum et fidas deo. Si deum times, non diffides, non blasphemis &c. non eris inobediens parentibus &c. sed econtra, non occides nec lades corpus eius, sed adiuvabis &c. Sic de reliquis praeceptis.” (as in n. 29) See also WA 30/1, 22: “Vetus est, der uns angeborn ist ab Adam veteri, der mit allen lastern besetzt ist, Et quicquid ei innatum est, ist nicht gut, sed mere malum &c. Ut ab avaricia semper desistam, quotidie castior fiam et den unlust jhe mehr únd mehr abbreche, sanfftmutiger werde, jhe lenger jhe weniger ungedult, rach &c. füle. Wenn stücke untergehen, ghet baptismus im rechten brauch.” 87  Osiander’s view on the Law and the Ten Commandments is presented towards the end of the catechism sermon series. He has a slightly different view of the Law compared to Luther. See his catechism sermons number 30–42, especially sermons 30, 40, 41 and 42. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 356–526. 88  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 490. 89 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 493. 90 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 493–496.

6.1 Setting the Scene: The Teaching Situation

205

the deeds they prescribe, Osiander explained. This last sinful way of relating to the Commandments equalled someone saying “Christ, you have not died for my sins, or you did not have to die for my sins.”91 When Osiander explained how the Commandments used rightly connect the believer to Christ’s merits and redemption, he used imagery similar to that he employed when explaining the second article of faith. In this way the Commandments came to point back to the Creed and the relationship to God explained there. In addition to their first function of connecting to Christ’s redemption, the Commandments had a second function as expressions of gratitude when they were fulfilled in good deeds. The Commandments gave form to the gratitude that resulted from God’s mercy and Christ’s redemption because they pointed to the deeds that please God and therefore to the adequate expression of gratitude.92 Also as gratitude, the Commandments pointed to the catechetical parts explained earlier in Osiander’s sermon series. It was a gratitude connected to the close and steady relationship established with God in baptism and developed and explained in the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer. Someone who has been made a child in baptism and an heir of salvation and heaven owes gratitude to his or her loving Father. It is possible, however, for such a child to exclude him‑ or herself from this heritage by being vicious and showing ingratitude. Thereby he or she would risk the status as son or daughter.93 There is symmetry in the way the two catechists depicted their audience and their opponents corresponding to their initial presentations of God. Luther found his opponents within the Christian church, whereas Osiander found them at the outskirts of society. Osiander’s implicit description of his audience established a flock of believers in need of a Christian society around them, whereas Luther’s audience appeared as a selection of society’s youth who were addressed in order to be turned away from the deceitful piety of the traditional church and towards the practical morality of everyday life. At the outset of their lectures on the catechism, the two catechists seem to present themselves as pastors with different roles in society, or as pastors fulfilling their roles in differently perceived societies. Their different starting points allow for a preliminary description of these roles and societies. In Osiander’s concept, there emerges a church which could be identified as a group within society, dependant on the Christian society surrounding it and at the same guaranteeing the supply of pious and loyal citizens for this society. It is a society where the catechist may play a fundamental role for society’s well-being. In Luther’s conception, the catechist also may play a fundamental role for society’s well-being, but he may do so in different way. Here the church is not established as a society of its own as obviously as it is in Osiander’s Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 518. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 514–517. 93 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 357–360. 91 Osiander, 92 Osiander,

206

6. Catechism Sermons

conception. Instead the catechist places himself as a support for society, where God demands and where the important deeds of the everyday take place. The church takes a serving role as that which may help people handle life in society and help bring God’s blessing to it. From the teaching situation mirrored in these sermons, the two catechists appear as two potentially different political actors. Luther’s catechist fills an important role in society as a learned interpreter of God’s Commandments and an authoritative teacher of God’s words, but Osiander’s catechist is indispensable as the shepherd leading his flock to salvation and blessing. It is he, on behalf of Jesus the arch-shepherd, who establishes the audience as a flock and brings them to be favoured by God, and who includes the city society’s integrity and protection as a key factor for the preservation of this flock.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed The different implied teaching situations described in the previous section also mark the two catechists’ presentations of the Apostles’ Creed. Osiander sees it as a main theme in a teaching directed at forming the young with a Christian identity, whereas in Luther’s teaching it takes a subservient role. The catechists accordingly weighed this part of their catechisms quite differently: Osiander made the Creed a major part of his catechism instruction and spent fourteen sermons and 174 pages on explaining it. Luther’s explanation of the same part, on the other hand, was rather limited. In all of his three series of catechism sermons held during the year 1528, he treated the three articles of the Creed in one single sermon. Though this difference in emphasis makes a direct comparison between the two catechists’ teachings on the Creed unfair, it may still be fruitful to contrast the two teachings with each other, in order to let the differences in form and length shed light on the theological and pedagogical functions ascribed to the Creed in the two catechetical concepts. This part of the chapter will analyze Luther’s and Osiander’s teaching on the three articles of the Apostles’ Creed: the belief in the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. 6.2.1 To Recite the Creed Is to Learn to Trust God Question: Recite the twelve parts of the Christian faith. Answer: I believe in one God, the almighty Father, creator of heaven and earth.94

Osiander’s teaching on the Creed was part of training in a religious practice. By the annual exam held during spring, the young were expected to present and un Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 60: “Frag. / Sag her die zwelff Stück des Christlichen Glaubens? / Antwort. / Ich glaub in einen Gott / den Allmächtigen Vatter / Schöpffer des Himmels vnd der Erden.” This is the sixth catechism sermon. 94

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

207

derstand Brenz’s catechism, and the recitation of the Creed was a central part of this exam.95 Osiander’s sermons explained the Creed by tying visual stories and metaphors to each part of the Creed and instructed the youth in the use of them. The instruction helped the young associate pictures and feelings to each part of the Creed as they recited it and was meant to help the young orient themselves within the religious universe that surrounded their faith. According to Osiander, the first article presents the purpose of the Creed as a whole as well as challenges that can only be met when the Creed is learnt as a whole, namely to learn about God so that one may trust Him.96 Luther’s sermons also held that the first article expressed the theme of the Creed as a whole, and Luther also tied his teaching to a religious practice, but his explanations employed few visualizations and were tied differently to religious practice. His audience was expected to be able to recite the Creed,97 but they were not instructed in the proper recitation of the Creed, and this recitation was not seen as an aim in itself. The Creed was rather presented as a means to something else. In the second series of catechism sermons, presented during September 1528, Luther’s explanation of the first article starts by stating that the Ten Commandments are impossible for humans to fulfil because human strength is insufficient.98 This observation points to the purpose of the Creed, namely that by learning to recite the Creed, one will receive the power and strength necessary to follow the Ten Commandments.99 One may try the best one can to fulfil the Commandments out of one’s own strength, for example by donating a large sum of money, but even that has no power to fulfil the demands of the Ten Commandments. If the Commandments are to be fulfilled, faith and prayer have to come to the rescue, and the fact that they can is a strong statement of the Creed’s great value.100 If, on the other hand, anyone were able to fulfil the Ten Commandments on their own, which no human on earth has ever done, he or she would have no use for either the Creed or the Lord’s Prayer.101 In his last series of catechism sermons, Luther’s explanation of the first article of faith shifts focus from the Commandments to creation. Here the right experi 95 Johannes

Brenz, “Fragstück des Christlichen Glaubens für die Jugendt”, 689–690.

 96 This is in both the sermon’s introduction and in the conclusion. Osiander, Fünffzig Predig­

ten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 61 and 72.  97 Cf. his Small Catechism, WA 30/1, 247–250.  98 WA 30/1, 43.  99 WA 30/1, 43–44: “Ideo quisque cum interrogatur: Ad quid servit Symbolum? discat sic respondere: Decem praecepta docent, quid sit faciendum &c. sed nemo facit, quia non est homo in terris, quis suis viribus possit implere. Ideo lernet man fidem sprechen, das man da durch kriege krafft, gnade und stercke, ut serventur 10 praecepta.” 100 WA 30/1, 44: “Ipsi sic gloriantur: Ego gr. non habeo et tamen voleo solvere 100 fl. Und sthet doch hie, quod ad servandum es nulla potentia sufficit, sed fides et precatio mus zu hilff komen, ut indesinenter clametur.” 101 WA 30/1, 43: “Si enim ex viribus nostris possemus efficere, quae praecepta exigunt, non opus haberemus nec Symbolo nec pater noster.”

208

6. Catechism Sermons

ence of creation is in itself seen as a primary concern of faith. The main object in Luther’s sermon is to help his listeners understand what it means to be created by God and to accept the consequences that follow. The words about God the Father as Creator of heaven and earth teach that one is God’s creation and that one’s life comes from Him.102 Since God the Creator has given body, life, senses, reason and everything else that is one’s own, one has nothing from oneself. As a consequence, one should thank and obey and serve Him who has given everything.103 This sermon follows the same logic as the previous one, but the experience of God as someone who gives and demands is explained as an aspect of one’s material existence in the world. Osiander’s sermon on God the Father and Creator is not aimed at explaining the conditions for life as God’s creature. It rather sees the recitation of the Creed as an aim in itself. His focus in the explanation of creation is not on creation, but on God’s being. It is a visual sermon meant to form the young’s conception of God’s invisible and supernatural being by presenting nature and the universe as expressions of God’s infinite wisdom in a way intended to accompany the young’s perception of nature, to let nature remind them of the reality of God’s being.104 This description of God was linked to a description of how the young ought to relate to God. The young should believe for themselves, for it was not enough to live in a society where one generally believed, or to have a Christian father or mother or Christian authorities. Since a foreign faith could save no one, every Christian should take responsibility for his or her own faith.105 To experience God the right way, one should start by positioning oneself alone in this world. Thus, another way of experiencing God seems to have been connected with Osiander’s description of God. Luther’s sermons indirectly described the listener as someone who was always called; he or she was called to fulfil the Commandments or to accept life from the Creator when striving to create him‑ or herself. Osiander, on the other hand, started by isolating the listener as a subject and instructing how one should be positioned in order to experience God rightly. In Osiander’s conception, a certain loneliness was necessary for a believing subject, and the experience of loneliness was implicitly linked to social categories and to the individual’s relation to society. Relating to God alone was not only necessary for being a Christian, but even for fully taking part in humanity. Every human being had to believe that there is a God, if he or she was not to be considered as 102 WA

30/1, 87. 30/1, 88. 104  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 70–71: “Liebe Kinder / laßt uns die Creaturen Gottes / wann wir dieselbige vor unsern Augen haben / nicht also anschawen / als wie die vnuernünfftige Thier / die Geschöpff Gottes / mit vnuerstandt ansehen / sonder laßt vns an dem herrlichen Werck Gottes (der erschaffung der Welt vnd aller Creaturen) betrachten vnd erkennen / den allmächtigen Gewalt vnsers Gottes / vnd sein vnendtliche Weißheit.” 105 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 62. 103 WA

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

209

primitive as sheep or cows.106 This was not a proper faith, since it did not involve a relationship to God or a real experience of God. Still, to have this minimal amount of faith was linked to the recognition of basic principles of justice and coherence in the world, which was necessary if someone were to be trusted as part of a human community.107 Obviously, true understanding of the first article was not reached with this general truth. A faith of this sort was not sufficient for salvation, for even the devil shared this faith.108 To have a saving faith, the young had to trust God and rely on Him, set all his or her hopes to God, and ascribe to Him all that is good. The internalization of these feelings and attitudes was essential for a Christian faith, but it relied on numerous preconditions, with the unity of God as the most obvious. If God is to be the target of these attitudes and the source of these feelings, He had to be experienced as one single being. Whereas the many gods of the heathens contradict true faith and proper praxis, true faith and practice emphasized the unity of God.109 The instruction on God’s unity was probably not intended to warn the young of a polytheistic threat, but rather to promote the proper experience of both God and world. God’s unity would hardly be disputed, but Osiander suggested that a child might be confused by the three persons Father, Son and Spirit, and therefore ask if that does not imply that Christians have three gods. This suggested child and its question gave Osiander the opportunity to explain how God may be understood by the metaphor of the sun: Because the sun itself is something different from its sunbeams, one may sometimes see more than one sun in the skies, even if there is always just one sun. The rainbow, for example, has its shine from the sun, and when one sees the sun shining through thick fog, one does not see the round sun itself or its bright light, and still one sees the same single sun. From the sun and its rays comes warmth which both livestock and elderly people search, and which warms creation and makes it fertile. Even though this warmth is different from the sun, it is still an experience of the same sun. In the same way as there is one sun in the skies, there is also only one God. The Son relates to the Father like the sunbeams to the sun, and the Holy Spirit equals the warmth that emanates from the sun and its beams, not only sustaining the creation, but also warming the heart of the human beings to love God and their neighbour.110 Parallel to being an explanation of the trinity, this parable also shows how Osiander saw his teaching on the three parts of the Creed as unified. It promoted the three attitudes of trusting God rightly, seeing Jesus rightly, and feeling the Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 62. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 62: “… das ist / daß ein Gott sey / der die Gottseligkeit belohnet / vnd die Boßheit strafft: …” 108 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 63. 109 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 63. 110 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 64. 106 Osiander, 107 Osiander,

210

6. Catechism Sermons

Spirit in the right way, with the intention that the two latter attitudes should support the first. The metaphor of the sun shows how a proper experience of God unites the diversity of human experiences. This aspect is further emphasized in Osiander’s instruction that the young should learn to know God through His creation. Human experience of nature differs from that of irrational animals exactly because it sees nature as an expression of God’s infinite wisdom and powers.111 And since God has not only created the world at the beginning of time, but also continues to uphold it with His creative powers until the last day, everyone necessarily encounters the Creator’s omnipotence in it.112 Together Osiander’s different instructions for experiencing God position the young in his or her world in a specific way. To learn about God’s unity is also to learn that the different experiences in life all stem from the same place. God’s unity makes the variety of experiences aspects of the same God. The distinction in Osiander’s sermon, between the faith that saves and the faith required for sharing in humanity, is vague, perhaps purposefully so, since promoting tolerance and understanding for those who did not share the saving faith was not among his primary concerns. He spent less effort on a precise description of the common faith than he did on motivating youths to live true humanity in a saving faith. It still seems that a great part of the faith prescribed in Osiander’s explanation of the first article of the Creed was obligatory for all to share. This faith involved the expectation of reward or punishment that motivates good conduct. A saving faith goes beyond what is required of human beings generally. It not only knows that there is a just God to be feared, but also places trust and hope in Him who is an omnipotent Father.113 Osiander’s distinction between the shared faith and the Christian faith comes with an implied sociality. It opens the possibility for the existence of people who share a minimum of faith guaranteeing their trustworthiness as citizens, relating to the same coherent cosmos as believers and living under God’s judgment. What makes them trustworthy is their minimum share in what Christians have to the full, namely the saving faith that involves trust and faith in the omnipotent and omnipresent God. In this way church community and civil community are distinguished as different parts of society, but with the church as the central one, since it guarantees what everyone needs for their inclusion in greater society. Osiander’s two forms of faith, of which one is mentioned and the other explored in depth, are absent in Luther’s sermons, probably because of the different starting point and scope in his description of God as Father. For Osiander, the description of God as Father involved a description of the solitary  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 71.

111

112 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 71: “Sonderlich weil Gott

der HErr nicht allein einmal die Creaturen erschaffen / sonder auch biß an den jüngsten Tag / dieselbige in jhrem gang vnd Ordnung erhelt.” 113 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 65.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

211

believer which made necessary a reminder of the two different possible forms of faith. Luther’s description of the individual as confronted with God’s demands, on the other hand, needed no such distinction, since it included all forms of human existence. This different strategy corresponds to a differently perceived teaching situation, as described in the previous section. Osiander had started by defining his listeners as a group of Christians because of their baptism, whereas Luther intended that his catechism should present a new generation of society, not yet defined as a flock, with what they needed to know in order to be called Christians. The two catechists’ different strategies for describing God reveal different views on the social function of Christian faith. Luther’s intentions seem to have been almost opposite of Osiander’s. Luther identified no faith superior to a common faith at the core of society, but saw some common demands present in society that may only be met by a Christian faith. One may even get the impression that Luther turned explicitly against the notion of a special Christian sociality. In his second series of catechism sermons, he mounted a polemic against monks and clerics claiming that the Commandments were too simple for them and that they therefore chose to live by a higher standard with more advanced rules.114 For Luther there existed nothing higher than the Commandments that were common to all. They were so sublime that no one would ever be able to live according to them. If one pressed oneself into following them, one would be like an angel, he claimed.115 The same goes for the demands of God that are experienced in the world. Those who live as His creatures must give and serve, but it is not in anyone’s power to give and serve out of their own strength. How should one then respond to the Creator’s gracious gifts, Luther asked rhetorically; establish a monastery? No, of course not, one should simply give thanks and praise to God.116 While Osiander let his audience envision themselves as part of a Christian sociality at the core of society, Luther polemicised against those who believed that faith led to a higher moral and a different sociality. The views of the two catechists are not simply contrary to each other, since Osiander’s sociality was not that of a monastery, but it is still evident that the two catechists’ concepts of God had different social functions. 6.2.2 To Recite the Creed Involves Believing in Christ Differences in form and style are obvious also in the two catechists’ teaching on the second article of the Creed. While Luther’s teaching on this article fills about a third of a short sermon, Osiander’s takes up seven lengthy sermons, which is 114 WA

30/1, 43. 44. See quotes in n. 59. 30/1, 44. See n. 59. 116 WA 30/1, 88. See n. 59. 115 WA

212

6. Catechism Sermons

half of all his sermons on the Creed and seven times the space of his teaching on the first article. In the sermon corpus of each catechist, the teaching on the second article occupies a central position, but due to the attention and space given it stands out as a far more central part of Osiander’s series of catechism sermons than of Luther’s. 6.2.2.1 Christ as Lord: The Importance of Knowing Christ And in Jesus Christ, his only begotten son, our Lord.117

For Luther the question about what youths needed to know about Christ could be answered simply and concisely in two sentences: How may Jesus be said to be God? He may be said to be so because He is the true Son of God and has become my Lord.118 According to Luther, this was also the answer to the question of who He is, the God who has given the Ten Commandments. It is He who sent the Son who became my Lord.119 This necessary knowledge about Christ placed Him within the believer’s relationship to God the Father as God’s Son and as the believer’s Lord. It was a relationship which also involved the Commandments, since it was the God who gave us His Commandments who sent His Son to become our Lord. To relate to Him as Lord also involved relating to God’s Commandments. Osiander’s explanation of Christ as Lord did not mention the Ten Commandments and mentioned God the Father only occasionally. Instead of placing the believer in a complex relationship of Father, Son, and Commandments, it focused on the relationship between the Son and the believer. This relationship was described with several images. The first image resembles Paul’s analogy of head and limbs in his first letter to the Corinthians and was employed by Osiander to emphasize the uniqueness of Christ.120 Even though each limb in a body may sense what happens to it, whether good or bad, and have some power of its own, all the limbs’ sensations are collected in the head, which also possesses all the powers of the limbs. Christ and believers are related to each other in a similar way, as is Christ’s dignity to that of normal human beings. Osiander continued from the analogy to a statement about Christ as a king who governs us like the head governs its limbs and protects us and thus makes us rich on heavenly goods.121 By this imagery, 117 The seventh catechism sermon is Osiander’s first sermon on the second article of faith. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 73: “Vnd in Jesum Christum / seinen eingebornen Sohn / vnsern HErren.” 118 This is explained similarly in the sermons in the first and the third series. WA 30/1, 9 and 89. 119 WA 30/1, 9. 120  Osiander refers to 1 Corinthians 12. Osiander, Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 77. 121 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 78.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

213

Osiander linked the understanding of Christ to the listeners’ experience of being members of the church community. Osiander’s version stretched Paul’s image to let the head not only govern the limbs, but also supply their power and effects. The following description of Christ as a king governing and protecting His people and making them rich hints at how Osiander’s version of Paul’s image would have carried different political connotations. Instead of positioning Christ above and together with the believer in his or her relationship to God and the Law as in Luther’s thought, Osiander isolated the relationship of Christ and believer and described it with an imagery that was both intimate and physical. The shift from relating to the Father through the Son to relating solely to the Son inspired different social and political impulses. This shows clearly in Osiander’s description of those who were excluded from this community. Luther had explained that the second article of faith separated the Christian faith from the faiths of Jews and Turks, and that this article was the reason why Jews and Turks had a different relationship with the same God.122 In contrast, Osiander did not mention other faiths in his theological argument on the second article. Turks still entered the scene in his sermon, and when they did, it was to confirm the congregation in Esslingen’s special relationship to Christ. In the story about Christ as head and king, the congregants were not only described as limbs, but also as Christ’s servants. An allegory of Germans enslaved in Turkey elaborated on the congregants’ status as servants of Christ. If a Turk came and seized a village with his army and abducted all the men, women, and children to Turkey, he would let them live like dogs with very little to eat, though Osiander assumed many dogs lived better in Germany than Christians in Turkey. Osiander employed this Turk as an illustration of the devil from whom Christ frees His believers. Similarly as Christians living under Turkish rule, we would live under the terrible rule of the devil and in fear of death had Christ not ransomed us, Osiander explained. It was a parable with a similar message when read in reverse. Christ’s intervention and freeing us from the devil was parallel to a rich and pious Christian who spent his money to buy enslaved Christians from the tyrant Turkish lord to set them free and let them move back to their fatherland.123  WA 30/1, especially page 9, but also page 90.

122

123 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 82: “Gleich als wann der

Türck mit Heeres Krafft an einem ort einfällt / vnd mit Gewalt gefäncklich hinweg führet / Männer / Weiber / Kinder: Da werden sie als dann in der Türckey / als leibeigne Knecht vnd Mägd / verkaufft: Da werden sie vbel geschlagen für wol essen / sie werden mit essen vnd trincken gehalten wie die Hund: Vnd würdt mancher Hund in Teutschland viel besser tractirt / dann ein Christ in der Türckey. Also hetten auch wir vnter dem grewlichen Tyrannen / dem Teuffel / durch Forcht des Tods im gantzen Leben Knecht sein müssen / dieses grewlichen Wieterichs des Teuffels: Wo vns nicht vnser HErr Christus auß der Tyranney des bösen Feinds / erkaufft vnd ledig gemacht hette: Gleich als wann ein frommer reicher Christ / einen gefangnen Christen / von seinem Tyrannischen Herrn / umb Gelt erkaufft / und ledig macht / und jhn widerumb auff freien Fuß stellet / daß er mag heim in sein Vatterland ziehen.” See also Kaufmann, “Türcken­

214

6. Catechism Sermons

While Christ was represented in the parable by a rich and pious Christian, who might have been imaginable to the young as someone not too different from Esslingen’s city councilors, the devil was represented by a Turkish lord. Osiander’s imagery thus presented characters from the listeners’ surroundings together with central actors in their faith. The way these characters and actors were related to each other followed a certain pattern which is characteristic of Osiander’s preaching technique. In the aforementioned allegory, a hypothetical story about tyrant, slaves, and liberator frames the real story of Christ freeing the believer. Whereas the real story concerned an abstract content of faith, the hypothetical story dealt with concrete realities in and around the society of the young. The concrete realities were intended to inform the abstract, but when the two stories were presented as a unity, their blend of abstract and concrete fluctuated in a way that let the understanding of Christ be strengthened by known and concrete concepts. One would then, at the same time, expect the known and concrete concepts to be confirmed by this strengthened faith. Though the parable was designed to teach the young about Christ and their relationship to Him, it would at the same time also teach the young to fear the Turks and to love their own society. Turks as well as pious and noble men were recurring characters in Osiander’s parables and were hardly arbitrarily chosen as examples. Rather, they were employed in his imagery in a way that corresponded to a pedagogical intention emphasizing Christian faith as an anchoring of identity and community. The same preaching technique was deployed when, in order to illustrate what it was like to live under sin and the devil, Osiander told the story of a German’s life in the Ottoman Empire. In the same way as Christian slaves in the Ottoman Empire struggle to survive due to lack of food, those who live under sin and the devil struggle because of the fear of death. On the other hand, when Christian slaves in the Ottoman Empire are freed by a rich and pious Christian, their lives are similarly transformed as the lives of those whom Christ has freed from the devil. The young in Esslingen lived under rich Christian rulers, and Osiander’s instruction associated this rule with the rule of Christ and life in Esslingen with life as free servants of Christ. Though Luther and Osiander both gave Christ the title of lord, their attributions had different connotations. For Osiander, the relational title of lord involved a twofold relationship between Christ and believer that was intimate, but which also involved the social reality of church and city. For Luther, Christ as lord was placed in a fourfold relationship with the believer in a way that changed how the believer related to the Commandments and to sin, but which was presented without explicit social implications. büchlein”, 157 on how Osiander’s elder colleague, Johannes Brenz, had emphasized in his sermons the need to dread living under Turkish rulers.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

215

6.2.2.2 The Passion of Christ: Entering in the Right Relationship with Christ Who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried.124

Prior to his explanation of Christ’s passion, Osiander had explained Christ’s nature in a way that focused on the difference between Christ’s nature and that of ordinary man as a difference that tied the two together in a way that saved man.125 The explanation of Christ’s passion and death stands out as the central part of both Luther and Osiander’s teaching on the second article of faith, but it does so in slightly different ways. For Luther it constituted the central argument of his explanation of Jesus.126 Interestingly, it was in connection with this explanation that Luther identified what it was that separated the faith of Christians from the faith of all others, not only from Turks and Jews, but also from papists and sectarians.127 Faith in the significance of Christ’s death was thus presented as that which places Christians in a special place in the world and in relation to God. This positioning quality of Christ’s suffering and death was not important in Osiander’s explanation, probably since the theme had already been treated in his explanation of baptism. Instead he gave here one of the few explanations that are practically without references to the social and political conditions surrounding the youths. It is as if Osiander here saw a core of pure religious experience behind all practical implications. The two catechists also chose slightly different leading motifs for their explanations of this theme. In Luther’s explanation, the main motif was two different ways of being in the world. One may either be a slave of the world and the devil, or one may have Christ as lord and be freed from sin and death.128 Luther’s focus was on Christ’s suffering and death as in itself causing this freeing from sin and death more than on enhancing the youths’ sensitivity to the account of Christ’s 124  See Osiander’s ninth sermon. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechis­ mum, 98: “Der gelitten hat vnter Pontio Pilato / gecreutziget / gestorben / vnd begraben.” 125 This theme continues a theme which has been omitted from this analysis, namely Osiander’s teaching about Christ’s nature (Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechis­ mum, 85–97). Here the main point was to show how the contrast between Christ’s nature and ordinary human’s sinful nature tied the two together (ibid., 90–91). Osiander also drew social consequences from this relationship, namely that when Christ who had such a great dignity still had to suffer, the youth who were less dignified should all the more endure the little suffering and poverty that might be laid upon them (ibid., 98). A key parable to explain the difference between Christ and ordinary humans was the story about a man stuck in the mud and Christ as a gentleman who came to his rescue (ibid., 94). It was a parable that showed how the believer was tied to Jesus with his sinfulness. 126 WA 30/1, 90. 127 WA 30/1, 9 and 90. These are the first and third series of the sermons. 128 In the third series of catechism sermons, having Christ as Lord means being freed from sin and death; in the second it means having received a share in Christ’s fulfilment of the Law, whereas in the first it means to be saved from all evil. See WA 30/1, 90, 44, and 10.

216

6. Catechism Sermons

suffering and death. Osiander, on the other hand, saw the need to instruct his listeners in how to make practical use of Christ’s death by dwelling on His suffering. As the object of God’s wrath, Christ suffered the pain of a cursed man, but at the same time He let God’s blessing and mercy come upon us.129 If the youth were to make use of this fact, however, they needed to understand how the devil operates. Again, Osiander employed an allegory to explain a theological concept. The allegory comparing the sinner’s conscience with a pedlar’s heavy basket was meant to give necessary knowledge of how sin and the devil were present in the lives of the young. It was a simple parable with imagery focused on individual experience. Osiander had the youth imagine pedlars on their way to the marketplace with their goods on their backs in heavy baskets, leaning on their walking sticks as they walk. Often pedlars cannot find a big stone or a wall to place their basket on when they pause to rest. Instead they use their sticks to support their baskets as they stand. If then a rogue comes sneaking up behind them and pulls away their sticks, they end up on their backs with their feet in the air. In the same way the evil enemy fools humans to sin.130 The pedlar represents the sinner, Osiander explained, the basket corresponds to the sinner’s conscience, and the stick to his feeling of carnal security,131 meaning the presumptuous feeling of safety that is not grounded in God. Since the evil enemy lets the conscience be supported by the stick of carnal safety, it can be loaded with sins as grave as heavy stones filling the basket. When the sinner least expects it, however, very often on the sinner’s deathbed, the evil enemy pulls away the stick and lets the sinner feel the terrible burden of his sins, thus inflicting him with tribulations, pain, and anxiety, and catching the poor sinner in a net of despair.132  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 102. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 105. 131 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 105: “fleischlichen Sicherheit”. 132 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 104–105: “Nemet ein Gleichnus: Ihr habt ohn zweiffel gesehen / daß die Krämer / welche ihr Wahr auff jhrem Rucken in einem Korb / oder in einer Laden vber Feld tragen / die haben einen Stecken in der Hand / an demselbigen gehen sie / wie sonsten ettwa alte Leut sich mit einem Stecken behelffen. Wann sie aber müd werden / vnd im freien Feld geruhen wöllen / da sie jhren Korb oder Laden nicht köndten auff ein hohen Stein / oder auff ein Mäurlin auffstellen / so nemen sie jren Stecken / vnd stellen denselbigen auffrecht vnter den Korb oder Laden / vnd geruhen also ein zeitlang. Wann nun hinderwerts ein arger Schalck heimlich hinzu schliche / vnd zuckte dem Krämer vnuersehens den Stecken hinweg / so fiel er als bald an den Rucken / daß er die Füß gehn Himmel auff kehrte. Also gehet der böß Feind mit vns listiglich vmb. Er stellet vns erstlich ein Stecken der fleischlichen Sicherheit / vnter vnser Gewissen: vnd ladet vns darnach auff dasselbig / viel vnd mancherley grosse vnd schwäre Sünd: Gleich / als wann man einem viel schwere Stein in einen Korb / den er auff dem Rucken hette / einlüde / daß er derselbigen nicht empfünde / all dieweil er den Stecken vnter dem Korb hette stehen. Darnach / wann der böß Feind sein gelegenheit ersicht / so zuckt er vns den Stecken der fleischlichen Sicherheit / widerumb hinweg / vnd fellet vns zu boden / vnd vermeinet vns dardurch dahin zubringen / daß wir in unsern Sünden solten 129

130 Osiander,

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

217

The allegory showed the youth how things are not always as they seem or are perceived. One may live happy days without worries and sense no risk and still be collecting sins on one’s conscience. Sin and evil therefore have to be exposed in order to be identified; they are phenomena one needs to learn to understand rightly. To protect oneself against the devil’s tactics, one must learn to see through carnal security and desire the benefits of Christ’s passion. Luther gave no such explanation of sin in his sermons on this part of the Creed. Probably it was redundant in his mind, since already in his previous explanation he had shown how the Commandments function as a mirror of sin.133 For Osiander, on the other hand, to learn to see through one’s own experiences and identify one’s sin was an important entry to the proper experience of Christ.134 A common experience, which the young might have had in their own lives, that ­sinning feels easy and seems without serious consequences, fits the devil’s character and cunning. The parable’s description of the world addressed this ­phenomenon and was intended to twist the experiences of the young and show them that what may seem pleasant and enjoyable should not be evaluated only by the moment, but also in view of one’s coming deathbed. The real threat was not the sins themselves, however, but the way the devil used them to create a despair that excluded God’s mercy. Therefore, when the young learnt to identify the devil’s cunning, they would see how Jesus was the last to die the death of a cursed man. If they despaired and feared death, it would not be because they were cursed by God, but because of the devil’s attacks. Osiander prescribed contemplation of Christ’s passion as a remedy for a sinner’s experience of life. In their hearts youths should learn to be decisive and say: “I know that my Lord Christ has suffered, was crucified and has died, not for His own sins since He was without sin and did not commit sin, but has died for my sins and for those of all other humans.”135 When they felt threatened by the devil, they should say: “Therefore, devil, you should spare me the scruples verzagen. Vnd dieses teuffelisch Stuck / vnd grosse Boßheit / sparet der tausentlistig böß Feind / manchem Christen biß in sein Todtbeth / oder auch wol biß der Todt herzu nahet. Da tringet er als dann mit seinen gewaltigen grewlichen versuchungen / auff einen solchen armen elenden Menschen / zu gleich mit den schmertzen vnd schrecken des Tods / vnd mit erzöhlung seiner vieler vnd grossen Sünden: vnd vermeinet also den armen Sünder in das Garn der verzweiffelung / wie ein flüchtigen Hasen / zuschrecken vnd hinein zujagen: Vnd wann Gott der HERr sich vber ein solchen Sünder nicht erbarmete / so wer es vmb eines solchen armen Sünders seligkeit allerdings geschehen.” 133 This makes up the first and greatest part in all of the three catechism sermon series. 134 The parable which is presented here , which explains the nature of sin as an entry to a proper experience of Christ, is a continuation of the previous parable about the man stuck in the mud and is employed to explain Christ’s nature and gives a twist to its imagery. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 94. 135 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 105: “Ich weiß daß mein HErr Christus gelitten hat / gecreutziget / vnd gestorben ist / nicht für seine Sünd / dann er kein Sünd gehabt noch gethan: sonder er ist für meine / und anderer Menschen Sünd gestorben …”

218

6. Catechism Sermons

of my own sins, for these my spiritual sins you present me have long since been paid for by Christ my redeemer.”136 Osiander presented the details of Christ’s passion as knowledge that was important in its own right. With these details, the youth should experience the story of Christ’s suffering as a register of debts, showing for each entry how all sins had already been paid for.137 Every detail of Christ’s suffering represented specific sins that were atoned for. When the young envisioned Christ on the cross, they should see the generous Christ’s outstretched arms welcoming them and in this way strengthen their love towards Christ. For this reason, Osiander also recommended the old practice of showing a crucifix to dying people, in order to let them see what they may no longer be able to hear and thus be saved from despair.138 Whereas Osiander promoted imagination and empathy with Christ’s suffering to help the youth benefit from Christ’s suffering and death, Luther’s recommendations for the same purpose seem less clear. His emphasis was on Christ’s suffering and death as a drama that had already taken place outside of the youth’s experience and empathy. How the young could make use of this incident was not his primary focus; it was rather to explain to them that which had already taken place with Christ’s suffering and death. Because of it, God was no longer only creator of the world and giver of the Law. He was also the giver of salvation and fulfilment with Christ who changed our relationship to Him and our place in the world.139 Luther presented this change in past tense, as a fact, and the relevance of it was presented without instructions about how one should make use of it. In Luther’s conception, instruction on how to make use of Christ’s suffering seems to have been postponed to his explanation of the Eucharist, which in his three series of sermons occurs as the last or the second-to-last sermon. Here the usefulness of Christ’s suffering is not secured by an imaginative spiritual exercise, but by the encounter with the Eucharistic elements. Luther explained this usefulness as rooted in an experience that is sensual more than imaginative. The mouth tastes the bread and not the body, but the soul apprehends the sounding 136 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 106: “Darumb / Teuffel / laß mich meiner Sünden halben / fürauß vnangefochten. Dann diese meine geistliche Schulden / die du mir fürwürffst / seind langst durch meinen Erlöser Christum bezahlt.” 137 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 106. 138 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 107. 139 This occurs in the second series of sermons, WA 30/1, 45: “Pater dedit omnes creaturas, Christus gibt dazu, quod est conceptus e spiritu sancto, pro nobis natus e virgine, passus, crucifixus &c. ut acquireret nobis gratiam per suam mortem, ut 10 praecepta impleremus. Creaturae datae, ut serviant, Christus filius dedit omnia sua opera et merita, ut impleremus 10 praecepta. Ipse enim non indigebat, ut moreretur, sed ideo tulit ut imponeret sibi nostra peccata, ut faceremus et quod nos omiseramus, ipse solveret. Ideo hat er sich lassen damnirn, ne nos damnaremur.” It also appears in the third series, WA 30/1, 89: “Iam Christus liberat nos a morte, diabolo, peccatis, dat iusticiam, vitam, fidem, potentiam, salutem, sapientiam &c.” Ibid., 90: “Primum, cum creatus essem, hette ich wol allerley gut, leib &c. sed serviebam peccato, morti &c. da kam Christus, qui mortem passus, ut liberarer a morte et fierem ipsius filius et ducerer in iustiticiam, vitam &c.”

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

219

word and receives the body of Christ.140 In this event, one receives the forgiveness of one’s sin, the devil is defeated, and one’s death is overcome.141 Since it rests on Christ’s words, the truth of this event cannot be guaranteed by any other instance, such as reason,142 and it need not be either, since acting in the Eucharist is Christ Himself who is incapable of lying.143 Thus, in order to reserve room for Christ’s effective presence, Luther refrained from explaining how the usefulness of Christ’s passion should be maintained. Instead he inserted the following little dialog with himself: “Do you believe it? I believe it. How is it possible? I leave that to Him. I am to believe Him, but how this takes place, He knows better than I do.”144 Luther seems to have been reluctant to secure the last step from fact to relevance and piety, even in his explanation of the Eucharist, and instead to have left that to result from the proper ritual practice.145 In contrast, this step seems to be exactly what Osiander was concerned to secure in his explanation of Christ’s suffering. This can be noticed also in the different focus in Osiander’s teaching on the Eucharist.146 He introduced the Eucharist as something that strengthens faith, and Osiander’s first sermon on the Eucharist shows how it strengthens an already existing faith and an established relationship to Christ. Those who believe in Christ and try to live his calling according to the Commandments neces­sarily experience tribulations in which they need to have their faith strengthened, 140 WA 30/1, 53: “Os sentit panem, sed non corpus, Anima vero, quia arripit verba, ut sonant, accipit corpus. Da mustu bey bleiben.” 141 WA 30/1, 118–119: “Haec verba fide apprehendi debent. Ergo utor Sacramento ad remis­ sionem peccatorum meorum et dico: Ich wil ghen und holen corpus et sanguinem, daß sey ein gewis zeichen, das es fur mich gesetzt ist et contra mortem meam. ‘Pro te traditur’ &c. da stehet der nutz.” 142 WA 30/1, 24 and 54. 143 WA 30/1, 24. 144  WA 30/1, 54: “Credis hoc? credo. Quomodo hoc possibile est? Da lasse ich yhn fur sorgen, Ich sol im gleuben, wie es aber zugehet, das weis er besser denn ich.” 145 Luther does have a short explanation of faith’s benefits in his explanation of the Holy Spirit, however. See the next section on the third article of faith. Cf. WA 30/1, 45: “Quid est fides? Ego credo in patrem, filium, spiritum sanctum. Quid discis ex hoc? ad quid valet? Ad hoc, ut sciam, ubi accipienda sit vis servandi et implendi decem praecepta. Nam impossibile est, ut servem. Qui enim spiritum sanctum non habent, ducuntur a Satana in pessima vita. Et nos faceremus ut isti palam impii, nisi &c. Ideo discimus symbolum, ut habeamus fortitudinem non sic vivendi ut impii. Quia fides indicat patrem, filium et spiritum sanctum, qui dat robur, ut servem ea, Et ut non vivam quemadmodum alii, vel si sic vivo, ut deus mihi condonet et remittat, ut hic scriptus sit articulus de remissione peccatorum.” 146 Osiander is also concerned to stress that Christ is bodily present in the elements; Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 558–559. When he explains how the Eucharist is a word-sign (Wortzeichen), he explains that it consists of three things, namely word, bread and wine, and Christ’s body and blood; ibid., 543. For the Eucharist to have its effect, it is essential also that Christ’s body and blood are present in it, since it was not the bread that was given for us and not the wine that was shed for us for the remission of sins; ibid., 548–549.

220

6. Catechism Sermons

Osiander explained.147 There are outward tribulations, such as disease, suffering, scorn, contempt, and animosity, and there are inner tribulations such as disbelief in God’s mercy and the feeling of being forsaken by God.148 These tribulations may dishearten Christians and deprive them of their motivation to do good, and, according to Osiander, this is the reason why they need to be strengthened by the Eucharist.149 When the need for the Eucharist was concretized in this way, Osiander could also describe the effect and usefulness of the Eucharist concretely. The way the Eucharist gives strength was described as concretely as was the need for physical strength. Like starved soldiers need nourishment to continue fighting and are revitalized by tonic (Kraftwasser), Christians need to receive the Eucharist regularly to be strengthened in their spiritual fight.150 The Eucharist gives this strength because it is a testimony to the one receiving it that God loves him or her and that the Son cleanses him or her of all sins with His blood.151 In this way the Eucharist works in the same way as baptism, namely as a signed letter which contains not only words, but also a concrete sign guaranteeing the truth of these words.152 Though it is a concrete sign, it still has its primary function in referring to the hidden truth behind the sign of the believer’s relationship to God. It is by assuring one of God’s mercy and compassion that it strengthens the believer in all tribulations.153 In this way the Eucharist has the function of a spiritual medicine (geistlich Artzney) strengthening faith and thereby improving the entire life of the believer.154 It is a medicine that conquers the believer’s inner tribulations and therefore in turn also changes the outward tribulations. It lets a believer see that outward tribulations are part of a Christian’s life and that they are necessary for disciplining the old Adam living in everyone. Seen in the right light, such discipline is in reality a confirmation of the fact that one has God as father. It would have been far worse if one had not experienced tribulations and discipline. In that case, one might not have been a son of God, but rather a bastard child.155 The explanation of tribulations and fighting as part of Christian life is repeated in the imagery found in Osiander’s explanation of the third article of faith and in his explanation of the seventh part of the Lord’s Prayer (“Lead us not into temptation”). By its imagery, the Eucharist was thus seen as referring to the faith which was explained with the Creed and the Lord’s Prayer, and as strengthening the faith and the relationship to God which was established in baptism. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 527. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 530. 149 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 528. 150  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 532. 151 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 533. 152  Cf. Osiander’s second sermon on the Eucharist, Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 544. 153 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 543, 544, and 551. 154 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 534. 155 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 528–529. 147 Osiander, 148 Osiander,

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

221

Osiander’s teaching was more explicit than Luther’s in explaining how Christ’s suffering may be utilised in the life of a Christian, and it was done in a way that relied on an already established and experienced relationship to Christ. In the Creed’s empathizing with Christ’s suffering as well as in the receiving of the Eucharist, there was a basic relationship between the believer and Christ that put all other relations in the life of a believer in the right perspective, including how he or she related to the world. Through empathy with Christ, who came to earth not for His own sake, but to suffer and die for sinners, believers should be able to see that their scruples and tribulations were not the result of God’s wrath, but of the devil’s attacks.156 Since their relationship with Christ should make it possible for them to differentiate between God and the devil, it led the youth to a way of perceiving the world which rested on a religious experience maintained in a pious intimacy with Christ. The sermon’s pedagogical operation thus combined being tied to Christ with seeing through one’s own experiences of the world. 6.2.2.3 Christ Defeats Devil and Hell for the Christian He descended into hell, and on the third day He rose from the dead.157

Having an intimate relationship with Christ was also a main concern in Osiander’s teaching on Christ’s descent to hell and on His resurrection. For Osiander, the importance of the resurrection stemmed to a large extent from Christ’s stay in hell. His sermon on the resurrection continued the previous sermon’s contemplation of Christ’s suffering by instructing the young in the proper contemplation of Christ’s battle and victory in hell, which should offer them a potent cure against worry. When a Christian worries about his sin, it is as if hell opens its jaws to swallow him, Osiander explained, and to hear the words about Christ’s descent to hell is the proper comfort for this worry.158 Still, if the words were to be effective, the youth needed to learn to use them rightly. Osiander recommended the singing of spiritual songs,159 as well as confronting hell with the following statement: “If you now opened your jaws as much as you like against me, you will never be able to catch me, for my Lord Christ descended to hell to remove your power over me.”160 Naturally, on this point Osiander found that a couple of analogies were Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 105, and 106. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 108: “Er ist abgestigen zur Höllen / am dritten tag wider aufferstanden von den Todten.” 158 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 112. 159 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 112: “Wir singen in einem Geistlichen Lied / … Mitten wir im Leben seind / daß vns Gott wöll bewahren vor der Höllen Rachen: / Daß vns auch Gott nicht wöll lassen verzagen / vor der tieffen Höllen Glut: Vnd / daß er vns wölle trösten in der Höllen Angst.” 160 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 112: “Da soll ein Christ bey sich selbs also sagen: Höll / wann du dann gleich deinen Rachen noch so weit gegen mir auff156 Osiander, 157 Osiander,

222

6. Catechism Sermons

in order to help point to the powerful reality hidden in Christ’s descent to hell, and, obviously, also on this point the analogies let political and social conditions enter the sermon’s imagery. With the analogy of the debtors’ prison, Osiander explained how Christ’s journey to defeat hell guarantees that one’s sins are forgiven. In many cities it was customary to have a debtors’ prison where debtors are locked up until they have paid what they owe. If one therefore sees a debtor walking about freely in a city, one may conclude that he has paid his debts and that his creditors are content. Accordingly, since God laid upon Christ all our debts, Christ not only became our guarantor, but also our payer, and was therefore put in the debtors’ prison of hell instead of us. The fact that He has now risen means that He is let out of the debtors’ prison and proves to us that all our debts have been paid.161 According to this analogy, Christ atoned for our sins not only with his passion, but also during His stay in hell. Contemplation on this stay should help the young believe in the forgiveness of their sins. However, since one is forbidden to speculate about the details of Christ’s stay in hell, one may not contemplate it as such. Instead, the youth should contemplate Christ’s resurrection as a sign of His atonement in hell assuring them that their debts have been paid. This should help free them from worry, and as a related exercise, Osiander therefore recommended the singing of Easter songs.162 Again, the prescribed spiritual activity was connected to the social world of the youth. The certainty of an invisible fact, forgiveness, was tied to a visible reality sperrtest / so kanst du mich dannoch nicht erschnappen / dann mein HERR Christus ist darumb abgestigen zur Höllen / daß er dir deinen Gewalt neme / vnd du kein anspruch an mich habest.” 161 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 113–114: “Nemet ein Gleichnus / liebe Kinder: In ettlichen Stätten hat es den Gebrauch / wann einer viel schuldig würdt / und kan solches nicht bezahlen / so legt man jhn in einen Thurn / der würdt ein Schuldtthurn genannt / darauß laßt man jn nicht kommen / biß daß die jenigen / denen er schuldig ist / bezahlt oder befridiget seind. Wann man nun ein solchen gefangnen Man widerumb auß dem Schuldtthurn ledig laßt / daß er darff frey vngescheucht in der Statt wandlen vnd handlen / wie er will / so schließt man recht darauß / daß seine Schulden bezahlt / vnd seine Gläubiger befridiget seien. Nun hat der Himmelisch Vatter alle vnsere Sünden vnd Geistliche Schulden auff unsern HErrn Christum gelegt / daß er dieselbige hat sollen bezahlen. Darumb er auch würdt genennet das Lamb Gottes / das der gantzen Welt Sünden trägt / wie im Euangelio Johannis am ersten Capitel … geschrieben stehet. Dann der HErr warff all vnser Sünd auff jhn / wie der Prophet Esaias am drey vnd fünffzigsten Capitel von jhm bezeuget. Vnd ist also vnser Heiland Christus für alle vnsere Sünden / nicht allein Bürg / sondern auch Bezahler worden. Darumb ist er auch von vnsert wegen in den Schuldtthurn des Tods gelegt worden: Dieweil er frembde Schulden / nämlich / vnsere Sünden zubezahlen / auff sich genommen hat. Dieweil nun der Himmelisch Vatter diesen seinen lieben Sohn hat auß dem Schuldtthurn des Tods widerumb außgelassen: Ja er hat jhn selbs auß diesem Thurn herauß geführet: Dann Christus ist vom Tod erweckt / durch die Herrligkeit des Vatters / wie Paulus bezeuget: So ist es ja gewiß / daß alle vnsere Sünden vnd Geistliche Schulden dem Allmächtigen Gott volkommenlich bezahlt seind.” 162  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 115: “Darumb singen wir in vnserm Christlichen Ostergesang: Es war ein wunderlicher Krieg / da Tod und Leben rungen. Das Leben behielt den Sieg / es hat den Tod verschlungen.”

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

223

which the youth probably knew well. In cities where prisons for debtors existed, and where one could meet both debtors and creditors in the streets, the poor debtors resembled sinners and the wealthy creditors the just God. An allegory of a pious sovereign fighting a cruel tyrant explained further how Christ’s resurrection was linked to His descent to hell. If a sovereign rides out with his army to counter a tyrant’s awaited assault on his city and defeats his enemy, but does not ride back to celebrate the victory with his people, the people will not be aware of the victory and have no reason to be glad. If, on the other hand, he comes back in triumph, his people will cheer and be jubilant. In the same way we would have had no comfort if Christ had not risen after His defeat of the devil, Osiander explained. Since Christ has risen as a proof of His victory, however, Osiander encouraged the young to rejoice.163 Perhaps this allegory also evoked the imagery that had been used in earlier sermons, and which pointed to political realities in the youths’ surroundings. The pious ruler could resemble a Protestant duke or the Christian emperor, and the evil tyrant could be associated with Turkish rule, as Osiander had described it in a sermon some weeks earlier.164 An instruction that operationalized this comfort to disarm the fear of the devil accompanied the learning of this part of the Creed. Christians should, boldly and without fear, face the evil enemy, who may still appear awful and terrible, knowing that after Christ’s victory in hell, he can no longer cause real harm.165 After Christ’s victory, the devil’s force may still be felt, but since he can no longer 163 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 116: “Nemet ein Gleichnus / liebe Kinder / wann ein grewlicher Tyrann wolte einem frommen Fürsten in sein Land mit Heers Krafft fallen / vnd wölt jhm seine Vnderthonen in Grund verderben: Der fromb Fürst aber zöge auß wider denselbigen Feind / sein Vnderthonen zuschützen vnd zuschirmen / vnd thete zwar ein Schlacht mit dem Feind / käme aber nicht wider heim / also / daß man nicht wissen möchte / ob er den Feind geschlagen hette / oder ob er von dem Feind wer geschlagen vnd vberwunden worden / so hetten sich ja solche Vnderthonen desselben Kriegs wenig zuerfrewen. Wann aber jhr Landsfürst widerumb käm / mit herrlichem Sieg vnd Ehren / so wurden sich alle seine Vnderthonen hertzlich darüber erfrewen / jubilieren vnd frölich sein: Also / liebe kinder / wann vnser lieber HErr Christus (da er mit dem Teuffel gekämpfft vnd gekriegt hat / für vnsere ewige Seligkeit) nicht wer vom Tod erstanden / so hetten wir vns seines kampffs / wider den Teuffel / nicht zutrösten gehabt. Nun er aber von den Todten erstanden / vnd widerumb lebendig vnd frölich / von dem kampff wider den Teuffel / ist herfür kommen / so haben wir vns seiner Aufferstehung zum höchsten zuerfrewen. Dann wir wissen / daß vnser Todfeind / der Teuffel / durch Christum geschlagen / vnd vberwunden ist / daß er vns kein Schaden an vnserer Seelen zufügen kan. Darumb sollen wir auch den Teuffel nicht fürchten.” 164 Cf. Chapter 6.1. 165 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 117: “Vnd wann gleich der böß Feind  / einen Christenmenschen  / in grewlicher gestalt erschiene  / so grewlich vnd schrecklich / als man jhn nimmermehr mahlen oder erdencken kan / so soll sich dannoch ein Christi nicht vor jhm fürchten / sonder jm den trutz bieten: Dann der HERr Christus hat jn vberwunden … Dann wann wir an den HERRN Christum / … / glauben / so seind wir vor Gott gerecht / vnd hat der Teuffel kein macht vber vns / so lang wir in solchem Glauben an Christum verharren.”

224

6. Catechism Sermons

reach his goal, he will not win in the end and therefore has no real power over a Christian. The emphasis on Christ’s descent to hell and His resurrection present in Osiander’s sermons was quite absent in Luther’s sermons on the second article of faith. In Luther’s sermons, Jesus’ conception, birth, and death, and his status as lord, were presented to the young as important knowledge, but not His descent to hell, nor His resurrection. It seems that all the important things that Jesus accomplished as the Son of God, including the atonement for sin and overcoming of death, in Luther’s sermons result from Christ’s death. Osiander gave little direct information regarding what took place when Christ had descended into hell, but the way he explained it and the way he presented Christ’s resurrection as referring to it166 still supplied his listeners with a relatively comprehensive description.167 It showed them that the Christ they gained an intimate relationship with through the proper spiritual life was their lord not only by the death He suffered, but also by His victory in the battle with sin and evil in hell. In this way Osiander tied individual religious experience to the cosmic events of Jesus’ victory over devil and death and presented Jesus boldly as the ruler of the world. Luther’s explanation on the same article depicted less vividly the cosmic aspect of these events and saw them as having taken place with Christ’s death and not with his descent to hell or His resurrection. Neither did Luther explain how these events were tied to individual religious experience. In Luther’s thought, such an explanation occurred first in his explanation of the sacraments. His explanation of baptism, which take up more space than his entire explanation of the Creed, is the only place where the word “resurrection” is to be found in Luther’s series of catechism sermons. The act of being immersed into and retrieved from the baptismal water signifies baptism’s two powers and operations, namely penance and mortification on the one hand, and resurrection and new life on the other.168 Accordingly, as previously shown in the section on baptism, a Christian should relive his baptism, and thereby also Christ’s victory over sin and death, as a lifelong practice of repentance. Instead of showing his audience how a believer is tied to the ruler of the world, as Osiander did, Luther showed them how they should unite with the saviour in their struggle with sin and death.

Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 112.  Therefore, even though his polemics against papal teaching on Christ’s descent to hell, criticizing them for speculating beyond Scripture might have been effective in warning the youth about the Catholic religion, it fails to convince the critical reader. See Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 110. 168 WA 30/1, 21. See quote in n. 82. 166 Osiander, 167

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

225

6.2.2.4 Jesus as a Present Force: Christ’s Ascension He ascended into heaven and sits on God’s, His almighty Father’s right hand.169

On this point, Osiander differs from Luther in a way that is characteristic for his catechetical concept and for his role as catechist in Esslingen. While Luther did not mention Christ’s ascension in his catechism sermons, since he regarded it a theme that lay beyond the limits of a simple catechetical explanation for the youth and simple folks and instead referred it to the regular sermons held throughout a year,170 Osiander held the opposite view. He saw it as vital knowledge which the youth needed to know thoroughly if they were to experience Christ correctly, for it explained the nature of Christ’s presence in the world. Though Luther refrained from explaining the theme in his catechism sermons, he himself was the reason for the theme’s great significance in later Lutheran theology. In his dispute with Zwingli in 1528, he had discussed the true understanding of Christ’s ascension in an argument in favour of Christ’s bodily presence in the Eucharistic elements.171 To be able to argue that Christ could be present on the Father’s right hand in heaven and in the elements of the Eucharist, Luther had had to point out how He could be bodily present in several places at the same time. The reason was Christ’s ubiquity, a quality of His being which meant that He was not restricted by categories of space. According to Luther, this quality was not restricted to Christ’s divine nature, but also applied to His human nature. The reason for this was the way Christ’s two natures related to each other. They were inseparable, and Christ’s divine nature could be nowhere without His human nature. It was this idea which Lutherans described with the concept communica­ tio idiomatum, and which stated that the natures of Christ were inseparable and reciprocally communicating their qualities.172 Though the concepts of ubiquity and communicatio idiomatum were neither mentioned nor referred to in Luther’s catechism sermons, and though the relationship of Christ’s two natures to each other was not explained, the intention behind his Christological argument may still be traced in his catechism sermons. His teaching on the Eucharist contains an implicit explanation of how Christ’s  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 119: “Er ist auffgefahren in die Himmel / da sitzt er zu der Gerechten Gottes / seines Allmächtigen Vatters.” 170 WA 30/1, 45: “Die stucke sol man wol predigen, sed das gehort ynn die Jarpredigt, Quomo­ do Christus mortuus, resurrexit &c. quid valeat eius sessio ad dexteram patris. Ideo iam manemus in instructione simplicissima pro pueris et rudi familia …” 171 Luther’s Vom Abendmahl Christi: Bekenntnis (1528), in WA 26, 261–509; Haga, Was There a Lutheran Metaphysics?, 21–88; Brandy, “Brenz’ Christologie und ihre von Jakob Andreae vertretene Form: Das Maulbronner Kolloquium 1564”, 59–68; and Jörg Baur, “Johannes Brenz: Ein schwäbischer Meisterdenker auf den Spuren Luthers”, Blätter für württembergische Kirchen­ geschichte 100 (2000): 38–55, especially 49. 172 Luther’s Vom Abendmahl Christi: Bekenntnis (1528), in WA 26, 261–509; and Thomas Kaufmann, “Abendmahl 3: Reformation”, in RGG4 1, 26. 169

226

6. Catechism Sermons

existence in heaven was related to His presence on earth. It describes how Christ after His death is primarily experienced in His corporeal presence in the Eucharist as the crucified Lord who saves with His body and blood.173 For Osiander the concept of communicatio idiomatum and the doctrine of the ubiquity of Christ’s human nature held great significance for concrete church practice. In his view, the dispute with superintendent Hermann in Esslingen had in reality been over this article. When he had discovered a formulation in Hermann’s explanation in the catechism describing the Eucharistic elements as nourishment for the soul, he had seen it as a sign of a concealed Calvinism. He had suspected that these were traces of the city’s Calvinist catechetical traditions, as they had been expressed in superintendent Jakob Otther’s catechism. In his effort to strengthen Lutheran teaching in the city, Osiander saw it as his calling to root out all such traces of Calvinist teaching. Still, though he had exposed these traces of Calvinism in an explanation of the Eucharist, it was not sufficient for Osiander to treat the theme as part of the explanation of the Eucharist as Luther once had done. This seems to have been an attitude which Osiander shared with his fellow elite theologians in Württemberg. During his service as court preacher in Stuttgart, he had been involved in conflicts over this article, and the way he argued in these conflicts shows how the correct knowledge of this article, in his view, should be discussed in its own right in order to be able to defend the true understanding of the Eucharist. In 1577, while the city of Strasbourg was in the process of turning to Lutheranism from Reformed doctrine and practice, Osiander was sent by Duke Ludwig to the city to ask the city council to sign the Formula of Concord. Though the majority of preachers were sympathetic to the proposal, members of the council were more skeptical, since they wanted to preserve good relations not only with neighbouring Württemberg, but also with their Reformed neighbours in the Pfalz. They knew that the Formula of Concord, with its clear formulations, would make it impossible for them to balance the two different positions. In the discussions that arose from this situation involving Württemberg’s pressure to include the city in a clear Lutheran bloc and the council’s wish to maintain religious compromise, Osiander engaged in a heated discussion that was expressed in the publication of pamphlets from both sides.174 Osiander attacked those who regarded the Formula of Concord as redundant clarifications of Lutheran doctrine, and especially those who regarded the doctrine of communicatio idiomatum as a novelty. He claimed the doctrine had been promoted by Luther himself and by the great men in Wittenberg in their struggle 173  WA 30/1, 23–24, and 27. See also the previous section 6.2.2.2 on “The Passion of Christ: Entering in the Right Relationship with Christ.” 174  Irene Dingel, Concordia controversa: Die öffentlichen Diskussionen um das lutherische Konkordienwerk am Ende des 16. Jahrhunderts, Quellen und Forschungen zur Reformationsgeschichte 63 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1996), 48–54.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

227

with the Zwinglians, and that it was exactly the doctrine’s ability to highlight Calvinist and Lutheran disagreement that was its great advantage. Osiander saw that the true understanding of the Eucharist was linked with the true understanding of Christology and therefore had to be confirmed by a clear Christology. Those who claimed that the Eucharistic elements are merely bread and wine also rejected Christ’s omnipotence because they did not credit Christ’s human nature with any divine effect. He maintained the necessity of a proper teaching of Christ’s majesty, an explicit explanation of the doctrine of communicatio idiomatum, and of the omnipresence of Christ’s human nature for a Lutheran understanding of the Eucharist, in contrast to a Reformed understanding.175 Osiander’s colleague Jacob Andreae was also involved in the diplomatic effort to secure support for the Formula of Concord, and he also emphasized the implications for Christian teaching of the doctrine of communicatio idiomatum. He regarded it as customary among Calvinists to deceive Lutherans into believing they agreed with them. This posed the threat of heresy spreading among Lutherans in a way that could cause the condemnation of many and it made necessary a Lutheran doctrine that could help open peoples’ eyes to the decisive questions of faith, especially the right understanding of the sacrament, Christology, and predestination.176 Since faith necessarily includes knowledge of its object, the true understanding of Christology must be regarded as necessary for salvation, Andreae claimed.177 The background for this great emphasis on a certain form of Christology was the theological development which Lutherans had been forced to undertake by their controversies with Zwinglian and Jesuit theologians.178 On this point, Württemberg theologians, who were one of the leading forces behind the Formula of Concord, came to hold a special position for their great emphasis on the ubiquity of Christ’s human nature.179 The basis for this theological position had been laid 175  Dingel, Concordia controversa, 56. According to Jörg Baur, Osiander’s design of the pictorial program in the roof of Duke Ludwig’s chapel, depicting the Son in his human figure on the majestic throne in heaven, is an expression of the centrality of this doctrine to Osiander’s thought. Jörg Baur, “Lutherische Christologie”, in Die lutherische Konfessionalisierung in Deutschland: Wissenschaftliches Symposion des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 1988, ed. Hans-Christoph Rublack (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1988), 103. 176 Dingel, Concordia controversa, 76. 177 Jörg Baur, Luther und seine klassischen Erben: Theologische Aufsätze und Forschungen (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1993), 173. 178 Baur, Luther und seine klassischen Erben, 171. 179 Johannes Hund, Das Wort ward Fleisch: Eine systematisch-theologische Untersuchung zur Debatte um die Wittenberger Christologie und Abendmahlslehre in den Jahren 1567 bis 1574, Forschungen zur systematischen und ökumenischen Theologie 114 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006), 110–111. This position and the Württembergians’ use of the concept com­ municatio idiomatum, as presented by Johannes Brenz, were explicitly rejected by Melanchthon. There were many Lutherans in the subsequent generations who would not follow the Württembergian interpretation of the Formula of Concord as expressing their view on communicatio idio­

228

6. Catechism Sermons

by Johannes Brenz. He had developed Luther’s interpretation of the Eucharistic words of institution into a description of how the Creator relates to creation. In Christ, in whom divine and human nature communicated completely, the distance between finite and infinite was overcome. Here, the giving divine nature and the receiving human nature were united in one person so that elevation occurred concurrently with humiliation.180 It is exactly the fact that it is a flesh like ours that resides in heavenly majesty and governs everything and enjoys heavenly bliss that makes our hope firm, Brenz claimed.181 Thus, it was not the idea of Christ’s majesty that was debated, since Lutherans and Calvinists agreed that Christ ruled at God’s right hand. The debate was about how this majesty related to human nature. Lutherans rejected a Calvinist Christology which saw Christ as resembling a king who ruled from a distance through his servants. They regarded a Christ who ruled without being present as one who needed the service of creation and therefore could not offer true comfort. Instead, Lutherans claimed that a Christology which maintained the integrity of Christ and saw Him as both ruling and omnipresent was the true Christology which secured both the literal meaning of the Eucharistic words of institution and a firm comfort for troubled Christians.182 Osiander’s catechism sermon on this part of the Creed may serve as an example of how the Lutheran concept of communicatio idiomatum was operationalized and became part of Christian education in the Württemberg church. Even though experiencing Christ in the Eucharist was also important in Osiander’s thought, his instruction on the ascension had evolved beyond this concern, so that the experience of the ascended Christ had become important in its own right, as something that may guide one’s existence in the world. Christ’s ascension into heaven could offer comfort because it brought the young closer to heaven. In his sermon, Osiander therefore explains how Christ’s ascension was crucial knowledge for the proper experience of God. If the young were to learn to be open to Christ’s presence on earth, Osiander claimed, they should be careful to hold on to the integrity of Christ’s person even after He has ascended into the matum. Thilo Krüger, Empfangene Allmacht: Die Christologie Tilemann Heshusens (1527–1588), Forschungen zur Kirchen‑ und Dogmengeschichte 87 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2004), 57, 163, and 277–278. 180 Jörg Baur, “Johannes Brenz: Ein schwäbischer Meisterdenker auf den Spuren Luthers”, Blätter für württembergische Kirchengeschichte 100 (2000), 49–50; and Hans Christian Brandy, Die späte Christologie des Johannes Brenz, Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 80 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1991), 220. 181 Brandy, Die späte Christologie des Johannes Brenz, 280: “Denn welche Hoffnung wächst uns nicht zu, welche Sache kommt uns nicht zu, wenn wir in gewissem Glauben festhalten, daß eben dieses Fleisch, das von unserem Fleisch genommen ist und mit dem wir behaftet sind, in höchster Majestät sitzt, die Lenkung aller Dinge innehat und alle himmlische Seligkeit genießt?” 182 Krüger, Empfangene Allmacht, 285. See also Haga, Was There a Lutheran Metaphysics?, 115–209, especially 130–156.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

229

heaven, and not divide His divine nature from His human nature.183 When Christ ascended into heaven and triumphed over the evil enemy,184 this marked the end of His earthly ministry.185 The fact that He afterwards became invisible, however, did not mean that He became absent, in the same way as the air is not absent only because it cannot be seen, but rather is closer to us than our clothes.186 Osiander referred to St. Paul’s words that when Christ ascended into heaven He did so in order to fill everything in heaven and earth and be present wherever in the world one may be.187 To feel this presence properly, the young should avoid the misconception that previously prevailed in Esslingen and still did in neighbouring areas, namely that of Zwinglians and Calvinists, who, according to Osiander, claimed that heaven, as the residence of Christ’s human nature, is a place that restricts Christ and lets only His divine nature be present on earth.188 If the young were to be open to Christ’s presence on earth, they had to maintain the integrity of Christ’s two natures even after the ascension.189 Just as Paul had met Christ on the way to Damascus, so the young might also come to meet Christ unexpectedly.190 And when they meet Christ’s body and blood in the Eucharistic elements, the young should trust this to be an encounter with this present Christ.191 Similarly to Christ’s descent to hell, Osiander saw that Christ’s ascension also had parallels on the battlefield. It was like a victory opening up heaven for His believers, as when a great lord takes a city with his army and opens its fortifications to let his people move in. Osiander encouraged the young to rehearse the feeling corresponding to this knowledge by singing a spiritual song for the day of Christ’s ascension.192 Christ’s ascension was not only for comfort, however, but it also secured a true image of God. In a proper understanding of the ascension, Christ was not only seated at the right hand of the Father, but was unified with God’s omnipotence. The young should not think too childishly of this part of the

 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 124. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 122. 185 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 123. 186 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 125. 187 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 123 and 124. Osiander was referring to Ephesians 4:9–10. 188 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 123. 189 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 124–125: “Darumb sollen wir nicht sein Menschheit allein in den Himmel setzen / vnd sein Gottheit allein wöllen bey vns auff Erden haben: Sonder wir sollen vnsern HERrn Chrstum / gantz vnd vnzertrennt / bey vns auff Erden behalten.” 190 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 125. The argument is also repeated in Osiander’s second sermon on the Eucharist. See ibid., 540–554. 191 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 128. 192 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 126: “… Derhalben singen wir in dem Geistlichen Gesang / am tag der Himmelfahrt Christi: Drumb sey Gott lob der weg ist gmacht / vnd steht der Himmel offen.” 183

184 Osiander,

230

6. Catechism Sermons

Creed and imagine an actual chair for Christ in heaven,193 but see it as a metaphor for the great honour Christ receives in heaven and for Christ operating as God’s right hand and doing the work of the omnipotent Father, and then they should know that the experience of God’s omnipotence in the world was also an experience of Christ.194 This insight should help the young relate to both the devil and political realities. It would remind them that it is not with their own power they must defend themselves against the devil, but with Christ’s, for it is Christ who works in this world with enormous powers, and nothing is strong enough to tear them away from the hands of Christ.195 If they were ever to experience living under a terrible tyrant raging against the Holy Gospel, they should remember this part of the Creed and be reminded that there are no tyrants in the world strong enough to stand up against Christ’s power, as history has shown on numerous occasions.196 In this way, the knowledge of Christ’s omnipotence informed the youths’ relationship to the enemies of the Christian empire, and thus Christ’s omnipotence also came to colour the way the enemies of the Empire were to be perceived.197 Though it was derived from a Lutheran understanding of Christ’s ascension, Osiander’s explanation of how the omnipotent Christ relates to tyrants deviated from a traditional Lutheran way of describing how God operates in the world. Instead of referring to God’s two regiments, the Law with which He rules the world and contains evil and the Gospel with which He rules the church and creates faith,198 Osiander referred to the two sceptres of Christ. With the sceptre of mercy He governs His faithful believers, and with the sceptre of just wrath He violently strikes down His enemies.199 Heaven was not only a place that was open to young Christians because Christ had conquered it, but heaven could also be felt as a mighty reality in this world when Christ acted as the Father’s right hand. It has been argued that church authority in early modern Lutheranism could unite with secular authority because of Melanchthon’s interpretation of the ruler’s role as protector of the two tablets of the Law, and that this merging of Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 127. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 128–129. 195 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 129. 196 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 130. 197 Note how the same imagery was employed to establish Christian identity in Osiander’s teaching on baptism. See section 6.1. 198  Martin Luther, Von weltlicher Oberkeit (1523), in WA 11, 245–280. Cf. Eilert Herms, “Zwei-Reiche-Lehre/Zwei-Regimenten-Lehre”, in RGG4 8, 1937. 199  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 130–131: “… hat zweierley Scepter oder Stäb … in seiner Hand. Der ein Scepter ist ein Gnaden Scepter / da er mit seinem Wort vnd Geist / seine glaubige / gehorsame Vnderthonen regieret. Das ander Scepter ist ein eisener Scepter seines gerechten Zorns / mit welchem er seine vnd vnsere Feind gewaltig schlecht / wann es jhn zeit sein gedunckt / daß er sich an jhnen reche.” 193 Osiander,

194 Osiander,

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

231

authorities met both the interests of Protestant authorities unwilling to observe religious limits to their jurisdiction as well as clerical ambitions to form a godly society. It was a merging of authorities that depended on the catechetical teaching of the Ten Commandments.200 Osiander’s teaching on Christ’s ascension shows that Christology could also support cooperation between secular and church authorities. It is evident that Osiander’s way of doing so differed from earlier Lutherans. The pedagogical operation in Osiander’s orthodox Lutheran teaching on Christ’s ascension was different from that of Luther. Luther had also encouraged an experience of the power of the ascended Christ in his catechism sermons, but it was not explicitly explained as such, and it was tied to the experience of the presence of the crucified Christ in the Eucharist. In the explanation of the Eucharist in his second series of catechism sermons, Luther stated that when receiving the Eucharist the believer was not only united with Christ’s body and blood, but also partook in Christ’s own power over sin and the devil.201 Still, since it was restricted to the experience of faith and salvation in the Eucharist, the ascension’s pedagogical function had a more limited scope in Luther’s sermon. In contrast, Osiander gave Christ’s ascension a wider pedagogical function. A dogmatic explanation of how Christ’s ascension was tied to His rule and effective omnipotence in the world was combined with examples employing imagery from the surrounding society in a way that made the learning of this section of the Creed a practice in how the youth should experience the world as Christians. Christ’s presence after the ascension should inform the youths’ view on the tyrants of this world and on the forces that attack the Gospel, since it pointed out which of the forces in the world represented Christ and since it assured that there were no powers strong enough to resist Christ’s power.202 In Osiander’s conception, the ascension’s pedagogical function was primarily to secure the right church practices and a proper understanding of them. His instruction on the ascension also went beyond the practices of the church. Osiander taught about the ascension in a way that allowed faith in Christ to govern how political events and institutions were perceived. For example, those who appeared as opponents of the Gospel would also appear to be justly the object of Christ’s sceptre of wrath. As part of an education for future citizens of a Christian society, the instruction of this doctrinal concept could aid the forming of loyal young citizens. When manifestations of God’s power could be identified from 200 Robert J. Bast, “From Two Kingdoms to Two Tables: The Ten Commandments and the Christian Magistrate”, Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 89 (1998): 79–95. 201 WA 30/1, 56: “Ideo accipienda sunt simplicia verba, quae diabolo contraria sunt, quia erigunt fidem. Hoc ideo dico, ut iuventus discat simplicissime loqui de Sacramento. Panis fit corpus Christi, Et vis, quod corpus stehe fur dich fur Gott, tum habes Sacramentum an yhm selb, wein und brod und seine kraft. Habetis nu alle stucke, die ein einfeltiger mensch wissen solle.” 202 Cf. the parable mentioned above about the pious sovereign in section 6.2.2.3.

232

6. Catechism Sermons

Christ, faith and church gained a role in politics. Faith and church held a critical potential by making the young Christians’ loyalty to the sovereign relative to their faith. The political potential in Osiander’s sermons corresponded with his understanding of his role as preacher. In his introductory sermon, Osiander had ascribed Christ’s role as shepherd for his flock to the catechism taught properly. He had assured the city council that his teaching would strengthen citizens’ and subjects’ resistance towards heresy and prevent them from being easily turned towards competing traditions. Thus, he had placed himself in a central spot between the council and their subjects’ loyalty. With his teaching on Christ’s being, Osiander confirmed this positioning and connected his role as teacher of Christian doctrine to a role as guardian of morals and truth in politics. 6.2.2.5 Christ as Judge „He shall return therefrom to judge the living and the dead“203

Osiander’s teaching on Christ as judge presented Christ as present in the experience of reality.204 Osiander ascribed a similar function to Christ’s judgment as he had to the so-called common faith in his explanation of the first article of the Creed, which held the recognition of the basic principles of justice and coherence in the world to depend on a common faith.205 Here it seems that what was actually needed for such recognition was an acceptance of Christ as judge of the world.206 Though there were those who mocked the idea of Christ’s judgment, Osiander held it to be inevitable, because in reality it was this idea that guaranteed the difference between good and evil in the world and maintained the contrast between piety and viciousness.207 Osiander found the example confirming the importance of Christ as judge in the Bible’s story of King Herod and John the Baptist. According to Jesus Himself, there had never been anyone as pious and just as John. Still, when the immoral spendthrift Herod was provoked by John’s corrective preaching, John ended up in prison so Herod could continue his extravagant way of life. John’s life came to a terrible end when Herod’s harlot wife at a party had her daughter request John’s head on a plate. Herod and his wife, on the other hand, lived on with everything

203 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 133: “Von dannen er kommen würdt / zurichten die Lebendigen vnd die Todten.” 204 This is also a theme that Luther does not mention, but which Osiander finds to be of great significance, enough so as to dedicate two sermons to it. 205 Cf. Chapter 6.1. 206 Thus, the common and obligatory faith described initially may not be a saving faith in itself, but to some extent it depends on a concept that is best understood as part of a saving faith. 207 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 135 and 138.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

233

their hearts could desire.208 It would have been obvious to Osiander’s listeners that this story really could not end where it ended, without absolving morality and the distinction between good and evil, and in this way the story showed that doubting the reality of a final judgment equaled surrendering the world to evil. Since everything happens irrevocably in our world, however, and since no punishment that could have place in time would be sufficient to atone for misdeeds committed, a complete punishment would not allow the world to continue at all, Osiander claimed.209 He therefore maintained that a judgment was both necessary and impossible. The world would be absurd without the idea of a judgment, but also unimaginable with a perfect judgment. Therefore the world had to be connected to judgment in the next world and the final judgment. The duality in Osiander’s presentation of judgment therefore implicitly described Christ as holding this world together. Despite this world’s injustice, Osiander could tie Christ’s judgment to the experience of the world in a way that let the young imagine Christ as a pedagogue encompassing the totality of life and as a heavenly judge who may appear unexpectedly to settle the accounts. It is like when a pious mother or father, who leave their children without saying when he or she may return, but promises them a little reward if they have behaved well and threatens to treat them with the stick if they have behaved badly. In the same manner, Osiander explains, Christ wants to keep the young in fear by not letting them know when He may appear to judge.210 208 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 138–139: “Laßt vns nur betrachten / wie es Johanni dem Täuffer / in dieser Welt ergangen ist. Es ist Johannes von jugent auff in der Wüsten auffgewachsen / vnd hat ein strenges Leben geführet / in essen vnd trincken / wie auch in seiner Kleidung. Vnd da er nach dem dreissigsten Jar seines alters / sein Predigampt angefangen / hat er dasselbig nicht gar zwey Jar lang getrieben / da hat jhn der König Herodes gefäncklich einziehen lassen. Darumb / daß er jhm eingeredt hatte / von wegen dessen / daß der Herodes seinem leiblichen Bruder / dem Philippo / sein Weib / die Herodias hinweg geführt / vnd selbige jhm selbst zum Weib genommen hatte. Nun sagt der HERR Christus selbst vom Johanne / daß unter allen denen / die von Weibern geboren seind / kein grösserer oder heiligerer Mann geweßt sey / dann Johannes der Täuffer. Aber wie ist es dem heiligen Mann ergangen? Alle dieweil Johannes im Gefängnus ligt / so leben der Gottlos König Herodes / vnd sein vnzüchtig Weib Herodias  / sampt jhrer Tochter  / in grossen Frewden. Man helt ein Königlich Malzeit vnd Bancket: Der Herodias Tochter tantzet: Darob der König / vnd die vnzüchtige Herodias grosse frewde gehabt. Eben dazumal / da diese Gottlose Leut mit einander in grossen weltlichen Frewden leben  / so würdt dem frommen heiligen Mann  / Johanni  / auß Befelch des Königs Herodis / in der Gefängnus der Kopff abgehawen. Vnd hat also der fromme vnd heilige Mann / in dieser Welt wenig guter tag gehabt. Aber der Tyrann Herodes / vnd sein Hürisch Weib / die Herodias / haben in dieser Welt gehabt / ein gute lange zeit / was jhr Hertz gelüstet vnd begeret hat. Darumb muß ja ein jüngstes und allgemeines Gericht / durch unsern HERRN Christum gehalten werden / in welchem dem frommen Mann Johanni / sein Gottseligkeit / dem Gottlosen Tyrannen Herodi aber / vnd seinem verhurten Weib / der Herodias / jhr Boßheit bezahlt werde.” 209 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 140. 210 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 140: “Gleich als wann ein frommer Vatter / oder Mutter / von seinen Kindern gehet / vnd sagt jhnen nicht / wie bald er wider kommen wölle / sonder spricht: Liebe Kinder / seid fromm / biß ich wider komm / wann

234

6. Catechism Sermons

The youth should therefore be open to Christ’s presence as judge in a way that permits them to experience events in life as part of Christ’s work as a judge. This openness should be exercised by awaiting His judgment with joy, which meant always letting faith be seen in good works and always be found in a pure life, which was best exercised in faithfulness to one’s vocation.211 When Luther refrained from commenting on this part of the Creed, the reason might be that the same concerns were met by his instruction on the Ten Commandments. One could say that in Luther’s framework, it is in the Commandments that God appears as judge. Here He meets humans with His demands and maintains the difference between right and wrong. He even operates as judge through His demands by tying to them the threat and promise of blessing or curse. This different way of describing the divine judgment had significant consequences for Christ’s role as pedagogue, as will be shown in the next section. 6.2.2.6 Concluding Remarks: Christ as Pedagogue The different extensions of the two catechists’ explanations of the second article of faith accentuate their different literary styles. Luther’s style is dense and terse and focused on theological issues, whereas Osiander’s style is pictorial and rich. In addition to the difference in form, the catechists also stated their intentions differently. Luther wanted the second article to explain to the youth who God is, the God who has given them the Ten Commandments, and why He may be called God and Lord, whereas Osiander set out to paint a picture of Christ to let the young experience Him as an important reality in life,212 in accordance with ich wider komme / vnd jhr fromm gewesen seind / so will ich euch ein Löhnlin geben: Wann jhr aber euch vbel gehalten habt / so würdt ich die Ruten in die Hand nemen. Also will auch vnser HERR Christus vns in der forcht halten / daß wir nicht wissen sollen / wann er kommen werd / auff daß wir immerdar in der Gottseligkeit verharren.” Judgment will not necessarily wait until the final day, but may also appear in time, as many biblical persons had had to experience, such as the kings Saul and David, the godless opponents of the prophet Daniel, and the people of Israel on numerous occasions. Ibid., 140–141. 211 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 157–158: “Damit wir auch den Jüngsten tag / vnd das letst Gericht / mit frewden erwarten / so gehört hierzu / daß wir ein vnsträfflichs / Christlichs Leben führen / auff daß vns der HErr Christus in seiner herrlichen Zukunfft / als getrewe vnd fromme Knecht / erfind / die in jhrem Ampt vnd Christlichen Beruff fleissig seien … Darumb wann ein Christ durch sein eigen verderbt Fleisch / oder durch die böse Welt / oder durch des Teuffels eingeben / zu Sünden vnd Lastern gereitzt würdt / so soll er jhm diese Gedancken machen: Sihe / wann du jetzt dem bösen anreitzen zur Sünden folgtest / vnd der Jüngste tag ergriff dich in deinen Sünden / wo würdest du hinfahren? freilich nicht in den Himmel / sondern in das Höllisch Fewr … Wann nun ein Christ den rechten Glauben an Christum hat / die Brüderliche Liebe an seinem Nächsten erzeiget / und sich eines Gottseligen Lebens befleisset / so darff er vor dem Jüngsten tag nicht erschrecken: Dann er ist alle tag und stund zu demselbigen jüngsten Gericht wol bereittet vnd geschickt.” 212 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 74: “vnd soll billich ein Christ auch notwendig wissen / was er von dem Sohn Gottes glauben soll. Wir haben aber in

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

235

the goal he presented in his introductory catechism sermon, namely to let the catechetical teaching be experienced as having Christ as shepherd. The two catechists pursued these intentions with different pedagogical techniques. Luther gave few instructions for how the young should make use of the Creed, aside from his references to it as an aid for better relating to and understanding the Ten Commandments. Osiander’s sermons have many references to religious practice. His preaching is explicitly linked to the practice of recitation and aims to couple it with an imaginative understanding. He gave his audience instructions for how to imagine the reality behind the words while reciting and for how to involve their hearts when they say the Creed’s formula with their mouths, in order to connect to this reality.213 These different pedagogical strategies placed Christ within different relations. In Luther’s sermons, Christ was placed in relation to three other actors, namely God the Father, the Commandments, and the believer. The Son’s work as Lord is to place the believer in the right relationship with the Father, who is the God of the Commandments. He does this by giving the believer a part in His atonement for sin and His victory over the devil and death which was won with His death. When Luther saw little need to argue for the relevance of Christ, it was probably because it was evident already in his catechetical conception and from the relationship he placed Christ within. The reality and seriousness of God’s demands in the Commandments were maintained throughout his sermons, and together with the constant presence of sin and the devil, they made the relevance of Christ obvious. When Luther was not too concerned to enhance the youths’ sensitivity for the passion of Christ, it might be because he had already taught them the Commandments and expected that they already longed to hear about Christ’s death and His fulfilment of the Law which they could not fulfil for themselves.214 This relevance was passed on with relatively plain information about concrete instances in the lives of the young, namely the Commandments and the Sacraments. It was in connection to these instances that Luther explained the experience of Christ’s presence. Correspondingly, this presence appeared as concrete and restricted to a few things. vnserm Christlichen Glauben ettliche Artickel / von diesem Sohn Gottes / an welchen allen / zu vnserer seligkeit / vns zum höchsten gelegen ist.” 213 A preliminary exercise is that the young should say silently in their heart that they believe and trust Jesus Christ, and do so at least as often as they recite this part of the Creed. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 74. 214 Susan Karant-Nunn claims Lutherans chose a middle way between Catholics and Calvinists in the way they encourage empathy with Christ’s passion in their sermons and that it became increasingly important towards the seventeenth century as a means to promote penance. Susan Karant-Nunn, The Reformation of Feeling: Shaping the Religious Emotions in Early Modern Germany (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 98–99. See especially Chapters 2 and 8.

236

6. Catechism Sermons

In Osiander’s sermons, Christ was primarily placed in a relationship of two, namely Christ and the believer, but this was an expansive duality that potentially comprises even more than the Christian community. It was an image of Christ that embraced the image of God the Father, and the description of His presence involved a rich description of reality, implicitly including social and political conditions by his rhetorical technique of explaining dogmatic themes with phenomena that resembled the society that surrounded Osiander’s young audience.215 Perhaps this ambitious description of Christ as encompassing life and society also called for a more ambitious and elaborate sermon rhetoric. Osiander’s teaching on Christ employed another pedagogical strategy and different techniques to enhance empathy. These techniques were connected to a wider range of religious practices, not primarily to Eucharist and penance, but to a greater extent to imagination, recitation, and singing. Plain information was not the primary focus in this strategy, but rather to impart images and stories to be accompanied by the proper feelings. It might have been the wider scope of Osiander’s teaching on Christ that called for such techniques. Luther identified Christ’s presence in a few practices and objects, while Osiander’s ambition was to describe Christ as being invisibly present in everything that takes place: as saviour and intimate friend for the believer and at the same time as ruler and judge of the world. 6.2.3 To Believe in the Spirit I believe in the Holy Spirit.216

In their teaching on the Holy Spirit, the two catechists also followed different strategies. While Osiander’s sermons set out to teach the young about the Spirit’s character, Luther’s sermons refrained from describing the Spirit in itself. Instead they focused on what the Spirit does. In the last of his sermons on the Spirit, Luther came closest to a definition when he explained the word “spirit” by pointing out that there are different sorts of spirit including a human spirit, an evil spirit, and the Holy Spirit. Still, when Luther described the Holy Spirit further, he returned to an explanation of what it does. It is a Holy Spirit because it makes people holy,217 and it does so through the institutions and practices of the church. The other sermons followed the same strategy and described the Spirit exclusively by what it does. It sustains and governs the church and gives the forgiveness of sins earned by Christ.218 In this way it was the concrete phenomena and activities of the church that described the Spirit in Luther’s sermon.  Cf. section 6.2.2.1 and its explanation of the parable about the Turkish lord. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 159: “Ich glaub in den heiligen Geist.” This is from the fourteenth catechism sermon. 217 WA 30/1, 91. 218 WA 30/1, 10 and 45. 215

216 Osiander,

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

237

Even though he admitted that the Spirit is not easily described, Osiander, for his part, was not afraid to describe the Spirit in Himself. The Spirit resembles the wind and the air and is an invisible and present force of infinite power which sustains creation.219 This explanation was extended with illustrations of how this abstract force may be experienced. While keeping in mind the Spirit’s vague outline, Osiander encouraged the young to envision how the Spirit makes Himself felt as a faithful friend, a physician, and a good and honest man. When the Spirit brings home to us what the Father has given and the Son deserved, He is like a faithful friend who one meets when having been given a valuable treasure, and who offers to help transport the treasure home so that one may enjoy it and make use of it as one pleases. When He installed preachers to open hearts and make believers who could have a part in salvation, the Spirit was equally faithful as this friend, Osiander explained.220 As someone who renews the hearts of the believers and lets them strive for piety and justice, the Spirit resembles a caring physician who helps the sick heal and gain strength in the way He strengthens believers and makes them more resistant to sin.221 The third image described the Spirit as resembling an honest man who sees a wanderer lost on a trail in a foreign forest and leads the wanderer to the open country road, in the same way the Spirit leads us on to the road of the Christian catechism which is the plain road to eternal life.222  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 162 and 163. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 164: “Was vns der Himmelisch Vatter auß Gnaden schencket zu vnserer ewigen Seligkeit: Vnd was vns sein lieber Sohn Jesus Christus verdient hat / das bringt vns Gott der heilig Geist gleichsam zu Hause / daß es vnser eigen würdt / vnd wir desselben ewiglich geniessen mögen. Gleich als wann einem Menschen ein grosser Schatz von Silber / Gold / vnd edlen Gesteinen in einem frembden Land geschenckt würde: Vnd es wer ein guter / frommer / redlicher Man vorhanden / der zu jhm spreche: Ich will dir diesen grossen Schatz in dein Hauß sicher lifern / daß du dessen geniessen / vnd nach deinem wolgefallen zu deinem nutzen gebrauchen mögest. So trewlich handlet an vns der heilig Geist / der hat das heilig Predigampt geordnet vnd angerichtet. Wann man vns dann von Christo prediget / so thut der heilig Geist vnsere Hertzen auff / daß wir der Predigt von Christo glauben / vnd durch denselben Glauben gerecht vnd selig werden.” 221 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 165–166: “… sonder er vernewert vns auch / vnd verendert vnsere hertzen / daß wir der Frombkeit vnd Gerechtigkeit hold werden / vnd derselben vns befleissen: … vernewert im heiligen Tauff vnsere hertzen. Vnd heilet vns also der heilig Geist / von der Kranckheit der Sünden. Dann wann wir gleich durch den Glauben vom ewigen Tod erlöset vnd errettet werden / so seind wir doch darumb noch nicht gar allerdings gesund / an vnserer Seelen: Sonder wir haben noch viel grosse Schwachheit vnd Gebrechligkeiten an vns. Gleich als wann ein mensch mit der Pestilentz angriffen vnd vergifftet ist worden: vnd man jhm ein köstlich Artzney gibt / daß er desselbigen Legers nicht sterben darff: so ist er gleichwol genesen / er ist aber darumb noch nicht gar gesundt / sonder muß ettwo noch lang des Beths hüten: Vnd hatt ein getrewer Artzt noch eine gute zeit an jhm zuheilen / biß er allerdings widerumb frisch vnd gesund würdt. Also heilet auch der heilig Geist täglich an uns / daß wir in dem newen Gottseligen Leben / je lenger je stärcker werden / vnd der Sünden / die noch in vns ist / je lenger je stärckern widerstandt thun.” 222 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 167 (Osiander refers to John 16): “Der Geist der Warheit würdt euch in alle Warheit leitten. Darumb thut der heilig Geist 219

220 Osiander,

238

6. Catechism Sermons

Though Osiander’s first and third image of the Spirit tied His activity to church practice in a similar manner as Luther did, they also differed from Luther’s conception in pointing to an experience of the Spirit in itself. This aspect was further emphasized with a fourth image. Osiander connected the images of the Spirit to instructions for how the youth should relate to the Spirit. These instructions resembled the rules for a good host and involved an image of the Spirit as an unexpected and foreign, but good and benevolent guest. As a faithful friend, a caring doctor and an honest man, the Spirit is a noble guest whom the young should make sure not to resist, insult, provoke, or chase away. Grave sins would, as an example, offend the Spirit, who is like a noble and righteous man. The exercises in openness towards the Spirit also emphasized the seriousness of sin, for sins may chase away the Spirit and instead leave the mind open to the evil spirit. The Spirit is also a guest who makes a good host, however, since His presence keeps the young away from vices and sins and comforts and sustains them with examples of holy men and helps them overcome scruples and tribulations.223 Hence, if the youth lived righteously and appear as good hosts of the Spirit, it was a sign that they really have a noble guest. In their own behaviour they could see signs of a divine presence in their souls. Although Luther’s sermons refrained from describing the Spirit in himself, he instead connected the experience of the Spirit to the church and its expressions. One gets the impression that Luther’s aim in doing so was not primarily to promote church practice as a spiritual experience, but rather to link the institutions and expressions of the church to the act of God, so that they could function as a concrete and external anchor of faith. In contrast, Osiander’s willingness to describe the Spirit let the Spirit appear as someone the youth could have a relationship with and experience. The Holy Spirit resembled the three different men described, but He was also different from each one of them. The Spirit’s invisible and super sensual character was important in Osiander’s sermons because it was exactly in this form that the Spirit may be experienced. The young could do so in concretely describable church practice, but not only there. Even though the Spirit an vns so trewlich / als wann ettwo ein Wandersman / in einer vnbekannten Landtsart / in einem Wald jrre gieng / vnd von der Landstraß auff ein Holtzweg gerhiet. Vnd aber ein guter ehrlicher Man sehe / daß er jrrete / vnd wiese jn widerumb ab / von dem Holtzweg / auff die rechte Landstrassen: Also weiset vns auch der heilig Geist / durch Gottes wort / von dem Holtzweg / auff die rechte Landstraß unsers Christlichen Catechismi / damit wir nicht des rechten wegs zum ewigen Leben verfehlen.” 223  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 169–170: “Darumb liebe Kinder / weil wir so grosse gutthaten von Gott dem H. Geist empfangen …: so sollen wir vns ja fleissig hüten / daß wir diesen werthen vnd edlen Gast nicht mit fürsetzlichen mutwilligen / vnd schweren Sünden / beleidigen / erzürnen / vnd außtreiben. Dann wann wir denselbigen von vns triben / so würde dagegen der böß Geist / die Herberg unsers hertzens einnemen / vnd würde nicht nachlassen / biß er vns an Leib vnd Seel / zeitlich vnd ewig verderbte / daruor vns der liebe Gott gnädiglich behüten wölle.”

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

239

was tied to church institutions and expressions in Osiander’s conception, he was not defined by them. Osiander promoted the Spirit’s invisibility with images that were absent in Luther’s sermons, but which let the Spirit appear as alive and real exactly as an invisible, but present force. 6.2.3.1 The Spirit and the Church One holy Christian church, the communion of saints.224

More than describing the Spirit and the church, Luther’s sermons describe the Spirit in the church. The Spirit is described by what He does in the church. He gives forgiveness of sin through baptism, preaching, absolution, and comfort. When the Spirit is not described without the church and the church not without the Spirit, there is correspondingly no description of a relationship between Spirit and church.225 Like Luther, Osiander also saw the church as the primary place for experiencing the Spirit, but his framework, in which the Spirit was described as an invisible character, allowed for, and even required, a description of the relationship between Spirit and church. This resulted in a slightly different accentuation in his description of the church. He encouraged the youth to envision the basic relationship of the Spirit to the church as similar to that of a captain’s relationship to his army. In the same way an army captain summons soldiers for an army to fight the Turks, the obvious arch-enemies of Christendom, the Spirit summons soldiers, but spiritual ones, to fight against the devil and the evil world as well as their own flesh, with the goal of winning a crown of heavenly glory. It is this little army that makes up the holy Christian church, Osiander explains.226 The army captain was a good illustration of the Spirit, because he had such an obviously just cause, namely to protect Christian society from its worst threat. The Spirit’s fight was different from the captain’s, however, since it was not fought against external threats to the land’s borders, but against the evil that also exists within the land and even within one’s own flesh. The two fights had different goals, respectively a land and a heavenly crown. As has already been pointed out in a previous section, many of Osiander’s images employed concrete realities to 224 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 171: “Ein heilige Christliche Kirchen / die Gemeinschafft der Heiligen.” 225 WA 30/1, 92 and 45. 226 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 172: “… das ist  /ein solches Christlichs Volck / welches mit Gott vnd allen H. Engeln / soll in ewiger frewd vnd herrligkeit leben. Gleich als wann ein Hauptman läßt vmbschlagen / daß er Kriegsleut möcht bekommen / welche wider den Erbfeind des Christlichen Namens (den Türcken) sollen streitten. Also sammlet vnd schreibt der H. Geist / durch das Predigampt / geistliche Kriegsleut / welche sollen wider den Teuffel / wider die böse Welt / vnd wider jr eigen verderbt Fleisch kämpffen / auff daß sie die Kron der himmlischen ewigen Herrligkeit erlangen. Vnd dieses häufflin des Volcks Gottes / würdt genennt ein heilige Christliche Kirch.”

240

6. Catechism Sermons

explain an abstract content of faith, and they did so in a way that let the concrete and abstract fluctuate between example and referent. Not only are the abstract truths of faith strengthened by the concrete example, but the opposite also takes place, namely that the concrete reality is confirmed and strengthened because it resembles the truths of faith which it exemplifies. In this example, however, the army captain’s fight was not merely a metaphor for the Spirit’s fight. There are also thematic links between the two which would have been recognized as real. Since the good Christian society which the army captain protects from external threats is one where one may live in a way that connects to a heavenly existence, there is also a logical connection between the two fights. The army captain fighting the Turks not only exemplifies the fight led by the Spirit, but implicitly his fight is also connected to it as a fight that is necessary for a Christian society to exist and that secures the existence of the church. Osiander continued from describing the Spirit as ruler and protector to describing the church as a city and to comparing church membership with being a citizen in a city where one enjoys rights and goods and liberties.227 As the community of the saints, the church resembled a city. The church was in fact a real city, namely the heavenly Jerusalem, but it was a city located in the hereafter, even though citizenship was experienced in the youths’ social context. The city of the heavenly Jerusalem was described as stretching into this world as a holy church and this holiness as a reality that may be described in two ways. It is holy because the Spirit resides in its members, making them love and long for justice and holiness, but also because of the justice and holiness that is ascribed to the members.228 This ascribed identity resembled citizenship. If a citizen of an ordinary city has committed a crime, Osiander explained, city authorities will revoke his honour and forbid his participation in honest associations and not allow him in the proximity of wherever good and honest men are gathered. If he stays honest for a while, however, the authorities may pardon him and make him good and fair again. He may then be regarded as honest as anyone, and nobody will any longer be allowed to point out his former shame.229 In the same way, Osiander 227 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 184: “In summa / die rechten Christen seind alle mit einander Bürger in dem himmlischen Jerusalem / das ist / in der heiligen Christlichen Kirchen / welche ist gleich als wie ein grosse herrliche vnd heilige Statt Gottes: in welcher die himmlische Bürger aller himmlischen Güter vnd Freyheiten genüssen. Vnd das heißt die Gemeinschafft der Heiligen.” 228 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 180 and 179. 229 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 179–180: “Vnd ist eben ein ding mit dieser zugerechneten Heiligkeit vnd Gerechtigkeit / als wann ettwa einer sich grob vbersehen hat / daß er umb seiner Missethat willen / durch sein Obrigkeit seiner Ehren entsetzt würdt / vnd man verbeut jhm ehrliche Geselschafften / daß er nicht stehen darff / wo zwey oder drey ehrliche Biderleut bey einander stehen. Aber doch / wann er sich ein gute zeitlang ehrlich vnd redlich helt / so kan jhn sein Obrigkeit begnaden / vnd jhn wider gut vnd redlich machen / daß er widerumb so gut gehalten würdt / als ein anderer ehrlicher Biderman / vnd darff jhm niemand sein vorige Schand fürohin auffrupffen oder fürwerffen  / denn sein Obrigkeit hat

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

241

told the youth, God may make us good again when we have committed awful sins, if we only repent, turn to God, and believe in Christ. Then He will no longer ascribe to us our sins, but regard us as just and holy as if we had never sinned.230 Osiander’s explanation of the analogy focused on the relationship between sinner and God, but the exemplifying images also pointed to the social aspect of this relationship. When city authorities gave his honour back to an offender, this honour became reality in his dealings with his community, and the same was true for the forgiven sinner’s relations within the Christian congregation. This example also employed a concrete example to explain the abstract idea, but this example not only moved from the concrete to the abstract, but also from the concrete city community to another concrete example, namely the existing church community where the practice of freeing debtors was enforced by the central Christian doctrine of forgiveness, and which at the same time was a description of an ideal city. Church membership could be experienced as an ideal citizenship, but the church could also be described by other aspects of city organization. According to Osiander, a church is characterized as a community by its communality of property, a shared inheritance of eternal life, spiritual freedoms for its members, the same faithful Heavenly Father, and a shared Christian prayer. Osiander reminded the youth that communality of property in its strict sense was abandoned already in the days of the apostles, who saw that the sharing of temporal goods could only work as long as the flock of Christians consisted of only a few. Christendom presents no alternative organization of economy, Osiander claimed, but rather a communality that goes beyond temporal goods and deals with the things that matter even more, namely the sharing of God’s forgiveness and His favour and mercy. This is a treasure far more important than all the riches of the world, since it leads to inheritance of eternal life, and it is a treasure that rich and poor share equally.231 Defined in this way, the communality of goods confirmed the difference between rich and poor by justifying them. At the same time it strengthened the community between rich and poor. To properly appreciate one’s share in the biggest of treasures, one had to leave the differences of this world untouched, accept them, and see that they belonged to our limited time. Here also Osiander’s example moved from the concrete to the abstract in a way that had concrete implications. The spiritual freedom which Christians have in common resembled jhn wider gut gemacht. Also ob wir gleich arme Sünder seind / vnd vns an Gott vnd vnserm Nächsten schwerlich versündiget haben: Jedoch / wann wir Christliche Buß thun / vns zu Gott bekehren / vnd an Christum glauben / so macht vns vnser Himmelischer Vatter wider gut / das ist / er rechnet vns vnsere Sünden nicht zu / sonder helt vns für gerecht vnd heilig / als wann wir nie kein Sünd gethon hetten.” 230 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 180. 231 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 182.

242

6. Catechism Sermons

the experience of living in a city, where the different categories of citizens had different rights and liberties. The communality defining the church, however, could be compared to an egalitarian city, where all citizens are given certain rights that apply equally to the poorest inhabitant as to the noblest gentleman and are equally useful to them all. Irrespective of what else may divide them, all Christians shared the same wonderful liberties, namely freedom from judgment, from the flames of hell, and from eternal suffering.232 In a way, the example postulated an egalitarian and spiritual city as connected to the material and social city where differences existed. The last form of communality that defined the church was Christian prayer. Christians pray not only for themselves, but for the whole of Christianity, Osiander claimed, and this practice unites the dispersed and borderless church into one. Even if they are unknown to each other, Christians pray for each other. Therefore, if some of the youth were to experience tribulations, they should remember that there would always be someone somewhere, maybe a hundred miles away from them, who pray for them, and that their Heavenly Father could never fail to hear such a prayer.233 Prayer should remind the youth that like the city, the church was a community where the members were linked to each other out of caring concern. The common care expressed in prayer should remind them that the church was also a community that transcended the city. Through it, the believer was connected also to other church members and citizens of the heavenly Jerusalem who might live in cities far away. To explain how the church transcends known local and social categories, Osiander employed an example from another political institution. When the youth stated their belief in the church as one Christian church,234 meaning that there is one Christian congregation on earth, they should think of the Spirit as parallel to the emperor. There is only one Holy Roman Empire, even if there are many dukes, counts, and imperial cities, who all have their own lands, but who are still members of the same Empire. In the same way the church is one, even if it is divided and spread out in the world, it is united since its people everywhere serve the one true God, believe in Christ as their redeemer and saviour, have the same holy sacraments, and expect a heavenly inheritance.235 Osiander explained 232 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 182–183: “Gleich wie ettwo ein gantze Burgerschafft in einer Statt / von jrer hohen Obrigkeit / mit sondern Freyheiten begabet ist: An welchen Freyheiten / der geringste Burger / so viel gerechtsame vnd genüß hat / als ettwo der fürnembsten Herren einer in der Statt. Also haben alle Christen mit einander gemein diese herrliche Freyheiten / daß sie vor der verdamnus des jüngsten Gerichts gefreiet seind: Daß sie vor dem höllischen Fewr vnd ewiger Pein gefreyet seind.” 233  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 183. 234 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 172. 235  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 173: “Diese Christliche Kirch oder Gemein würdt genennet ein einige / heilige / Christliche Kirch: ob sie wol hin vnd wieder in der weitten Welt außgetheilt vnd zerstrewet ist. Gleich wie das Römisch Reich würdt

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

243

how all this had been present also in the papal church,236 and how its members had been saved despite the heresy of the papacy. Just like horses blow away the straws from the oats when they are given a mixed fodder, true Christians could make use of what was good and useful among the superstitions of the papal church.237 The true church, in which the young state their belief and which rests on the Spirit’s own work, transcended political divisions and historical changes and would be present on earth until the end of the world.238 Thus known social and political categories were employed not only to describe how Spirit and church may be experienced, but also to describe how the church transcended experience. The true church was not only that which appeared as such, but also something beyond the apparent. When it transcended social categories, however, the church maintained a social function, for also in this example there can be found a rhetorical and a logical connection between the concrete example and its abstract reference. Though it was not stated explicitly, one gets the impression that just as cities relate to each other in an empire, different churches should relate tolerantly to each other as different parts of the one universal church. A precondition for such openness was the willingness to identify the Spirit also outside of its concrete church expressions. This openness to the Spirit’s possible presence in the papal church was absent in Luther’s sermons. He stated quite explicitly that the papal church lacked that which constitutes the church and which is the Spirit’s only work, namely the witness of Christ as saviour of sinners.239 Under the papacy they never preached Christ as my saviour, Luther claimed, instead they preached actions and salvation through them.240 In this way Luther connected his rejection of the Spirit’s presence in the pope’s church to his central teaching on justification by faith. ein einigs Römisch Reich genennet: Vnd ist auch ein einigs Reich: Vnd seind dannoch viel Fürsten / Reichsstätt / Grauen vnd Herrn / welche doch alle sampt zu dem Römischen Reich gehören / vnd desselbigen Glieder seind. Es würdt aber die Christliche Kirch darumb ein einige Christliche Kirch oder Gemein genennet / dieweil alle rechte wahre Christen dienen einem einigen wahren Gott  / sie haben alle sampt ein Glauben an jhren Erlöser vnd Seligmacher Christum: Sie haben alle sampt einerley heilige Sacramenta: Vnd warten allesampt eines einigen Himmelischen Erbtheils. Dann also schreibt der Apostel Paulus / da er von der Einigkeit der Christlichen Kirche redet: Es ist (spricht er) ein Herr / ein Glaub / ein Tauff / ein Gott / vnd Vatter vnser aller.” 236 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 174–175: They had had the holy baptism and the twelve articles of faith, they had read yearly about the passion of Christ, they had had the Lord’s Prayer, the Ten Commandments, absolution, as well as some form of the Lord’s Supper. 237 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 176. 238 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 174. 239 WA 30/1, 91. 240 WA 30/1, 91–92: “In papatu nemo praedicavit, quod Christus sic meus dominus esset, quod sine meis operibus &c. Quia malignus et humanus spiritus praedicavit, praedicavit quidem Chri­ stum, sed cum hoc etiam opera praedicavit, ut per ista homines salvarentur.”

244

6. Catechism Sermons

Since Osiander also adhered to this Lutheran article, however, it can hardly be identified as the most appropriate description of their disagreement, even though there were divergences between the two catechists on this point. Seen from the perspective of the catechetical teaching situation, Luther’s different evaluation of the papal church seems to be connected with his different description of Spirit and church. Luther’s catechism sermons never described the Spirit, but only by the concrete expressions of the church that communicate Christ and the forgiveness of sin and the gift of eternal life.241 The church was defined as present wherever this takes place, where Christ is heard and understood.242 From this followed a description of the church that was closely connected to Luther’s definition of Christ and the gospel. His claim that one cannot be made holy outside of this church and its sacraments excluded from the Spirit and His church both the papacy and all concrete church institutions that interpreted Christ, gospel and sacraments wrongly.243 When the Spirit could not be described outside of this concrete church and its expressions, it became impossible to liken it to an empire since no hidden superior level uniting the different concrete church institutions and church expressions could be identified. Thus Luther’s way of describing the Spirit determined conditions for describing the church as a social entity. In Osiander’s sermons, the church could be called holy both because it taught the forgiveness of sin244 and because the Spirit resided in its members to make them holy and pious.245 This double description of the holiness of the church resonated in Osiander’s images of the church as a city consisting both of rules and institutions as well as of citizens doing and experiencing certain things. The Spirit maintained its vague outline in both instances because of Osiander’s free use of metaphors and examples. Luther’s sermons, on the other hand, employed metaphors restrictively as relatively simple explanations and definitions of phenomena and concepts. In his sermons there was no double description of the holiness of the church. The church was holy only as the place where sins were forgiven and justice ascribed. The Spirit was not described as residing in the members of the church, but rather in the church itself, in the words that were 241 These expressions are baptism, preaching, absolution, and comfort. WA 30/1, 92: “In hoc articulo conclusus est baptismus et praedicatio in lecto, Sacramentum altaris, Absolutio et omnes loci consolatorii.” 242 WA 30/1, 92: “… Sed spiritus sanctus sic sanctificat, quod in Ecclesiam sanctam ducit et proponit tibi verbum, quod praedicat ecclesia Christiana. … Per Christianam ecclesiam i. e. per officium eius sanctificaris, quia utitur eorum officio, ut sanctificeris, alioqui nunquam Christum agnosceres et audires.” 243 WA 30/1, 93: “Extra illam Ecclesiam, Sacramenta &c. non est sanctificatio.” See also WA 30/1, 93: “Clerici sunt extra Ecclesiam, quia per sua opera volunt salvari.” 244 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 179. 245 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 180.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

245

preached and in the practices that took place. It was through them that the Spirit was given to hearts.246 Luther did not use the city as a metaphor for the church. The closest he came to describing the church as a social entity was as a crowd. According to Luther, it was the German word Hauffe and gemeine, crowd and community, that came closest to the Latin and Greek word for church, Ecclesia. Luther explained that the word gemeine (identical to Gemeinde) was to be preferred over the word ge­ meinschaft,247 even though the words seem to have a parallel meaning. Perhaps the word gemeinschaft more unambiguously signifies a community of people, whereas gemeine, which may also signify a district, a commune, and a parish, also suggests that which a group of people share and hold in common ownership.248 Luther retained the duality of the word gemeine when he continued by explaining that the church was not only a community of the saints; it was both those who own something as well as that which they own, a community with some holy treasure.249 In this way the church was not identified with believers as bearers of the Spirit’s presence, but rather believers were seen as members of the church by being tied to its treasure. This community might resemble a big crowd, but probably also the house community. According to Luther, the church also resembled a mother, the natural centre of any home, in that it conceived and carried the believer.250 Luther’s differently profiled use of metaphors for church was echoed in the way he related the Spirit to the Ten Commandments. No rules of conduct or justice were described as part of the church community; instead the Spirit was seen as a necessary helper for the fulfilment of the Ten Commandments which were God’s demands on all humans.251 They could only be fulfilled if one through faith received the power which fulfils them.252 From the Spirit’s acting in church, the believer received that which was necessary to fulfil the demands for justice that were valid in all of society. The believer was not freed from observing the Ten Commandments, but was enabled to observe them by the gifts he or she received 246 WA 30/1, 93: “Item dat tibi in cor per sacramenta, ut credas verbo et fias membrum Ec­ clesiae.” 247  WA 30/1, 92: “Ubi audis vocis ‘Ecclesiam’, intellige den hauffen, ut germanice: der Wittembergische hauffe, gemeine i. e. ein heiliger Christlicher hauffe, versamlung vel germanice: die heilige gemeine Christenheit, Et verbum, quod sol nicht gemeinschafft heissen, sed ein gemeine. Aliquis voluit priorem articulum glossare, ‘Ecclesiam Catholicam’ i. e. communio Sanctorum, Ger­ manice: Ein gemein der heiligen i. e. communio, in qua sunt meri Sancti. Idem Ecclesia Christiana et Communio Sanctorum i. e. credo, quod sit ein heiliger hauffe et ein gemeine eiteler heiligen.” 248 Jacob Grimm and Wilhelm Grimm, Deutsches Wörterbuch, vol. 5 (Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1887; repr. München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 1984), s. v. “Gemeinde, Gemeine”. 249 WA 30/1, 92: “… quae est communio, in qua sunt meri Sancti”. 250 WA 30/1, 91: “Christiana ecclesia est mater tua, illa zeugt dich per verbum et tregt dich.” 251 WA 30/1, 45: “… Sic symbolum docet, wo et quomodo implere debeamus 10 praecepta.” 252 WA 30/1, 45. See quote in n. 145.

246

6. Catechism Sermons

in church.253 Thus, in Luther’s thought, existence in the church seems to have stood in an almost subordinate relation to the existence in the world where life was to be lived according to the Ten Commandments. To sum up, Luther’s occasional description of the church as a social entity was combined with an even rarer description of the Spirit’s activity in the world outside the church. His focus was to describe the church and not society as a whole, and the only obvious connection between the two were the Ten Commandments. His simpler use of metaphors explained the truths of faith in a way that was more concrete and related to a practice taking place in church. His sermons’ more restricted use of political images and their different choice of social imagery seem to present a view of the church which stems from a catechist less ambitious to dispute or influence the social and political institutions surrounding him. In Osiander’s sermons, on the other hand, one gets the impression of a catechist ambitious to interact in political discourse. They entailed vivid descriptions of the form of life that should prevail in church, and, as shown in the section about the catechetical teaching context, they adapted the explanation of the Commandments to this overarching objective. Fulfilment of the Commandments was urged as an expression of gratitude to the Saviour and as a Christian life’s testimony of faith. His extensive description of the church had explicit social implications for how the young were to perceive life in society. This section has shown that his sermons present ideals for the church that seem to interact with ideals for city life. As has previously been indicated, Osiander would hardly have chosen his examples arbitrarily. In the case of city and church, a logical connection seems to have existed between the example and its reference. The religious welfare described in church was also a central interest for the city which Osiander employed as an example of this church.254 Even though the city’s rhetorical function is that of an image or an illustration, the resemblance between image and that which it illustrates, and the way its description is regulated by that which it is supposed to explain, lets the ideal description of life in the church also appear as the ideal for city life. A similar interplay between example and reference, concrete and abstract, took place when Osiander used the emperor as an illustration of the church’s transcendent character. The cities’ tolerance towards each other and their loyalty towards the emperor was an established political ideal which became an ideal also for how the church should be viewed. This view of the church, however, also confirmed the ideal for how to relate to cities and emperor within the Empire. 253 WA 30/1, 46: “qui filius emeruit spiritum sanctum, qui remittit peccata. Unicum verbum indicat nos non servasse 10 praecepta, nempe Remissio peccatorum. Si remittuntur peccata, quid iactant isti de sublimiori statu quam 10 praeceptorum? Ad articulos symboli habt yhr das osterfest, pfingstfest et marterwochen et alia festa et dominicas in anno. Oportet pater, filius, spiritus sanctus veniat sua potentia et operibus, ut servemus decem praecepta.” 254 Hamm, Bürgertum und Glaube, 66.

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

247

6.2.3.2 The Spirit Gives Forgiveness for Sin and Eternal Life Forgiveness of sins. Resurrection of the body. And an eternal life.255

There are no important differences in Osiander’s and Luther’s sermons on the forgiveness of sins. Both catechists instructed youths in the acknowledgement of their own sinfulness and in the appropriation of Christ’s merit. It is more interesting to notice Osiander’s elaborate description of the resurrection and eternal life which awaits a Christian which is not found in Luther’s sermons. Through the teaching on the forgiveness of sin, youths had learned that they would not be condemned because of their sin. Their souls may still be troubled by awaiting temporal death, however, which will consume their bodies, and it was therefore important that they be taught about how this life relates to the next. It is natural for humans to oppose this death, Osiander explained, for the body destroyed by death is created by God.256 God has created body and soul as a unity, and had it not been for sin, they would have remained unified. But sin has corrupted the body and therefore it must die. Human nature’s resistance towards death is good and not a consequence of sin, as Christ’s resistance towards his own death confirms.257 Therefore the youths’ task was not to overcome their resistance towards the death of the body, but to learn to see it the right way. Osiander wanted to convince the young of the reality of the bodily resurrection with examples of biblical persons who rose from death as well as with an example about grain. According to St. Paul, nature also testifies to the phenomenon of bodily resurrection. Grain left in the ground to rot and decay comes to life and grows up beautifully, and in this way every spring God shows how the resurrection of the dead works, namely that after death and decay, new life follows. The radical transformation in nature testifies to how even human bodies which have been awfully destroyed may be resurrected and renewed.258 In the same way as spring follows autumn and cereals come from the sowing of grain, the young should expect their bodies to be transformed and made perfect after death. It is 255 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 185, 198, and 210: “Vergebung der Sünden”. “Aufferstehung des Fleischs”. “Vnd ein ewigs Leben”. These are from the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth catechism sermons. 256 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 199. 257 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 208. 258 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 203: “… Dann besehet (liebe Kinder) im Winter / das Gras auff dem Feld / vnd in den Gärten / so hat es ein ansehen / als wann es allerdings were verdorben / vnd (mit bescheidenheit zumelden) zu lauter Mist worden … Aber im Früling … Also auch wir Menschen / wann wir sterben vnd begraben werden / so ist es der Winter vmb vns / wann aber wir von Todten widerumb aufferweckt werden / so würdt es mit vns ein lustiger Früling vnd Sommer sein / in welchem vnsere Leib werden widerumb herfür kommen / welche zuuor abgestorben / vnd im Grab ein häßliches ansehen bekommen haben.”

248

6. Catechism Sermons

with their own present bodies as with an old, dark, and faulty silver cup which is renewed to become a shining and perfect silver cup by a skilled silversmith. Though the young naturally should continue to care for their bodies, they should also be aware of another side of this body, which is the perfect and beautiful body it will become. This perfect body can only be realized when the present body dies, and it is an aspect of the present as long as the young accept that the present body must die. Rightly understood, a Christian who resists temporal death is like someone who, when given new clothes, insists on wearing them on top of his old ones. To be able to live according to this insight, the youth were encouraged to exercise the way they look upon death. Whenever they come to a grave, they should pause and look at it and think that this grave is a sleeping chamber where a Christian rests until the last day when Christ will wake him up. And whenever they come to a graveyard, they should stop and think that what they now see are the fields of God where he has sewn his little seed, namely the Christians, so that they may grow up on the last day to bloom more beautifully than ever.259 Osiander cited Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 15, where he stated that “if in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable.” According to Osiander, the reason for this is that Christians have to suffer more in this world than the children of the world do.260 Since those who do not believe need not consider the God who sees into their hearts, they may enjoy sinful pleasures Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 207–209. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 212–213: “Der Apostel Paulus (in der ersten Epistel an die Corinthier am 15. Capitel) schreibt also: Hoffen wir allein in disem Leben auff Christum / so seind wir die elendsten vnder allen Menschen: Das ist / wann wir kein anders vnd bessers Leben nach vnserm abscheiden auß diser Welt zugewarten hetten / so weren elendere Leut auff Erden nicht / dann die Christen. Dann die fromme Christen müssen sich in diser Welt vil mehr erleiden / dann die gottlose Weltkinder / welchen es gemeinglich in disem Leben (auffs wenigst ein zeitlang) wol / vnd nach jhrem willen geht: (Wie der siben vnd dreissigst / vnd der drey vnd sibenzigst Psalm hierüber klagen) Sollte nun nicht ein anders Leben zugewarten sein / in welchem den frommen Menschen jr Gottseligkeit vnd Frömbkeit belohnet würde / so hette es das ansehen / als ob Gott der HERr nichts darnach fragte / ob die Leute fromb / oder böß weren / vnd es gelte bey vnserm HERREN GOtt ein verruchter Mensch eben so viel / als ein Frommer. Das sollen wir aber Gott dem HErrn nicht zutrawen. Dann Gott ist ein gerechter Gott vnd Richter / der den Gottlosen jhr Boßheit bezahlt / vnd den Frommen jhr Gottseligkeit belohnet vnd vergilt / wie der Apostel zun Ebreern am eilfften Capitel bezeuget. Darumb schreibt Sanct Paulus hieruon (in der andern Epistel zum Timotheo) also: Ich hab ein guten Kampff gekämpfft: Ich hab meinen Lauff volbracht: Ich hab Glauben gehalten: Hinfort ist mir beygelegt die Kron der Gerechtigkeit / welche mir der HERR an jenem Tag / der gerechte Richter geben würdt: Nicht aber mir allein / sonder auch allen denen / welche sein Erscheinung lieb haben. Diese Wort des Apostels Pauli bezeugen klar / daß der Apostel Paulus die Belohnung seiner getrewen Dienst (welche er in seinem Predigampt angewandt) nicht in dieser Welt / sonder im ewigen Leben zuempfahen getrawet hat. Darumb weil Gott ein gerechter Gott ist / der kein boßheit vngestrafft / vnd kein wolthat vnbelohnet laßt / so muß so wahr vnd gewiß / nach diesem Leben / ein ewigs Lebens sein / so gewiß es ist / das ein einiger ewiger Gott ist / der Himmel vnd Erden erschaffen hat / vnd der allem Gottlosen Wesen vnd Leben feind ist / vnd der zur Gerechtigkeit vnd Fromkeit lust vnd liebe hat.” 259 Osiander, 260 Osiander,

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

249

and the fruits of greed, and, as experience shows, they often get away with it. If everything ends with this life, those who enjoyed the pleasures of this world would stand out as winners, whereas Christians, who endure suffering because they follow another standard, would appear as losers.261 Thus the centrality of resurrection for a Christian life was presented in an imagery which tied future reward to someone’s honour in the present. The bestowed reward was described as determining the honour of a man in a way that made it natural for Osiander to turn to the classic text about Paul’s testimony in face of his own death, the text that had become a classic basis for funeral sermons for clergy, namely 2 Timothy 4:6–8. This text would be employed in the funeral for Lucas Osiander a few years later, and had been employed by Osiander himself in a funeral sermon to honour a deceased colleague.262 In it St. Paul, on his own deathbed, foresees his coming honour with the following testimony. Since he had kept his faith and endured the life of a true Christian, which implies that he had renounced timely reward, the Lord as a righteous judge would reward him with the crown of righteousness. From a very trustworthy source Osiander could thus present a striking and visual expression of the glory attained by the Christian.263 To be sure to be connected to eternal life, the youth should, whenever they were troubled, remind themselves that life on earth is so short compared to eternal life and ask, “why should I not endure suffering for a while here, when I know what awaits me?” And whenever they were tempted by lust, they should use this article for the same purpose, and ask themselves if they were willing to risk eternal pain for such a short and temporal delight.264 By this instruction on the shape and form of the youths’ future resurrected body, it is as if Osiander taught them the advanced aesthetics of Christian citi261 Here the instruction on the Spirit continues the sermons analyzed in section 6.2.2.5: “Christ as Judge”. The more severe standard that applies to Christians was explained in Osiander’s sermon on the acknowledgement and forgiveness of sins where he explained how regular justice is different from God’s justice, even though the two are related to each other. God’s demands reach further than those of secular authority, since He demands not only good deeds, but also words and thoughts, which are invisible to others. See Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 189. 262 Cf. Chapter 1.2 and Chapter 3.5. 263  St. Paul is also a key figure when Osiander describes to the young what eternal life looks like. He describes Paul as someone who himself had been taken up to heaven to experience paradise and to hear things that no one may hear. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 213: “Dann der heilig Apostel Paulus schreibt (in der andern Epistel an die Corinthier am zwelfften Cap.) Er sey entzuckt worden / vnd sey im Paradeiß gewesen: Er schreibt aber auch darbey / er hab daselbst gehört vnaußsprechliche wort / welche kein Mensch sagen könne. Darmit er zuuerstehen gibt / daß er solche Frewd vnd Herrligkeit gesehen hab / die er nicht könne mit worten außsprechen oder erzehlen. Jedoch hat vns Gott der HERR in der heiligen Schrifft ettwas daruon zuuerstehn geben.” Based on a variety of scriptural passages, Osiander fills out the description of life everlasting as an existence of endless happiness and glory. Ibid., 215–217, and 219. 264 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 220.

250

6. Catechism Sermons

zens. Even if they renounced the pleasures regarded as worldly reward, they were still the most honourable of citizens, because they maintained the core values that society rested upon. They contributed to securing society as a place where justice had room and where there was a difference between good and evil. Even though they subjected themselves to more severe moral standards than others, this humility would still not make them miserable. It was rather connected to the greatest honour and reward. It was as if a hidden, but beautiful, silver cup shone through in the humble sorrow and regret they expressed over their own sins and in the forgiveness they offered their neighbour. It was as if strong and crowned bodies appeared in the bodily pleasures they forsook. A Christian identity described this way would probably appear as very compatible with a citizen’s honour. 6.2.3.3 Concluding Remarks: Trust of the Heart Is the Faith that Saves In his first sermon on the Creed, Osiander introduced it as presenting a faith that saves because it lets the believer trust God as a Father. When thirteen sermons later he came to his final sermon on the Creed, he concluded that the Creed learnt rightly provides the trust of a saving faith, but still saw the need for three concrete instructions on how this trust should be maintained. Firstly, one should remember that one’s actions cannot be trusted, since because of inherited sin even good deeds are never completely good. Therefore the young should not trust their deeds in the face of God’s judgment, but rely instead on God’s mercy.265 Secondly, one should remember the benefits of the life and death of Jesus and be reassured that Christ’s actions replace one’s own, just like when a friend comes and pays your debts.266 Finally, trust in God should also be 265 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 226–227: “Nemet ein einfeltigs Gleichnus: Wann man ein köstlichen guten Wein in ein schümpelichte Fleschen thut / vnd jhn auch ein kleine zeit darinn stehen laßt / so würdt er schümpelich / vnd vnangenem zutrincken / vnd hilfft nicht / daß der Wein an jhm selbs gut ist: Dann der schümpelicht Geschmack / der in der Fleschen ist / der verderbt auch den allerbesten Wein / daß er nicht mehr ist / wie er sein soll. Also auch wann gleich ein Christ einrecht gut Werck thut / das Gott selbs beuohlen vnd gebotten hat / so ist dannoch dasselbig nicht volkommen / darumb / daß die Sünd im Menschen hindert / daß er dasselbig gut Werck nicht volkommenlich / wie es sein solte / verrichten kan. Darumb dörffen wir auch nicht mit unsern guten Wercken / mit vnserm GOtt rechten / vor seinem Gericht. Dann der Prophet Dauid sagt (im hundert vnd drey vnd vierzigsten Psalmen:) HErr / gehe nicht mit deinem Knecht ins Gericht: Dann vor dir würdt kein lebendiger Mensch gerecht sein. Darumb stehet vnser Seligkeit darauff / daß Gott nicht mit vns handle / nach vnsern Wercken / sondern daß er vns nach seiner Gnad vnd Barmhertzigkeit / für fromb vnd heilig halte / ob wir wol noch arme vnd gebrechliche Sünder seind.” 266  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 229: “Nemet ein Gleichnus: Wann ein armer Mann hundert Gulden schuldig were / vnd köndte dieselbige nicht bezahlen / vnd müste drüber der Gefäncknus erwarten. Er hette aber einen guten getrewen vnd reichen Freund / der solche schulden auff sich nem / vnd selbige bey Heller vnd Pfenning zahlte / so würde ja dem armen Mann die Bezahlung / welche für jhn beschehen were / also zugerechnet /

6.2 Orienting within the Framework: To Recite the Creed

251

rehearsed as a practice of comfort. Since the despair threatening this trust was the devil’s work, Osiander gave the young an answer to rehearse and to confront the devil with when facing this threat. This is what they should say: You are lying, devil, for even though I have sinned a lot, I am still just in the eyes of God, through faith in Christ my saviour. For as Paul has taught (in chapter 13 of the Acts of the Apostles), he who believes in Christ is justified. Therefore, since God, for Christ’s sake, regards me as pious and holy, you have no right to complain about me, you evil spirit. I have never sinned against you, but against my God who forgives me because of Christ since I believe in Him. Therefore I know that I am a loved child of God.”267

This last rehearsal made clear that even though a Christian’s identity rested in the acknowledgment of one’s own sinfulness and the partaking in a foreign dignity, it should still involve a considerable amount of pride and self-esteem. Still, trust of the heart did not depend on exercises, but had its source in a different power. Those who believe were given the Spirit to reside in their hearts. The Spirit was at hand when the young felt the urge to live honest and Christian lives and have good thoughts,268 and also when the young were eager to pray and be able to pray to God as a beloved and faithful Father, which was an activity not too different from the practice of reciting the Creed.269 This explanation of the Spirit’s presence lent the recitation of the Creed a double religious function. It taught the young about the Spirit’s characteristics, but it also interpreted the recitation practice as a confirmation of the Spirit’s presence and created a concrete connection between this practice and the explained concept of faith. Thus Osiander ended his teaching on the Creed where he had promised, with trust in God. On the way to this end of clarified and calm trust in God, Osiander had led his listeners through the movements of the Creed as a whole and as a coherent dogmatic concept involving a coherent cosmology. als wann er selbs / auß seinem Seckel / sein Schuld bezahlt hette / vnd köndte niemandts billich derselben Schuld halben / fernere anforderung an jhn haben / vnangesehen / daß er / an bemelter Schuld kein Heller bezahlt hette. Also rechnet vns auch vnser himmlischer Vatter unsers HErren Christi bezahlung zu / vnd bedeckt vnsere Sünd mit des HERREn Christi volkomnen Gehorsam / Frömbkeit vnd Heiligkeit / welche er vns auch zurechnet vnd schenckt …” 267 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 230–231: “Du leugst Teuffel. Dann ob ich wol viel gesündiget hab / so bin ich doch vor Gott gerecht / durch den Glauben an meinen Heyland Christum. Dann wer an Christum glaubt / der ist gerecht / wie Paulus (in der Apostel Geschicht am dreyzehenden Capitel) gelehret hat. Darumb weil mich mein Gott / vmb Christi willen / für fromm vnd heilig helt / so hastu böser Geist / nicht vber mich zuklagen: Dann ich hab nicht wider dich / sonder wider meinen Gott gesündigt / der verzeihet mir alle meine Sünd / vmb Christi willen / weil ich an denselbigen glaube. So weiß ich auch / daß ich ein liebes Kind Gottes bin.” 268 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 233. 269 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 232: “… der H. Geist mundert vns auff / vnd erweckt vns zu einem Christlichen eyfferigen vnd kräfftigen Gebet / daß wir Gott / als vnsern lieben getrewen Vatter / anrüffen / vnd mit jhm / als mit vnserm lieben Vatter / reden dürffen: der vns auch nichts versagen kan oder will.”

252

6. Catechism Sermons

The explanation of the different articles of faith followed a movement from the first to the third parts of the Creed which brought the concepts of faith gradually closer to life and made them increasingly relevant. A similar movement as in the dogmatic argument was present in the images employed. When seen from the perspective of this imagery, the Creed moves from positioning the believer in the world to positioning him or her within a Christian empire surrounded by enemies, before it concludes by placing the believer as a citizen in a city with a certain self-understanding and self-esteem. The two levels in Osiander’s explanation were thus combined in a way that let the images, and with them the social structure surrounding the young, appear as regulated and confirmed by dogmatic concepts. One could argue that these connections would not be accessible to the young minds in Osiander’s audience, since the overview which let them appear involves a fairly advanced analysis. It is still my view that these connections could be communicated to the young. It would partly take place on an emotional level, to let the metaphors reach their didactic goals without too much critical thought by the youth, and partly by the way the connections that have been pointed out in this section organize the knowledge the youth would have received. It has been observed how Osiander’s choice of images corresponds to a composition principle guiding his sermon corpus.270 This organizing principle might not only have been perceived in the different metaphors, but would probably also have reproduced itself in the youths’ repeated recitation of the Creed and by the images that would accompany it, if Osiander’s catechetical design was as effective as here suggested.

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer As with the other parts of the catechism, the analysis of the sermons on the Lord’s Prayer will focus on the differences between Luther and Osiander and employ Luther’s teaching as a contrast to enhance characteristics in Osiander’s homiletics conception. This contrast will be described by an examination of the different starting points the catechists chose for their explanation of the Lord’s Prayer, of how they tied the different parts of the prayer together in their presentations, and finally, of how these structural differences in their explanations are connected to a differently perceived situation of prayer. 6.3.1 Starting Point: The Spirit’s Urging or God’s Command Osiander concluded his teaching on the Spirit by referring to prayer as a proof of the Spirit’s dwelling in the heart of the believer. His instruction on the Lord’s Prayer continued this perspective and stated that it was the Spirit residing in the 270 Cf.

Chapter 6.1.

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer

253

heart that urged the young to pray.271 In this way the initiative for prayer comes from God himself, but it was still necessary for the young to learn from God’s words how one should pray so that they might get what they desire in prayer.272 Luther’s description of the starting point for prayer developed throughout his three series of catechism sermons. In the first series, he started in a similar way as Osiander,273 but in his second series he linked the prayer to the Ten Commandments, as enabling a fulfilment that no one can produce on their own.274 His third series presented a starting point that was kept also in his Large Cat­ echism and which stated that to pray the Lord’s Prayer was to fulfil the second commandment.275 God was presented as the true subject of prayer by both catechists; Osiander saw Him as the subject of prayer through the Spirit who acts through the believer’s heart, while Luther saw Him as the subject of prayer by being the Lord who commands prayer. These different starting points had consequences for how the catechists described the experience of God in prayer. Osiander described it as a relationship that was fundamentally intimate, whereas Luther’s description maintained a greater distance between God and the one praying. Both catechists explained the different sections of the Lord’s Prayer by the use of imagery, but Osiander used images more extensively. In Osiander’s composition, this imagery pointed to a thematic unity in the prayer that let his explanation resemble a narration of the relationship with God as a continuous progression. For Luther, on the other hand, the thematic unity of his teaching on the Lord’s Prayer lay not in illustrations or images, but in his theological interpretation of the situation of prayer. 6.3.2 Prayer’s Progression 6.3.2.1 God as Father Whereas God as Father was the first important motif in Osiander’s sermon, Luther saw no need to elaborate on the theme. Instead his sermons proceeded directly to the prayer “hallowed be thy name.” Only once was the concept of God as Father mentioned, which was in his second sermon as an explanation of how the Father’s name may be hallowed. Just like a father’s children may bring a father honour or shame with their words and deeds, so the words and deeds of Christians, as children of God, are involved when God’s name is to be held in 271 Osiander,

Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 235.

272 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 235: “Derhalben werden

wir jetzt (mit Gottes hülffe) in ettlichen Predigten lernen / wie wir mit vnserm lieben Gott / in vnserm Gebet reden sollen / daß wir von jhm erlangen / was wir begeren.” 273 WA 30/1, 11. 274 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 46. 275 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 95 and 193.

254

6. Catechism Sermons

respect.276 In Osiander’s explanation, the prayer’s opening address naming God “Father” was a main motif that took up ample space. It set the scene and named the relationship one entered when praying, and it remained a basis for the experience of God in prayer throughout his explanation. The first part of his teaching on the Lord’s Prayer discussed in depth and with a number of images and stories what it meant to call God Father. It began by pointing out the remarkable fact that we are allowed speak to God as a father, He who is the Creator of heaven and earth and a Lord above all the lords of the world. Osiander told his young audience of the many dignitaries of the world he had met during his career and of the custom of addressing the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire with the titles The by far most enlightened, The mightiest, Invincible and Most gracious Lord. Since it is appropriate to use such titles for the emperor to show proper respect for secular authority, it is all the more remarkable that we are allowed to call the Lord of heaven and earth our Father, Osiander stated.277 The comparison with the emperor adds an important contrast to the description of God as a father. The title of Father gave God a familiarity in tension with the tremendous respect He deserved. This tension was maintained throughout Osiander’s explanation, though God’s highness was never emphasized at the expense of his familiarity, but was always presented as compatible with it. Several images in Osiander’s sermons described God as Father. One was that of a rich man adopting a poor child, raising, correcting, and feeding it, and making it heir of all that is his, an image which Osiander had also used to explain baptism.278 In another image, he described God as Father in a more direct sense. When one in baptism was born anew and renewed in spirit to become differently inclined, one took on the ways and forms of the Heavenly Father.279 Because of 276  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 47. Osiander uses a similar illustration in his explanation of the same section of the prayer. Connected to God’s respect in the world is His honour. God’s honour is connected to the impression every individual praying Christian gives with his or her life, in the same way as a housefather’s evil children serves the diminution of the same father. As an example of this mechanism, Osiander tells of the Christian soldiers in the new European colonies who had been exploiting heathen countries for silver, gold, and pearls for about a hundred years. These so called Christians had led awful lives with thefts, murders, and rapes, which had made heathens think that the Christians were either the devil’s children or their God had to be as bad and useless as the Christians. With this example, Osiander points a visual aspect of the Christian life being led by God. The common subjectivity that arises from this form of relationship between parent and child is visible in a way that connects God’s honour to the honour of Christians. Ibid., 262. 277 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 247: “… Wann man mit dem Römischen Keyser redet / so gibt man jhm den herrlichen Titel / daß man jhn nennet / Allerdurchleuchstigster / Großmächtigster / Vnüberwündlichster / Allergnädigster Herr.” 278  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 248; and Chapter 6.1 in this study. 279  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 249: “Darumb daß vns Gott durch sein heiligen Geist im heiligen Tauff vernewert / daß wir anderst gesinnet werden / vnsers Himmlischen Vatters gute Art vnd heiligen Sinn an vns nemen.”

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer

255

baptism, one may have a mind like that of the Heavenly Father. According to Osiander, the possibility of this likeness and sharing of heart was confirmed by Christ, when he admonished us to be as kind-hearted and gracious as our Heavenly Father who lets his sun rise and set upon just and unjust alike, and who lets it rain on both the pious and evildoers.280 This shared heart pointed to a relationship to God as Father that went beyond the merely metaphorical to resemble a more direct form of paternity. It described a parent who shared some essence and form with his offspring in a way that formed a firm basis for the relationship between them. One gets the impression that the description of God’s highness and familiarity in the first set of images was combined in such a way to favour His familiarity. He does not appear as an emperor that may be called father, but rather as a father who is worthy beyond even the emperor. The balancing of familiarity and highness was also present when Osiander compared God’s parenthood to that of earthly parents. The prayer’s designation of the Father as “in heaven” pointed to a difference of quality between the Heavenly Father and fathers on earth.281 There are fathers on earth who do not appreciate their children at all, and some would rather carry their children to the graveyard than care for them and feed them, Osiander said. They leave their children at home hungry and running around naked while they themselves sit happily in the pub with their comrades drinking wine. Obviously these fathers are unlike the Heavenly Father; they are like dogs and hardly deserve to be called fathers at all.282 Still, not even the most pious of parents, those who care diligently for their children and feed them and raise them with love, can equal God as Father. For while the best of parents relate to their children with love, God’s entire being is pure love.283 Thus Osiander employed the vast difference between good and bad parents to explain God’s differentness as parent. By their insufficiency as an illustration, the best of the earthly parents were descriptions of God because they were different from God in a similar way as bad fathers differed from good parents. The difference between earthly parents and the Heavenly Father was not only a difference of quality, but also of power and abilities. There are many parents on earth with the best of hearts and intentions to help their children, but who are still not able to save their children from severe illnesses and poverty, or who have to leave their children in fires or drowning accidents, even though it hurts them enough to make their hearts jump out of their chests, Osiander explained. 280 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 249. Osiander is quoting from Matthew 5:45. 281 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 252. 282 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 252. 283 If a painter were to paint God, he would have to paint pure love, faithfulness, mercy and charity to make the picture resemble Him. Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 252.

256

6. Catechism Sermons

When the prophet David, in one of his psalms, said that his parents had also had to leave him, it was an example of how even the most pious and faithful of parents sometimes are unable to help their children. On this point, there was a striking difference to God’s abilities as a Father, for he was described as an almighty Father with power to save his children from all possible harm and to arrange everything in a way that serves both body and soul.284 The powerlessness of the earthly parents would have displayed a very recognizable compassion and longing which let the experience of having loving parents, as well as the experience of being a parent, interpret the experience of God. A familiar experience from family life could thus inform Osiander’s catechetical explanation, but the connection between example and doctrine would probably continue and be effective even after Osiander had finished his explanations. The audience’s future experiences of having and being parents could very well be interpreted in light of having God as a parent, and their image of God could very well develop with their continuing experiences of parenthood. The caring longing that appeared so strikingly in the stories of loss resembled God’s love in its sincerity and intensity, but it was just as much connected to God by difference. Parents’ despair expressed not only a sincere love, but also a powerlessness that was foreign to God. In this way the experience of parenthood in families stood out as a basic category for the intimate experience of God in prayer both by resemblance as well as by difference. To establish such a familiarity with God was fundamental for the practice of prayer that Osiander prescribed. By omitting a description of God as Father, on the other hand, Luther refrained from making God similarly familiar as a partner in prayer. The difference between the two catechists on this point is related to their different view of the situation of prayer, which will be discussed in greater detail towards the end of this section. In Osiander’s view of the situation of prayer, one could pray because the Spirit resided in the believer’s heart and the believer therefore already was close to God. This familiarity was kept throughout his explanation of the Lord’s Prayer. 6.3.2.2 Praying Is Being a Child For Osiander, the other side of relating to God as Father in prayer was that praying meant being a child. For the same reason, this is an aspect of prayer which naturally is absent in Luther’s sermons. The child who related to God as a Father in Osiander’s sermons was described with several images and turned up at different ages. The youngest child appears in an example explaining the prayer “Your will be done.” It is a toddler who is still not able to walk on its own and who keeps falling to the ground whenever it tries to walk, until the father takes it by its hand and leads it. With the father’s help it is able to walk across the floor, but 284 Osiander,

Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 253.

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer

257

whenever the father retracts his hand, it falls again. Osiander presented this scene as a direct parallel to the relationship to God in prayer. The child cannot walk without the support of its father, and neither can humans by their own strength wander through life in accordance with the will of God. Only if the Heavenly Father sustains and leads them will this be possible, and the right practice of prayer allows for this to happen.285 The image allowed the youth envision following the will of God as being led by Him as a child. As an illustration of prayer, it pointed to the practice of prayer as a sharing of subjectivity between God and the one who prayed. For the child in Osiander’s example, it was obviously desirable to be led by its father, since it wished to walk and the father could help. Osiander’s image encouraged his young listeners to relate similarly harmoniously to the will of God, but this harmony depended on the identification of the youths with the will of God and their desire to follow it. It was a desirable harmony, but it was not easily reached, for the will of God could be contrary to our wishes and also happen when we suffer, Osiander warned.286 Suffering may be an experience of being led by God according to His will. Osiander tried to convince his listeners that God led this way for good reason, namely to steer his children away from dangers they do not recognize themselves. Prominent among these dangers was carnal security, which was a danger so severe that nobody would want to be spared from suffering if that condition was the price to pay. In carnal security one feels safe enough to ignore the grave sins one has committed and therefore feels no need to stay away from sin or to turn to God for help. Osiander retold the stories from the Bible about Joseph and Job as examples of how God may lead His children away from this sin.287 The famine that struck Joseph’s brothers awakened their sleeping consciences,288 and the bodily wounds that provoked Job to swear also made him realize the foolishness of his accusations against God.289 King David, on the other hand, was presented as an example of someone who not only experienced suffering, but who was also a role model for how to handle suffering. Osiander recalled the incident when 285 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 283: “Dann sollen wir den willen Gottes gehorsamlich thun / so muß vns Gott darzu auffbringen / vnd vns auff dem weg seiner H Gebot / leiten vnd führen. Nemet ein feine einfeltige Gleichnus: Ein kleines Kind / das noch nicht allein stehen vnd gehen kan / das rutschet auff der Erden / es kan aber nicht von jhm selbs auffstehen / vnd allein vber die Stuben gehen. Wann aber sein Vatter das Kind bey der Hand ergreifft / vnd es führet / so kan es vber die Stuben gehen. Wann jhm aber der Vatter sein Hand zuckte / so leg es gleich wider auff der Erden. Also vermögen wir auch (als schwache Kinder Gottes) nicht auß vnsern eigen Kräfften / nach dem willen Gottes / zuleben vnd zuwandlen: Wann vns aber vnser himmlischer Vatter / durch seinen H. Geist / auffrichtet / leitet vnd führet / so können wir den Willen Gottes thun / so viel vns in diesem Leben müglich ist.” 286 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 284. 287 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 286, 284, and 285. 288 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 286. 289 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 284–285.

258

6. Catechism Sermons

David had been thrown out of the royal city of Jerusalem by his own son and was encouraged by his priests to collect his troops to strike back, but answered in a way that showed his willingness to be led by God: “… If God wants me as king in Jerusalem, he will reinstall me, and if he wants another king, I will endure it in patience …”290 The example of David showed how the one praying should let his own will meet the superior will of God. Jesus, God’s own child, showed the same patience on the Mount of Olives the night before His passion, a form of patience that the young also should strive to have, when He prayed that not His will, but the Father’s will should come to pass.291 Suffering occurred for a higher good, and the young should know that suffering was mostly there to save them from sin. Therefore Osiander recommended that the young should continue the custom of repeating the following traditional rhyme when being punished corporally: O du edle Rut / du machst böse Kinder gut (“O you noble rod, you turn evil children into good ones”).292 Osiander’s audience was thus presented with a recognizable experience which permitted their own situation as daughters and sons to resemble not only that of David, but also that of Jesus, even though Jesus obviously was different as Son since He was sent to save the world. In light of the stories about David and Jesus, the pain and humiliation the young experienced when being punished appeared as a form of suffering to be endured patiently and as taking place for the sake of leading the young away from carnal security. From the punished children’s perspective, the earthly parents came to resemble the Heavenly Father in imposing suffering for a higher good. The children practiced bending their wills to a superior will. Here, as in the previous comparison of earthly parents and the Heavenly Father, an inner-worldly and recognizable experience served as explanation of a part of the catechism’s doctrinal content, though in this case, it was not really a piece of doctrine that was explained, but rather a category of experiences that was explained by one specific experience. In the same way as was observed in the previous section’s analysis of Osiander’s teaching on parenthood, one may expect that here also Osiander not only explained an abstract truth with a concrete example, but that also the opposite took place, and that the explanation therefore came to work in two directions at the same time. The phenomenon in the example, reciting a rhyme while being spanked, explained the abstract truth that suffering taking place in life was God’s way of leading His children away 290  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 288: “Ich hab nicht lust zu dir / sihe / hie bin ich / er machs mit mir / wie es jhm wol gefällt. Das war so viel gesagt: Will mich mein GOtt länger zu einem König haben / so kan er mich wol wider zu Jerusalem einsetzen: Will er dann ein andern König an mein statt machen / so will ich solches auch mit Gedult auffnemen.” 291 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 288. 292 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 287.

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer

259

from carnal security. Another explanation would probably also take place, however, namely that God as leading and educating by imposing suffering informed and enlightened the concrete and experienced practice of corporeal punishment and of being someone’s child. One would expect that the very concrete sensual experience involved made this a very effective combination of concrete example with abstract doctrine, in a way that could help establish the cosmology of prayer as one that could also structure the social environment of the one praying. The punishment the youth received as children from their earthly fathers should enlighten the situation of prayer as well as the experience of life as God’s children. The childlike existence exercised and maintained in prayer would be an existence that should combine confidence in God with a radical openness to what life may bring. It promoted a trust in God and a respect for God which was intended to protect against carnal security and which included God in all that takes place as the benevolent will behind all experiences in one’s life as His child. The next child in Osiander’s sermons on the Lord’s Prayer was old enough to be respectful to its father. In the sermon on the prayer “Give us today our daily bread”, Osiander explained that when God every now and then had to withhold his gifts from people living evil lives and let them have less nutrition than they needed, it was like a father who raised his children and disciplined them with the rod in order to get the proper respect out of them. In the same way as this father, God tries the faith, patience and obedience of His believers and presses patience out of them by restricting their access to food.293 Job was presented as the perfect example of how this pedagogy may improve a man. Even when he had lost all his possessions and his children had been taken away from him, and he for a while had grumbled against God, he was in the end patient enough in his suffering to say that God gave it and God took it away, God’s name be praised.294 Osiander explained that from God’s activity as a disciplining father, Christians learn about a weakness and impatience in themselves of which they would otherwise have been ignorant. In this way, God takes His children into His school, not to let them be ruined, but in order to return their losses generously in the end.295 This was not the only form of respect expected of someone being a child in prayer. There was also the respect that God required of other people, and the one praying should sympathize with God’s need to make Himself respected in the world. To explain this, Osiander told of an adolescent child who raged against its father. Naturally, the father would deprive this child of inheritance and money in Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 299. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 299: “Also hielt sich der heilig Job gar wol vnter dem Creutz / da er vmb seine liebe Kinder kommen war / darzu all sein Haab vnd Gut verlohren hette / war er noch darüber so gedultig im Creutz / daß er sagte / Gott hats gegeben / Gott hats genommen / des HERrn Namen sey gelobt. Dieses war ja ein herrliche grosse Gedult.” 295 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 300. 293 Osiander, 294 Osiander,

260

6. Catechism Sermons

order to keep the respect of his other children. In a similar way God reaps respect in the world, Osiander explained in his explanation of the prayer “Forgive us our trespasses”.296 The one praying should therefore be prepared for a discipline that was not intended to teach him patience, but to further the respect for God in the world by maintaining the connection between sin and punishment. Thus, the one praying also related to God as someone who acted in the world, and the proper prayer also respected this aspect of God. David again stood out as a prominent example, since, when he was punished with worldly accidents for his adultery, he responded by saying that God’s punishment was merciful and proportional according to its purpose. Still God’s punishment is mild, Osiander explained, for God’s rod is not as sharp as our sins have deserved.297 The image of the Father promoting respect expands the prayer situation to also involving God’s activity in the world. It points to another aspect of the rationality of suffering, namely that it is not only the Heavenly Father’s means for leading His children, but that it also secures an ordered society and the respect for God in the world. In this explanation, the relationship to God in prayer comes to strengthen a certain view on the cosmos, namely that it is principally understandable as an expression of God’s good will. The images of a child at three different ages are part of the same rhetorical scheme Osiander employed in his explanation of baptism and the Creed and which was discussed in greater detail in the previous sections. It is a rhetorical scheme that employs concrete images from the youths’ life to explain abstract images of faith. The images here described were of a child from the youths’ own time and social context. Though the images are concrete and would have been very recognizable, they seem to be arbitrarily related to that which they explain as freely chosen illustrations. The truths of faith that the images were meant to explain are real, but abstract. From their connection to the concrete examples, the abstract truths receive shape and form and become comprehensible. When dealing with the image of the child appearing at three different ages, however, Osiander added a third element to the concrete example and the abstract truth, namely a historical example which is the life of a biblical person, such as David and Job. This third element shows how the two other elements combine in real life and how they should be present in the lives of young people. The biblical persons are not seen as arbitrary examples, but as real and important persons who embody the abstract truth and who experience the relationship to God in the way prescribed by the arbitrary examples. In this way, they transform an abstract relationship into concrete reality. In the image of the first child, this example is also tied to a physical exercise, namely the old rhyme to be recited  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 313. This appears in the sermon “Forgive us our sin”. 297 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 314. 296

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer

261

during punishment. It is an exercise that continues the rhetorical function of the biblical example by making a situation in the youth’s own life analogous to that of the real examples. Osiander might have seen the need for this third level in the explanation of the image of the child because it was not intended as an image of a theological concept or an abstract truth of faith, but as an image of a relationship to God and an experience of God which needed to be rooted firmly in reality. 6.3.2.3 To Pray Is to Wander with God Passivity and receptiveness seem to have been important qualities for a Christian who was to be led through life by God as a father. Being a child in prayer was not an entirely childlike existence, however, but also involved struggling and fighting. In his explanation of “Lead us not into temptation”, Osiander compared the life of a Christian to being a wanderer who had received an expensive treasure in a foreign country and had to watch out for thieves and murderers when bringing his treasure home to his fatherland. Osiander employed the same image in his explanation of the Spirit, but here it received a twist. The wanderer’s journey resembled a Christian’s life. In the same way as thieves await the wanderer, the devil lurks about Christians as they live their lives. He wants to throw them to the ground and steal their heavenly inheritance and ruin their souls, and he attempts to do so by sending them temptations. The prayer was explained by Osiander as a prayer for help on life’s journey where the young were attacked from their own flesh, from the world, and from the devil. It is an explanation that is not very different from Luther’s and used the same temptations Luther identified and described in his series of catechism sermons.298 What is characteristic of Osiander’s explanation is the way he presented the temptations within an implied story of a journey. The first form of attack comes from our corrupted flesh and blood, which is like an ill-bred horse. Sometimes it is wild and cannot be held by the reins. At other times it may be in a mood where it will hardly leave the stable, even if one beats it and runs the spurs into it. In the same way our old Adam runs willingly to what is evil, but resists that which is good. Another form of attacks comes from the world and gives us the impression that sin is profitable. When the children of the world enjoy forbidden pleasures and gorge in food and drink, and when they indulge in fornication and whoring without punishment, they pose as a dangerous threat to Christians, who are tempted to mistrust God and become impatient.299 The biggest threat, however, comes from the devil who cooperates with

298 WA

30/1, 16, 49, and 106–107. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 323.

299 Osiander,

262

6. Catechism Sermons

the two other forms of attack to exploit our weaknesses. If we are doing fine, the devil will inflict arrogance; if we are poor, he will turn us towards other sins.300 One should still not pray that God should relieve these burdens, Osiander warned. That would be as absurd as a man who wants to join an army and become a soldier, but who says to the captain that he would rather not take part in any battles or skirmishes nor in any assaults or occupations; neither would he like to be kept awake at night. The captain would obviously hold such a man to be a dreamer, for if someone wants to be taken for a warrior, he must also be willing to battle.301 Likewise, struggling and suffering belong to a Christian’s journey through life. Instead of praying to be relieved of these burdens, one should pray that one will survive and live through these temptations.302 Osiander explained, however, that numerous examples testify that Christians deal differently with temptations. Some are courageous and brave, such as Daniel and his friends, and others, such as Judas and Peter, are cowards.303 It is therefore urgent that on one’s journey through life, one prays to God for weapons to fight with, particularly faith as armour and God’s words as sword.304 Still, however 300 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 327: For example, destitute or despised women will easily turn to prostitution and become indecent women who might strangle their unlawfully begotten children. “Wann Weibspersonen in grosse armut gerahten / sonderlich / wann sie auch etwo zu spott vnd schanden werden / so bringt sie vnterweilens der Satan dahin / daß sie sich allerdings der vnzucht ergeben / vnd gemeine vnzüchtige Weiber werden / oder aber jhre leibliche Kindlein / die sie in vnehren empfangen / erwürgen.” 301 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 328: “Dann wann wir gar ohn alle Versuchungen sein wolten / so theten wir eben / als wann einer sich wolte für ein Kriegsmann dargeben: wolte sich bey einem Hauptmann anzeigen vnd schreiben lassen: Er dingete aber bey dem Hauptmann auß / daß er sich nichtwollte [sic] in einer Schlacht / noch in einem Scharmützel gebrauchen lassen. Er wölte auch nicht stürmen / noch sich in ein Besatzung legen lassen: Auch wolte er des Nachts nicht wachen. Zu einem solchen Krieger würde der Hauptmann sagen: Du bist ein rechter Phantast / wilt du dich für ein Kriegsmann außthun vnd brauchen lassen / so mustu da schlagen / scharmützlen / stürmen / in Besatzung ligen / wachen / vnd alles das thun / was andere redliche Kriegsleut thun: wo nicht / so magst du wol daheim hinder dem Ofen sitzen bleiben. Derwegen muß ein rechter Christ / ein redlicher dapfferer Kriegsmann sein / der wider den Satan / wider die böse Welt / vnd wider sein eigen verderbt Fleisch vnd Blut / ritterlich streitte vnd kämpffe.” 302 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 329. Luther has a similar view on how to pray against temptations. One should not pray to be relieved of them, not because, as Osiander says, one should avoid being a coward, but because temptations and scruples will always be a part of this world. As will be shown in the next section (6.3.3), Luther’s view on how one should live with them is fairly different from that of Osiander. 303 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 329. 304  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 330: “Dann wann sich ein Christ mit seinem Glauben vnd Vertrawen vestiglich an die Verheissungen Gottes (von der Gnaden vnd Barmhertzigkeit Gottes) helt: vnd glaubt / daß Gott jhne durch die heilige Sacrament versichert hab / seiner ewigen Seligkeit / so kan er darmit die fewrige Pfeil des Satans abtreiben / daß sie in die länge nicht hafften mögen”, and “Wann ein Christ zuuor dem Teuffel gesagt hat: Teuffel / ich weiß auß dem heiligen Euangelio / auß meinem heiligen Tauff / vnd auß dem heiligen Abendtmal Christi / daß ich ein gnädigen Gott vnd Vatter im Himmel hab.”

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer

263

strong and however well one fights, it will in the end turn out for the worst. In this way, a Christian’s life as a journey with various attacks resembled a cobblestone at the end of a gutter. Even though the dripping water is soft and the stone is hard, the water will still pierce a hole in it in the end. In the same way scruples, afflictions and ordeals end up drilling a hole in any human’s heart.305 The Christian, therefore, should pray to be released from evil, as the Lord’s Prayer prescribes, but even when he does and experiences relief, it will not result in a definite solution, for the reliefs one experiences in life never last; they are like the shifting weather in April, where sunny weather suddenly shifts to rain and hailstorms.306 Only when God takes us out of this life will there be true relief.307 According to Osiander, the Lord’s Prayer therefore entailed a prayer for a blessed ending for oneself and all fellow Christians, to free those who pray from worries about how they will meet their end and depart.308 Osiander appears as relatively insistent in his description of life as a tragedy. It is a perspective on life that is absent in Luther’s sermons, but which is followed with such consequence in Osiander’s sermons that the concluding description of life’s blessed ending appears as a surprise. When studying his account at a distance, the consequent tragedy is interrupted by a surprisingly blessed ending which threatens to make his argument absurd. It threatens to render the exercise of letting oneself be led by God in life, which the prayer has evolved around, as being without consequence. This combination of tragedy and blessed ending was probably intended to strengthen the audience’s hope and trust in God. No matter how dark it may seem, it would always turn out for the best in the end, for one’s ending was in the hands of the Father. One’s destiny depended not on how one’s faith appeared or was felt, but rather on a relationship that was real and of which prayer was a part. It was a relationship with a Father who was not only fatherly, but who also had all the power and riches in the world. For, as Osiander said in his final sermon on the Lord’s Prayer, the first and the last sequence of the Lord’s Prayer are connected to each other because God is both Father and the Almighty ruler of the world.309 The nearly tragic rhetoric of the last part of Osiander’s teaching on the Lord’s Prayer pointed beyond the experience of faith to a relationship that was real even when it was not experienced as such. In a way it presented an argument that was confirmed by the cosmology it implied. Osiander’s last sermon on the Lord’s Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 334. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 341: “Darumb hat es kein bestand mit den zeitlichen Erlösungen / sonder es ist Aprilen Wetter / da jetz ein weil die Sonn scheinet / bald aber hernach wider regnet / kitzbonet / oder auch wol gar haglet.” 307 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 341: “Das geschicht aber alsdann / wan vns vnser himmlischer Vatter / durch ein seiligs Stündlein / auß diesem Leben abfordert / vnd vns in sein himmlisch ewigs Reich nimpt.” 308 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 341–342. 309 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 344. 305 Osiander, 306 Osiander,

264

6. Catechism Sermons

Prayer explained this cosmology in order to convince the youth of God’s omnipotence as a secure basis for prayer’s relationship to God.310 A central part of this argument was to describe the devil’s presence in life and the world not as a threat to this cosmology, but as integrated into it without challenging the power of the Father.311 The devil fulfilled a certain function in God’s universe as punisher and executioner, and he could only act if and as far as God permitted,312 and therefore his existence posed no real threat to the blessed ending of those who prayed. 6.3.3 Concluding Remarks: The Situation of Prayer Osiander’s sermons rarely explicate or discuss the situation of prayer. On the explicit level, he describes it fairly naïvely as a situation where the believer prays in order to get what he or she desires. As the prayer and Osiander’s explanation proceeds, however, it becomes clear that prayer’s conversation between a human being and an almighty God, may not be understood quite so simply. In this relationship, it turns out that God hardly changes anything according the requests of the one who prays. Instead, during the prayer’s progress, the one who prays enters a process of learning where he or she is being changed in accordance with how God leads. Therefore the one who prays still gets what he or she desires, since he or she comes to want what God wants. The account of the prayer’s progression ends with raising doubt about this merger of divine and human subjects, however, so that the fulfilment of prayer comes to rest not on this process of learning, but on the relationship to the Heavenly Father. Thus the fulfilment of prayer is ultimately anchored in God’s omnipotence. Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 349–351.  Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 345: “… Wir bitten solche ding von dir / lieber Vatter / dann du hast das Reich vnd Regiment im Himmel vnd auff Erden / vber alle Menschen vnd Creaturen: Du bist ein König aller König / vnnd ein HERR aller Herren: Du bist nicht nur ein HERR oder König in Teutschland / in Franckreich / oder sonsten in einem Königreich / oder zweyen: sonder vber die gantze weitte Welt. Alles was du willt / vnd bey dir beschlossen hast / das muß geschehen. Vnd ohn dein Willen / oder ja verhängnuß / vermögen alle Creaturen nichts zuthun / noch jemanden einen Schaden zuzufügen: Darumb suchen wir billich bey dir Hilff vnd Rhat / als bey dem allergrösten vnd öbersten HERRN / im Himmel vnd auff Erden.” 312 Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 346–347: “Wann die Menschen Gottloß seind / wöllen sich nicht zu Gott bekehren: oder aber / wann sie bekehrt seind gewesen / vnd aber sich widerumb mutwillig von Gott abwenden / vnd sich mit groben Sünden beflecken / vnd also thun / was dem Teuffel wolgefällt / vnd was Gott dem HERRN leid vnd zu wider ist: So vbergibt Gott der HERR solche Gottlose Leut in des Satans Gewalt / (wie ein Obrigkeit einen bösen Menschen vnd Vbelthäter dem Hencker vbergibt) der ihn an seinen Banden vnd Stricken / von einer Gassen zur andern führet / biß er jhn endtlich fürs Thor hinaußbringet / alda er jhm am Hochgericht sein Recht thut. Also führet auch der Teuffel (der vnsers HERRN Gottes Nachrichter ist) auß Gottes verhängnüß vnd zulassung / die Gottlose Leut an seinen Stricken vnd Versuchungen / von einer schweren Sünd zu der andern / biß er sie in das zeitliche vnd ewige verderben bringet …” 310 Osiander, 311

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer

265

The situation of prayer is different in Luther’s sermons. There, the presentation of the prayer situation becomes increasingly clear throughout the three series of sermons and has its definite expression in the last of the series as well as in his Large Catechism.313 It differs not only because images are not attached to a story as in Osiander’s sermons, but also because the sermons employ a different starting point. As mentioned previously, Osiander’s and Luther’s sermons have different descriptions of how God is the real subject in prayer. In Osiander’s sermons, He is the subject because it is the Spirit residing in the believer’s heart who urges to prayer, whereas Luther’s sermons portray God as effecting prayer through His Commandments. The Commandments are effective because God has tied a promise and a threat to them. Praying the Lord’s Prayer fulfils the second commandment and brings about the promise, which is that the prayer will be heard.314 This way of describing God as active in prayer allows for a greater distance between God and the one who prays than was the case in Osiander’s conception. God is the subject of prayer not because the one who prays responds to the Spirit’s urging in the heart, gradually leading to a unification with God’s will, but rather because those who pray hear His command and respond to their own needs. Another reason why God is the active subject in prayer is that it is He who instructs how true prayer is to be conducted. The Lord’s Prayer was taught by Jesus,315 and the form of prayer it teaches is that one should pray out of need (Not). It reminds the audience that the troubles of life are real forces, and that those who pray have to speak to God from their lives’ experience of need. This is true prayer because praying out of a real need is like opening up one’s lap or cloak in order to be able to receive blessings from God.316 This different perspective on the situation of prayer points to another view on how prayer is fulfilled. It is not necessarily the themes that are envisioned in the prayer sections that are to 313 WA

30/1, 95–109, and 193–211. promise connected to the second commandment is that God will hear one’s prayer, and the threat is that if one refuses to pray one may become the object of God’s rage. See Luther’s Large Catechism, in WA 30/1, 195–196, and in the third catechism sermon series in WA 30/1, 97–98: “Quia hic audis praeceptum et promissionem: ‘Petite et acciepietis’ &c. Mandatum est, ut ores, et promissum, das ja solt sein, was man bittet, Ut ‘Invoca me in die tribulationis’ Et sic: ‘Ego exaudiam te’. Darauff gehe et dic: Nunc scio, quod mea precatio non est contemnenda. Si enim eam contemnerem, contemnerem praeceptum et promissionem dei: deus non contemnit orationem, sed praecepit et promittit &c. Cur igitur ego contemnerem? Nos ut bestiae vivimus nihil orantes.” 315 WA 30/1, 96. 316 WA 30/1, 97: “Er wil haben, ut ores et certus sis te exaudiri und das du deine schos auffhaltest, das er dir geben kunne.” See also WA 30/1, 197: “Darümb auch Gott haben wil, das du solche not und anligen klagest und anzihest, nicht das ers nicht wisse, sondern das du dein hertz entzündest deste stercker und mehr zubegeren, und nur den mantel weit ausbreitest und auffthuest viel zuempfahen.” 314 The

266

6. Catechism Sermons

be fulfilled, but primarily the needs and troubles which the prayer names and identifies and which true prayer stems from. In contrast to Osiander’s sermons, where the situation of prayer could only be identified indirectly, the situation of prayer is an explicitly important concern in Luther’s sermons, both in the introduction to the Lord’s Prayer as well as in the explanation of the different prayer sections. In them it is repeatedly emphasized that it is that which happens with the one who prays during prayer that is important. This focus on the situation of prayer can be observed in Luther’s explanations of the first five sections of the Lord’s Prayer. The explanation of “hallowed by thy name” starts by pointing out that the Lord’s name is holy in itself even without our prayer, but the prayer helps us respect the Lord’s name as holy.317 Thus, the prayer is not intended to change anything other than the one who prays. The prayer “your kingdom come” is explained similarly. This prayer also points to a reality that exists independently of our prayer; God’s kingdom comes whether we pray for it or not. In the prayer, one prays for one’s own part in God’s kingdom,318 which exists in the present through God’s word and faith, and in the hereafter as life everlasting.319 In the prayer ”your will be done” it is emphasized that God’s will takes place even without us, and that we therefore pray that His will should have no hindrance in us and among us.320 Nor does the supply of “our daily bread” depend on our prayer, as can be seen in the world where even those who do not pray have bread to eat. The reason for praying “give us today our daily bread” is to be able to recognize God’s generosity.321 The Heavenly Father’s gift of bread is not seen as a response to the prayer. The prayer is almost presented as a picture of reality, placed on some distance of what takes place, as a means for interpreting life as it is being sustained in the world. Luther’s explanation of “forgive us our trespasses” continues this perspective. God forgives even without this prayer, since God’s forgiveness is given with the gospel and faith before we pray this prayer, but the prayer is there to give us confidence in God’s forgiveness.322 On this point, Luther’s explanation connects to the perspective presented in his introduction to the Lord’s Prayer. It focused on 317 WA

30/1, 98–99. 30/1, 100. 319 WA 30/1, 101. 320 WA 30/1, 102. 321 WA 30/1, 104. This is perhaps expressed more precisely in Luther’s Large Catechism, WA 30/1, 205–206. The explanation of this prayer is one of few instances where Osiander refers explicitly to the situation of prayer in a similar manner as Luther. See Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 302. 322 WA 30/1, 105, and 206–207. Since Luther interprets the prayer in this way, he also sees the next part of this prayer section “as we forgive those who trespass against us” not as a condition for forgiveness, but as a description of a fact that should be taken as a sign and confirmation of our forgiveness; when we forgive others, it confirms that we have been forgiven first, for it is the forgiveness from God that enables us to do such things; WA 30/1, 106 and 207–208. This point was absent in his last series of catechism sermons. This is different in Osiander’s teaching, 318 WA

6.3 Experiencing God: Praying the Lord’s Prayer

267

the prayer as commanded by God and as instructed by God, and therefore as a prayer where God acts. On this point, however, a main advantage of seeing the prayer as commanded by God and fulfilling God’s command is that the prayer may secure a good conscience. Since it is God who has commanded this prayer and tied His promise to it, the one who prays can be assured that the prayer will be heard. It contains its own fulfilment in a way that lets Luther compare it to a letter of indulgence but with the difference that it has God the Father’s own seal on it.323 Praying this prayer is therefore to leave all worries and have a peaceful heart;324 it is a prayer one may run to in order to find comfort and straighten one’s conscience.325 Thus, in Luther’s thought, it is not necessary for prayer to be heard that realities in the world are changed because of prayer, but that the one who prays has his or her faith strengthened and his or her conscience relieved. On this point Luther’s sermons guarantee that those who pray the Lord’s Prayer will be answered because they pray a prayer that was designed to overcome scruples. The situation of prayer presented by Osiander has a slightly different promise of change. In his view, the world may be changed because of prayer, but it is more likely that prayer is heard because the one praying is being changed. The one who prays enters a process of learning where his or her will is conformed to God’s, so that they come to wish what the Almighty wants. In this way, Osiander’s sermons present prayer not as meeting an experienced need, but as a transformative experience. Ultimately the promise connected to prayer cannot be evaluated by experience and may not be met during one’s lifetime, for life may turn out very much like a tragedy, and fulfilment may wait until the hereafter. As a consequence, the one thing that Luther’s explanation really promises is the one thing Osiander’s promise cannot. For Luther, prayer’s fulfilment was in the situation of prayer itself, whereas for Osiander it lay behind and beyond it. Osiander’s conception did not really present life as a tragedy, but used tragedy as a rhetorical device to emphasize the strength of prayer’s relationship with the Heavenly Father. Thereby prayer’s real purpose was not to help the young get what they desire, at least not what they initially believed they desired, but rather to rehearse and strengthen their relationship to God. This relationship had God as its real subject and guarantor, and its strength was confirmed not in the overcoming of scruples, but by the cosmology of God’s omnipotence. This cosmology where the forgiveness of others is seen as a condition; Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 315. 323 WA 30/1, 106: “Non dicit: da 5 gl. in aerarium pauperum, sed remitte tantum alteri, si non suscipere vult, las ihn faren, modo cor tuum sit pacatum, Et inspice bene omnes precationes. Noli murmurare ut clerici: ‘dimitte’ &c. certa fiducia ora, quia ut certus esses, adiunxit sigillum &c.” 324 WA 30/1, 106. 325 WA 30/1, 207: “So ist on unterlas von nöten, das man hieher lauffe und trost hole, das gewissen widder auffzurichten.”

268

6. Catechism Sermons

was explained explicitly in Osiander’s last sermon on the prayer section “for thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory”, but it was also alluded to in several of the images Osiander had employed to explain the other sections. For example, when explaining “Our Father” he had compared the Father’s title to that of the emperor and had placed them within a consistent hierarchy, when explaining “thy kingdom come” he had compared God’s kingdom to the kingdoms in this world, and when in his explanation of “give us today our daily bread” he had emphasized that one prays also for the bread of others, including that of the rich. In his explanation of the prayer “forgive us our trespasses” he had showed that an aspect of learning to see one’s life as led by God was to respect and to some extent understand that God must command respect in the world. Thus, the familiarity that characterizes prayer’s relationship with God not only altered the youths’ perception of their experiences, it also opened up the possibility of sharing God’s perspective in the world. As a pedagogy for young Christian citizens, Osiander’s concept of prayer had a different function from that of Luther and probably a greater potential for constructing a religiosity that could support a certain view of society and citizenship. Even though the images from the youths’ social system and hierarchy were not described in detail as part of God’s omnipotence, or included in cosmology, the many images in Osiander’s sermons still combined in a rhetoric that tied them to God’s omnipotence.

Chapter 7

Conclusion: Catechist and City Preacher 7.1 City and Confessionalization The introductory chapter addressed the discussion between historians Heinz Schilling and Heinrich Richard Schmidt about the concept of “confessionalization”, a discussion about whether a perspective from below or a perspective from above should be regarded as primary in the study of “religious disciplining” and religious change in early modern Germany: Was it the needs and beliefs of villagers that gave the premises for this “disciplining”, or was it primarily motivated by ambitions of early absolutist rulers striving to gain control of their territories and construct integrated and strong states? As described in the introductory chapter, this discussion ended with a compromise which described disciplining as resulting from a negotiation between interests from above as well as from below. Part One of this study employed this perspective when it described how Osiander served his and the church’s interests by positioning himself as part of a disciplining from above. The introductory chapter of Part Two placed Osiander’s preaching in the political context of early modern imperial cities. It was a place where forces of communalism and feudalism struggled for political influence, a struggle which towards the end of the sixteenth century moved in favour of feudalism. In this struggle, Reformed theology had supported communalist theory, but ended up losing ground to a Lutheranism which was promoted by territorial states and which was not as clearly allied with communalist interests. Part Two’s analysis identified Osiander as an agent for a disciplining from above in his service to Esslingen. On the question of church authority, he sided with the ruling elite in the city to increase their influence over the church and to strengthen their support from their most important ally in foreign policy, Württemberg. Osiander defined his position as Lutheran whose authority came from above, whereas Hermann saw his position as a position whose authority came from below, where he respected the relative independence of the church as it understood its position within the corporative system of a city. Though it was a conflict between perspectives on authority from above and below, however, it has not been possible to identify it as a conflict between Lutheran and Reformed thought. Hermann’s position was most likely very compatible with Luther’s catechism, and the comparison between Luther’s and Osiander’s catechism sermons

270

7. Conclusion: Catechist and City Preacher

has shown clear differences between the two. Osiander’s teaching differs from Luther’s in ways that make it far more compatible with what Moeller described as “city religiosity” and which Blickle regarded as a form of communalism theory. Continuing from this perspective, this study’s comparison of Luther and Osiander has pointed to a certain dynamic in Osiander’s role as preacher in Esslingen. The tradition that Osiander promoted and regarded as Lutheran was a Brenzian tradition. It had its root in a city reformation that had been transformed into a religious program for a territory and which had turned out to be very compatible with an effective territorial confessionalization. When Osiander brought it back to the city context, he did so in a way that brought the territory with it. It aided the close cooperation between elite preacher and secular authority and it involved the city in the confessionalization processes of the surrounding territory. The opposition between Osiander and Hermann was therefore not that of a Lutheran preacher against a Reformed preacher, but that of a Brenzian and Württembergian preacher against a corporativist and probably Lutheran preacher. The analysis has pointed to a logical connection between the theological and political aspects in Osiander’s conflict with Hermann. Luther’s catechetical conception has been shown to be a less potent tool for a confessionalization agent of Osiander’s kind. Osiander’s role in Esslingen has been confirmed in this study by a description of his homiletical style. The description has shown how Osiander’s sermons could serve confessionalization from above and from the outside and it has pointed out the form of disciplining his sermons intended.

7.2 Luther and Osiander The study of Luther’s sermons in Part Two’s sermon analysis has served as a means to enhance the special theological and pedagogical characteristics of Osiander’s teaching. Osiander regarded Luther’s catechisms as the purest expression of true doctrine and as prescriptive for proper Christian and Lutheran teaching. Osiander’s teaching is still quite different from Luther’s and therefore appears as a development of the Lutheran tradition in a way that Osiander would not have been fully aware of himself. Many of the changes observed obviously resulted from the choice of Brenz’s catechism as a basis for Osiander’s teaching instead of Luther’s catechism. Osiander was probably unaware that by choosing Brenz as the basis for his teaching, he chose an instructional conception which was formed by a different historical context than Luther’s and which related differently to its surroundings than Luther’s had done. Luther’s catechism stemmed from a territorial context and had been taught by a catechist well aware of Catholic religious practices and who knew the Catholic Church as the dominant and established religious order.

7.3 Composition as an Analytical Perspective

271

Brenz’s catechism, on the other hand, took shape in the context of a Protestant city and was written by a theologian who had never served as a Catholic catechist. It was a catechism which Osiander knew as part of Württemberg’s state constitution and the basis for the territory’s educational program. The two catechisms thus reflect different contexts and theological styles. The most basic observation is the significance of the different rhetorical and compositional principles in the sermon corpus of each catechist. The analysis has pointed out how these rhetorical and compositional differences are tied to different pedagogical functions for the two catechisms. This has in turn been linked to different social and political impulses in the two catechists’ teaching. Comparing Luther’s catechism teaching with Osiander’s teaching has offered a window not only to Osiander’s preaching style and theology, but also to his time and to the social and political context surrounding his pedagogical effort.

7.3 Composition as an Analytical Perspective One could ask if the difference in composition is as decisive as this study has made it, whether it could not have been arbitrarily chosen by the two catechists, and if it would really be perceived by listeners as such an important difference. These chapters have argued that the differences in composition and starting point are of vital importance. They have done so not because different intentions for the choice of different compositional principles have been proved, but because it has been shown how these differences resulted in different rhetorical and pedagogical functions for the sermons. Due to the recommended learning technique, where listening to sermons was combined with learning the shorter catechism by heart and recitation of the different catechetical parts, the young would probably get a clear impression of the catechism sermons’ overall composition. The most important argument, however, concerns the way the compositional principle marked the different sermons; their choice of images and arguments and the way each single sermon referred to an overarching perspective. The argument has therefore not been based on the historical audience’s ability to comprehend the overarching structure or the catechists’ deliberations, but on the way this overarching structure has characterized each single part of the catechetical instruction. The compositional principle was an important expression of the sermons’ pedagogical operations and functions as well as of their implicit pedagogical intentions. At the outset of their sermon series, the two catechists were explicit in tying a social dimension to their choice of starting point and to the ordering of sequences prescribed by their different compositional principles. This social dimension will be commented on in detail later, but here its importance for the sermons’ rhetorical function as parts of different sermon corpora will be indicated briefly.

272

7. Conclusion: Catechist and City Preacher

Luther set out by presenting the Commandments as that which everyone has in common as opposed to the superficial rules of monks and clerics, and he presented their greatness in connection with a description of the greatness of ordinary and worldly life. Osiander, on the other hand, set out by presenting baptism as a marker of Christian identity and of belonging to a group which is to be led by the catechism as a flock is led by its shepherd and which is surrounded by Jews and Turks, described as the enemies of Christendom. In the two catechists’ starting point, the intentions behind their compositional principles were already implicitly present, at least as they may be interpreted in social categories. Luther presented himself as a catechist intending to open the church up and make it relevant for ordinary life, whereas Osiander presented himself as a catechist establishing a group at the centre of society with a firm trust in God. These intentions marked the presentation of the different parts of the catechism. Osiander presented baptism as establishing a flock and tying the believer to God, whereas Luther, who treated baptism towards the end of his sermon series, presented it as enabling a proper repentance. Osiander presented the Creed after baptism but long before the Commandments, as developing an individual relationship between the believer and God and as affirming a Christian cosmos surrounding his or her world. Luther, on the other hand, presented it after the Commandments as an aid to the fulfilment of the Commandments. Osiander’s focus in this section was on the bilateral relationship between Christ and believer, while Luther’s was on Christ as enabling the believer’s proper relationship to the God of the Commandments, which corresponds to the different intentions of their compositions. The different perspectives on prayer also were marked by the compositional principles when Osiander identified prayer as a relationship between a heavenly parent and an earthly child while Luther focused on prayer as an expression of need which promised the fulfilment of this need. When towards the end of his sermon series Osiander treated the Commandments, they were not primarily presented as God’s demands to all, as in Luther’s thought, rather their fulfilment was seen as a testimony of faith and as an expression of gratitude. Thus, the different starting point led Osiander to present the relationship to God not primarily as one that came to help in situations of need and was offered in the words and rituals of the church, but rather as a steady and familiar relationship to a Heavenly Father already established by baptism.

7.4 Doctrinal Content The different compositional principles that characterize the catechism sermon corpora of Luther and Osiander have their foundation in different rhetorical styles and preaching techniques. After all, the sermons were written in two different epochs of Lutheran homiletics. Still, whether they were employed consciously

7.4 Doctrinal Content

273

or not, the compositional and rhetorical differences brought with them different pedagogical and social impulses and presented different descriptions of Christian faith. Because of these differences, the sermons structured the knowledge they communicated quite differently, and therefore one may say that these rhetorical differences resulted in a different structuring of the dogmatic content and in different descriptions of Christian cosmology, even if Luther’s descriptions were far more restricted than Osiander’s. The dogmatic consequences of the two catechists’ rhetoric were seen most distinctly in their explanations of the second article of faith. Here Luther explained Christ as putting the believer in the right relationship to God and the Commandments. He pointed out what Christ did and what the consequences were for the believer: Christ freed from sin in a way that could be experienced in the Eucharist and relived in penance’s re-enactment of baptism. The listeners’ own experiences of sin and suffering were taken as a premise for this description, and a remedy was prescribed for these sins. The remedy was tied to concrete and visible signs, and instruction focused on the use of these signs. For Osiander, on the other hand, this explanation took place after a steady relationship to a heavenly shepherd had been established and in a universe where the most important aspects of faith existed in an invisible reality. He accordingly saw empathy with Christ’s suffering as necessary for the believer to appropriate Christ’s merit and therefore prescribed a form of empathy that made the believer’s relationship to Christ a primary relationship which placed all other relationships and experiences in their right perspective. It was intended to change the believer’s view of life and the world in a way that let him or her identify what was good and evil seen from God’s perspective. It was an empathy with Christ which mistrusted one’s own suffering, but which made God understandable. This prescribed alteration of perception, which reappeared in Osiander’s explanation of the Lord’s Prayer, was connected with the central role Osiander ascribed to Christ’s ascension. While Luther found Christ’s ascension to be too complicated a theme for the instruction of youth, Osiander saw it as central because it taught the youth a Christian view of the world and of their lives. Christ’s ascension was seen as the reason for His effective omnipotence on earth and the reason why everything the youth experienced in life was to be regarded as an experience of Christ. For Osiander, Christ’s ascension was also the reason why he could explain God’s activity on earth not with the traditional Lutheran concept of Law and Gospel, but with the concept of Christ’s two sceptres: the sceptre of wrath employed against His enemies and the sceptre of mercy employed in His church. The two catechists appeared to have had a common wish to convey trust in God to their audiences, but they intended to affect this trust by different strategies. While Luther’s was to teach his audience how to use the sure signs of God’s grace, Osiander’s was to impart a cosmology to the youth which placed them in

274

7. Conclusion: Catechist and City Preacher

a privileged and secure place in the world. These different strategies awakened different experiences of the surroundings and of God’s presence in the world. While for Luther’s audience there would remain a distance to God, since His strict commands continued to play a primary role, Osiander’s audience took part in the flock’s unique perspective on the world and could experience how this perspective absorbed any other possible perspective and let their perspective stand out as particular and universal at the same time. Here it is interesting to note that when Osiander promoted community and the connection between secular and spiritual rule, features which Moeller ascribed to Zwingli and saw as characteristic of city religiosity, he did so by developing the very Lutheran concept of communicatio idiomatum. The concept had been originally employed by Luther in his polemic against Zwingli’s teaching on the Eucharist, and Osiander continued to use it polemically against Zwinglian and Calvinist teaching on the Eucharist and ascension. Though on a dogmatic level the concept emphasized the conflict between Zwinglian and Lutheran teaching, it united the two traditions on a pragmatic and pedagogical level in Osiander’s preaching. Here the concept promoted God’s omnipotence in a way that had an obvious potential for both strengthening the Christian and social community as well as for disciplining inhabitants and congregants. It communicated a cosmology which had an inherent and explicitly explained potential for altering the individual believer’s perception of suffering, but it also convinced believers of the firm safety surrounding their existence as members of a Christian community.

7.5 Teaching Discourse As shown, the overarching rhetorical principle behind the sermons demonstrates a shift from Luther’s emphasis, which started with the Commandments as God’s challenge to all, to Osiander’s focus on a steady relationship to a familiar God resting on baptism. This shift allowed the dogmatic conception described in Osiander’s sermons to differ from Luther’s on important points. Christ was not primarily described as the one who placed the believer in the right relationship with the Father who was the God of the Commandments. Instead He was presented as someone one may sympathize with in order to see the world as the scene for Christ’s effective omnipotence according to his two sceptres. This dogmatic conception changed the sermons’ pedagogical task. This changed pedagogy could also be described as a changed teaching discourse because it moved religious teaching to a slightly different field of practice. In Luther’s sermons, one is presented with a catechist who seems to have a rather practical ambition with his instruction. More than improving how the youth understood God, he wanted to help them relate to God. He restricted his

7.5 Teaching Discourse

275

explanations and required no more understanding of his audience than what was necessary for them when they were to make use of the prescribed religious practices in a way that brought comfort and an upright consciousness and which helped them meet God’s demands. In Osiander’s sermons, understanding as such advanced into the foreground. To understand God emerged as the primary task for the young, and all the practices that were described and encouraged followed from this understanding. The practices which Osiander’s teaching promoted had a wider scope and were more vaguely described. He urged a sense of belonging to the group of Christians in the city and beyond it; he encouraged his listeners to be persevering in their life’s calling, to feel safe and secure as Christian citizens, and to have a sense of loyalty towards Christian authorities. Osiander’s broader pedagogical task resonated in the concrete preaching techniques he employed. While Luther settled for relatively concrete information tied to different church practices, Osiander employed a rich imagery in a complex system of images and metaphors. The images are too numerous for them all to be mentioned here, but several of them have been described and analyzed in the previous chapters. Nevertheless, a short summary of the different images’ function in Osiander’s sermons may still be useful. In an example mentioned in Chapter 6.2’s analysis of the second article of the Creed, about a rich and pious man freeing Christian slaves living under an evil Turkish tyrant as an example of how Christ frees sinners, the image reinforces Christian doctrine through association and similarity. A hypothetical and concrete story, describing recognizable conditions from the youths’ surroundings, is combined with an abstract story about a Christian truth. The hypothetical and concrete story explains the abstract and true story, and the abstract and true story is strengthened by the hypothetical and concrete by letting concrete experiences and knowledge become part of the faithful imagination. At the same time, however, the opposite also takes place, namely that faith maintains the way of experiencing and understanding one’s surroundings that was described by the example. Example and Christian truth thus promote similar emotions and attitudes; parallel to being encouraged to hate the devil and love Christ, the youth are encouraged to fear the Turks and love their own society. A similar associative connection was observed in the examples of the emperor as an example of the church’s transcendent character and in the example of the freshly polished silver cup that illustrates the Christian citizen’s honour. A more emotional connection between example and that which it explained was observed in Chapter 6.3’s analysis of the sermons on the Lord’s Prayer. Parents were here employed as images of God in a way that let the difference between good and bad parents explain the difference between good parents and God as Father. Here, the intensity in the powerlessness parents feel when they lose their beloved children was employed to explain both the Heavenly Father’s great love as well as His great power.

276

7. Conclusion: Catechist and City Preacher

In other examples, a connection was found between image and Christian doctrine that went beyond resemblance and established a logical connection. This form of connection was observed in two examples in Chapter 6.2’s analysis of the third article of the Creed, one about an army captain defeating the Turks as an example of how the Spirit rules His church and another about the city as an explanation of the shape of the church. The images were employed as metaphors explaining an abstract idea, but the images were also connected more concretely to what they were meant to explain. The army captain was not only an image of the Spirit’s rule in the church, but also a real protector of the church and of Christian society from its foremost external threat. The city was not only a concrete image explaining an abstract truth, namely church community, but it was also a concrete phenomenon connected to another concrete phenomenon, namely an existing Christian city connected to the heavenly Jerusalem which stretches into this world. Another way examples were tied relatively concretely to that which they explained was found in Chapter 6.3 and in Osiander’s use of biblical figures as a meeting point between hypothetical example and abstract truth. Continuing from the example of a child being led by its father, the biblical figures David, Job, and Jesus were examples of how God’s will had met the will of real and historical persons. The abstract example was pulled further into reality in this sermon when Osiander proceeded from the hypothetical child and biblical persons to addressing the youth’s own experience of being children and encouraging them to understand their own corporeal punishment as an example of being led contrary to their own will. When Osiander employed his various preaching techniques involving appeals to the youths’ perceptions, emotions and experiences, he did so to enhance the youths’ religious imagination. The young were thus invited to apprehend a religious universe and to see their lives as positioned within this universe. Continuing from these observations, it is my view that Luther and Osiander present different views of religious teaching in their catechism sermons. While Luther saw his teaching as information enabling the right religious practice, Osiander saw his teaching as implementing knowledge of a religious universe that encircles the youths’ world. Luther explains church practices and gives the necessary answers which the youth need in order to live with God’s commandments. The practices his teaching relates to are repentance and Eucharist, in addition to the hearing of God’s commands. Osiander’s teaching is related to a wider field of practice, but it is a field described more vaguely. He also recommends penance and Eucharist, but the practices of imagination, remembering, recitation, singing, and enduring pain are just as prominent. The religious imagination which his sermons urge is so closely connected to a certain way of understanding and relating to one’s own society that life as a citizen appears, however indirectly, as another field of practice which his teaching targets.

7.6 The Formation of Identity

277

7.6 The Formation of Identity This changed view on instruction is, in my view, connected with a changed catechetical ambition. When compared to Luther’s catechetical teaching, it becomes clear that in Osiander’s conception the catechist’s primary intention is no longer to open up the church and make it useful and relevant for worldly life. Instead, in Osiander’s sermons a catechist emerges who is ambitious to form his listeners’ identity. It is a catechist ambitious to influence how the youth view themselves and their surroundings and how they understand their society and position themselves within it as Christian citizens. This ambition for a formation of identity which was traced in Osiander’s sermons could be seen as an attempt to influence the social common sense which Kaschuba described as a central feature of any functioning communalism. It was a common sense that was produced by ethical maxims and religious motifs. According to Kaschuba, these motifs had to meet some requirements if they were to effectively serve a social common sense. They had to reject external claims of authority, support some form of mutuality, and facilitate an exchange of interest between lordship and community. In my view, Osiander’s sermons testify to an ambition to target this social common sense in order to stretch it in a direction compatible with elite interests.1 The eagerness to define insiders and outsiders, and to describe the roles of different layers of civic society and of city allies, was led by a will to describe to the congregation the benefits of belonging to this society even when political power and wealth resided elsewhere. The fundamental feature of the identity promoted by Osiander was that the youth should see themselves as positioned in the most favourable spot in the universe where they could experience their existence as unshakeably safe in a way that let them live as loyal and enduring citizens and believers. The formation of identity was a major intent in Osiander’s sermons, which places them firmly within the definition of “disciplining” as it was described by Schilling, namely as a discourse on morality and attitudes, thinking, faith, and emotions. The fact that the faith and emotions promoted were of experiencing life as an unshakeably safe existence corresponds well with what Schilling claimed to be a major driving force for confessionalization, namely the struggle for stability in church and society. This intent in Osiander’s sermons has been revealed by an analysis of composition, rhetoric, and theology. On several occasions in his catechism sermons, Osiander expressed this intent quite explicitly. In them one sees how Osiander regarded his teaching as strengthening the Christian congregation and the city community, but they also offer clues to understand on whose premises Osiander made his educational contribution. In his introductory sermons on baptism, Osi1 See

Part Two, Chapter 5.

278

7. Conclusion: Catechist and City Preacher

ander explained baptism as an identity marker in a way that tied the individual listener to the flock. He also reminded them that this flock was surrounded by enemies, namely Turks and Jews, and in this way he described a catechetical teaching situation where the audience found themselves in a specific community that was also defined by external threats. His image of the church as resembling the Empire showed the audience that not all outsiders were enemies, but that many belonged to a privileged group of Christians in a hidden way. These descriptions contained explicit instructions for how the listeners in the congregation should perceive the teaching situation they took part in and for how they should see themselves as positioned in the world. It was a positioning that emphasized the citizens’ connectedness with the outside world and with foreign alliances in a universal Christian church, a perspective which would have been compatible with the political concerns of the ruling elite. There were, however, different categories of outsiders. Osiander’s explanation of the sceptres of Christ was also an instruction concerning how to regard those who were inside and outside of the listeners’ community. They were all subjected to Christ’s omnipotence, but they were subjected in different ways. The outsiders were subjected to Christ’s sceptre of just wrath whereas insiders were subjected to his sceptre of mercy. The doctrine of Christ’s omnipotence maintained the city as a unique Christian community. The identity Osiander wanted to impress on his audience was expressed in instructions for experiencing life within the Christian community and the Christian city. His distinction between common faith and saving faith is an example of this. It pointed to the least common denominator necessary for being part of a Christian society such as the city of Esslingen, namely a common faith which holds God to be the creator and just judge of the world. At the same time, with this distinction Osiander intended his audience to regard themselves as belonging to the core and support of this society, since they lived in the saving faith that was the real faith from which the common faith was derived. Another example of the identity Osiander wanted to impress on the city’s youth can be found in his explanations of the church as a community. The church was described as a worldly community where social differences should be endured because it had a common share in a heavenly treasure that made earthly differences trivial. It was a community where one prayed for each other across distances and where one forgave each other in a way that was exemplary for city life. The descriptions of the Christian citizen’s honour as maintaining a justice that went beyond what was rewarded in this life, and which therefore maintained a justice that, though not always given room in this world, was necessary to secure the difference between right and wrong and between good and evil, also expressed this intended identity. In these explicit descriptions of the identity which the catechism wanted to develop, Osiander also presented his formative ambition and the role he ascribed

7.7 The Preacher as a Political Player

279

to his teaching. One of his primary concerns was to emphasize the importance of the city as the place for living a Christian life and its authorities as the protectors of the church and to stress how Christians made up the core and support of this society. Another concern was to anchor the legitimacy of this society in religion. He did this by encouraging his listeners to take God’s perspective and see how Christ ruled the world according to his two sceptres. When Osiander trained a new generation in this perspective, he also expressed an ambition that the governing class should see their role in this perspective. It was a perspective that went beyond the mere description of secular authority as protectors of the church to claiming a cosmology and an understanding of authority requiring secular authority to seek advice from church and preacher in order to have legitimacy in their rule. The traditional claim, formulated by Hans-Christoph Rublack, that the Lutheran orthodox sermon was conservative and promoted a traditional and premodern society on the basis of God’s commandment,2 does not appear as an accurate description of Osiander’s preaching. His preaching aimed for stability, but not primarily by traditional Lutheran means. More appropriate in Osiander’s example are the views that Lutheran preachers of this era negotiated legitimacy and morals in a society by their interpretations of reality,3 and that the contents of their sermons were influenced by the interest of citizens.4

7.7 The Preacher as a Political Player This description of theology and pedagogy in Osiander’s catechism sermons demonstrates Osiander’s many differences from Luther and represents a “city religiosity”. By emphasizing city loyalty as an important part of life as a Christian, he met concerns described as an important part of city mentality, but he did so differently from the classic city reformers. Osiander saw church congregation and city community as connected to each other and as resembling each other, but he identified them as clearly different institutions. In a way the two communities were connected by a shared faith, but this faith was divided into two different faiths in the same God, namely a common faith and a saving faith. Osiander recognized a clear connection between secular and spiritual rule, but he did not simply describe it as a harmoniously cooperating form of regnum Christi. Rather, some distance to God was preserved in a Lutheran fashion, since Osiander saw Christ as binding both spheres together by His omnipotence and omnipresence, 2 Rublack,

“Lutherische Predigt und soziale Wirklichkeiten”, 378. and Kolb, “Preaching in Lutheran Pulpits in the Age of Confessionalization”, 157; and Haag, Predigt und Gesellschaft: Die lutherische Orthodoxie in Ulm; 1640–1740, 5. 4 Haag, Predigt und Gesellschaft: Die lutherische Orthodoxie in Ulm; 1640–1740, 415–417. 3 Haemig

280

7. Conclusion: Catechist and City Preacher

acting partly with His sceptre of just wrath and partly with His sceptre of mercy.5 In his insistence that secular authorities should base their rule on theological counsels and needed legitimacy from the church, however, Osiander clearly resembled Reformed thinkers more than Luther. The preacher was seen as laying down criteria for the values that government should be based on and which could legitimize it as a good government and as thereby tying a close connection between church and secular rule. Although the city council seems to have been satisfied with Osiander’s service in Esslingen, they might have come to a different conclusion if Osiander had been younger and vigorous enough to stay for a longer period in the city. The way Osiander tied church to secular authority not only subjected the church to secular rule, but it also tied secular authority to the church in a way that offered the preacher considerable political influence. Osiander was an agent for disciplining from above, but he was so as a preacher who saw himself as an important factor for secular rule. A more concrete description of this role may be found in the way Osiander presented himself as preacher and political agent in his sermons. Osiander began his catechism sermons by introducing himself as shepherd for the flock of youth who were now to learn the catechism, standing in the tradition from Jesus as the arch-shepherd. In his final catechism sermon, he concluded in a similar manner by preparing for the shepherd’s departure and by explaining how the youth should behave after he had left them. They should adhere to his teaching even after he was no longer present, for in reality it was the catechism itself that was the real shepherd.6 Osiander clearly placed himself in a central spot in his relation to his listeners. As catechist he was their leader who guided them through life on their way to salvation and as citizens of a Christian city. His role as a catechist thus also gave him a political role as educator of a new generation of citizens, imposing certain values and attitudes on them and positioning them in a certain way in the city’s social and political community. The previous chapters have argued that despite being Lutheran, Osiander’s teaching was still compatible with important concerns in a city religiosity inspired by Reformed thinking. Throughout Esslingen’s history, the city council had continually balanced opinions and demands from corporations within the 5 There seems to be a clear difference between Bucer and Osiander in their view on Christ’s offices. Instead of the two sceptres, Bucer, a central figure among city reformation theologians, describes Christ with the three offices of king, priest, and prophet. As king Christ works against the evil enemy, but He does so through the Word and the Spirit. His office as king is directed at realizing the power of redemption through Word and Spirit; in other words, His office as king is mainly seen as conveying salvation. See Willem van’t Spijker, The Ecclesiastical Offices in the Thought of Martin Bucer, Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought 57 (Leiden, New York / Köln: Brill, 1996), 40–45. 6 See Osiander, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum, 618–620.

7.7 The Preacher as a Political Player

281

city with the demands of foreign policy. In the second half of the sixteenth century, the concerns of foreign policy spoke in favour of Lutheranism, and it is my view that in this situation, Osiander’s catechetical teaching offered a welcome compromise uniting different concerns. It accommodated civic mentality and at the same time strengthened the city government’s influence in the church regiment and aided their relationship with their most important foreign ally, Lutheran Württemberg. By bringing to Esslingen the catechism of Brenz which he was familiar with from his ministry in Württemberg, Osiander brought this catechism back to its original context. It had originally been written by a city preacher who intended to use it as an instruction for youth partaking in the Eucharist and for their growth into the tight social systems of a city. Its patterns of thought and structuring of religious life were later employed in Württemberg in the attempt to form a complex territory into a unified community. With Osiander’s service to Esslingen it was as if a city reformation returned to the city context. Though it was more or less the same theology it had been in its original city reformation context, this teaching now received a very different function. When Osiander now brought this teaching back to the city from Württemberg, it contributed to subjecting the church regiment, once a part of a corporative city organization, more directly under the city’s secular authority. Thereby it helped strengthen the patriciate’s power base within the city at the expense of corporative forces. At the same time, it tied the city’s church closer to the surrounding territory’s state church and thereby contributed to a weakening of the city’s independence. In many ways, Osiander served Württemberg’s interests in his service as city preacher to Esslingen.

Conclusion The introductory chapter presented the confessionalization theory as describing how the state’s need for stability in this historical epoch met the church’s need for stability through a disciplining of subjects which included various discourses on morality and attitudes, thinking, faith, and emotions, and which contributed to social discipline, concentrating power in society, and political and social integration on the way towards the early modern state. Schmidt’s objection to Schilling’s theory was presented as an insistence on faith and religion as phenomena that may not be realized by a state, but which must be anchored individually in the believer’s perceptions. In a way, what Schmidt regarded as an obligatory focus in the study of religious disciplining was exactly what Osiander was concerned to do in his pedagogical work. He targeted individual perceptions and related them to a faith that already existed and was already being shared, but he did so in a historical situation characterized by confessionalization: by the state’s concern for stability and integration, as well as by the church’s and theology’s concern for stability and integration. In his discussion of the confessionalization theory, Schmidt emphasized that in a time when no absolutist state yet existed, disciplining ambitions from above had to relate to popular consensus if they were to have any prospects of succeeding. In disciplining, authorities from above, such as state and church, had to negotiate with authorities from below, such as families, neighbourhoods, villages, and guilds. This book’s analysis of Osiander’s sermons has placed Osiander among the authorities who acted from above, but it has observed that his sermons were also marked by negotiations. The sermons analyzed in Part One negotiated primarily with the next of kin in funerals and those analyzed in Part Two primarily with the culture and mentality of citizens and councilors. These negotiations resemble the negotiation with popular consensus which Schmidt held to be unavoidable. Still, even though this study has placed Osiander as a participant in a disciplining from above, the conflicts he was involved in showed that his interests were not necessarily identical to that of secular authority. In that respect, Magirus was right when, in his funeral sermon for Osiander, he claimed that church and true doctrine had been the primary concerns in Osiander’s service as preacher. This study has shown how agents of confessionalization may be described by analyzing the pedagogical function of theological concepts and their connected rhetorical forms. It has shown how Osiander’s homiletical concept was one that

284

Conclusion

was especially well suited to serve confessionalization and to unite the concerns of secular authority with those of the church. This did not mean that Osiander simply subjected himself and his preaching to the concerns of duke and city council. Rather, he served them in a way that strengthened his own and the church’s position. In that sense his biography appears as the perfect example of how state and church interests coincided in this historical epoch. This study’s sermon analysis has described this by pointing out the specific homiletical form employed by this preacher. The introductory chapter called attention to examples as the most prominent rhetorical tool in Osiander’s sermons, and it introduced examples as a relevant analytical category for his sermons. Osiander himself recommended the use of biblical examples in sermons instead of complicated examples from the classical tradition. In the sermons treated in this study, however, another form of examples was most prominent and was given most attention in the analysis, namely examples from the audience’s life world. In Part One these examples were taken from the lives of the deceased to be buried, while in Part Two they were drawn from the political and social conditions in and around the city society. In the funeral sermons, similarity in situation tied biblical examples to contemporary examples across a distance in time. The two forms of examples were connected in a way that tied the deceased to God and salvation, but since the deceased were examples to the living the sermon’s listeners also were connected with the biblical time and with salvation. The deceased were examples in their specific estate, gender, and calling, and therefore their examples connected the living to the beyond in a way that had a social dimension. Faith was lived in a certain estate, gender, or calling. For the deceased presented in this study, this meant that the listeners were also placed in a relationship with the duke. The examples in the catechism sermons had a similar function. Examples from civic life were connected with the religious universe in different ways that made the listener familiar with this universe, but which also tied it to a social reality. Thus Osiander’s example rhetoric connected the present to biblical times in a way that lent the present a certain form of predictability. Compared to previous funeral traditions, the funeral sermons renounced the possibility of negotiating the future with the past for a solid feeling of security. The funeral sermons let all parts of life appear as moments on the way to final salvation, and they placed the deceased and the bereaved in a hierarchy which constituted a blessed society. A negotiation with a similar outcome took place also in the catechism sermons. The catechism sermons promoted knowledge of a Christian cosmology and they urged a steady and intimate relationship to Christ in a way that constructed the relationship to an almighty Christ as a primary relationship in life. It was a cosmology and a relationship that opened the possibility for doubting one’s own experience, but it also positioned the listener in a privileged spot of the universe and in an unshakeably safe existence.

Conclusion

285

The preacher’s role that was described by analysis of sermon rhetoric coincided with the preachers’ description of themselves in sermons and should therefore be regarded as in accordance with their conscious intentions. On a rhetorical level, Osiander, as the catechist in his catechism sermons, stood out as the shepherd who led the youth into the safe existence of Christian society. As funeral preacher, he held the system of examples together in a blessed society. In both sermon genres, the preacher held a key role as the one who drew the connection between the present and biblical times and between the present society and the religious universe. In the descriptions of preachers in sermons, this role was described very similarly. In Osiander’s funeral sermon for Jacob Andreae, the preacher was described as the glue that kept the system of funeral sermon examples together. Like all others, the preacher should live humbly and be loyal to God, but his loyalty was different from most others, since it was a loyalty to God before all others. The implicit self-presentations in Osiander’s sermons, the way Osiander portrayed his colleague and friend Andreae in his funeral sermon for him, and Magirus’s portrayal of Osiander in his funeral sermon for him all describe a preacher who understood himself in a way compatible with Lutheran confessionalization.

Bibliography Works cited, before 1700 Jacob Andreae, Zehen Predig von den sechs Hauptstucken Christlicher Lehr (Catechismus genannt): allen Christlichen Haußuättern nutzlich zuolesen / gepredigt zuo Lawgingen / durch Jacobum Andree / der heiligen Schrifft Doctorn (Tübingen: Ulrich Morharts Wittib, 1561). –, Drey vnd dreissig Predigten von den furnembsten Spaltungen in der Christlichen Religion, so sich zwischen den Bäpstischen, Lutherischen, Zwinglischen, Schwenckfeldern und Wi­ derteuffern halten. In wölchen jedes theils Meinung vnd Grund trewlich gesetzt, vnd ein einfaltiger Bericht vnd Anleittung auß den sechs Hauptstucken christlicher Lehr gegeben würdt, wie ein jeder einfaltiger Lay in solchem allem die Warheit erkennen vnd sich Christlich darein schicken soll, daß er in kein Sect verfüret werdt. Allen frommen Christen vnd einfaltigen Pfarrern nuzlich zulesen. Geprediget zuo Eßlingen durch Jacobum Andree, D. Probst zu Tübingen vnd bey der Vniversität daselbsten Canzlern, 5 parts (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1568, 1573). –, Christliche Leichpredig bey der Begräbnus des Ehrwurdigen vnd Hochgelehrten Herrn / Primus Trubern … Pfarrer zu Derendingen / bey Tübingen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1586). –, Christliche Predig bey der Begräbnuß / Weyland deß Edlen vnd Vesten Balthasarn von Karpffen / seligen (Tübingen: Alexander Hock, 1586). Eberhard Bidembach, Johannes Magirus, Andreas Osiander, and Lucas Osiander. Vier Christliche Predigten  / Vber der Leich  / weilund des Durchleuchtigen  / Hochgeborenen Fürsten vnd Herrn / Herrn Ludwigen / Hertzogen zu Würtenberg … (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1593). Wilhelm Bidembach, Ein Christliche Leichpredig / Bey der Begrebnuß weilundt des Ehr­ würdigen vnd Hochgelehrten Herrn / Johann Brentzen / Probsts zu Stutgarten / Gehalten in der Stiffts-Kirchen allda / den Zwölfften Septembris / Anno 1570 (Tübingen: Ulrich Morharts Wittib, 1570). Johannes Brenz, “Fragstück des Christlichen glaubens für die Jugendt (Hagenau: Valentin Kobian, 1535).” Pages 685–694 in Christoph Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz. Spätmittelalter und Reformation 21 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1990). –, Catechismus pia et vtili explicatione illvstratus (Wittenberg, 1553). –, “Catechismus pia et utili explicatione illustratus. Prefatio” (1551). Pages 703–717 in Christoph Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz. Spätmittelalter und Reformation 21 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1990). Johan(nes) Bugenhagen, “Eine Christliche predigt / vber der Leich vnd begrebnis / des Ehrwirdigen D. Martini Luthers” (Wittenberg: Georg Rhaw, 1546). In “Vom Christlichen

288

Bibliography

abschied aus diesem tödlichen leben des Ehrwirdigen Herrn D. Martini Lutheri.” Edited by Peter Freybe (Stuttgart: Joachim W. Siener, 1996). Jean de Gerson, Opusculum tripartitum eiusdem De preceptis decalogi, De confessione & De arte moriendi (Paris: J. Petit, 1515). Christoph Hermann, Einfältiger Bericht Von des Herren Abendtmal, auss den worten des Catechismi genommen: In frag und Antwort gestellet / für die Jugent und Schulkinder zu Eßlingen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1600). Polykarp Leyser, Regenten Spiegel, gepredigt aus dem Ci. Psalm des Königlichen Propheten Davids, auff gehaltenem Landtage zu Torgaw, dieses 1605. Jahres, im Junio (Leipzig: Lamberg, 1605). Martin Luther, Ein Sermon von der Bereitung zum Sterben (1519). In WA 2, 685–697. –, Eyn kurcz form der zeehen gepott. D. M. L. Eyn kurcz form des Glaubens. Eyn kurcz form deβ Vatter unszers (1522). In WA 7, 204–229. –, Betbüchlein (1523). In WA 10/2, 331–502. –, Von weltlicher Oberkeit (1523). In WA 11, 245–280. –, Zwo Predigt uber der Leiche des Kurfürsten Herzogen Friedrichs zu Sachsen: Anno 1525. In WA 17/1, 196–227. –, Deutsche Messe und Ordnung des Gottesdienstes (1526). In WA 19, 44–113. –, Vom Abendmahl Christi: Bekenntnis (1528). In WA 26, 261–509. –, Katechismuspredigten (1528). In WA 30/1, 2–122. –, Deudsch Catechismus (Der Große Katechismus) (1529). In WA 30/1, 123–238. –, Der Kleine Katechismus (1529). In WA 30/1, 239–425. –, “Vorrede Luthers zum ersten Bande der Gesamtausgabe seiner lateinischen Schriften” (1545). In WA 54, 176–187. Iohannes Magirus, Christliche Leichpredigt / Bey der Begrabnus des Ehrwurdigen / Hoch­ gelehrten Herren Lucae Osiandri, der H. Schrifft Doctoris, so Montags den 17. Septem­ bris, Anno 1604, in Christo seliglich entschlaffen / vnd Mittwochs / den 19. hernach zur Erden bestattet worden. Gehalten zu Stutgarten in der Stifftkirchen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1604). Philipp Melanchthon, Unterricht der Visitatorn an die Pfarhern ym Kurfurstenthum zu Sachssen (1528). Pages 215–271 in vol. 1 of Melanchthons Werke. Edited by Robert Stupperich (Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann Verlag, 1951). –, “Oratio dicta in funere Friderici Saxoniae Ducis (1525).” In CR 11, n. 9, 90–98. –, “Oratio in funere D. Martini Lutheri (1546).” In CR 9, n. 89, 726–734. Lucas Osiander, Warnung / Vor der falschen Lehr / und Phariseischen Gleißnerei der Jesuiter (Tübingen: Ulrich Morharts Wittib, 1568). –, Ableinung Der Lugen, Verkerungen, vnnd Lösterungen, mit denen Bruder Johann Naß in seinen Centurijs der Euangelischen Warheiten (wie ers nennet) die Christlich Lehr der Augspurgischen Confession, auch deren Personen, so sich zu derselben begeben, vnwar­ hafftig vnd schmälich antastet (Tübingen: Ulrich Morhart, 1569). –, Bericht / Was der Türcken Glaub sey / Gezogen auß dem Türckischen Alcoran, sampt desselben Widerlegung; Türken (Tübingen: Ulrich Morhart Wittib, 1570). –, Ein Christliche Leichpredig / Von Adelichen Tugenden: Gehalten zu Geysingen / den 23. Januarij Anno 75. Vber der Leich des Edlen vnnd Vesten Hansen von vnd zu Stamhaim &c. (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1575). –, Ein Predig Vber der Leich  / Deß Edlen vnd Ehrenvesten  / Herren Frantzen Kurtzen  / Fürstlichen Wirttenbergischen Secretarii. Gehalten zu Stutgarten in dem Stifft / den 30. Augusti / Anno 1575 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1575).

Bibliography

289

–, Institutio christianae religionis (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1582). –, Ein Predigt / Vber die Leich / der Durchleuchtigen Hochgebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Dorothea Ursula  / Hertzogin zu Würtenberg  / etc. Gebornen  / Marggräuin zu Baden vnd Hohenberg / etc. (Tübingen: Alexander Hock, 1583). –, De ratione concionandi (Tübingen: Alexander Hoggis, 1588). –, Ein Tröstliche Predigt. Bey der Fürstlichen Leich / weilund der Durchleuchtigen Hoch­ gebornen Fürstin vnd Frawen / Frawen Anna Maria / Hertzogin zu Würtenberg / … Ge­ halten zu Tübingen / den 9. Junij / Anno / etc. 89 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1589). –, Ein Predig / Bey der Leych / des Ehrwürdigen vnd Hochgelehrten Herrn / Jacobi Andreae / der heyligen Schrifft Doctorn / Probsts vnd Cantzlers bey der Vniuersitet zu Tübingen … (Tübingen: Alexander Hock, 1590). –, Epitome historiae ecclesiasticae, centuriae I–Xvi, in quibus breviter et perspicue com­ memoratur, quis fuerit status ecclesiae Christi a nativitate salvatoris usque ad annum 1600 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1592–1604). –, Ein Predigt / Vber der Leich / Des Edlen vnnd Vesten Junckern / Hansen Jörgen Branden / etc. Fürstlichen Würtenbergischen Kammer jungen  / Gehalten zu Stutgarten  / den 17. Iunij. Anno, etc. 93 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1593). –, Ein Predigt / Uber der Leich des Edlen und Vesten Junckern Joachim Quast / &c. gewesnen Fürstlichen Würtembergischen Reitterhauptmans / Uber die Wort des Predigers Salomonis am 7. Capitel. Der Tag des Tods ist besser / dann der Tag der Geburt. Gehalten zu Stutgar­ ten / den 24. Septembris, Anno, &c.95 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1595). –, Bawren Postilla. Das ist / Einfältige / jedoch gründtliche Außlegung der Episteln und Eu­ angelien / welche von allters her / an Sonn vnd Feyrtägen / auch auff die Hohe Fest / erklärt werden. Für das einfältig Christlich Völcklin auff den Dörffern. Geprediget in der Pfarr Hundsholtz / zu der Abbtey des Closters Adelberg / im löblichen Herzogthumb Würtem­ berg / gehörig, Theil 1 (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1597). –, Der kleine vnd der grosse Catechismus / Herrn D. Martini Luthers / seliger gedächtnus. Auß welchem ein Christ fein kurtz vnd gründlich erlernen kan / was D. Luther seliger von allen vnd jeden Articuln vnd Stucken der christlichen Religion geglaubt vnd gelehret. Vnd wie ein jeder Christ / dem sein ewige Seligkeit hertzlich angelegen / recht glauben / christ­ lich leben / gedultig leiden / selig sterben / vnd endtlich ewiglich selig werden soll. Sampt einer außfürlichen Vorred D. Lucas Osianders / in deren gründtlich angezeigt würdt / wie vnbillich die Jesuitter / vnd jhres gleichen päpstliche Scribenten / die reine christliche Lehr / vnd die Person Luthers / mutwillig calumnieren / verkehren / vnd verlästern. Darumb dann ein frommer Christ durch solche / der Jesuitter / Lästerungen / vo der reinen euangelischen Lehr sich nicht soll abhalten / noch von derselben abwendig machen lassen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1599). –, Fünffzig Predigten Vber den Christlichen Catechismum / Gehalten in des heiligen Rö­ mischen Reichs Statt Eßlingen (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1600). –, Die christliche Haußtafel: Verfasset in fünffzehen Predigten [1601] (Tübingen: Georg Gruppenbach, 1650). Jacob Otther, “Ein kurtze Innleytung in die Bekantnuss rechgeschaffner / christenlicher Leer vnnd Glaubens  / Für die Kinder vnd Eynfaltigen” (1532). In Reu, Quellen zur Geschichte des Katechismus-Unterrichts, vol. 1: Süddeutsche Katechismen (Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1904).

290

Bibliography

Works cited, after 1700 Allgemeine deutsche Biographie. Edited by Die historische Commission bei der königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Leipzig and Berlin: 1887/1970). Ernst Christian Achelis, Lehrbuch der Praktischen Theologie vol. 2 (3d ed.; Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1911). Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Edited by Die historische Commission bei der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, vol. 24 (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1887: repr. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1970). Sabine Arend, Baden-Württemberg II: Herzogtum Württemberg = XVI/2 of Die evangeli­ schen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts. Edited by Eike Wolgast and Gottfried Seebass (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004). –, Südwestdeutsche Reichsstädte. Pt. 2: Reutlingen, Ulm, Esslingen, Giengen, Biberach, Ravensburg, Wimpfen, Leutkirch, Bopfingen, Aalen = vol. XVII/4 of Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI. Jahrhunderts. Edited by Eike Wolgast and Gottfried Seebaß (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009). Christian Gottlob Barth, Geschichte von Württemberg: Neu erzählt für den Bürger und Landmann (Calw: Vereinsbuchhandlung des Calwer Verlags-Vereins, 1843; repr. Stuttgart: Thienemann, 1986). Robert James Bast, “From Two Kingdoms to Two Tables: The Ten Commandments and the Christian Magistrate.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 89 (1998): 79–95. –, Honor Your Fathers: Catechisms and the Emergence of a Patriarchal Ideology in Germany 1400–1600. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought 63 (Leiden: Brill, 1997). Jörg Baur, “Johannes Brenz: Ein schwäbischer Meisterdenker auf den Spuren Luthers.” Blätter für württembergische Kirchengeschichte 100 (2000): 29–57. Repr.: Pages 18–46 in idem, Lutherische Gestalten – Heterodoxe Orthodoxien: Historisch-systematische Studien. Edited by Thomas Kaufmann (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2010). –, Luther und seine klassischen Erben: Theologische Aufsätze und Forschungen (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1993). –, “Lutherische Christologie.” Pages 83–124 in Die lutherische Konfessionalisierung in Deutschland: Wissenschaftliches Symposion des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 1988. Edited by Hans-Christoph Rublack (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1988). Albrecht Beutel, In dem Anfang war das Wort: Studien zu Luthers Sprachverständnis. Hermeneutische Untersuchungen zur Theologie 27 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1991). –, “Predigt VIII.” In TRE 27, 296–311. Ernst Bezzel, “Beichte III”, in TRE 5, 421–422. Peter Blickle, “Begriffsbildung in heuristischer Absicht.” Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991): 5–38. –, Kommunalismus: Skizzen einer gesellschaftlichen Organisationsform, vol. 1: Oberdeutsch­ land (München: Oldenbourg, 2000). Gerhard Bode, “Instruction of the Christian Faith by Lutherans after Luther.” Pages 159– 204 in Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550–1675. Edited by Robert Kolb. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 11 (Leiden: Brill, 2008). Birgit Boge and Ralf Georg Bogner, “Leichenpredigtforschung auf Abwegen? Zu den Gründen für die bisherige Ignoranz gegenüber einer Gattung frühneuzeitlicher katholischer Gebrauchsliteratur.” Pages 3–8 in Oratio funebris: Die katholische Leichenpredigt

Bibliography

291

der frühen Neuzeit. Edited by Birgit Boge and Ralf Georg Bogner. Chloe. Beihefte zum Daphnis 30 (Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi, 1999). Thomas A. Brady, Ruling Class, Regime and Reformation at Strasbourg, 1520–1555. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought 22 (Leiden: Brill, 1978). Hans Christian Brandy, “Brenz’ Christologie und ihre von Jakob Andreae vertretene Form: Das Maulbronner Kolloquium 1564.” Blätter für württembergische Kirchengeschichte 100 (2000): 58–84. –, Die späte Christologie des Johannes Brenz. Beiträge zur Historischen Theologie 80 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1991). Martin Brecht, “Andreae, Jacob”, in TRE 2, 672–680. –, Martin Luther, vol. 2: Ordnung und Abrenzung der Reformation 1521–1532 (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1986). Martin Brecht and Hermann Ehmer, Südwestdeutsche Reformationsgeschichte: Einführung der Reformation im Herzogtum Württemberg 1534 (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1984). Georg Buchwald, “Jenaer Lutherfunde.” Theologische Studien und Kritiken 76, no. 1 (1894): 374–391. Moritz Freiherr von Campenhausen, Der Klerus der Reichsstadt Esslingen 1321–1531: Das Verhältnis des Rates zu den Geistlichen von der Kapellenordnung bis zur Reformation. Esslinger Studien 19 (Esslingen: Thorbecke, 1999). Robert Christman, “The Pulpit and the Pew: Shaping Popular Piety in the Late Reformation.” Pages 259–303 in Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550–1675. Edited by Robert Kolb. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 11 (Leiden: Brill, 2008). Ferdinand Cohrs, Die evangelischen Katechismusversuche vor Luthers Enchiridion, vol. 4: Undatierbare Katechismusversuche und zusammenfassende Darstellung. Monumenta Germaniae Paedagogica 23 (Berlin: A. Hoffmann & Comp., 1902). Johanna Dahm, “Epitaph.” in Gedächtnis und Erinnerung: Ein interdisziplinäres Lexikon. Edited by Nicolas Pethes and Jens Ruchatz (Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlt, 2001). Irene Dingel, Concordia controversa: Die öffentlichen Diskussionen um das lutherische Konkordienwerk am Ende des 16. Jahrhunderts. Quellen und Forschungen zur Reformationsgeschichte 63 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1996). Johannes Ehmann, Luther, Türken und Islam: Eine Untersuchung zum Türken‑ und Islam­ bild Martin Luthers (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus 2008). Hermann Ehmer, “Erhard Schnepf (1495–1558): Reformator in Nassau, Hessen und Württemberg, Professor in Marburg, Tübingen und Jena.” Pages 209–232, 288 in Heilbronner Köpfe 5. Edited by Christhard Schrenk. Kleine Schriftenreihe des Archivs der Stadt Heilbronn (Heilbronn: Stadtarchiv Heilbronn, 2009). –, “Johannes Brenz und Martin Luther.” Pages 97–109 in Luthers Wirkung: Festschrift für Martin Brecht zum 60. Geburtstag. Edited by Wolf-Dieter Hauschild (Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1992). –, “Württemberg.” Pages 168–194 in Pt. 5: Der Südwesten of Die Territorien des Reichs im Zeitalter der Reformation und Konfessionalisierung: Land und Konfession 1500–1650. Edited by Anton Schindling and Walter Ziegler. Katholisches Leben und Kirchenreform im Zeitalter der Glaubensspaltung 53 (Münster: Aschendorff, 1993). Stefan Ehrenpreis and Ute Lotz-Heumann, Reformation und konfessionelles Zeitalter (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2002). Theodor Eisenlohr, Sammlung der württembergischen Kirchen-Geseze. Pt. 1: Enthaltend die erste Reihe der Kirchen-Geseze vom Jahre 1418 bis zum Jahr 1802 = vol. 8/1 of Voll­

292

Bibliography

ständige, historisch und kritisch bearbeitete Sammlung der württembergischen Gesetze. Edited by A. L. Reyscher (Tübingen: Fues, 1834). Astrid Erl, Kollektives Gedächtnis und Erinnerungskulturen (Stuttgart and Weimar: Metzler, 2005). James Martin Estes, Christian Magistrate and State Church: The Reforming Career of Jo­ hannes Brenz (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1982). Helmut Feld, Der Ikonoklasmus des Westens. Studies in the History of Christian Thought 41 (Leiden: Brill, 1990). Ludwig Melchior Fischlin, Memoria theologorum Wirtembergensium resuscitata: h.e. bio­ graphia praecipuorum virorum, qui a tempore Reformationis usque ad hanc nostram aetatem partim in Ducatu Wirtembergico verbum domini docuerunt  …, 2 pts. (Ulm: Georg Wilhelm Kühnen, 1709). Werner Fleischhauer, Volker Himmlein, Ulrich Klein, Hans-Martin Maurer and Paul Sauer, Geschichte Württembergs in Bildern 1083–1918 (Stuttgart, Berlin, and Köln: Kohlhammer, 1992). Adam S. Francisco, Martin Luther and Islam: A Study in Sixteenth-Century Polemics and Apologetics. The History of Christian-Muslim Relations 8 (Leiden: Brill, 2007). Jacob Grimm and Wilhelm Grimm, Deutsches Wörterbuch, vol. 5 (Leipzig: Hirzel, 1887; repr. München: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 1984). Walter Grube, Der Stuttgarter Landtag 1457–1957: Von den Landständen zum demokra­ tischen Parlament (Stuttgart: Klett, 1957). Aubrey Gwin, Roman Education from Cicero to Quintilian (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1926). Norbert Haag, Predigt und Gesellschaft: Die lutherische Orthodoxie in Ulm; 1640–1740. Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Europäische Geschichte Mainz, Abteilung Religionsgeschichte 145 (Darmstadt: P. von Zabern, 1992). Mary Jane Haemig and Robert Kolb, “Preaching in Lutheran Pulpits in the Age of Confessionalization.” Pages 117–157 in Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550–1675. Edited by Robert Kolb. Brill’s Companions to the Christian Tradition 11 (Leiden: Brill, 2008). Joar Haga, Was There a Lutheran Metaphysics? The Interpretation of Communicatio Idiomatum in Early Modern Lutheranism. Refo500 Academic Studies 2 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2012). Berndt Hamm, Bürgertum und Glaube: Konturen der städtischen Reformation, Sammlung Vandenhoeck (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1996). –, “Normierte Erinnerung: Jenseits‑ und Diesseitsorientierungen in der Memoria des 14. bis 16. Jahrhunderts.” Jahrbuch für biblische Theologie 22 (2007): 197–251. Siegfried Hermle, “Andreae, Jacob.” In RGG4 1, 470. Eilert Herms, “Zwei-Reiche-Lehre/Zwei-Regimenten-Lehre.” In RGG4 8, 1936–1941. E. Hochstetter, “Lucas Osiander der Ältere.” Blätter für württembergische Kirchengeschichte 8 (1893): 37–77. Hans-Georg Hofacker, … “sonderliche hohe Künste und vortreffliche Geheimnis”: Alchemie am Hof Herzog Friedrichs I. von Württemberg – 1593 bis 1608 (Stuttgart: WegrahistorikVerlag, 1993). André Holenstein, Beat Kümin, and Andreas Würgler, “Diskussionsbericht.” Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991) 489–505. Sabine Holtz, Theologie und Alltag: Lehre und Leben in den Predigten der Tübinger Theo­ logen 1550–1750. Spätmittelalter und Reformation N. R. 3 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1993).

Bibliography

293

–, “Seid untertan der Obrigkeit? Stuttgarter Stiftskirchenprediger im konfessionellen Zeitalter.” Pages 85–101 in Tradition und Fortschritt: Württembergische Kirchengeschichte im Wandel; Festschrift für Hermann Ehmer zum 65. Geburtstag. Edited by Siegfried Hermle, Norbert Haag, Sabine Holz, and Jörg Thierfelder. Quellen und Forschungen zur württembergischen Kirchengeschichte 20 (Epfendorf/Neckar: bibliotheca academica Verlag, 2008). Johannes Hund, Das Wort ward Fleisch: Eine systematisch-theologische Untersuchung zur Debatte um die Wittenberger Christologie und Abendmahlslehre in den Jahren 1567 bis 1574. Forschungen zur systematischen und ökumenischen Theologie 114 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006). Eberhard Isenmann, “Die städtische Gemeinde im oberdeutsch-schweizerischen Raum (1300–1800).” Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991): 191–261. –, “Obrigkeit und Stadtgemeinde in der frühen Neuzeit.” Pages 74–126 in Einwohner und Bürger auf dem Weg zur Demokratie: Von den antiken Stadtrepubliken zur modernen Kommunalverfassung. Edited by Hans Eugen Specker. Forschungen zur Geschichte der Stadt Ulm 28 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1997). Werner Jetter, “Katechismuspredigt.” In TRE 17, 744–786. Martin H. Jung, Christen und Juden: Die Geschichte ihrer Beziehungen (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2008). Friedhelm Jürgensmeier, “Leichenpredigt in der katholischen Begräbnisfeier.” Pages 122– 145 in Leichenpredigten als Quelle historischer Wissenschaften: Erstes Marburger Per­ sonalschriftensymposion, Forschungsschwerpunkt Leichenpredigten. Edited by Rudolf Lenz (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1975). Susan C. Karant-Nunn, The Reformation of Feeling: Shaping the Religious Emotions in Early Modern Germany (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2010). Wolfgang Kaschuba, “Kommunalismus als sozialer ‘Common Sense’: Konzeption von Lebenswelt und Alltagskultur im neuzeitlichen Gemeindegedanken.” Historische Zeit­ schrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991): 65–91. Thomas Kaufmann, “Universität und lutherische Konfessionalisierung: Die Rostocker Theo­ logieprofessoren und ihr Beitrag zur theologischen Bildung und kirchlichen Gestaltung im Herzogtum Mecklenburg zwischen 1550 und 1675. Quellen und Forschungen zur Reformationsgeschichte 66 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1997). –, “Lutherische Predigt im Krieg und zum Friedensschluß.” Pages 245–250 in 1648 – Krieg und Frieden in Europa, Textband I: Politik, Religion, Recht und Gesellschaft Edited by Klaus Bußmann and Heinz Schilling (München: Bruckmann, 1998). –, Abendmahl 3: Reformation.” In RGG4 1, 24–28. –, Konfession und Kultur: Lutherischer Protestantismus in der zweiten Hälfte des Reforma­ tionsjahrhunderts, Spätmittelalter und Reformation N. R. 29 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006). –, “Türckenbüchlein”: Zur christlichen Wahrnehmung “türkischer Religion” in Spätmittel­ alter und Reformation. Forschungen zur Kirchen‑ und Dogmengeschichte 97 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008). –, Luthers “Judenschriften”: Ein Beitrag zu ihrer historischen Kontextualisierung (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2011). Stephanie A. Knöll, Die Grabmonumente der Stiftskirche in Tübingen. Beiträge zur Tübinger Geschichte 13 (Stuttgart: Konrad Theiss, 2007). Wiebke Köhler, “Hofprediger.” In RGG4 3, 1831–1832.

294

Bibliography

Craig M. Koslofsky, The Reformation of the Dead: Death and Ritual in Early Modern Ger­ many, 1450–1700 (Houndmills: Macmillian Press / New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1999). Thilo Krüger, Empfangene Allmacht: Die Christologie Tilemann Heshusens (1527–1588). Forschungen zur Kirchen‑ und Dogmengeschichte 87 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2004). Julian Kümmerle, Luthertum, humanistische Bildung und württembergischer Territorial­ staat: Die Gelehrtenfamilie Bidembach vom 16. bis zum 18. Jahrhundert. Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg 170 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2008). Matthias Langensteiner, Für Land und Luthertum: Die Politik Herzog Christophs von Würt­ temberg (1550–1568) (Köln, Weimar and Wien: Böhlau, 2008). Vincent Leitch, The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism (New York and London: W. W. Norton & Company, 2001). Volker Leppin, “‘Omnem vitam fidelium penitentiam esse voluit’: Zur Aufnahme mystischer Traditionen in Luthers erster Ablaßthese.” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 93 (2002): 7–25. –, Martin Luther (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2006). Gudrun Litz, Die reformatorische Bilderfrage in den schwäbischen Reichsstädten. Spätmittelalter und Reformation N. R. 35 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2007). Sönke Lorenz, Dieter Mertens, and Volker Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographi­ sches Lexikon (Berlin and Köln: Kohlhammer, 1997). Otto Mayer, “Geschichte des humanistischen Schulwesens in der Freien Reichsstadt Eßlingen 1267–1803.” Pages 204–326 in Geschichte des humanistischen Schulwesens in Würt­ temberg, vol. 2: Geschichte des humanistischen Schulwesens in den zu Beginn des 19. Jahr­ hunderts württembergisch gewordenen Landesteilen von 1559–1805, pt. 1: Geschichte des humanistischen Schulwesens der Reichsstädte (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1920). Friedemann Merkel, ”Bestattung”, in TRE 5, 743–749. Dieter Mertens, “Weltliche Territorien: A. Württemberg.” Pages 1–159 in Handbuch der baden-württembergischen Geschichte. Edited by Meinrad Schaab and Hansmartin Schwarzmaier (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1995). H. C. Erik Midelfort, “Madness and Civilization in Early Modern Europe: A Reappraisal of Michel Foucault.” Pages 247–266 in After the Reformation: Essays in Honor of J. H.  Hexter. Edited by Barbara C. Malament (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1980). Bernd Moeller, Reichsstadt und Reformation (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1987). Rudolf Mohr, “Der Tote und das Bild des Todes in den Leichenpredigten.” Pages 82–121 in Leichenpredigten als Quelle historischer Wissenschaften: Erstes Marburger Personal­ schriftensymposion, Forschungsschwerpunkt Leichenpredigten. Edited by Rudolf Lenz (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1975). Cornelia Niekus Moore, Patterned Lives: The Lutheran Funeral Biography in Early Modern Germany. Wolfenbütteler Forschungen 111 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2006). Hermann Mosapp, Die Stiftskirche in Stuttgart (Stuttgart: Hänselmann, 1887). Hans Martin Müller, “Homiletik.” In TRE 15, 526–565. Eberhard Naujoks, Obrigkeitsgedanke, Zunftverfassung und Reformation: Studien zur Ver­ fassungsgeschichte von Ulm, Esslingen und Schwäbisch Gmünd. Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für geschichtliche Landeskunde in Baden-Württemberg B 3 (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1958).

Bibliography

295

–, “Latente Zunfttradition in den schwäbischen Reichsstädten.” Vierteljahresschrift für Sozial‑ und Wirtschaftsgeschichte 49 (1962): 171–194. Andreas Ohlemacher, Lateinische Katechetik der frühen lutherischen Orthodoxie. Forschungen zur Kirchen‑ und Dogmengeschichte 100 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2010). Peter von der Osten-Sacken, Martin Luther und die Juden: Neu untersucht anhand von Anton Margarithas “Der gantz Jüdisch Glaub” (Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 2002). Steven E. Ozment, The Age of Reform 1250–1550: An Intellectual and Religious History of Late Medieval and Reformation Europe (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1980). Johann Gottfried Pahl, Geschichte von Wirtemberg: Für das wirtembergische Volk. 6 vols. (Stuttgart: Löflund, 1827–1831). Johann Ulrich Pregitzer, Wirttembergischer Cedern-Baum Oder Vollständige Genealogie Des Hoch-Fürstlichen Hauses Wirttemberg. 2d ed. (Stuttgart: Metzler und Erhardt, 1734). Volker Press, “Stadt‑ und Dorfgemeinden im territorialstaatlichen Gefüge des Spätmittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit.” Historische Zeitschrift: Beihefte N. S. 13 (1991): 425–454. –, “Vorderösterreich in der habsburgischen Reichspolitik des späten Mittelalters und der frühen Neuzeit.” Pages 1–41 in Vorderösterreich in der frühen Neuzeit. Edited by Hans Maier and Volker Press (Stuttgart: Thorbecke, 1998). Gerhard Raff, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. I: Das Haus Württemberg von Graf Ulrich dem Stifter bis Herzog Ludwig. 5th ed. (Stuttgart and Leipzig: Hohenheim-Verlag, 2003). –, Hie gut Wirtemberg allewege, vol. II: Das Haus Württemberg von Herzog Friedrich I. bis Herzog Eberhard III. 3d ed. (Stuttgart and Leipzig: Hohenheim-Verlag, 2003). Tarald Rasmussen, “Hell Disarmed? The Function of Hell in Reformation Spirituality.” Numen 56 (2009): 366–384. Austra Reinis, “Piety and Politics: Aegidius Hunnius’s Sermons on the Lutheran Catechism (1592).” Archiv für Reformationsgeschichte 102 (2011): 220–242. Johann Michael Reu, Quellen zur Geschichte des Katechismus-Unterrichts, vol. 1: Süd­ deutsche Katechismen, Quellen zur Geschichte des kirchlichen Unterrichts in der Evangelischen Kirche Deutschlands zwischen 1530 und 1600 (Gütersloh: C. Bertelsmann, 1904). Ulrich Rosseaux, Städte in der frühen Neuzeit. Geschichte kompakt (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 2006). Hans-Christoph Rublack, “Lutherische Predigt und soziale Wirklichkeiten.” Pages 344–395 in Die lutherische Konfessionalisierung in Deutschland: Wissenschaftliches Symposion des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 1988. Edited by Hans-Christoph Rublack. Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 197 (Gütersloh: G. Mohn, 1992). Manfred Rudersdorf, “Ursula von Pfalz-Veldenz-Lützelstein.” In Sönke Lorenz, Dieter Mertens, and Volker Press, Das Haus Württemberg: Ein biographisches Lexikon (Berlin and Köln: Kohlhammer, 1997), 117. Paul Sauer, Von der Einführung der Reformation bis zum Ende des 17. Jahrhunderts, vol. 2 of Geschichte der Stadt Stuttgart (Stuttgart, Berlin and Köln: Kohlhammer, 1993). –, Herzog Friedrich von Württemberg 1557–1608: Ungestümer Reformer und weltgewandter Autokrat (München: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 2003). Heinz Schilling, “Die ‘Zweite Reformation’ als Kategorie der Geschichtswissenschaft.” Pages 387–437 in Die reformierte Konfessionalisierung in Deutschland: Das Problem der “Zweiten Reformation”; Wissenschaftliches Symposion des Vereins für Reformations­

296

Bibliography

geschichte. Edited by Heinz Schilling. Schriften des Vereins für Reformationsgeschichte 195 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus G. Mohn, 1986). –, “Die Konfessionalisierung im Reich: Religiöser und gesellschaftlicher Wandel in Deutschland zwischen 1555 und 1620.” Pages 504–540 in idem, Ausgewählte Abhand­ lungen zur europäischen Reformations‑ und Konfessionsgeschichte. Edited by Luise Schorn-Schütte and Olaf Mörke (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2002). –, “Disziplinierung oder ‘Selbstregulierung der Untertanen’? Ein Plädoyer für die Doppelperspektive von Makro‑ und Mikrohistorie bei der Erforschung der frühmodernen Kirchenzucht.” Pages 632–645 in idem, Ausgewählte Abhandlungen zur europäischen Reformations‑ und Konfessionsgeschichte. Edited by Luise Schorn-Schütte and Olaf Mörke (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 2002). –, Early Modern European Civilization and Its Political and Cultural Dynamism (Hanover and London: University Press of New England, 2008). Heinrich Richard Schmidt, “Sozialdisziplinierung? Ein Plädoyer für das Ende des Etatismus in der Konfessionalisierungsforschung.” Historische Zeitschrift 265, no. 3 (1997): 639–682. Helga Schnabel-Schüle, Der protestantische Südwesten = Pt. 2 of vol. 2: Baden-Württemberg of Repertorium der Kirchenvisitationsakten aus dem 16. und 17. Jahrhundert in Archiven der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Edited by Peter Thaddäus Lang, Ernst Walter Zeeden, Christa Reinhardt, Helga Schnabel-Schüle (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1985). Luise Schorn-Schütte, “Prediger an protestantischen Höfen der Frühneuzeit: Zur politischen und sozialen Stellung einer neuen bürgerlichen Führungsgruppe in der höfischen Gesellschaft des 17. Jahrhunderts, dargestellt am Beispiel von Hessen-Kassel, HessenDarmstadt und Braunschweig-Wolfenbüttel.” Pages 275–337 in Bürgerliche Eliten in den Niederlanden und in Nordwestdeutschland: Studien zur Sozialgeschichte des europäischen Bürgertums im Mittelalter und in der Neuzeit. Edited by Heinz Schilling and Herman Diederiks. Städteforschung A 23 (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1985). –, Evangelische Geistlichkeit in der Frühneuzeit: Deren Anteil an der Entfaltung frühmoder­ ner Staatlichkeit und Gesellschaft, dargestellt am Beispiel des Fürstentums BraunschweigWolfenbüttel, der Landgrafschaft Hessen-Kassel und der Stadt Braunschweig, Quellen und Forschungen zur Reformationsgeschichte 62 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus, 1996). Tilman Matthias Schröder, Das Kirchenregiment der Reichsstadt Esslingen: Grundlagen, Geschichte, Organisation. Esslinger Studien 8 (Sigmaringen: Thorbecke, 1987). Michael Sievernich SJ, “Gesetz oder Weisheit: Zum theologischen Prinzip der Katechismen Martin Luthers und Petrus Canisius’.” Pages 399–422 in Petrus Canisius SJ (1521–1597): Humanist und Europäer. Edited by Rainer Berndt (Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2000). Wolfgang Sommer, “Die Stellung lutherischer Hofprediger im Herausbildungsprozeß frühmoderner Staatlichkeit und Gesellschaft.” Pages 74–91 in idem, Politik, Theologie und Frömmigkeit im Luthertum der frühen Neuzeit: Ausgewählte Aufsätze. Forschungen zur Kirchen‑ und Dogmengeschichte 74 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1999). Willem van’t Spijker, The Ecclesiastical Offices in the Thought of Martin Bucer. Studies in Medieval and Reformation Thought 57 (Leiden, New York, and Köln: Brill, 1996). Ludwig Timotheus Spittler, Geschichte Wirtembergs unter der Regierung der Grafen und Herzöge (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck, 1783). Paul Friedrich Stälin, Wirtembergische Geschichte. 4 vols. (Stuttgart and Tübingen: Cotta, 1841–1870).

Bibliography

297

Johann Anselm Steiger, “Oratio panegyrica versus homilia consolatoria: Ein exemplarischer Vergleich zwischen einer römisch-katholischen Trauerrede (Wolfgang Fuchs) und einer lutherischen Leichenpredigt (Johann Gerhard).” Pages 103–131 in Oratio funebris: Die katholische Leichenpredigt der frühen Neuzeit. Edited by Birgit Boge and Ralf Georg Bogner. Chloe. Beihefte zum Daphnis 30 (Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi, 1999). Dieter Stievermann, “Die württembergischen Klosterreformen des 15. Jahrhunderts: Ein bedeutendes landeskirchliches Strukturelement des Spätmittelalters und ein Kontinuitätsstrang zum ausgebildeten Landeskirchentum der Frühneuzeit.” Zeitschrift für Württembergische Landesgeschichte 44 (1985): 65–104. Birgit Stolt, Martin Luthers Rhetorik des Herzens (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000). J. Wagenmann and G. Bossert, “Lukas Osiander, der Ältere.” Pages 509–514 in vol. 14 of Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche. 3rd ed. Edited by D. Albert Hauck (Leipzig: J. C. Hinrich’sche Buchhandlung, 1904). Johannes Wallmann, “Prolegomena zur Erforschung der Predigt im Zeitalter der lutherischen Orthodoxie.” Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 106 (2009): 284–304. Christoph Weismann, Die Katechismen des Johannes Brenz. Spätmittelalter und Reformation 21 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1990). Eberhard Winkler, “Zur Motivation und Situationsbezogenheit der klassischen Leichenpredigt.” Pages 52–65 in Leichenpredigten als Quelle historischer Wissenschaften: Er­ stes Marburger Personalschriftensymposion, Forschungsschwerpunkt Leichenpredigten. Edited by Rudolf Lenz (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1975). Ernst Walter Zeeden, “Grundlagen und Wege der Konfessionsbildung in Deutschland im Zeitalter der Glaubenskämpfe.” Historische Zeitschrift 185, no. 2 (1958): 249–299. Winfried Zeller, “Leichenpredigt und Erbauungsliteratur.” Pages 66–89 in Leichenpredigten als Quelle historischer Wissenschaften: Erstes Marburger Personalschriftensymposion, Forschungsschwerpunkt Leichenpredigten. Edited by Rudolf Lenz (Köln and Wien: Böhlau, 1975). Doreen Zerbe, “Memorialkunst im Wandel: Die Ausbildung eines lutherischen Typus des Grab‑ und Gedächtnismals im 16. Jahrhundert.” Pages 117–163 in Archäologie der Reformation: Studien zu den Auswirkungen des Konfessionswechsels auf die materielle Kultur. Edited by Carola Jäggi and Jörn Staecker. Arbeiten zur Kirchengeschichte 104 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 2007).

Index of Bible verses Deuteronomy 34 86

Ecclesiastes 7: 1–4

100, 120, 122

2 Kings 22 93

Matthew 10: 29–31

120, 121

Job 29:12–25 114

John 12: 26 85 21:15–17 185

Psalm 7

89, 94

Psalm 103: 15–18

Acts 13 251

83

Romans 8: 35–39

110

2 Timothy 4: 6–8

31, 124, 249

Proverbs 22:1 117

Index of Names Achelis, Ernst Christian  16, 17, 22 Albrecht, Duke of Prussia  41 Andreae, Jacob  2, 16, 17, 21, 34, 40–42, 53, 78, 80, 108, 123–129, 133, 135, 136, 148, 150, 176–179, 201, 225, 227, 285 Anna Maria, Duchess of Württemberg  56, 90, 104–114, 128, 132, 134, Arend, Sabine  70, 170, 171, 174 Aurifaber, Johannes  21 August, Duke of Saxony  94 Barth, Christian Gottlob  57 Bast, Robert James  157, 158, 171, 231 Baumhauer, Leonhard  104 Baur, Jörg  225, 227, 228 Beutel, Albrecht  14, 21, 23, 24, 44 Bezzel, Ernst  162–164 Bidembach, Balthasar  41, 42, 55, 81, 108 Bidembach, Eberhard  56, 81, 83, 89, 97 Bidembach, Felix  18, 152, Bidembach, Wilhelm  40, 135, 136 Blarer, Ambrosius  144, 146, 160, 169, 174 Blickle, Peter  139–141, 144, 270 Bode, Gerhard  180 Bodin, Jean  59 Boge, Birgit  73 Bogner, Ralf Georg 73 Bossert, G.  29, 56, 62 Brady, Thomas A.  141, 148, 154 Brand, Hans Jörg  120, 121, 122, 123 Brandy, Hans Christian  201, 225, 228 Brecht, Martin  2, 14, 21, 41, 46–51, 61, 126, 127, 159, 164, 169, 170, 182 Brenz, Johannes  2, 3, 22, 40, 41, 50, 55, 56, 135, 136, 156, 158–160, 164–183, 189, 190, 199, 201, 203, 207, 214, 225, 227, 228, 270, 271, 281 Bucer, Martin  153, 154, 168, 169, 280

Buchwald, Georg  14 Bugenhagen, Johannes  40, 72, 134, 135, 164, 182 Calvin, Johannes  151 Campenhausen, Moritz Freiherr von  144 Charles V, Emperor  142 Chemnitz, Martin  63 Christman, Robert  25 Christoph, Duke of Württemberg  2, 3, 41, 47, 49, 50, 56, 58, 81, 90, 104, 106, 126, 148, 149, 169, 171 Cohrs, Ferdinand  157–159, 164, 167 Dahm, Johanna  30 Dietrich, Veit  14 Dingel, Irene  226, 227 Dorothea Ursula, Duchess of Württemberg  56, 97–102, 104, 109, 120, 133, 134 Eberhard I, Duke of Württemberg  47, 48 Eberhard II, Duke of Württemberg  147 Ehmann, Johannes  190, 192 Ehmer, Hermann  29, 46–52, 56–58, 61, 86, 126, 159, 167, 169, 170 Ehrenpreis, Stefan  145, 153 Eisenlohr, Theodor  70, 82, 170–172 Eleonore, Princess of Württemberg  107–109 Erasmus, Desiderus  16 Erl, Astrid  39 Estes, James Martin  164, 168, 169 Feld, Helmut  147 Fischlin, Ludwig Melchior  29 Fleischhauer, Werner  59 Francisco, Adam S. 190, 192

Index of Names

Friedrich, Duke of Württemberg  35, 57–62, 64, 65, 85, 88, 95, 96, 122, 131, 133, 139, 149, 152, Friedrich the Wise of Electoral Saxony  50, 72, 94 Friedrich Wilhelm, Duke of Saxony  99 Georg, Count of Hesse-Darmstadt  107, 109 Georg, Landgrave of Brandenburg-Ansbach 168 Gerson, Jean de  157, 162 Gräter, Jakob  55, 159, 165 Grimm, Jacob  245 Grimm, Wilhelm 245 Grube, Walter  57, 60 Gwin, Aubrey  177 Haag, Norbert  20, 25, 86, 279 Haemig, Mary Jane  13, 16, 18, 25, 279 Haga, Joar  200, 225, 228 Hamm, Berndt  11, 74–78, 120, 153, 172, 246 Hermann, Christoph  150–153, 155, 156, 168, 173, 176, 178–180, 226, 269, 270 Hermle, Siegfried  86, 126 Herms, Eilert  230 Himmlein, Volker  59 Hochstetter, E.  29, 41, 42, 53–57, 62, 98, 99 Hofacker, Hans-Georg  59, 60, 62 Holenstein, André  143, 155 Holtz, Sabine  2, 55, 70, 86, 169, 170, 171 Hund, Johannes  227 Hyperius, Andreas  17 Isenmann, Eberhard  140, 142, 143 Jäger, Melchior  58 Jetter, Werner  182 Joachim Ernst, Prince of Anhalt  107 Jung, Martin H.  62, 63, 195 Julius, Duke of Brunswick  63 Jürgensmeier, Friedhelm  73, 74 Karant-Nunn, Susan C.  235 Karl, Count of Baden-Durlach  98 Karl, Margrave of Baden  108

301

Karpffen, Balthasar von  108 Kaschuba, Wolfgang  141, 142, 277 Kaufmann, Thomas  6, 12, 13, 19, 25, 62, 63, 65, 180, 190–195, 197, 198, 213, 225 Klein, Ulrich  59 Knöll, Stephanie A.  124 Köhler, Wiebke  43, 44 Kolb, Robert  13, 16, 18, 25, 180, 279 Koslofsky, Craig M. 76 Krüger, Thilo  228 Kümmerle, Julian  2, 30, 38, 40, 41, 51, 61, 85 Kurtz, Frantz  117–120 Langensteiner, Matthias  3, 50 Leitch, Vincent  23 Leppin, Volker  162, 163 Leyser, Kaspar  42 Leyser, Polykarp  35, 44, 45, 94 Litz, Gudrun  147 Lorenz, Sönke  56–61, 98, 99, 105, 106 Ludwig, Duke of Württemberg  42, 50, 53–61, 64, 65, 68, 78, 80–85, 87–94, 96–99, 104–109, 131, 133, 150, 171, 226, 227 Luther, Martin  9–15, 21–24, 32, 36, 40, 49, 50, 54, 55, 63, 72, 76–78, 93, 94, 134, 135, 141, 153, 154, 156–169, 175–179, 182, 183, 186–188, 190, 192–199, 202–208, 210–215, 217–219, 221, 224–226, 228, 230–232, 234–236, 238, 239, 243–247, 252, 253, 256, 261–263, 265–277, 279, 280 Magirus, Johannes  30–40, 45, 56, 57, 81, 83, 85–89, 93, 95, 96, 124, 125, 135, 152, 181, 283, 285 Margaritha, Antonius  63, 194, 195, 198 Maurer, Hans-Martin  59 Mayer, Otto  173, 181 Melanchthon, Philipp  13, 16–18, 70–72, 158, 227, 230 Merkel, Friedemann  125 Mertens, Dieter  3, 48–51, 56–62, 98, 99, 105, 106 Midelfort, H. C. Erik  109, 112 Moeller, Bernd  140, 141, 144–146, 148, 153–155, 172, 270, 274

302

Index of Names

Mohr, Rudolf  69 Moore, Cornelia Niekus  42–45, 51, 55, 68–73, 77, 82, 94 Mosapp, Hermann  29 Müller, Hans Martin  17 Naujoks, Eberhard  142, 144–148 Oestreich, Gerhard  4 Ohlemacher, Andreas  168 Osiander, Andreas  3, 34, 41, 195 Osiander, Andreas (son of Lucas)  56, 83–85, 89, 93, 97 Osiander, Lucas (son of Lucas)  21, 35 Osiander, Johannes  21, 35 Osten-Sacken, Peter von der  63 Otther, Jacob  160, 168, 174–176, 178, 179, 200, 226 Ozment, Steven E.  175, 200 Pahl, Johann Gottfried  58 Pregitzer, Johann Ulrich  57 Press, Volker  52, 53, 56, 57–61, 98, 99, 105, 106, 139, 143 Quast, Joachim  120, 122, 123 Quintilian  18, 22, 23, 177, 184 Raff, Gerhard  57, 58, 81, 97–99, 104–109 Rasmussen, Tarald  36 Reinhard, Wolfgang  4 Reinis, Austra  168, 182 Reu, Johann Michael  148, 158, 159, 172, 174 Reuchlin, Johann  16 Rörer, Georg  14, 15 Rosseaux, Ulrich  148 Rublack, Hans-Christoph  25, 155, 227, 279 Rudersdorf, Manfred  56 Rudolf, Emperor  58

Sauer, Paul  57–60 Schilling, Heinz  4–8, 12, 13, 19, 41, 269, 271, 277, 283 Schmidt, Heinrich Richard  6–8, 283 Schnabel-Schüle, Helga  30, 42, 46, 49 Schorn-Schütte, Luise  4, 8, 9, 38, 41–44, 46, 51, 64, 117 Schröder, Tilman Matthias  143–147, 149–152, 168, 173, 174, 179, 181 Sievernich SJ, Michael  157, 163 Sommer, Wolfgang  43, 44, 64 Spener, Philipp Jakob  15 Spijker, Willem van’t  280 Spittler, Ludwig Timotheus  57, 58 Stälin, Paul Friedrich  56, 57, 107 Stamhaim, Hans von und zu  114, 116, 117 Steiger, Johann Anselm  73 Stievermann, Dieter  48, 49, 61 Stolt, Birgit  14, 15, 22–24 Ulrich, Duke of Württemberg  47–49, 82, 126, 147, 168, 169 Ursula, Duchess of Württemberg  56 Wagenmann, J.  29, 56, 62 Wallmann, Johannes  14, 15 Weismann, Christoph  55, 159, 160, 164, 166, 168, 169, 172, 173, 175, 176, 181, 199 Wilhelm, Landgrave of Hesse  108, 109 Winkler, Eberhard  69, 72 Zeeden, Ernst Walter  4–6, 8, 11, 30 Zeller, Winfried  69, 70 Zerbe, Doreen  30, 76–78 Zwingli, Huldrych  15, 153, 154, 158, 159, 175, 200, 225, 274

Index of Subjects Absolutism  4, 6, 7, 50, 59, 60, 64, 96, 131, 133, 148, 269, 283 Aesthetics  196, 249 Allegory  214, 216, 217, 223, 231 Anabaptist 148 Apostolic tradition  186 Ars moriendi  36 Ascension  175, 225, 228–231, 273, 274 Augsburg Confession  35, 148 Baptism  34, 112, 113, 159, 165, 166, 174, 175, 178, 182, 184, 185, 189, 192, 193, 198–205, 211, 215, 220, 224, 230, 239, 243, 244, 254, 255, 260, 272–274, 277, 278 Biography  3, 31, 34, 38, 40, 42, 67–69, 70–72, 79, 84, 85, 87, 92, 96, 97, 99, 100, 101, 104, 110, 111, 113, 119, 132, 134, 135, 163, 284 Book of Concord  2, 12, 35, 53, 63, 123, 148, 168 Building of confessions (Konfessions­ bildung) ​4 Calvinist  53, 90, 148, 151, 179, 180, 226–229, 235, 274 Calvinism  50, 121, 149, 151–153, 155, 176, 226 Carnal security / safety  102, 216, 217, 257–259 Catechism  3, 10, 14, 19, 24, 36, 54, 55, 63, 151, 155–170, 172–189, 191–199, 203, 205–207, 211, 224–226, 228, 231, 232, 235, 237, 244, 252, 253, 258, 261, 269, 270–272, 276–281, 284, 285 Catholic  1,43, 53, 54, 72–74, 76, 82, 102, 144, 146, 148, 157, 158, 161, 164, 171, 174, 179, 180, 195, 197, 224, 235, 270, 271

Christ’s presence  225, 228, 229, 231, 234–236 Church council  2, 41–43, 46, 49, 52, 55, 173 Church order  2, 3, 47, 49–51, 54, 61, 81, 82, 123, 132, 151, 158–160, 164, 168–172, 177, 180 Church regiment / government  90, 126, 144, 146, 151,152, 281 Circumcision  175, 200 Citizens  9, 13, 86, 106, 140–146, 155, 170, 175, 178, 185, 193, 205, 210, 231, 232, 240–242, 244, 250, 268, 275, 277–280, 283 Collective memory  39, 68 Comfort  18, 19, 67, 69, 70, 71, 74, 76, 77, 79, 83–85, 89, 97, 99, 101, 103, 104, 107, 110, 114, 117, 119, 124, 128, 132, 161, 168, 185, 221, 223, 228, 229, 238, 239, 244, 251, 267, 275 Composition  31, 67, 68, 70, 71, 74, 76, 79, 80, 103, 108, 112, 134, 158, 159, 161, 163–166, 169, 175–177, 183, 203, 252, 253, 271, 272, 277 Common faith  210, 211, 232, 278, 279 Common good  140, 170 Communalism  139–144, 151, 155, 269, 270, 277 Communicatio idiomatum  200, 225–228, 274 Confessio Augustana  35, 56, 148 Confessio Wirtembergica  56 Confessional characteristic  12, 51, 135 Confessional culture (Konfessionskultur) ​ 12, 13 Confessionalization  2, 4–8, 10–14, 25, 63, 67, 131–135, 139, 143, 269, 270, 277, 283–285

304

Index of Subjects

Conscience  62, 75, 136, 167, 216, 217, 257, 267 Consistory  46, 152 Cosmology  200, 251, 259, 263, 264, 267, 268, 273, 274, 279, 284 Court preacher  2, 3, 9, 10, 34, 35, 38, 41–47, 52–56, 59–61, 64, 65, 67, 80, 81, 83, 91, 93, 94, 97, 98, 103, 104, 108, 114, 117, 122, 123, 129, 131–133, 150, 152, 226 Credo  157, 159, 161, 166, 175 Devil  34, 84, 191, 193, 202, 209, 213–217, 219, 221, 223, 224, 230, 231, 235, 239, 251, 261, 262, 264, 275 Diocesan dean (Stiftsptrobst)  61, 81, 83, 86, 93, 152 Discipline  6, 8, 12, 17, 54, 67, 105, 106, 126, 143, 144, 150, 174, 177, 180, 220, 259, 260, 283 Disciplining  6, 8, 46, 52, 67, 96, 134, 139, 149, 220, 259, 269, 270, 274, 277, 280, 283 Doctrine of salvation  136 Edifying  12, 31, 33, 68–71, 74, 79, 82, 90 Epitaph  29–31, 123, 124 Esslinger Vertrag  147 Estates  8, 9, 47–52, 59–62, 64, 67, 80, 131, 134, 145, 147, 171 Etatism  6, 8 Eucharist  36, 126, 151, 158, 159, 164–166, 173, 178, 179, 182, 184, 185, 218–221, 225–229, 231, 236, 273, 274, 276, 281 Example rhetoric  9, 79, 99, 104, 134, 284 Exemplarity  9, 134 Exercise  145, 194, 218, 222, 234, 238, 248, 251, 259, 260, 263 Faith  9–11, 13, 17, 21, 23, 24, 30–37, 40, 44, 52, 57, 59, 63, 67, 69, 71, 72, 74, 76– 82, 85, 90, 91, 94, 96, 97, 99, 102, 103, 105, 107, 109, 111–113, 116, 121, 122, 124–129, 132–136, 141, 144, 146, 148, 149, 154, 158–161, 163, 165–167, 169, 170, 173–175, 178, 179, 181, 182, 187, 189–193, 195, 196, 198, 199, 201, 202,

204–215, 219, 220, 224, 227, 230–232, 234, 237, 238, 240, 241, 243, 245, 246, 249–252, 256, 259–263, 266, 267, 272, 273, 275, 277–279, 283, 284 Feudalism  139, 142, 143, 151, 155, 269 Foundations  48, 49, 51, 75, 77 Foreign policy  5, 48, 126, 147, 148, 152, 269, 281 Formation  1, 3–5, 7, 67, 74, 79, 80, 132, 277 Formula of Concord  12, 57, 146, 148, 150, 226, 227 Guilds  140–146, 155, 180, 283 Hell  75, 101, 221–224, 229, 242 Holy Spirit  32, 110, 165, 167, 174, 206, 209, 236, 238 Homiletics  14–20, 22, 24, 25, 39, 71, 134, 252, 272 Homiletical style  80, 134, 135, 155, 270 Identity  1, 39, 68, 69, 160, 163, 165, 166, 168, 171, 174, 175, 189, 192, 201, 202, 206, 214, 240, 250, 251, 272, 277, 278 Imperial law  5, 50, 146 Imperial city  5, 30, 62, 139, 147, 164, 172 Intercessions  74, 76, 103 Interim  146, 169 Jesuits  43, 53, 73, 167 Jews  193, 194, 195, 197, 198, 203, 213, 215, 272, 278 Judgment  75, 77, 91, 96, 98, 116, 123, 210, 232–234, 242, 250 Knowledge  10, 35, 38, 55, 63, 70, 82, 90, 105, 108, 117, 121, 157–159, 162, 165, 167, 170–173, 178, 183, 185, 187, 189, 212, 216, 218, 224–230, 252, 273, 275, 276, 284 Landhofmeister  46, 61, 88, 107 Landtag  43, 47–50, 61, 62, 139, 171 Learning  1, 9, 21, 22, 32, 43, 74, 89, 90, 105, 122, 126, 139, 162, 165, 172, 173, 176, 177, 183, 207, 223, 231, 264, 267, 268, 271

Index of Subjects

Lord’s Prayer / Paternoster  82, 159, 161, 165, 166, 172, 175, 177, 178, 182, 185, 187, 196, 204, 205, 207, 220, 252–254, 256, 259, 263, 265–267, 273, 275 Lutheran orthodoxy  2, 11, 12, 14–17 Media  39, 68 Memorial object  30, 68, 69, 74 Memory  22, 23, 31, 33, 38–40, 59, 67, 68, 74, 75, 80, 87, 88, 95, 98, 120, 128, 189, 203 Metaphor  153, 207, 209, 210, 230, 240, 244–246, 252, 275, 276 Münsinger Vertrag  47 Nobility  6, 9, 21, 44, 45, 47, 51, 58, 64, 83, 85, 98, 106, 114, 115, 134, 143 Negotiation  39, 45–47, 49, 68, 103, 132, 140, 142, 149, 155, 269, 283, 284, Oratio funebris  72 Ottoman Empire  214 Patricians  140, 141, 143 Pedagogical operation  68, 71, 160–163, 165–167, 175, 183, 221, 231, 271 Parable  23, 24, 43, 145, 209, 213–217, 225 Pedagogy  79, 162, 167, 182, 259, 268, 274, 279 Penance  32, 36, 88, 95, 157, 158, 163, 178, 202, 204, 224, 236, 273, 276 Plot  38, 120, 163, 166 Political legitimacy  140 Prayer situation  260, 265 Purgatory 75–77 Reformed theology  269 Reformation  5, 10–13, 48–50, 53, 73, 74, 82, 140, 141, 144, 153, 158, 164, 190, 194, 270, 281 Religious diplomacy  52, 123 Religious education  10, 42, 149, 158 Religious experience  215, 221, 224 Religious teaching  42, 169, 170, 172, 178, 181, 274, 276 Requiem mass  72, 74, 75 Rhetoric  9, 15–24, 33, 36, 40, 68, 71, 79, 99, 103, 104, 113, 133, 134, 136, 192,

305

197, 203, 236, 243, 246, 260, 261, 263, 267, 268, 271–274, 277, 283–285 Ritual  68, 73, 74, 76, 78, 79, 81, 82, 84, 102, 113, 132, 155, 162, 165, 189, 198, 200, 202, 203, 219, 272 Role model  32, 73, 77, 86, 93, 97, 114, 115, 126, 135, 257 Salvation  3, 17, 21, 36, 67, 70, 71, 74–76, 78, 81, 82, 96–98, 102, 107, 109–112, 114, 116, 119, 120, 122, 128, 129, 132–136, 141, 157, 163, 170, 177, 178, 185, 191, 192, 195, 201, 205, 206, 209, 218, 227, 231, 237, 243, 280, 284, Saving faith  1, 3, 77, 79, 97, 121, 198, 209, 210, 250, 278, 279 Schwenckfeldianism 176 Second reformation  11, 12 Secular rule / authority  1, 5, 10, 12, 25, 45, 46, 51, 64, 67, 79, 80, 96, 97, 117, 127–129, 132, 149, 152–155, 158, 172, 180, 230, 254, 270, 279–281, 283, 284 Schmalkaldic War  142, 154 Shepherd  112, 186, 188, 203, 206, 232, 235, 272, 273, 280, 285 Sin  72, 74–77, 84, 88, 94–96, 99, 101, 111, 112, 121, 126, 157, 161, 163, 165, 167, 171, 175, 177, 178, 186, 191, 204, 205, 214–224, 231, 235–239, 241, 243, 244, 247–249, 250, 251, 257, 258, 260–262, 273, 275 Social disciplining (Sozialdisziplinierung) ​ 4, 80 Social common sense  141, 142, 155, 277 Social imagery  246 Superintendent  2, 34, 35, 41, 42, 46, 49, 61, 123, 126, 144, 149, 150–152, 173, 178, 182, 226 Swabian League  142 Teaching situation  159, 163, 184, 188, 189, 197,203, 204, 206, 211, 244, 278 Teaching discourse  274 Temptations  110, 112, 261, 262 Ten Commandments  157, 159, 161, 171, 182, 187, 196, 197, 204, 207, 212, 231, 234, 235, 245, 246, 253

306

Index of Subjects

Thirty Years’ War  4, 5, 44 Tübinger Vertrag  47, 51, 60, 147 Turks  171, 189–195, 197, 203, 213–215, 239, 240, 272, 275, 276, 278 Types  78, 96 Two regiments  230 Two sceptres of Christ  230 Ubiquity 225–227 University in Tübingen  2, 3, 41

Visitations  5, 46, 49, 91, 158, 172 Word-sign  169, 199, 200 Zwinglian  140, 141, 146–148, 151, 153–155, 169, 174, 176, 179, 180, 227, 229, 274