The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology - Saint Mary ...

This letter shows:
1. That Melanchthon desired Luther to know all that he was doing.
2. That the Articles of Faith were finished, and that the changes were
confined to the Articles on Abuses.
3. That in the discussions on Abuses, there were many questions
which would have to be decided as the occasions, in the providence of
God, would determine them.
From three to four days seems to have been the ordinary time of the
letter-carrier between Augsburg and Coburg. The Elector sent the
Confession May 11th. Luther replied May 15th, probably the very day he
received it; his reply probably reached Augsburg May 20th, and two days
after, Melanchthon sends him the Articles of Faith, with the elaboration
which had taken place in the interval, and informs him of what he had
been doing, and designs to do.
In part, on the assumption that Luther was not permitted to receive
this letter, a theory was built by Rückert, a Rationalistic writer of Germany,
that the Augsburg Confession was meant to be a compromise with Rome,
and that it was feared that if Luther were not kept in the dark he would
spoil the scheme. But even if Luther did not receive Melanchthon's letter
and the Articles of May 22d, we deny that the rational solution would be
that they were fraudulently held back by the friends of the Confession at
Augsburg. Grant that Luther never received them. What then? The
retention of them would have been an act of flagrant immorality; it was
needless, and foolish, and hazardous; it is in conflict with the personal
character of the great princes and leaders, political and theological, who
were as little disposed as Luther, to compromise any principle with Rome.
The Elector and Brück were on some points less disposed to be yielding
than Luther. The theory is contradicted by the great body of facts, which
show that Luther, though absent in body, was the controlling spirit at
Augsburg. It is contradicted by the Confession itself, which is a
presentation, calm in manner, but mighty in the matter, in which it
overthrows Popery from the very foundation. It is contradicted by the fierce
replies of the Papists in