German version appeared in 1563. What is now the eightieth question ( U7nit difference is there between the Lord's Supper and the Rumiin Mass ?) is not to be found m the first edition ; part of it appears in the second edi- tion; and in tlie third, of 1563, it is given in full as fol- lows : " What ditference is there between tlie Lord's Supper and the Popish jMass ? The Lord's Supper tes- tifies to us that we have full forgiveness of all our sins by the one sacrifice of Jesus Christ, which he himself has once accomplished on the cross; and that by the Holy Ghost we are ingrafted into Christ, who with his true body is now in heaven at the right hand of the Fa- ther, and is to be there worshipped. But the Mass teaches that the living and the dead have not forgive- ness of sins through the sufferings of Christ, unless Christ is still daily offered for them by the priest; and that Christ is bodily under the form of bread and wine, and is therefore to be worshipped in them. (And thus the Mass at bottom is nothing else than a denial of the one sacrifice and passion of Christ, and an accursed idol- atry.)" The occasion for the introduction of this eigh- tieth question appears to have been the decree of the Council of Trent " touching the sacrifice of the Mass," Sept. 17, 1562. This declaration, and the anathemas pronounced at Trent against the Protestant doctrine of the sacraments, had not time to produce their effect be- fore the issue of the first edition of the Catechism. But the elector soon saw the necessity for a strong and clear declaration on the Protestant side, and such a declara- tion is furnished in this eightieth question, which was added to the Catecliism in 1563. The first edition of 1563 was for a lung time lost; that given by Niemeyer {Colleciio Confessionum, p. 390) is the third of that year. But in 1864: pastor Welters found a copy and reprinted it, with a history of the text {Der Heidelb. Katechismus in seiner urapriinglichen Gestalf, Bonn, 1864, sm. 8vo), which cleared up all doubt as to the various editions of 1563. In 1866 professor Schaff published a very valua- ble edition, revised after the first edition of 1563, with an excellent history of the Catechism {Der lleidelb. Kat. nnch d. ersten Ansjabe von 1563 revidirt, Philad. 18mo). Other editions appeared in 1571 and 1573, and in this last the questions are divided, as now, into lessons for fiftj'-two Sundays, and the questions are numbered. An abstract of the Catechism appeared in 1585. The larger Catechism has since been republished by millions ; no book, perhaps, has gone through more editions, except the Bible, Bunyan's Pilgrim, and Kempis. It has been translated into near!}' every spoken language. It was, of course, at once used throughout the Palatinate by command of the elector. But it soon spread abroad wherever the Reformed Church had found footing, es- pecially in North Germany and parts of Switzerland. It was early received in tlie Netherlands, and formally adopted at the 'Synod of Dort, 1618. Long and bitter controversies witli Roman Catholics and Lutherans on the Catechism only endeared it the more to the Reform- ed. It is to this day an authoritative confession for the Reformed churches (German and Dutch). The (Dutch) Reformed Cluirch directs all her ministers to explain the Catechism regularly before the congregations on the Sabbath day.
II. Contents. — The Catechism, in its present form, consists of 129 questions and answers. It is divided into three parts : 1. Of the misery of man. 2. Of the redemption of man. 3. Of the gratitude due from man (duties, etc.). The arrangement of the matter is ad- mirable, looking not simply to logical order, but also to practical edification. The book is not simply dogmatic, but devotional. It assumes that all who use it are Christians, and is thus not adapted for missionary work. As to the theology taught by the book, it is," in the main, that of pure evangelical Protestantism. On the doctrine of predestination it is so reticent that it was opposed, on the one hand, by the Synod of Dort, the most extreme Calvinistic body perhaps ever assembled, and, on the other (though not without qualification), by
James Arminius, the greatest of all the opponents of Calvinism. On the nature of the sacraments the Cate- chism is Calvinistic, as opposed to the Lutheran doc- trine. Dr. Heppe {deutscher Protestantismus, i, 443 sq.) goes too far in asserting that the Catechism is thor- oughly Melancthonian, and in no sense Calvinistic, Sudhoff answers this in his article in Herzog's Real-En- cyklopddie, v, 658 sq. ; but he himself goes too far, on the other side, in finding that the Calvinistic theory of predestination, though not expressly stated, is implied and involved in the view of sin and grace set forth in the Catechism (see Gerhart's article in the Tercentenary Monwmnt, p. 387 sq., and also his statement in this Cyclopaedia, iii, 827). Olevianus, it will be remember- ed, was educated mider the influence of Calvin ; Ursinus under that of Melancthon. Dr. Schaff remarks judi- ciously that " the Catechism is a true expression of the convictions of its authors; but it communicates only so much of these as is in harmony with the public faith of the Church, and obsen'es a certain reticence or reserva- tion and moderation on such doctrines (as the twofold predestination), which belong rather to scientific theolo- g}' and private conviction than to a public Church con- fession and the instruction of vouth" (.4 merican Presb. Review, July, 1863, p. 371).