RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Heidelberg Catechism
Brenz. Many theologians protested against the new catechism. In 1564 Flacius published Widerlegung eines kleinen deutschen calvinischen Catechismi, and Hesshus published his Trewe Warnung. There appeared also a new and enlarged edition of the Verzeichnis der Mangel, which criticized especially the marginal Bible texts. In defense of the catechism, Ursinus published, in 1564, in Heidelberg, three treatises: Griindtlicher bericht vom heiligen Abendmahl; Verantwortung wider die ungegrundten aufflagen wind verkerungen, mit welchen der Catechismus . unbillicher weise beschweret ist; Antwortt auff etlicher Theologen Censur uber die am rand dess Heydelberger Catechismi auss heiliger Schrifft angezogene Zeugnusse. Concerning the further events from the Colloquy of Maulbronn to the Diet of Augsburg, see Frederick III. the Pious.
Having gone through this ordeal, the success of the book began. An assembly of emigrants from the Netherlands in Wesel in 1568 5. Accept- recommended it by the side of the ance of the catechism of Calvin. The Synod at Catechism. Emden in 1571 adopted it for the German-speaking Netherlandish congregations in East Frisia and on the Lower Rhine. It entered also the ranks of the Reformed in Julich, Cleves, and Berg. Other German regions and individual congregations (in Nassau-Siegen, Wittgenstein, Solms and Wied, Bremen, Lippe, Anhalt,Hesse- Cassel, Brandenburg, Prussia, etc.) followed in the course of time. The Reformed churches of Hungary, Transylvania, and Poland adopted it; and in 1619 the Synod of Dort officially declared it one of the general symbolical books of the Reformed Church. From Holland, and afterward also from Germany, it was brought to America, where it has always been the honored symbol of the Dutch and German Reformed churches. The first reunited General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, at Philadelphia in 1870, authorized its use. It has been translated into all European languages, also into Hebrew, Arabic, Malay, Singalese, and others, and numerous paraphrases, summaries, and expositions have appeared.
From the dogmatic point of view, the history of the origin of the Heidelberg Catechism frustrates every attempt to identify it with the 6. Doctrinal doctrine of any individual theologian Character, of the Reformation time. Its specifically Reformed character shows itself, apart from the doctrine of the sacraments, by its continual going back from all perishable authorities to the Bible ; by its ethical rather than metaphysical mode of viewing Christ as being anointed by the Holy Ghost for the execution of his work; by its peculiar manner of closely connecting the moral life of the Christian with faith as its subjective proof; finally, by its conception of the intimate social connection in the congregation and by its designation of the church or congregation as the real source of discipline. In an anonymous pasquil of 1566 the Heidelberg Catechism is said to have been compiled " by Bullinger and his associates." Quantitatively it contains more of Calvin's catechism than of Bullinger's. Bullinger's influence, however, may be recognized, perhaps, if it be con-
sidered in its total impression; for it is true that the catechism does not share the philosophical and intellectual traits of Caivin, but takes its root in the Christian experience of salvation which it represents practically and devotionally. The doctrine of election is represented even more cautiously than by Bullinger. The doctrine of the Lord's Supper is distinguished less by clearness than by an effort to bridge over existing differences. In bringing the Lord's Supper into relation to the suffering of the Lord, the influence of Zurich may be recognized; the emphasis of a mystical union of the believers with the heavenly body of Christ reveals Calvin's influence; and in order to reconcile the distrusting Lutheran adversaries, the confessional and obligatory character of the celebration was given up.
Considered as a catechetical text-book, the Heidelberg Catechism is distinguished from Luther's
smaller catechism by its systematic
7. Arrange- arrangement. The five traditional
ment. articles of faith have been retained,
but have been inserted into an organic whole in accordance with subjective, psychological reasons, under the head of three main conceptions. After the two introductory questions there follow: (1) the misery of man as it may be recognized from the condensation of the law in Matt. xxii. (questions iii.-xi.); (2) the redemption of man, the Gospel to be accepted in faith developed according to the three articles of the Apostles' Creed, which is followed by the doctrine of justification, the sacraments, and the power of the keys (questions xii.-lxxxv.); (3) thankfulness, i.e., the new life according to its basis in conversion, its norm in the decalogue, and its most beautiful expression in prayer (questions lxxxvi.-cxxix.). The catechism is not entirely adapted to a child's capacity; but its noble language, captivating by its clearness as well as by its fervent joy of faith, may justify its being offered to school children for memorizing.
(M. Lauterburg.)
Bibliography: The official German editions were published in 1563, 1585, 1595, 1684, 1724; the American in 1863. Only one copy of the first edition is known, now in the university library at Utrecht. The most valuable work is the Tercentenary Monument. In Commemoration of the Three Hundredth Anniversary of the Heidelberg Catechism, Published by the Germ, Ref. Ch. of the U. S. A. in Eng. and Germ. The German ed. by Dr. Schaff, with an historical Introduction, Chambersburg, 1863 (contains a number of essays by authorities on the history and theology of the symbol). With the foregoing may be conveniently compared Schaff, Creeds, i. 529-554 (history, specimens, and estimates), iii. 307-355 (text, Germ, and Eng.); idem, Christian Church, vi. 555-557, 681, vii. 669, 811. The best work in Eng. on the catechism is by J. W. Nevin, History and Genius of the Heidelberg Catechism, Chambersburg, 1847 (cf. his introduction in the Tercentenary Monument, ut sup., pp. 11-127). Valuable also for the early history is J. I. Doedes, De Heidelbergsche Catechismus in zijne eerste Levensjaren 1563-67, Utrecht, 1867; also TSK for 1863 and 1867. Other works which may be consulted are: H. S. von Alpen, Geschichte und Literatur des Heidelberger Katechismus, Frankfort, 1796- 1797; J. C. W. Augusti, Versuch einer historisch-kritischen Einleitung in die beiden Haupt-Katechismen der evangelischen Kirche, pp. 96 sqq., Elberfeld, 1824; K. Sudhoff, C. Olevianus und Z. Ursinus, ib. 1857; G. W. Bethune, Expository Lectures on the Heidelberg Catechism, New York, 1864; H. Calaminus, Die Geschichte des Heidelberger Katechismus in Deutschland, Elberfeld, 1885; M. A. Gooszen, De Heidelbergsche Catechismus en het boekje
Heil Heldring-