(click to open)

In contrast to the role Charles had forced upon Frederick in the 1547-1548 Diet of Augsburg, the Palatinate diplomatic position at the important imperial Diet of Augsburg in 1555 favored the Protestant cause. This meeting produced the important “Religious Peace of Augsburg” which recognized both Lutheranism, in the form of the Augsburg Confession, and Catholicism as legal confessions in the Holy Roman Empire; Reformed Protestantism was excluded. All secular princes were granted the jus reformandi— the right to determine the religion of their territories. This principle is summed up in the Latin dictum cuius regio, eius religio (“ whose region, his religion”).

...Ordinary citizens were also denied the right to determine their faith but were allowed to emigrate if their theological convictions differed with the sovereign’s religious policy.

 


Gracious Law in the HC

For Melanchthon, the first use, the law as a teacher of sin, remained primary. Neuser also detected a Calvinistic stamp on the HC’s portrayal of the law in part 1 as a mirror for our misery. The fact that HC 4 answers the question, “What does God’s law require of us?” with the words, “Christ teaches us this in summary in Matthew 22” ... suggests a Calvinistic understanding of the law— one in which law and gospel are not polar opposites but different expressions of the gracious righteousness of God. This represented a significant revision of the first part of the SC, where we encounter a sharp Melanchthonian contrast between law and gospel. Therefore, Neuser concluded, whoever was the final redactor of the HC was certainly a Calvinist.60


60
Neuser, “Väter des Heidelberger Katechismus,” 188-90. The point that HC 4 suggests a Calvinistic approach to law and gospel had been made earlier by Graffmann, Unterricht, 3: 657. [61]. In Lang, Heidelberger Katechismus, 200-201.
 


Who wrote the Heidelberg Catechism?

In summary, there is indeed no solid evidence for the longstanding claims that Olevianus was one of two main authors of the HC or that he was responsible for the final German redaction{yellow/}. ... However, the critics have not presented convincing arguments that Olevianus could not have been the final redactor or could not have played a major part in the production of the HC.