Prayers, not Charms

Device 8: The devil encourages us to fight him with charms and sacred objects. But Scriptures written on jewelry or clothing are nothing compared to Scripture that is written on our hearts. Satan is not disturbed by holy water and incantations, though he may at times give them false success to spur on superstition.75

Remedy: Spurstowe wrote, “Do not think that these things will frighten the devil; rather look up to God.” He urged, “Be abundant in the use of prayer,” and quoted Bernard of Clairvaux, who said, “Satan’s temptations are grievous to us, but our prayers are more grievous to him.”77

Spurstowe, The Wiles of Satan, 72.

Joel R. Beeke and Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 197.

(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

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.


Anselmian Believers

That's what Anselmian believers do: they prayerfully exercise their rational powers in order to understand what they already believe.


Sandra Visser;Thomas Williams. Anselm (p. 7). Kindle Edition.

Debt Inheritance

Anselm's second reply is to argue that the strictness of God's judgment is actually not out of line with our own moral judgments. He invites us to consider an analogy: "Suppose a man and his wife who have been promoted moted to some great dignity and possession, not by their own merit but by grace alone, together commit some serious crime for which there is no excuse, and because of this crime they are justly dispossessed and reduced to servitude. Who would say that the children they have after their condemnation demnation do not deserve to be subjected to servitude as well, but rather should by grace be restored to those good things that their parents justly lost?"22 One can imagine that this analogy would have been more persuasive sive in Anselm's day than it is in ours, since many of us will have meritocratic itocratic and individualistic intuitions that undercut its force. We might agree that the children should not be restored to the rank and possessions that their parents justly lost-certainly in practice we would not restore them-but we would not think it fair to subject the children to servitude (or imprisonment, or the denial of the franchise, or whatever the analogous gous punishment in the current day might be). Even if, as would certainly happen in practice, the children grew up in the poverty resulting from their parents' deprivation, their poverty would not be permanent-not, at least, as a matter of law. They would be allowed to work their way back into prosperity and respectability. And if their parents died in debt, and without the means to satisfy the creditors, the children would not inherit that indebtedness.

On the Virginal Conception, and On Original Sin 28 (11:171)

Sandra Visser;Thomas Williams. Anselm (pp. 247-248). Kindle Edition.

Franciscan Disunity

Scotus disagrees with Bonaventure almost as much as he disagrees with the Dominican Aquinas.


Theologia in Se

cotus distinguishes between theologia in se (theology in itself) and theologia nostra (our theology). The first refers to all possible knowledge about God: all those things which are naturally known by God about himself. The second refers to the understanding possible for us to have in this life. The 'theology' of interest throughout the rest of this chapter is theologia nostra. This theology is the study of those facts about God that we can only know via revelation.


, Scotus argues that he can show that we can only have knowledge of God in his essence if God decides to reveal himself to us.


Richard Cross, Duns Scotus (Great Medieval Thinkers)

Proto-Pre-Forerunner of the Reformation

Scotus’ influence on succeeding thinkers is great. There are some clear links between Scotus’ thought and that of the Reformers. Perhaps the most obvious one is Scotus’ merely forensic account of the remission of sins.


Richard Cross, Duns Scotus (Great Medieval Thinkers)