tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post115599411213691058..comments2024-03-17T19:56:31.931-05:00Comments on Weedon's Blog: Gottes Befehl...DIAKONOSWilliam Weedonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01383850332591975790noreply@blogger.comBlogger64125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156605042975480372006-08-26T10:10:00.000-05:002006-08-26T10:10:00.000-05:00It has been a great discussion and I know I have l...It has been a great discussion and I know I have learned much. Thanks for carrying it forward. Fr. Fauts, if it issues in an opus magnum, don't forget to share the goodies.William Weedonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01383850332591975790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156566375922821832006-08-25T23:26:00.000-05:002006-08-25T23:26:00.000-05:00I, too, have appreciate this conversation -- quite...I, too, have appreciate this conversation -- quite eye opening indeed. <BR/><BR/>I think that the evidence that has been presented in this thread certainly supports your suspicion that Melanchthon actually intended Jonas' Apology to be the offical German edition. I don't know if it will ever be possible to say *for certain* which came first -- his octavo, or the German apology -- but it seems as though the similarities are not so much due to a translation from the "octavo" or the "quarto" but that the German edition was being done almost alongside of the latin "octavo," though not without its differences...Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156471228403335132006-08-24T21:00:00.000-05:002006-08-24T21:00:00.000-05:00I believe the reason is that some others have been...I believe the reason is that some others have been convinced by a couple of German scholars, of highly questionable confessional/theological commitments [meaning that they have no concern for the nature of the BOC as an authoritative, binding, and most importantly TRUE exposition of God's Word], that there was a "mistake" made and that the Octavo "should have been chosen" for us as the text of the Apology, but to offer that thesis, they must basically set aside the work of Chemnitz and Andreae and others and label it erroneous. <BR/><BR/>Having said that, and at the risk of repeating myself ad naseum, while all this remains fascinating, perhaps endlessly so, the text in the Book of Concord is the Book of Concord, not any other.<BR/><BR/>But this is all interesting. I've appreciated this conversation, for I'm increasing growing convinced that the Jonas translation was not merely a "paraphrase" but was intended by even Melanchthon to be the German edition of the Apology, from which he then went back and used when he did his "Variata" version of the Apology.<BR/><BR/>I've yet to consult Bente.<BR/><BR/>I do not find the comments in the K/W at all persuasive and I notice that there is scant documentation for the assertions, which is rather odd, since such a significant suggested change for what we receive as the "Apology" would, you would think, at least have very specific documentation for the speculations and assertions made to justify its use in the K/W, but notice how there is a poverty of any documentation or citation of any evidence or authorities, just assertions without any documentation.<BR/><BR/>Odd, no?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156468817579645462006-08-24T20:20:00.000-05:002006-08-24T20:20:00.000-05:00Interesting... So, if the Apology was first publis...Interesting... <BR/><BR/>So, if the Apology was first published alongside Jonas' German, which he had been assisted with by Melanchthon, it would only seem natural to use Jonas' translation, rather than some sort of new German translation from the octavo, in the 1580 BoC. I'm wondering why all this evidence doesn't seem to fit with what I had learned from other sources.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156454365265037052006-08-24T16:19:00.000-05:002006-08-24T16:19:00.000-05:00Found this fascinating information in Schaff's "Cr...Found this fascinating information in Schaff's "Creeds of Christendom" which remains a truly amazing piece of scholarship.<BR/><BR/>The Apology, though not signed by the Lutheran Princes at Augsburg, was recognized first in 1532, at a convent in Schweinfurt, as a public confession; it was signed by Lutheran divines at Smalcald, 1537; it was used at the religious conference at Worms, 1540, and embodied in the various symbolical collections, and at last in the Book of Concord.<BR/><BR/>The text of the Apology has, like that of the Confession, gone through various transformations. The original draft made at Augsburg has no authority.456456Manuscript copies of this ' Apologia prior ,' which was based on an imperfect knowledge of the Romish Confutatio , still exist. The Latin text of it was published forty-seven years afterwards by Chytræus (from Spalatin's copy), 1578, better by Förstemann, in his Neues Urkundenbuch (1842), pp. 357–380 (from a copy written partly by Spalatin and partly by Melanchthon). The best edition is by Bindseil, in the Corp. Reform. Vol. XXVII. pp. 275 sqq. in Latin, and in German, pp. 322 sqq. The first Latin edition was much enlarged and improved, and appeared in April, 1531, at Wittenberg, together with a very free German translation by Justus Jonas, assisted by Melanchthon.457457During the preparation of the editio princeps he wrote to Brentius (February, 1531): ' Ego retexo Apologiam et edetur longe auctior et melius munita ,' and to Camerarius (March 7): ' Apologia mea nondum absoluta est, crescit enim opus inter scribendum. ' Quoted by Köllner, I, p. 426. Six sheets were reprinted, and a copy of the first print is preserved in the library of Nuremberg. See Corp. Reform. Vol. XXVII. pp. 391 sqq. The second Latin edition of the same year was again much changed, and is called the Variata.458458See the titles of the various editions in Corp. Reform. Vol. XXVI. pp. 235–242, and the best text of the ' Apologia altera ' of 1531, with the changes of later editions till 1542 (viz., of the ed. II. 1531, ed. III. 1540, ed. IV. 1542), in Corp. Reform. Vol. XXVII. pp. 419–646. The German text was also transformed, especially in the edition of 1533. The Book of Concord took both texts from the first edition.<BR/><BR/> <BR/>« Prev The Apology of the Augsburg Confession. A.D.…Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156432728003900642006-08-24T10:18:00.000-05:002006-08-24T10:18:00.000-05:00I'm thinking I had read that in the editors introd...I'm thinking I had read that in the editors introduction to either Apology or the Smalcald Artciles in K/W. Though, that looks as though there was at least some sort of German Apology available already in 1531.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156429752553950202006-08-24T09:29:00.000-05:002006-08-24T09:29:00.000-05:00That's interesting, I'll have to look into that. I...That's interesting, I'll have to look into that. I'll take a look at what the historical introduction in the BKS has to say about when Jonas did his work. I would be a little surprised to think Jonas waited that long to translate it, and I have seen a picture of the Quarto edition of the Augustana and Apology, in Germany, printed in 1531. Here is that picture, and you can read the handwritten note explaining what it is: note the words the Augustant and the Apology.<BR/><BR/>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ACAP.jpg<BR/><BR/>Interesting again!!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156388795461759802006-08-23T22:06:00.000-05:002006-08-23T22:06:00.000-05:00Certainly possible...Though I seem to remember rea...Certainly possible...<BR/><BR/>Though I seem to remember reading somewhere that Jonas began his work on the German Apology after Smalcald in 1537 when the Smalcald league, rather than adopting the Smalcald Articles, simply signed onto the AC, the Apology, and commissioned Melanchthon to write the Treatise. Again, I am away from home without my references at the moment, so I can't double check it.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156367449230088362006-08-23T16:10:00.000-05:002006-08-23T16:10:00.000-05:00There is a footnote in Elert's "Structure of Luthe...There is a footnote in Elert's "Structure of Lutheranism" that the changes Justas were approved by Melanchthon.<BR/><BR/>Here's my hunch.<BR/><BR/>Melanchthon wrote Latin Apology. Jonas "translates" it and makes his changes with Melanchthon's knowledge and approval and I find it impossible to believe, knowing that Jonas was in constant contact with Luther, that Luther too did not have a hand in it. So there well could have been close collaboration amongst them all on the Jonas version of the Apology. <BR/><BR/>Jonas finishes his work and the Apology is published in April/May 1531.<BR/><BR/>Melanchthon, ever revising, set to work revising the Apology some more, and began his work on "improving" the Augustana too.<BR/><BR/>We know Luther chastised Melanchthon for his constant tinkering.<BR/><BR/>I would say the chances are high that the Jonas edition of the Apology were given the "OK" by Melanchthon and perhaps also by Luther, but Melanchthon kept going and produced the Octavo and it was printed in September 1531, and just basically accepted, but it was Melanchthon's changes to the AC that finally spelled the end for the Octavo, since, by the time of the Formula and in light of the mess caused by the various "Variata" of the AC, they said, "Chuck all these multiple editions, we are sticking with the first editions of the AC and the Ap."<BR/><BR/>Hence, we have what we have.<BR/><BR/>There may well be every reason to believe that the Octavo is really based on Melanchthon's work with Jonas in translating the Ap. into German, and Melanchthon decided to take that work and building on it, revise again the Latin.<BR/><BR/>Possible?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156365807136716802006-08-23T15:43:00.000-05:002006-08-23T15:43:00.000-05:00Interesting. I was reading last night, also, that...Interesting. I was reading last night, also, that Bente has a few quotes from Melancthon speaking of his involvement in the German Apology.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156351402036031582006-08-23T11:43:00.000-05:002006-08-23T11:43:00.000-05:00Clarification of previous....the question is where...Clarification of previous....the question is where does the bracketed note, in German, on the last pages of the Solid Declaration come from? It is not to be found in the BKS, and it would appear to be a note added by the editor of the German text Bente used for the Triglotta.<BR/><BR/>Note also I found this interesting comment in the historical introduction to the Henkel edition, a translation of German theologial Mueller's 1847 introductions:<BR/><BR/>Mueller explains that the chief reason Selnecker's hasty 1580 translation of the BOC was rejected was because he used the Octavo.<BR/><BR/>The historical introduction also points to the possibility that in fact it was the "Jonas translation" that was the basis for the Octavo, not the other way around. The introduction notes that Melanchthon was very much involved in the Jonas translation, and so it may well be said that the German Apology is every bit as much "authoritative" and is the text the Octavo is based on.<BR/><BR/>Curioser and curioser.<BR/><BR/>http://www.lutheranlegacy.org/viewbook.asp?BookID=32&VolNo=1&ImgIdx=4Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156340176773294552006-08-23T08:36:00.000-05:002006-08-23T08:36:00.000-05:00A mystery to pursue....where, precisely, does the ...A mystery to pursue....where, precisely, does the note, in German, at the very end of the SD, in the Triglotta, come from? I can not locate it in the Triglotta. It would seem to me to be a note added by the editor of the German text, simply indicating what follows in the particular copy of the German BOC.<BR/><BR/>And, if you feel yourself ready for the true gnosis, Dr. Von Hagel, at Concordia University RF has been carefully studying the individual printed copies of the 1580 Dresden BOC!!<BR/><BR/>If you love detail, detail, detail...you would do well to be in touch with him. A friend of mine told me about his work.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156340039149254352006-08-23T08:33:00.000-05:002006-08-23T08:33:00.000-05:00Also, Bohlmann, "Hermeneutics of The Lutheran Conf...Also, Bohlmann, "Hermeneutics of The Lutheran Confessions" ... the book. Now out of print, but surely in the library.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156338663374185872006-08-23T08:11:00.000-05:002006-08-23T08:11:00.000-05:00Thanks! I'd surely borrow yours, Tutal, though I ...Thanks! <BR/><BR/>I'd surely borrow yours, Tutal, though I imagine with the citation now provided it will be just as easy to pick it up at the Library and run a copy.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156337890208273292006-08-23T07:58:00.000-05:002006-08-23T07:58:00.000-05:00Here you go:A. C. Piepkorn, “Suggested Principles ...Here you go:<BR/><BR/>A. C. Piepkorn, “Suggested Principles for a Hermeneutics of the Lutheran Symbols,” CTM, XXIX (January 1958), 1–24.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156310237747323192006-08-23T00:17:00.000-05:002006-08-23T00:17:00.000-05:00Pastor Fouts,There were a bunch of old CJ's from t...Pastor Fouts,<BR/><BR/>There were a bunch of old CJ's from the 40's through the 70's that I picked up. That essay does sound familiar, and I believe it was a multi part essay spanning a few Journals. I can check in a couple weeks and let you know when I get back in STL. Of course if I have them, I'll want to keep them, but we could make a copy if you need them.mlorfeldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03138561905418684851noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156297321245131762006-08-22T20:42:00.000-05:002006-08-22T20:42:00.000-05:00err.. correction... "help" should have read "healt...err.. correction... "help" should have read "health"Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156297259343215832006-08-22T20:40:00.000-05:002006-08-22T20:40:00.000-05:00Fr. Weedon,Unfortunately I won't be able to make i...Fr. Weedon,<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately I won't be able to make it tomorrow, though I do plan to make it a week from tomorrow. I'd very much like a copy. <BR/><BR/>Without classes at the moment, I'm taking the opportunity in the middle of the week to head down to visit my grandparents at the Lake of the Ozarks. At their age, and declining help, I try to take the opportunity whenever possible to pay them a visit.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156297105487127962006-08-22T20:38:00.000-05:002006-08-22T20:38:00.000-05:00Hard to say... I won't know until I receive the sy...Hard to say... I won't know until I receive the syllabus. Though, now that I know of its existance, I'll be sure to pick it up either way. Come to think of it, I vaguely remember reading an article along those lines in the M.Div. level Confessions 1 class, with Kolb. But I was such a young pup in those days (well, I guess I'm still pretty young), I didn't even yet know who Piepkorn was, thus making it harder to remember for certain if we had read it or not. Though I'm about 75% sure we did.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156296829252562492006-08-22T20:33:00.000-05:002006-08-22T20:33:00.000-05:00I have the essay, Fr. Fouts. I think it was publi...I have the essay, Fr. Fouts. I think it was published in the CJ or whatever it was called back then. IF I see you tomorrow, I can give you a copy. : )William Weedonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01383850332591975790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156295488708890692006-08-22T20:11:00.000-05:002006-08-22T20:11:00.000-05:00It is a bit of a puzzle to me that the work of one...It is a bit of a puzzle to me that the work of one of the Synod's most significant scholars on the Confesions is not required in a graduate course on this issue. Perhaps it is an essay/article to which you will be referred, perhaps at the library desk, etc. I would be surprised if you were not required to read it. It is quite good actually. But then again, I'm given to understand that the translation of the BKS introductions to the various documents, done by Piepkorn and others, is no longer in print via the seminary book store. These BKS historical introductions have remained virtually unchanged since they were translated for the purpose of the Tappert edition. I'm fairly sure it is not in fact a book, but rather an essay. At the same time, I find it puzzling that Bohlman's book on the subject is not required. Perhaps it is out of print as well? Probably will be referred to quite a bit. The more I think of this, I'm remembering that Piepkorn's work was an essay/article. I believe the CTS Fort Wayne bookstore had it as a print shop work.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156294826343286972006-08-22T20:00:00.000-05:002006-08-22T20:00:00.000-05:00At this point I'm not sure if we'll be using Piepk...At this point I'm not sure if we'll be using Piepkorn's book for the class or not, as it wasn't on the list of required books in the bookstore (though, being out of print, one wouldn't expect it to be). I'm sure it would be a good book to have, particularly in the light of recent issues, if the publisher who holds the rights to the book were to decide to reprint it. ;-) <BR/><BR/>The only book listed in the bookstore was K/W. Though it seems as though Dr. Arand typically has very short book lists, and assigns articles or texts on "closed reserve" in the library. If you happen to be whom I think you are, I'll let you know after the class begins.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156285848671268942006-08-22T17:30:00.000-05:002006-08-22T17:30:00.000-05:00Who is teaching that claas, Pastor? And I wonder t...Who is teaching that claas, Pastor? And I wonder to what extent Piepkorn's "Hermenutics of the Lutheran Confessions" -- to my knowledge the only thing in print on this.<BR/><BR/>I think the good thing about all this recent attention to textual issues is that many, many of us have been alerted to the fact that something happened with the advent of the BKS in 1930 and that "something" may well be worth considering very closely rather than simply, or merely, swallowing the presuppositions of the BKS over against the Book of Concord.<BR/><BR/>Fascinating stuff indeed, no?<BR/><BR/>The other interesting point is that the Preface of the BOC was specifically prepared for the whole book and specifically subscribed. The argument has been made that the signatories to the Preface were all "politicians" and therefore the subscription to the entire BOC make it a German legal document, not actually a church confession. <BR/><BR/>This strikes me as no different than saying that the Nicene Creed is merely a "legal" document since it was Constantine who called for it and "subscribed" it on behalf of the Empire.<BR/><BR/>There is something just far too facile about all these things, and the "volume" of the comments made by some who wish zealously to safeguard the K/W as the "best" edition to me bespeaks a very definite indication that they are well aware that they have not been as entirely forthcoming, or intellectually honest, on these issues, or that they now find themselves in quite an awkward spot indeed!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156282962500646842006-08-22T16:42:00.000-05:002006-08-22T16:42:00.000-05:00I agree...It does seem an odd argument to make tha...I agree...<BR/><BR/>It does seem an odd argument to make that the signatures were only to the Formula, in the light of the matters concerning the decision not to include the signature page in the Latin edition. <BR/><BR/>It seems, rather, that a simple explanation as to why the signatures were added at the time that they were likewise signing on to the Formula is a matter of logistics. Particularly when the printing process was a much more costly, and compex procedure than it is today, it would only make sense that if they wanted to include a signature page in the Book of Concord, they would get the signatures prior to its publication. It is not as though they could afford to set the type face for the entire book, particularly one as substantial as the Book of Concord, only to run off a few rough drafts that could be signed. I'm actually taking a class entitled "Hermeneutics of the Book of Concord" this fall -- it should be quite interesting.Rev. Ryan Foutshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15608412790780631961noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7291232.post-1156281774404036262006-08-22T16:22:00.000-05:002006-08-22T16:22:00.000-05:00I'm happy to grant that the Octavo is a text we ca...I'm happy to grant that the Octavo is a text we can, and should, take very seriously and as an authoritative and illuminating resource for understanding the Apology, but I can not regard it as one of our Confessions, per se, but definitely a "confessional document part of the history of our confessional documents" or something like that.<BR/><BR/>But I simply can't grant it the status that we must, in my opinion, grant and be gladly willing to grant to the actual texts of the German and Latin BOCs. <BR/><BR/>I would argue, still, therefore, that it was an error to include it in the K/W edition. I would have much rather had a well done translation of the 1580 German Jonas work, or the Latin, or ideally, even both! <BR/><BR/>Obviously, that would have posed difficulties for the publisher...that's why my esteem for the Triglotta has only continued to rise ever higher!<BR/><BR/>The Octavo could well have been published as a separate monograph, or as part of the "Sources and Contexts" book. As it is now it is now the K/W is a typographical mess and it is hard to make heads or tails of what's going on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com