I may be remembering this incorrectly, but early on in my studies of the Book of Concord, I was told that the division of the Articles of the Augsburg Confession (with the headings) was somewhat similar to the division of chapters (together with editorial headings) in the Bible: These divisions were not in the original. However, one may see that the article divisions and headings were included in the 1580 Book of Concord by looking here. Perhaps this piece of information was referencing the Augsburg Confession as it was presented in 1530?
What I do remember with some certainty was the understanding that the divisions fall more naturally after each condemnation. It works like this: Article I. ends with a condemnation. Article II. ends with a condemnation. When you arrive at Article III., you do not see a condemnation until the end of Article V., so that Articles III. to V. should all be considered together with regard to the censured teachings of the Anabaptists and others, "who teach that we receive the Holy Spirit in consequence of our own preparation, our thoughts and works, without the external word of the Gospel."
Any thoughts on this? (Or correction of my memory in remembering these things?)
1 comment:
One may certainly defend the traditional division from the Apology to the Augsburg Confession, where Melanchthon operates with an understanding of the traditional divisions. (See for example, Art. III., "Our adversaries agree to the third article...", which is followed in Art. IV. of the Apology where Melanchthon says: "The adversaries condemn the doctrines taught in the fourth, fifth, sixth, and twentieth articles of our Confession," etc.)
Perhaps the reference was to the Schwabach and Torgau Articles?
Post a Comment