§.VIII: Dorscheans with Museus — Philippica mostly useful, yet Art. X said corrupted for Calvinists; first vs later wording
§. VIII. Here I may seem, even to the more modest Dorscheans, to beg the question — standing with Johann Museus, who will weigh the Philippica Confession like this:
Most of its articles, they grant, are drawn out more fully and declared more richly, and many useful things appear in that edition.
Yet some insertions later set Augsburg-Confession theologians quarreling among themselves — for example, whether the Gospel is a sermon of repentance.
Above all, they say, Article X on the Lord's Supper was corrupted to favor the Calvinists.
In Article X of the first edition the words run: Concerning the Lord's Supper they teach that the flesh and blood of Christ are truly present and are distributed to those who eat, and they reject those who teach otherwise.
In the other edition, Museus reports, the words are truly present and are distributed drop out, and this is put in their place: that the body and blood are truly exhibited, and so on.
The Calvinists, he adds, even conceded that formula of speech — yet said the exhibition is spiritual.
Then the clause And they reject those who teach otherwise is omitted in the Philippica edition; and from that, he says, the controversy over this Confession's authority arose.
So far Museus, Lectures on the Epitome of the Formula of Concord.
Latin
§. VIII. Equidem videri hic possum Dorschaanis, etiam modestioribus, Principium petere, cum Joh. Museo, Confess. Philippicam ita comparatam pronunciaturis, ut plerique quidem Articuli inibi fusius deducti & uberius declarati sint, multaque etiam utilia in ista Editione reperiantur; interim, ut quaedam etiam inserta fuerint, quae postea in controversiam vocarunt Augustanae Confessionis Theologi inter se, v. g. An Evangelium sit concio poenitentiae? Cumprimis verò, ut Articulus decimus de Coena Domini in gratiam Calvinianorum depravatus fuerit. Nam in Articulo X. primae Editionis haec haberi verba: De Coena Domini docent, quod Caro & Sanguis Christi verè adsit & distribuatur vescentibus, & improbant secus docentes. In altera verò Editione verba (Verè adsunt & distribuuntur) omissa esse, substitui autem haec: Quòd Corpus & Sanguis verè exhibentur &c. At verò formulam hanc loquendi, etiam concessisse Calvinianos; sed dixisse, quod spiritualiter exhibeantur. Deinde verba: Et improbant secus docentes, in Editione Philippica omissa esse, Atque hinc Controversiam de auctoritate hujus Confessionis ortam fuisse, Hactenus Museus Praelect. in Epitom. Formul. Concord. p. m. 32.