{"id":88721,"date":"2025-01-09T16:56:22","date_gmt":"2025-01-09T20:56:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?p=88721"},"modified":"2025-01-09T17:18:20","modified_gmt":"2025-01-09T21:18:20","slug":"reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html","title":{"rendered":"Reply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<\/head>
De Fide<\/em> Dogma on Communion in One Species Only; Theological Discord; Sola Scriptura<\/em><\/strong><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\"\"<\/a>
Photo credit: 1679 edition of Gerhard\u2019s Confessio Catholica<\/em> (Frankfurt) [public domain \/ Internet Archive]<\/figcaption><\/figure><\/div>\n
<\/div>\n
\n
\n
Many Lutheran scholars and apologists consider Johann Gerhard<\/a>\u00a0(1582-1637), a\u00a0Protestant scholastic<\/a>, to be the most knowledgeable Lutheran apologist in history. What\u2019s particularly notable about him is that he actually directly interacted with the best Catholic apologetics and theological sources (such as\u00a0St. Robert Bellarmine<\/a>: 1542-1621). According to the 1911\u00a0Encyclopaedia Britannica<\/em>\u00a0article on Gerhard<\/a>, he was \u201cregarded as the greatest living theologian of Protestant Germany.\u201d And it described his multi-volume book, \u201cthe\u00a0Confessio Catholica<\/em><\/a>\u00a0(1633\u20131637)\u201d as \u201can extensive work which seeks to prove the evangelical and catholic character of the doctrine of the\u00a0Augsburg Confession<\/a>\u00a0[1530, written by\u00a0Philip Melanchthon<\/a>] from the writings of approved Roman Catholic authors.\u201d<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Gerhard\u2019s words will be in\u00a0blue<\/span>. The\u00a0first volume\u00a0<\/a>of this work is 1008 pages, and is in the public domain. I will be utilizing\u00a0Google Translate<\/a> to render the original Latin into English (with my own slight modifications to make it more readable). I use RSV for scriptural citations.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

*****<\/p>\n

Since they demonstrate the uncertainty of the very papal dogma that we are attacking, they thereby confirm our opinion opposed to the same papal dogma.<\/span><\/span> But since those differences argue the uncertainty of papal dogmas, the matter itself is proved, and can be confirmed in detail from Bellarmine himself.<\/span><\/span> For he, in Book 4. On the Eucharist, Chapter 23, Prop. 4, forms the following proposition: \u201cNo spiritual fruit is taken from two kinds, which is not taken from one\u201d;<\/span><\/span> he adds: \u201cthis proposition is not at all certain, since theologians think variously about it, nor does the Council openly define it.\u201d<\/span><\/span> Therefore, transferring the hypothesis to the theory, we can say that those statements, about which theologians variously argue, either before or after the definition of the Council of Trent, are not really certain, and therefore those differences of theologians and pontiffs are not to be rendered by the papal dogmas, which confirm our opinion opposed to them.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

He\u2019s either citing St. Robert Bellarmine out of context or erroneously\u00a0 or interprets him wrongly, since Trent was clear on this point. In its 21st session in 1562, in the Decree on Communion Under Both Species, chapter 3<\/a>, it stated:<\/p>\n

That Christ whole and entire, and a true Sacrament are received under either species.<\/strong><\/p>\n

It moreover declares, that although, as hath been already said, our Redeemer, in that last supper, instituted, and delivered to the apostles, this sacrament in two species, yet is to be acknowledged, that Christ whole and entire and a true sacrament are received under either species alone; and that therefore, as regards the fruit<\/em> <\/strong>thereof, they, who receive one species alone, are not defrauded of any grace necessary to salvation. (my italics and bolding; Denzinger 1729; p. 415 in the 43rd edition, 2012<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Moreover, in its session 13 in October 1551, the Council had also declared in the Decree on the Sacrament of the Eucharist<\/a>:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n
Wherefore it is most true, that as much is contained under either species as under both; for Christ whole and entire is under the species of bread, and under any part whatsoever of that species; likewise the whole (Christ) is under the species of wine, and under the parts thereof. (Chapter 3; Denzinger 1641, p. 394)<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
If any one denieth, that, in the venerable sacrament of the Eucharist, the whole Christ is contained under each species, and under every part of each species, when separated; let him be anathema. (Canon 3; Denzinger 1653, p. 397)<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n
The Council of Florence had stated the same doctrine in November 1439, in the Bull of Union with the Armenians: Exsultate Deo<\/em>:<\/div>\n
\n
The whole Christ is contained under the species of bread and the whole Christ under the species of wine. Further, the whole Christ is present under any part of the consecrated host or the consecrated wine when separated from the rest. (Denzinger 1321, p. 341)<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n
So had the Council of Constance in its session 13 on 15 June 1415: Decree on Communion Only under the Species of Bread: \u201cThe whole Body and Blood of Christ are truly contained under both the species of bread and the species of wine. . . . It should be held as a law . . .\u201d (Denzinger 199, p. 326)<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Moreover, Ludwig Ott\u2019s widely used reference work, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma<\/em> (2018 revision<\/a>), asserts (p. 409) that these doctrines are classified as de fide<\/em>; that is, the very highest level<\/em> of dogmatic certainty. Lastly, the Lutheran belief in some sort of \u201cdivided Christ\u201d in Holy Communion (if one form is received, as I always do, myself) is theologically, philosophically, and logically inadequate, as well as unbiblical:<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
\n
Bible on Receiving One Species in Communion<\/a>\u00a0[3-11-08 and 6-24-11]
\n*<\/div>\n
Does Communion in One Kind \u201cTrivialize\u201d the Sacrament?<\/a>\u00a0[1-31-12]
\n*<\/div>\n
Chalice or Host Only Contain the Body & Blood of Christ<\/a> [11-21-19]<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
The Host and Chalice Both Contain Christ\u2019s Body and Blood<\/a>\u00a0[National Catholic Register<\/em>, 12-10-19]<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Augsburg Confession Dialogues: Communion In One Kind<\/a>\u00a0[5-6-24]<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Giovanni Pico della Mirandola<\/a>\u00a0states the same thing in different words in his Apology, writing: \u201cDiscord in writers is an argument for falsehood, when it is necessary that what one of the disagreeing parties says is false, because necessarily the other part of the tradition is false.\u201d<\/span><\/span> For this reason Augustine, in book 16 of the City of God<\/em>, proves the truth of Scripture from the mutual concord of its writers, in which all agree and none disagree with another, which is attested by the fact of Scripture, to indubitable and infallible truth.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
It\u2019s pretty humorous and the very height of irony when a Lutheran cites a Catholic philosopher talking about discord and contradictory opinions, and seeks to (wrongly) apply that against Catholicism<\/em>, rather than addressing the innumerable contradictions inherent in Protestant denominationalism<\/em>, which will never<\/em> be \u2014 and never could<\/em> be \u2014 resolved, due to the fundamentally flawed nature of their rule of faith. This is certainly the sort of approach that Jesus condemned, when He said,<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\n
Matthew 7:3-5<\/strong> Why do you see the\u00a0speck that is in your brother\u2019s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? [4] Or how can you say to your brother, \u2018Let me take the\u00a0speck out of your eye,\u2019 when there is the log in your own eye? [5] You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the\u00a0speck\u00a0out of your brother\u2019s eye.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The beginning of the truly Catholic religion is this, that the word of God, contained in the prophetic and apostolic writings, should perfectly inform us of all things necessary for faith, and consequently be the only norm and rule of all controversies of faith which are discussed in the Church.<\/span><\/span> Therefore, the first principle is that Scripture is perfect. For example, 1. By the praise of perfection attributed to Scripture, we understand this, that it fully and perfectly informs us of all things which are necessary for faith and morals. 2. We do not call Scripture perfect because all things which are necessary for faith and morals are contained in the Scriptures in a large number of letters and in as many words, but we say that some are contained explicitly, some implicitly in them, so that they can be deduced from them by legitimate and immutable confluence.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

He offers a fairly standard definition of sola Scriptura<\/em>: the historically novel<\/a> and unbiblical<\/a> Protestant rule of faith.<\/p>\n

Rev. 22. v. 18.<\/span><\/span> & 19. wherefore the Apostle warns, that no one should do more than what is written 1. Cor. 4. v. 6.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Revelation 22:18-19\u00a0<\/strong>I warn every one who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: if any one adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book,\u00a0[19] and if any one takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This has nothing do do with the question of whether legitimate unwritten traditions exist. It simply warns about adding to or taking anything away from the one book of Revelation. Once we enter into Protestant defenses of sola Scriptura<\/em>, non sequiturs<\/em><\/a> are ubiquitous. They never cease to amaze me, in their wrongheadedness and argumentative bankruptcy. I\u2019ve already dealt with the failure of 1 Corinthians 4:6<\/a> as an alleged prooftext, so it need not detain us any further.<\/p>\n

From a perfect voluntary cause, willing and not hindered to produce a perfect effect, a perfect effect proceeds.<\/span><\/span> Such is the cause of Scripture, since He willed that the Scriptures should be written and come forth for that end, that from His own power and will they should fully lead us to faith, and no impediment to the production of this effect intervenes or could intervene.<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

This is clearly untrue (and equally as clearly, silly), and it is because human free will can and does interfere with God\u2019s will for His inspired Scripture. Hence St. Peter wrote about St. Paul\u2019s writings: \u201cThere are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures\u201d (2 Pet 3:16). And Paul refers to those who \u201cwill not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander into myths\u201d (2 Tim 4:3-4).<\/p>\n

Thus, the perfect effect\u201d of the truth of Scripture is and always can be prevented by willful human obstinacy and pride. A perfect Scripture doesn\u2019t guarantee that all will accept<\/em> and understand<\/em> and follow<\/em> this perfect Scripture and come to total agreement because God wills that. Any three-second pondering of Protestant division proves this.<\/p>\n

Rom. 1:1-2, explains all the parts of Christianity, so that from it we may have faith in Christ and the doctrine of good works.<\/span><\/p>\n

It does no such thing:<\/p>\n

Romans 1:1-2<\/strong> Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God [2] which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures,<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

This refers only to the gospel. St. Paul defines the gospel in Acts 13:30-33 as the resurrection of Jesus and as His death, burial, and resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:1-8. Therefore, Romans 1:1-2 does not<\/em><\/strong> explain \u201call the parts of Christianity.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

nothing should be added or taken away, Deuteronomy. 4. v. 2. chap. 12. v.32. (which is to be understood of the word written is evident from Deuteronomy. 28. v. 58. &\u00a0 Jol. i. v. 8.) Prov. 3o. v.5. Galatians .i .v. 8.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is the same repeated fallacy dealt with in regard to Revelation 22:18-19 above.\u00a0 Deuteronomy 4:2 and 12:32 teach that Scripture (at that time, the Torah, or the first five books of the Old Testament) shouldn\u2019t be added to or subtracted from. It\u2019s very simple. This is not the same thing as saying that \u201cno oral<\/em> tradition can also exist.\u201d In the same book, after all (8:20-22) it\u2019s stated that prophets speak the \u201cword\u201d of the Lord, \u201cin the name of the Lord.\u201d Such prophecies go beyond Scripture itself. Thus, Deuteronomy doesn\u2019t prove sola Scriptura<\/em>; it disproves<\/em> it.<\/p>\n

Proverbs 30:5-6 states that \u201cEvery word of God proves true . . . Do not add to his words.\u201d It\u2019s the same concept again. Protestants assume that \u201cword of God\u201d is the equivalent of \u201cBible.\u201d But it\u2019s not. It (like \u201cword of the Lord\u201d) also refers to God\u2019s personal revelation to prophets: \u201cthe word of God came to Shemai\u2019ah\u201d (1 Kgs 12:22); \u201cthe word of God came to John the son of Zechari\u2019ah in the wilderness\u201d (Lk 3:2). 1 Corinthians 14:30 even refers to extra-biblical continuing new covenant prophecy as \u201crevelation.\u201d<\/p>\n

Galatians 1:18 is about false gospels, not about whether Scripture is the only infallible rule of faith. It gets very wearisome having to point out these obvious things. But it happens in every discussion about sola Scriptura<\/em> because Protestants have no genuine biblical proof of it at all, let alone compelling ones. So instead we get irrelevant nonsense such as the above, even (the most amazing thing) from brilliant minds and scholars like Gerhard.<\/p>\n

*<\/div>\n
\n
\n
\n
***
\n*
\nPractical Matters<\/strong><\/em>:\u00a0 I run the most comprehensive \u201cone-stop\u201d Catholic apologetics site:\u00a0rated #1\u00a0for Christian sites<\/a>\u00a0by leading AI tool, ChatGPT \u2014 endorsed by popular Protestant blogger Adrian Warnock. Perhaps some of my 5,000+ free online articles or\u00a0fifty-six books<\/a>\u00a0have helped you (by God\u2019s grace) to decide to\u00a0become Catholic<\/a>\u00a0or to\u00a0return to the Church<\/a>, or better understand some doctrines and\u00a0why<\/em>\u00a0we believe them<\/a>.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
Or you may believe my work is worthy to support for the purpose of apologetics and evangelism in general. If so, please seriously consider a much-needed financial contribution. I\u2019m always in need of more funds: especially\u00a0monthly<\/em>\u00a0support. \u201cThe laborer is worthy of his wages\u201d (1 Tim 5:18, NKJV). 1 December 2021 was my 20th anniversary as a\u00a0full-time Catholic apologist<\/a>, and February 2022 marked the 25th anniversary of my blog.<\/div>\n
*<\/div>\n
PayPal donations<\/a>\u00a0are the easiest: just send to my email address: apologistdave@gmail.com. Here\u2019s also a\u00a0second page to get to PayPal<\/a>. You\u2019ll see the term \u201cCatholic Used Book Service\u201d, which is my old side-business. To learn about the different methods of contributing (including\u00a0Zelle<\/a>), see my page:\u00a0About Catholic Apologist Dave Armstrong \/ Donation Information<\/a>.\u00a0Thanks a million\u00a0<\/strong><\/em>from the bottom of my heart!<\/div>\n
\n

*
\n***
\n*<\/p>\n

Photo credit<\/strong>: 1679 edition of Gerhard\u2019s Confessio Catholica <\/em>(Frankfurt)<\/span> [public domain \/ Internet Archive<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Summary<\/em>: Second of two replies to the \u201cConfessio\u201d of Lutheran theologian Johann Gerhard (1582-1637), in which he sought to confirm Lutheran doctrines by various Catholic statements.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

De Fide Dogma on Communion in One Species Only; Theological Discord; Sola Scriptura Many Lutheran scholars and apologists consider Johann Gerhard\u00a0(1582-1637), a\u00a0Protestant scholastic, to be the most knowledgeable Lutheran apologist in history. What\u2019s particularly notable about him is that he actually directly interacted with the best Catholic apologetics and theological sources (such as\u00a0St. Robert Bellarmine: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2331,"featured_media":88724,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[415],"tags":[18842,19571,2636,19574,19311,419],"class_list":["post-88721","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-lutheranism","tag-augsburg-confession","tag-johann-gerhard","tag-lutheran-apologetics","tag-lutheran-critique-of-catholicism","tag-lutheran-scholasticism","tag-lutheranism-2"],"yoast_head":"\nReply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Second of two replies to the "Confessio" of Lutheran theologian Johann Gerhard (1582-1637), in which he sought to confirm Lutheran doctrines by various Catholic statements.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Reply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Second of two replies to the "Confessio" of Lutheran theologian Johann Gerhard (1582-1637), in which he sought to confirm Lutheran doctrines by various Catholic statements.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-01-09T20:56:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-01-09T21:18:20+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2025\/01\/GerhardConfessio1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"360\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"622\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Dave Armstrong\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html\",\"name\":\"Reply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2025-01-09T20:56:22+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-01-09T21:18:20+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\"},\"description\":\"Second of two replies to the \\\"Confessio\\\" of Lutheran theologian Johann Gerhard (1582-1637), in which he sought to confirm Lutheran doctrines by various Catholic statements.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Reply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/\",\"name\":\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism\",\"description\":\"Catholic biblical apologetics\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":\"required name=search_term_string\"}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e\",\"name\":\"Dave Armstrong\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Dave Armstrong\"},\"description\":\"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \\\"This Rock\\\" (now called \\\"Catholic Answers Magazine\\\"), \\\"Envoy Magazine\\\" (Patrick Madrid), \\\"The Catholic Answer,\\\" \\\"The Coming Home Journal,\\\" \\\"Gilbert Magazine\\\" (American Chesterton Society), and \\\"The Latin Mass.\\\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \\\"The Michigan Catholic\\\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \\\"Catholic Answers Live\\\" (twice), \\\"Faith and Family Live\\\" (Steve Wood), \\\"Kresta in the Afternoon,\\\" \\\"Son Rise Morning Show,\\\" \\\"Catholic Connection\\\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \\\"The Catholics Next Door.\\\" His large and popular website, \\\"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\\\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \\\"Envoy Magazine.\\\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \\\"index\\\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \\\"Surprised by Truth\\\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \\\"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\\\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \\\"The Catholic Verses\\\" (2004), \\\"The One-Minute Apologist\\\" (2007), \\\"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\\\" (2009), \\\"The Quotable Newman\\\" (editor: 2012), and \\\"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\\\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \\\"The New Catholic Answer Bible\\\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \\\"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\\\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \\\"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\\\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \\\"Quotable Wesley\\\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).\",\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/\",\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798\",\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Reply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2","description":"Second of two replies to the \"Confessio\" of Lutheran theologian Johann Gerhard (1582-1637), in which he sought to confirm Lutheran doctrines by various Catholic statements.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Reply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2","og_description":"Second of two replies to the \"Confessio\" of Lutheran theologian Johann Gerhard (1582-1637), in which he sought to confirm Lutheran doctrines by various Catholic statements.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html","og_site_name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","article_published_time":"2025-01-09T20:56:22+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-01-09T21:18:20+00:00","og_image":[{"width":360,"height":622,"url":"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2025\/01\/GerhardConfessio1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Dave Armstrong","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Dave Armstrong","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html","name":"Reply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-01-09T20:56:22+00:00","dateModified":"2025-01-09T21:18:20+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e"},"description":"Second of two replies to the \"Confessio\" of Lutheran theologian Johann Gerhard (1582-1637), in which he sought to confirm Lutheran doctrines by various Catholic statements.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/2025\/01\/reply-to-lutheran-johann-gerhard-1582-1637-2.html#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Reply to Lutheran Johann Gerhard (1582-1637) #2"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/","name":"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism","description":"Catholic biblical apologetics","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/471eaa20e441eca4bb1ea50393cf632e","name":"Dave Armstrong","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/820e6db89734ae7a9e5dac8d498f5ac7?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Dave Armstrong"},"description":"Dave Armstrong is a Catholic author and apologist, who has been actively proclaiming and defending Christianity since 1981, and Catholicism in particular since 1991 (full-time since December 2001). Formerly a campus missionary, as a Protestant, Dave was received into the Catholic Church in February 1991, by the late, well-known catechist and theologian, Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave\u2019s articles have appeared in many influential Catholic periodicals, including \"This Rock\" (now called \"Catholic Answers Magazine\"), \"Envoy Magazine\" (Patrick Madrid), \"The Catholic Answer,\" \"The Coming Home Journal,\" \"Gilbert Magazine\" (American Chesterton Society), and \"The Latin Mass.\" He also writes a featured column for every issue of \"The Michigan Catholic\": published by the archdiocese of Detroit, and was editor for most of the apologetics tracts published by the St. Paul Street Evangelization apostolate. Dave\u2019s apologetics and writing apostolate was the subject of a feature article in the May 2002 issue of \"Envoy Magazine.\" He served as the staff moderator at the Internet discussion forum for The Coming Home Network, from 2007-2010. Dave has been interviewed on many nationally syndicated Catholic radio shows, including \"Catholic Answers Live\" (twice), \"Faith and Family Live\" (Steve Wood), \"Kresta in the Afternoon,\" \"Son Rise Morning Show,\" \"Catholic Connection\" (Teresa Tomeo), and \"The Catholics Next Door.\" His large and popular website, \"Biblical Evidence for Catholicism,\" was online from March 1997 to March 2007, and received the 1998 Catholic Website of the Year award from \"Envoy Magazine.\" His blog of the same name (now transferred to Patheos), begun in February 2004, contains more than 1,500 papers, at least 500 debates or dialogues, and over 50 distinct \"index\" web pages. Unsolicited correspondence has indicated many hundreds of conversions (or returns) to the Catholic faith as a result, by God's grace, of these writings. Dave's conversion story was published in the bestselling book \"Surprised by Truth\" (edited by Patrick Madrid; San Diego: Basilica Press, 1994). Sophia Institute Press has published six of his books: \"A Biblical Defense of Catholicism\" (Foreword by Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J., 1996 \/ 2003), \"The Catholic Verses\" (2004), \"The One-Minute Apologist\" (2007), \"Bible Proofs for Catholic Truths\" (2009), \"The Quotable Newman\" (editor: 2012), and \"Proving the Catholic Faith is Biblical\" (2015). He is co-author (with Dr. Paul Thigpen) of the inserts for \"The New Catholic Answer Bible\" (Our Sunday Visitor: 2005), and editor for \"The Wisdom of Mr. Chesterton: The Very Best Quotes, Quips, and Cracks from the Pen of G. K. Chesterton\" (Saint Benedict Press \/ TAN Books: 2009). \"100 Biblical Arguments Against Sola Scriptura\" was published by Catholic Answers in May 2012. His \"Quotable Wesley\" compilation was published by (Protestant \/ Wesleyan publisher) Beacon Hill Press in April 2014. Several of his 49 books are bestsellers in their field. Dave maintains a popular personal Facebook page, a Facebook author page, and has a Twitter account as well. He offers almost all of his books in e-book form on his own Biblical Catholicism site (http:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/), at a permanent deep discount: only $2.99 for ePub, mobi, and AZW, and $1.99 for PDF. His writing has been enthusiastically endorsed or recommended by many leading Catholic apologists, authors, and priests, including Dr. Scott Hahn, Fr. Peter M. J. Stravinskas, Marcus Grodi, Patrick Madrid, Steve Ray, Tim Staples, Devin Rose, Mike Aquilina, Al Kresta, Karl Keating, Fr. Dwight Longenecker, Brandon Vogt, Marcellino D'Ambrosio, and Fr. John A. Hardon, S. J. Dave has been happily married to his wife Judy since October 1984. They have three sons and a daughter, and reside in southeast Michigan (metro Detroit).","sameAs":["https:\/\/biblicalcatholicism.com\/","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/dave.armstrong.798","https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/@LuxVeritatisApologetics"],"url":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/author\/davearmstrong"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/88721","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2331"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=88721"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/88721\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/88724"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=88721"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=88721"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.patheos.com\/blogs\/davearmstrong\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=88721"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}