Reformed Covenanter
Cancelled Commissioner
I have really been enjoying reading Johann Gerhard's Theological Commonplaces on the Law, but this comment on how Lutherans enumerate the ten commandments really let the cat out of the bag. I used to be of the opinion that the disagreement on this point was a rather trivial one, but I believe that experience teaches us that subsuming the second commandment under the first tends to weaken the force of the former to the point that it is honoured more in the breach than in the observance:
Before we go on to our opponents’ arguments with which they attack this division and set down our supports for it, we must note carefully the following hypotheses: (1) The establishment of an ordinal number in the commandments of the Decalogue is of itself and by its nature an adiaphoron. It is certain that there are ten commandments, that is, the cardinal number of the commandments is certain; but nowhere did Moses add which one is the Second and which is the Third Commandment. (2) Therefore it is a sin against Christian liberty when our adversaries foist as necessary their enumeration by which the commandment about graven images is made the Second. (3) It is also a very serious sin against Christian love and unity when well-established churches are disturbed by an untimely battle over this division. (4) Our adversaries, who contend that the commandment about graven images is the Second, believe that images themselves are utterly forbidden, and not just their worship and veneration; they work hard to push their false interpretation on the church in the same effort. (5) Attributing a mutilation of the Decalogue to Luther’s catechism, they try to eliminate his catechism from the church by secret schemes. These cases are quite pressing, and, because of them, that enumeration of the commandments of the Decalogue is nowhere accepted in our churches.
Johann Gerhard, Theological Commonplaces: On the Law of God, on the Ceremonial and Forensic Laws, trans. Richard J. Dinda, ed. Benjamin T. G. Mayes and Joshua J. Hayes (1613; St Louis MO: Concordia Publishing House, 2015), XV.4.6. § 44 (emphasis added).
Before we go on to our opponents’ arguments with which they attack this division and set down our supports for it, we must note carefully the following hypotheses: (1) The establishment of an ordinal number in the commandments of the Decalogue is of itself and by its nature an adiaphoron. It is certain that there are ten commandments, that is, the cardinal number of the commandments is certain; but nowhere did Moses add which one is the Second and which is the Third Commandment. (2) Therefore it is a sin against Christian liberty when our adversaries foist as necessary their enumeration by which the commandment about graven images is made the Second. (3) It is also a very serious sin against Christian love and unity when well-established churches are disturbed by an untimely battle over this division. (4) Our adversaries, who contend that the commandment about graven images is the Second, believe that images themselves are utterly forbidden, and not just their worship and veneration; they work hard to push their false interpretation on the church in the same effort. (5) Attributing a mutilation of the Decalogue to Luther’s catechism, they try to eliminate his catechism from the church by secret schemes. These cases are quite pressing, and, because of them, that enumeration of the commandments of the Decalogue is nowhere accepted in our churches.
Johann Gerhard, Theological Commonplaces: On the Law of God, on the Ceremonial and Forensic Laws, trans. Richard J. Dinda, ed. Benjamin T. G. Mayes and Joshua J. Hayes (1613; St Louis MO: Concordia Publishing House, 2015), XV.4.6. § 44 (emphasis added).
