The Heidelberg Catechism in Translation: A World-Wide Reformed Catechism! (2)

In our year-long series covering the history and content of the Heidelberg Catechism during this year of commemorating its 450th anniversary (1563-2013), we began last Thursday a brief mini-series looking at the translations of the “HC”. The fact that this Reformed catechism was translated into five (5) languages after only five years and into eleven (11) languages after only a little more than twenty-five years, shows how popular (and needed!) it was and how quickly it spread to other parts of Europe during the great Reformation of the 16th century (The Heidelberg Catechism In Its Newest Light, J.I.Good, 1914 – pp.7-9). God was certainly at work in this, providing for His newly formed church (Re-formed according to the Word of God) a precious tool for her continued growth in knowledge and godliness throughout the world. And we can be thankful that from the original German it was translated into many languages to reach many peoples with the Reformed faith.

It is always an interesting question as to which was the first language into which the “HC” was translated. It had been assumed the Latin, since this was “the universal language of the day”, but as it turns out, Dutch was probably the first. And that because of a small Dutch Reformed congregation in northwest Germany. Amazing! Here is what Good writes concerning this:

It has been a question which language had the honor of the first translation. No less than three translations appeared in that first year. Heretofore, it has been supposed that the Latin version, made by Rev.Mr.Lagus, of Heidelberg, together with Professor Pithopoeus, of the Latin school there, was the first. For Latin was the universal language of that day, the language of literature, commerce and diplomacy; and so the catechism eas early translated into that language for use in the higher schools and universities. But the late Professor Doudes, of the University of Utrecht (in the Netherlands -cjt), who was one of the great authorities on the catechism, has in his researches unearthed two Dutch translations of 1563, one published at Heidelberg. The other was published at Emden, that Reformed city at the northwestern corner of Germany. Now this Emden translation was made from the second edition of the catechism, while the Latin was made from the third edition. The Emden Church may, therefore, have made this translation before the third edition appeared. The truth probably was that the Reformed Church at Emden, the first of the Reformed Churches in Germany, seems to have been so delighted to have another Reformed Church in Germany that it did not wait long, but hastened to put itself under the powerful protection of the Elector of the Palatinate by publishing his catechism in Dutch, which was the language of Emden at that time, so that it might be used in its churches and schools. From these facts it looks very much as if the Dutch translation was made before the Latin. But whether so or not, the catechism soon came into use in the Netherlands, for in 1566 (the picture of the title page in Dutch has this date -cjt) it was used in Amsterdam by Peter Gabriel, in spite of the persecutions of that time, and in 1568 it, together with Calvin’s catechism, was adopted by the Dutch synod of Wesel. Later this adoption was completed by the action of the Dutch synod of Dort in 1574. In 1618-1619 the General Synod of the Reformed Churches of Europe, also held at Dort, adopted it, and thus virtually made it the ecumenical symbol of the Reformed Churches, because that synod had in it delegates from most of the National Reformed Churches. This Dutch translation is now used in South Africa, in the Dutch East Indies, in the Dutch West Indies and in Dutch Guiana in South America (pp.4-5)

 

The Heidelberg Catechism in Translation – A World-wide Reformed Catechism (1)!

One of the things that reveals not merely the popularity of the Heidelberg Catechism but also its world-wide distribution is a consideration of its varied translations. This struck me as I was recently browsing the fascinating book The Heidelberg Catechism In Its Newest Light by Rev.Prof. James I. Good (Philadelphia: Publication and Sunday School Board of the Reformed Church in the United States, 1914). Good was a German Reformed pastor and professor (Central Theological Seminary) who wrote a number of books on Reformation history and on the history of the German Reformed Church (the main stream of which was swallowed up by several liberal denominations into one, but the true continuation of which remains in the Reformed Church in the U.S. – RCUS).

The first section of this Good book (In more ways than one!) treats  ”The World-wide Circulation of the Catechism”, and the first chapter under this deals with the many different translations of the “HC”. Today, in connection with our year-long commemoration of the 450th anniversary of the “HC” (see all my Thursday posts this year.), I would like to start a brief series looking at these translations of the “HC”. And we begin with the obvious – the German translation – since this was the language in which the “HC” was first produced. Good also has a number of pictures of the title-pages of the “HC” in various languages, which I am scanning and will post here as well (Click on the image to expand its size.).

This is how good opens his chapter on the translations of the Heidelberg Catechism:

‘The Heidelberg Catechism, next to the Bible and the Pilgrim’s Progress, is the most widely circulated of books,’ is the remark of one of the old writers. Whether this estimate, made long ago, is exactly true now may be questioned , as some other books have since become widely popular. But the fact, nevertheless, remains true: the Heidelberg catechism is one of the most widely circulated books in the world. In order to have such popularity the catechism had to be translated into many languages. …The story of of these translations, together with their history, is of wonderful interest and reveals the great popularity of the book.

The original language of the Heidelberg catechism was, of course, the German, because it was composed for use in a German state, the Palatinate, in southwestern Germany, where it was published early in 1563. A number of German editions appeared in that year. Their number has been generally given as four, but Rev.Professor Goeters of Bonn university, who has been making researches, has found other editions of that year (pp.3-4)

New Junius Institute Expands Reformation Research – Calvin College

New Institute Expands Reformation Research | Article | Christian Reformed Church.

Back in October of 2011 I first mentioned on my blog that Calvin College and Seminary had a significant digital library of post-Reformation works. A few weeks ago they made another significant announcement regarding a new Institute of digital materials for research (posted April 23, 2013). Below is the notice which was given. Follow the links to the wealth of important materials on the Reformation and post-Reformation periods.

Students at Calvin Theological Seminary and Calvin College now have access to a new research center devoted to developing digital tools, resources, and scholarship focused on the religious reformation, particularly arising out of the Protestant Reformation of the 16th century.

The Junius Institute for Digital Reformation Research  of Calvin Theological Seminary is a natural fit for the seminary community, seminary president Julius Medenblik said.

“We’re pleased to see the ongoing efforts of faculty, students, and alumni of the seminary develop into a formal home for projects with exciting possibilities for coming to a better understanding the multifaceted legacy of the Reformation,” he said.

The institute is conceived as a forum to promote research into the Reformation and post-Reformation periods, covering the 16th to the 18th centuries, through the use of digital tools, skills, and resources.

The Junius Institute will house the Post-Reformation Digital Library (PRDL), an electronic database covering thousands of authors and primary source documents on the development of theology and philosophy in these centuries.

Vatican Files no. 19 – Reformation21

Vatican Files no. 19 – Reformation21.

I have also referred several times to this on-going series on contemporary Roman Catholicism at the website “Reformation21″. This is actually a post I had saved last month (April 2013), and just yesterday I received notice that #20 in this series has been posted for this month. I believe it is important for us as 21st century Reformed Protestants to stay informed of the modern church of Rome. These posts by an Italian Reformed Baptist church planter in Rome are significant for our understanding of what Rome continues to do and teach. You will find this one and the latest one significant too.

Here is a part of #19; follow the “Ref21″ link above to read all of it, and to find #20.

Left Without Words: How Roman Catholicism is Reshaping the Evangelical Vocabulary

 

“The beginning of wisdom is the definition of words” (Socrates). If you define a word in a certain way you make claims about reality. Our postmodern culture has stirred us to come to terms with the fact that words do not have stable meanings but exist in an flux that drives them in one way or another depending on the interests of their users. This is the current situation of the word “Evangelical”.

Evangelical Catholicism and the Current Genetic Modification

 

The recent book by George Weigel, Evangelical Catholicism (New York: Basic Books, 2013) is a clever attempt to re-engineer the word by overlooking its Biblical focus, by severing its historical roots and replacing them with other roots, by changing its doctrinal outlook, by staffing its experiential ethos differently, and by renegotiating its religious use. In other words, this is a genetic modification of a word.

…According to Weigel, Evangelical is a qualifying adjective, not a noun. The noun which carries “thick” meaning is Catholicism. Curiously, what used to be termed as “Roman Catholicism” is now shortened to “Catholicism” alone. All the Roman elements of Roman Catholicism are nonetheless part of EC: sacraments, Mariology, hierarchy, traditions, papacy, devotions, etc. To this “Catholicism” Weigel adds the adjective “Evangelical,” which basically refers to the depth of convictions and the passion to make them known. EC is a full orbed Roman Catholicism practiced with strong impetus and missionary zeal. Catholicism is the doctrinal and institutional hardware, while “Evangelical” is the sociological and psychological software. While doctrine deeply remains Roman Catholic, the spiritual mood is called Evangelical.

The History of Christianity in 25 Objects: The Gutenberg Bible

The History of Christianity in 25 Objects: The Gutenberg Bible | Challies Dot Com.

On his blog Tim Challies is doing a great church history series centered on 25 objects of significance in the history of Christianity. The above-linked article is #9 of the series, and centers on the Gutenberg Bible and the impact of the Gutenberg press on church history. If you have even the smallest remembrance of this significance, you know that it was great – especially for the Reformation. Challies’ series is interesting and informative – find links to the rest of his posts in this series at the bottom of the page to which you are taken.

This is how he introduces this subject (object!):

The Harry Ransom Center at the University of Texas in Austin contains a copy of what many people consider the most valuable book in the world. The Gutenberg Bible is not only the oldest surviving book to be printed using moveable type, but also the first complete book to be produced with that technology. The volume in the University of Texas is one of only 20 complete copies to survive. Though its value is merely speculative as it has been almost 40 years since a copy was last sold, there is no doubt that if it were put on the market today, it would shatter all existing records. (The edition at the Harry Ransom Center was purchased in 1978 for $2,400,000.) As we survey the history of Christianity in 25 historical objects, Gutenberg’s Bible represents his great contribution to history in the movable type printing press.

Christ Ascended for His Glory and Our Interest

As we continue our own year-long series on the Heidelberg Catechism – remembering and celebrating her 450th anniversary (see my Thursday posts this year) – today we mark “Ascension Day”, the day the church of Christ commemorates His glorious going up into the glory of heaven, by quoting from Zacharias Ursinus’ commentary on Lord’s Day 18, Q&A’s 46-49. First, let’s put the catechism itself before our eyes and minds:

XVIII. LORD’S DAY.

 

Question 46. How dost thou understand these words, “he ascended into heaven”?

Answer. That Christ, in sight of his disciples, was [a] taken up from earth into heaven; and that he continues [b] there for our interest, until he comes again to judge the quick and the dead. 

Question 47. Is not Christ then with us even to the end of the world, as he hath promised?

Answer. Christ is very man and very God; with respect to his [c] human nature, he is no more on earth; but with respect to his Godhead, majesty, grace and spirit, he is at no time absent from us. 

Question 48. But if his human nature is not present wherever his Godhead is, are not then these two natures in Christ separated from one another?

Answer. Not at all, for since the Godhead is illimitable and [d] omnipresent, it must necessarily follow that [e] the same is beyond the limits of the human nature he assumed, and yet is nevertheless in this human nature, and remains personally united to it. 

Question 49. Of what advantage to us is Christ’s ascension into heaven?

Answer. First, that he is our [g] advocate in the presence of his Father in heaven; secondly, that we have our flesh in heaven as a sure pledge that he, as the head, will also [h] take up to himself, us, his members; thirdly, that he [i] sends us his Spirit as an earnest, by whose power we “seek the things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God, [j] and not things on earth.”[a]: Acts 1:9; Mark 16:19
[b]: Heb. 4:14; Rom 8:34; Eph. 4:10
[c]: Acts 3:21; John 3:13; John 16:28; Mat. 28:20
[d]: Acts 7:49; Mat. 24:30
[e]: Mat. 28:20; John 16:28; John 17:11; John 3:13
[g]: Heb. 9:25; 1John 2:2; Rom. 8:34
[h]: John 14:2; Eph. 2:6
[i]: John 14:16; 2Cor. 1:22; 2Cor. 5:5
[j]: Col. 3:1; Phil. 3:20

 

And from The Commentary of Dr.Zacharias Ursinus on the Heidelberg Catechism (Transl. by Rev.G.W.Williard; Presbyterian and Reformed, 1982) we find these words (We can only quote a small portion of his treatment of this section of the catechism. To find all of it visit this site. It is from this online version that I quote below.):

III. FOR WHAT PURPOSE DID CHRIST ASCEND INTO HEAVEN?

Christ ascended into heaven for his own glory, and for that of his Father. It was proper, and necessary, that he should have a heavenly kingdom.  Hence it was not expedient that he should continue on earth. “He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things “Wherefore God hath also highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name, that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” (Eph. 4:10. Phil. 2:9, II.) It also belonged to, and was proper that Christ who is the Head should be glorified with an excellency, and superiority of gifts above all the members, which could not have been the case had he remained on earth. And still further, Christ ascended for our benefit, and that in these three respects. 1. That he might make intercession for us in heaven. “ Who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.” (Rom.  8:34.) He intercedes for us, first, by the value of his sacrifice, already offered in our behalf, which is so great that the Father ought, on this account, to receive us into favor. Secondly, by Us own will, by which he continually desires, that the Father would receive us into favor at the sight, and recollection of that sacrifice which he accomplished in his own body. Thirdly, by the consent of the Father, approving the will, and de sire of the Son, accepting the value of his sacrifice, as a sufficient satisfaction for our sins, and together with the Son receiving us into favor. It is by making intercession for us in this manner that Christ applies unto us the benefits and merit of his death. And the entire glorification of the mediator, consisting in his resurrection, ascension and sitting at the right hand of the Father, was necessary in order that this application might be made unto us. But some one may, perhaps, be ready to object and say ; but Christ interceded for us already when he was on earth ? To this we reply, that the intercession which Christ made on earth had respect to that which was yet future; for it was made upon the condition, that the mediator, after he had accomplished his sacrifice on earth, should for ever appear in the sanctuary on high. 2. That we might also ascend, and have assurance thereof. Christ him self says in the gospel of John, “ I go to prepare a place for you.” “ In my Father’s house are many mansions,” that is, places to abide for ever; for he speaks of our continuance there. Christ ascended; therefore we shall also ascend. This conclusion is proper, and forcible ; because Christ is the head, and we are the members ; he is also the first-begotten among many brethren. 3. That he might send the Holy Spirit, and by him gather, comfort, and defend his Church, even to the and of the world. Hence he says, “If I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you.” “ Which (Holy Ghost) be shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Lord.” (John 16:7. Tit. 3:6.)

IV. IN WHAT DOES THE ASCENSION OF CHRIST DIFFER FROM OURS?

Christ’s ascension and ours agree, first, in this, that both, he and we, ascend to the same place. They agree, secondly, in this that both, he and we, ascend to glory. “Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am, that they may behold my glory.” (Joh. 17:24.)

They differ in the following respect: 1. Christ ascended by his own peculiar power and virtue. “No man hath ascended up to heaven (that is, by his own peculiar virtue) but the Son of man.” (John 3:13.) Our ascension, on the other hand, will be effected by, and for the sake of, Christ. “I go to prepare a place for you.” “I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I am.” (John 14:2; 17:24.) 2. Christ ascended that he might be head, we shall ascend that we may be members; he ascended to glory such as is proper for the head, we shall ascend to glory such as is becoming those who are members; he ascended that he might sit at the right hand of the Father, we shall ascend that we may sit upon his throne and that of his Father, not in the same dignity, but only by a participation therein. “To him that ovcrcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame and am set down with my Father in his throne.” (Rev. 3:21.) We shall, therefore, be partakers of his glory, a just proportion being preserved between the members and the head. 3. The ascension of Christ is the cause of ours, but not the contrary. 4. Whole Christ ascended, but not the whole of Christ; because he ascended only as to his human nature, and not as it respects his divine nature, which is also on earth. But we shall ascend whole, and the whole of us; because we have only a finite nature, and that but one.

 

The Heidelberg Catechism: 450 Years of Reformed Youth Ministry!

As we continue marking the 450th anniversary of  the Heidelberg Catechism this year (1563-2013), we reference the brand new book published by Reformation Heritage Books, A Faith Worth Teaching: The Heidelberg Catechism’s Enduring Heritage (2013, Edited by J.Payne and S.Heck – see this earlier post on this new title). The first chapter in this book is by Lyle D.Bierma, professor of Systematic Theology at Calvin Seminary. He writes on “The History and People Behind the Heidelberg Catechism”, which includes a section on the “purpose of the catechism”. Here Bierma has a fine paragraph in which he quotes from Frederick III, the Elector of the Palatinate, the region that included the city of Heidelberg. He shows well why Frederick was so intent on having this Reformed catechism written and taught in his realm:

…If government, church, and family are to flourish, he writes, ‘it is essential that our youth be trained in early life, and above all, in the pure and consistent doctrine of the holy Gospel.’ Thus, he concludes, the Palatinate needed a single, clear guide to biblical truth. Thus, he explains, ‘We have secured the preparation of a summary course of instruction or catechism of our Christian Religion, according to the Word of God.’

Frederick wanted this new catechism first, then, for the training of children and young people – what today we would call youth ministry! But it was not only so that youth could be trained in doctrine and piety, it was ‘also that the Pastors and Schoolmasters themselves be provided with a fixed form and model, by which to regulate the intruction of youth, and not, at their option, adopt daily changes, or introduce erroneous doctrine.’ All such instructors should thankfully accept this catechism, diligently explain it to the youth in the schools and the common people in the pews, and pattern their own lives after it. For if youth in early life are instructed aright in the Word of God, one can have the assured hope that ‘it will please Almighty God also to grant reformation of public and private morals, and temporal and eternal welfare’ (pp.9-10).

That is certainly good reason to continue the practice of “HC” instruction in the Reformed churches, both in the classroom and in the pulpit. I am thankful to be part of a denomination that still maintains this practice (Protestant Reformed Churches). The fruits of it  – even as Frederick stated – are evident in our homes and churches. Soli Deo Gloria!

New Title on the Heidelberg Catechism: “A Faith Worth Teaching”

Reformation Heritage Books has just released (March 2013) its new book in tribute to the 450th anniversary of the Heidelberg Catechism this year (1563-2013). A Faith Worth Teaching: The Heidelberg Catechism’s Enduring Heritage, edited by Jon D. Payne and Sebastian Heck, (RHB: Grand Rapids MI, 2013) looks to be one of the best books produced for the anniversary this year. Its significant contents are wrapped in an attractive hardcover with a beautiful picture of the Heidelberg castle on the dust jacket. Contributers include the likes of  Lyle D. Bierma, D.G. Hart, Joel R. Beeke, Michael S. Horton, W.Robert Godfrey, and Cornelis Venema. The book is divided into four (4) main parts:

1. The History and Background of the Heidelberg Catechism (including a history of the “HC” in the U.S.)
2. The Heidelberg Catechism and the Means of Grace (with articles on preaching the catechism, the Lord’s Supper, and Baptism)
3. Christian Doctrine and the Heidelberg Catechism (articles on various doctrines treated by the “HC”)
4. The Heidelberg Catechism as Catechetical Tool

The book is also enhanced by a “Selected English Bibliography on the Heidelberg Catechism”, which includes the most important primary and secondary materials on the “HC” in English (H.Hoeksema’s The Triple Knowledge [RFPA] and his Seminary syllabus “Reformed Symbols: Introduction and Notes on the Heidelberg Catechism” are noted on the list).

I have purchased a copy for the Seminary library (all processed and ready to go!) and I have just received my review copy from RHB (Thank you!). I plan to work my way through its contents here, as well as prepare a special review for The Standard Bearer. For today, I will reference the “Foreword” by Herman J. Selderhius. Writing on “The Heidelberg Catechism: The Secret of Its Success”, he has these words at the end:

One of the most attractive and notable features of the HC is its opening words. In contrast with Lutheran catechisms, in which man is considered under the rubric of a baptized member of the church, and with Calvin’s catechism, which approaches man under the rubric of a creature made in the image of God, the HC begins with man as the special property of God: ‘That I with body and soul, both in life and death, am not my own, but belong….’ Man is not simply a creature of God or a part of the whole that we call the church but rather an individual who lives in relation to Christ in an experiential and inseprable way. This approach is typical of the practical and personal character of the entire HC. Its basic structure, which relates everything to the individual (‘I’), makes it attractive and timelessly relevant.

Hermann Friedrich Kohlbrugge (1803-1875)…, made mention of his beloved HC on his deathbed: ‘The Heidelberger, the plain Heidelberger…. Hold to it firmly, my children.’ Perhaps these words reveal the true success of the HC – its simplicity and content, which speak of comfort in life and in death (p.ix).

I also wanted you to know today that the relatively new children’s book on the “HC” by Rev.W.Boekestein,  The Quest for Comfort: The Story of the Heidelberg Catechism (Reformation Heritage), is back in print! This would make a fine addition to your family library,and now is the perfect time to obtain it.

 

C.Trueman on Rome, Justification, and Lord’s Day 1

In the eightenneth chapter of his book Fools Rush In Where Monkeys Fear to Tread, Dr.Carl Trueman treats not only areas of (rare) agreement between the Roman Catholic Church and Protestants but also the areas of obvious disagreement, including the authority of Scripture, the sacraments, justification, and assurance. That last one may surprise you, but it is significant, and at the end of his treatment of this point of difference with Rome Trueman makes a great reference to Q&A 1 of the Heidelberg Catechism. Here’s the relevant quotation:

But the difference on justification leads to a fundamentally different view of the Christian life. For the Catholic, assurance of God’s favor is a non-issue; indeed, assurance can be a dangerously subversive thing, encouraging moral laxity and poor churchmanship. For the Protestant , however, it is absolutely crucial: only as we are assured of God’s favor can we understand his holiness without despairing, and do good works – live as Christians! – in a manner that is not servile but rather affiliative and familial. Catholics and, indeed, Protestants who have a faulty understanding of justification, are at the very least losing out on the sheer joy and delight of the assured Christian life.

…If, however, you value the Protestant tradition on justification, and its concomitant pastoral point, that of the normality of the individual’s assurance, you may, indeed, you should, appreciate much of what Catholicism  and Protestantism share in common, but you should remain at Geneva and not head to Rome. For me, the right to claim Question One of the Heidelberg Catechism as my own, as the most profound statement of a truly childlike faith and ethic, is too precious to cede either to the numpties of postmodern evangelicalism or the geniuses of Rome, even the great Newman….

And then he quotes that first Q&A of the catechism, which I will also do, only from the long-standing English edition (used by the PRC):

Question 1. What is thy only comfort in life and death?

Answer. That I with [a] body and soul, both in life and death, [b] am not my own, but belong [c] unto my faithful Savior Jesus Christ; who, with his precious [d] blood, hath fully [e] satisfied for all my sins, and delivered [f] me from all the power of the devil; and so preserves me [g] that without the will of my heavenly Father, not a hair [h] can fall from my head; yea, that all things must be [i] subservient to my salvation, and therefore, by his Holy Spirit, he also assures me [j] of eternal life, and makes [k] me sincerely willing and ready, henceforth, to live unto him. 

[a]: 1Cor. 6:19,20
[b]: Rom. 14:7,8,9
[c]: 1Cor. 3:23
[d]: 1Pet. 1:18,19
[e]: 1John 1:7
[f]: 1John 3:8; Heb. 2:14,15
[g]: John 6:39; John 10:28,29
[h]: Luke 21:18; Matt. 10:30
[i]: Rom. 8:28
[j]: 2Cor. 1:22; 2Cor 5:5
[k]: Rom. 8:14; Rom. 7:22

C.Olevianus on Christ’s Resurrection (HC, Lord’s Day 17)

As we continue our year-long series commemorating the 450th anniversary of the Heidelberg Catechism (1563-2013), we turn once more to the co-author of this beautiful Reformed creed, Casper Olevianus (1536-1587). We have been looking at his Exposition of the Apostles’ Creed, but today we quote from his other important (translated) work, A Firm Foundation: An Aid to Interpreting the Heidelberg Catechism, Translated and edited by Lyle D. Bierma (Baker/Pasternoster, 1995). This is Olevianus’ “commentary on the section of the Heidelberg Catechism dealing with the Apostles’ Creed” (covering Lord’s Days 5-24, CJT ) and “parallels the more famous lectures on the catechism by Zacharias Ursinus”, offering us “a superb illustration of the theology and piety of early Reformed orthodoxy” (from the “Foreword” by Richard A. Muller).

For our purposes today, and in connection with Resurrection Sunday which we just commemorated, we will provide a quotation from Olevianus’ commentary on Lord’s Day 17 treating the article on Christ’s resurrection from the dead. We will remember that the “HC” in Q&A 45 simply gives us the three-fold profit of Jesus’ resurrection. Olevianus not only gives us a statement on the literal meaning of the article; he also provides one more “benefit”. And, in addition, he gives us a Q&A on the comfort of our Lord’s resurrection for the believer. These three (3) items (Q&A’s) we will post here for your profit:

101 Q. Explain the next article, ‘The third day He arose from the dead.’
A. I believe that the Holy God, Jesus Christ, because He was free from all sin in Himself and had completely paid for our sins (which He had taken upon Himself), could not be held by death, which had come into the world only by sin (Acts 2[:24]). Therefore, just as God had earlier ordained and foretold, on the third day He arose again from the dead unto immortal life and thus showed Himself in actual fact to be a conqueror of sin and death.

105 Q. Now give the last benefit.
A. We are certain that Christ has gained the victory for Himself and us against our enemies, namely, sin, mockery and scorn, death, and the power of Satan – which are not only our enemies but also and especially Christ’s. It is with joyful hearts, therefore, that we now accept whatever adversity these enemies bring upon us in this world. We do so with a sure confidence that all of this together will not only not hinder but even further the delight and enjoyment of our victory, already gained and freely given to us by Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 15 [:57]: ‘Thanks be to God, who gave us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.’ 2 Corinthians 4[:10]: ‘We always carry about in our body the dying of Christ the Lord, that his life may also be manifested in our mortal flesh.’ See also 1 John 5 and 1 Peter 1.

107 Q. What comfort do believers derive from this?
A. That also our souls, when they are separated from their bodies until the day of resurrection, neither perish nor sleep but live happily with Christ in His Kingdom. As St.Paul says, ‘I desire to be released and be with Christ’ [Phil.1:23]. Indeed, as also Christ solemnly swore to the believing thief on the cross, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise’ [Luke 23:42]. Now that was not written for the benefit of the thief, for he died that very same day, before it was recorded by the Gospel writers. It was written rather for our benefit, in order that we too might offer up and entrust our souls to Him. 1 Peter 2[:25]: ‘You were once like sheep going astray, but now have returned to the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls.’ See also 1 Peter 1:4,5 and Colossians 3:3 (pp.72-74).