What do you think?
Rate this book
The Loci Communes with a Critical Introduction by the Translator
This English translation represents the first "evangelical" statement of theology.
274 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1521
28 people are currently reading
191 people want to read
About the author
Philipp Melanchthon
370 books17 followersPhilipp Melanchthon (16 February 1497 – 19 April 1560), born Philipp Schwartzerdt, was a German reformer, collaborator with Martin Luther, the first systematic theologian of the Protestant Reformation, intellectual leader of the Lutheran Reformation, and an influential designer of educational systems. He stands next to Luther and Calvin as a reformer, theologian, and molder of Protestantism. Along with Luther, he is the primary founder of Lutheranism.[1] They both denounced what they believed was the exaggerated cult of the saints, asserted justification by faith, and denounced the coercion of the conscience in the sacrament of penance by the Catholic Church, that they believed could not offer certainty of salvation. Melanchthon made the distinction between law and gospel the central formula for Lutheran evangelical insight. By the "law", he meant God's requirements both in Old and New Testament; the "gospel" meant the free gift of grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
November 22, 2025
Considering this book is (arguably) the first ever Protestant systematic theology — it should probably get more attention than it does. It’s fascinating to read Protestant distinctives in their early articulations.
Every Christian ought to be more familiarly with Melanchthon’s work on repentance especially — both in the Loci and the Augsburg Confession. It has been transformative in my life, and it’s a standout feature of his writing in this work.
Every Christian ought to be more familiarly with Melanchthon’s work on repentance especially — both in the Loci and the Augsburg Confession. It has been transformative in my life, and it’s a standout feature of his writing in this work.
November 12, 2022
Melanchthon: The Metaphysician of Wittenberg
The Loci Communes Rerum Theologicarum, commonly called the Loci Communes, was originally published in 1521 in New Latin. This was revised in 1535, 1543 and shortly before his death in 1559, and a German version was translated by Justus Jonas in 1538 and by Melanchthon in 1553. This German versions was called “Loci praecipui theologici: Die wesentlichen Grundbegriffe der Theologie”. In his own words, this book is about “the proper dogmas of the Church about God, about eternal things, about the Law of God, about Sin, about the Gospel, about Grace, Justice, and the Sacraments, and later also the doctrine about the civil life.” It is the first Protestant Systematic.
Philipp Melanchthon was born in Bretten, near Stuttgart in Baden-Württemberg in 1497. After studying at the University of Tübingen (where a school is still named after him to this day), he was made the chair of ancient Greek at the University of Wittenberg in 1518. He was a true Humanist, and focused on increasing literacy in the "three holy languages" ("drei heilige Sprachen“); Greek, Hebrew and Latin. Although self-taught, he was one of the best Greek students in Europe at the time second only to Bishop Erasmus, whom he had a life-long friendship with. When Luther was translating the Lutherbibel from the Vulgate, Melanchthon utilized Erasmus’ Greek New Testament to assist in the translation.
Melanchthon’s work was critical in the development of Luther’s theology and accompanied Luther to the early Leipzig Disputation in 1519. He was Luther’s personal proxy and a chief defender of the Wittenberg Theology. He wrote the Augsburg Confession and associated lengthy apology of it. From a politico-military perspective, he was instrumental in building the Schmalkaldic League and attempted a common doctrinal statement, which ultimately failed between the Lutherans and Zwinglians.
Beyond the Evangelical and Lutheran influence, Melanchthon was deeply influential on Reformed Theology. He has extensive personal correspondence with Calvin (who had mixed feelings about him) and Melanchthon’s pupil Zacharias Ursinus was the main author of the Heidelberg Catechism. Loci Communes, because it defends a type of Free Will, is not as directly crucial to the Calvinist flavors of Protestantism, but his influence on this branch was significant through secondary causes (see what I did there?).
Loci Communes is the first systematic formulation of Protestant theology and is a defense of the Wittenberg Reformation. Finished in 1521, Loci Communes was proofread by Luther and published the same year. Luther wrote "next to Holy Scripture, there is no better book" and at one point he talked about adding it to his Biblical canon. While overshadowed by his friend Luther and the second generation Reformers, Melanchthon is a critical nexus within European Christianity and offers a look 'behind the curtain' at the malevolent motivations and personalities which drove the Reformations of the 16th century. The real value of Loci Communes lies not in its logical reasoning, but its intimate look at the budding Reformations by an honest thinker dedicated to truth instead of power and respect.
Communes is thoroughly polemic, primarily towards the Scholastics, but is well-rounded and nuanced. He avoids the one-sentence absolutist dogmatism characteristic of Luther, encouraging reconciliation and communication “like the bees of the valley, working together”. He is striving to curb “the frenzy of all ages” from all sides. This was a unique characteristic of Melanchthon- he sought reconciliation when Luther preferred picking flights and namecalling anyone he perceived to disagree with any part of his opinions. Despite being largely loyal, he did criticize Luther’s warmongering and arrogance several times: "I also endured an almost dishonorable servitude before, since Luther often followed his temperament, in which there was a not insignificant φιλονεικία, than to pay attention to his reputation and the common good."
This is an erudite work, broad in historical scope, seamlessly weaving in Socrates, Cato, Plato, Cicero, Aristotle, Xenocrates, and other philosophers, but dismisses them as teaching nothing but "philosophic virtues" and caring for nothing except self-praise. Arians, Marcions, Manicheans, the “recent Jews”, Valentinians, Pelagians and the Samosates (turks) are treated briefly several times. He quotes a wide range of Latin authors and weaves in short quotations from Old and New Testaments to prove his logical treaties, oftentimes only two or three word. His understanding of Christianity’s metaphysical roots in the Greek Rationality religions is much deeper than any other Reformer's.
The historical parallax between Luther and Melanchthon is powerful but not perfectly linear. Luther respected Melanchthon enormously and vice versa yet they disagreed on several critical fields of belief. Melanchthon was drawn to the Wittenberg preacher due to his Humanism-centric philosophy, and Luther to Melanchthon due to his sharp and systematic mind as well as his humble and pious personality. It is believed that Luther never wrote a systematic theology because the Loci Communes was the perfect summary of essential Christian doctrine in his mind. At points, Luther plagiarized Melanchthon word-for-word and continuously praised his friend's contribution to the cause. At Luther's funeral, it was Melanchthon who eulogized his close friend and compatriot. And after Melanchthon died, he was buried next to Luther. Their friendship and intellectual partnership was a formative influence on the budding Reformation as a whole. Luther wrote about wanting to add Communes to his greater Lutheran canon:
We possess no work wherein the whole body of theology, wherein religion, is more completely summed up, than in Melanchthon’s Loci Communes... Melanchthon is a better logician than myself; he argues better. My superiority lies rather in a rhetorical way."
The Reformation's Continuation of Catholicism's Trinitarian Heresies
Quite a bit of this work is a defense of the Trinity, which had been a major debate within Protestantism from the very beginning. But Melanchthon, as with Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and all other Reformers after him continued the heterodoxy of the 6th-century Filioque of the Latin-turned-Catholic Church which led to the Great Schism of 1045 between Rome and Athos.
He writes here in Loci Communes casually: “...the Holy Spirit is the mover, proceeding from the Father and the Son”.
Ironically, this statement of double-procession is in the chapter on the defense of the Trinity, while simultaneously clearly denying the Trinitarian Formulation in Canon VII of the Council of Ephesus of 431. The Reformers had no understanding of these nuances, as they were immersed in debating the very existence of the Trinity against the anti-Trinitarian Protestants of the Radical Reformation, a debate which still rages today among “Bible-Believing” Protestants and has no end in sight (Oneness Pentecostalism etc). It wouldn’t be until the 20th century that some protestant theologians became aware of this debate between the Apostolic East and the Latin West over double procession, and views on it naturally varied widely, even within Lutheranism specifically.
Melanchthon, along with Luther and the entire Wittenberg circle, spoke highly of the Eastern Orthodox and corresponded with Patriarch Jeremiah in Constantinople and a few other Bishops. Melanchthon assisted in these efforts later in life. Luther called the Orthodox the “Truest Christians and the best followers of the Gospel on earth” at the Diet of Worms. The nascent conversation went nowhere because the Orthodox could not find any real difference between Protestants and Catholics, despite their insistence on being the antithesis of Medieval Catholicism, and the Reformers had not the slightest clue what the Orthodox were talking about. The fundamental categories and metaphysics of the Reformation were inherently Aristotelian-Medieval in nature, and the Reformers did not understand the roots of the differences of the West and East. The Trinitarian formulas and the Aristotelian collapse of the Noumena-Phenomena divide manifest in the “doctrine” of Sola Scriptura (a further apotheosis and individualization of Papal Infallibility) are merely a handful of the issues that went over the heads of the early Protestants. Here in Loci Communes, Melanchthon cites the ancient Orthodox Church as an example to model, despite committing several Orthodox heresies in this work alone:
Despite having a somewhat nuanced understanding of the Energy-Essence distinctions due to his Greek knowledge, he falls short when it comes to procession. He interestingly points out that the Latin language makes it all but impossible to preserve the Trinitarian doctrines composed and delineated in ancient Greek, illustrating at least part of the origins of the Filioque controversy.
He identifies the origins of the Non-Trinitarian Protestants as the influence of Stoicism, which is a bit of a stretch. He has a similar half-baked understanding of Islamic Unitarianism: “From Arius arose the furies of the Mohammedans”. But Unitarian Monotheism was the norm in several religions in Muhammad’s day. He certainly did not learn it from the monks of St. Katherine’s Monastery he stayed with briefly. If anything, this was a result of the Jews Muhammad encountered, not Arianism.
Protestantism resurrected every single heresy which had been extinguished by the Orthodox church- from Nestorianism to Arianism to Donatism, and Melanchthon was challenged on all sides.
Proto-Sola Scriptura
Melanchthon advocates for a type of Prima Scriptura model, as his debates with the Anabaptiststs, non-Trinitarians, Zwinglians and Antinominalists made him realize that the interpretation of the bible is inevitably rooted in pre-conceptions of some kind, i.e. tradition. He understood, thanks to his Greek studies, the influence of Metaphysics in these debates better than perhaps any other Reformer, and pushed back against some of the Wittenberg concepts. He realized the Aristotelan nature of the Scholastics, but also became away of how deeply Aristotelan the Reformed concepts were. He notes that Luther “learned Dialectica and Physica from Aristotle” in his Roman Theological studies. And in his 1519 “Report on the Leipzip Disputation to Oecolampadius”, he takes a balanced view and makes astute observations on how Tautological the Protestant-Catholic arguments were, being both deelpy Aristotelan in nature. Luther believed that the “Bible alone” was against Scholastic Theology, while Melanchthon realized is was a further development of Medieval-Aristotelean philosophy. He attempted to shape the reformation from Monergism and Sola Scriptura, to no avail.
Melanchthon heavily emphesizes the importance of the Bible, but does not go as far as Luther’s Claritas Scriptura concept, which allowed Luther and the following reformers to place their personal interpretations as absolute truth, even if it contradicted all teachings before it. Melanchthon still roots interpretation in the teachings of the historic church, citing the councils in passing. He pulls small excerpts from Gregory Neocaesari (St. Gregory of Nyssa) and Irenaeus, which is perhaps what caused his doubts about some of Evangelicalism’s dogmas as scripture is treated in the Apostolic writings as a product of tradition, not something separate from it as the Reformation considered it. He advocates for reading the Early Church fathers, something Luther would heavily discourage (apart from the “blessed Augustine):
He was not a fan of Luther’s edits to the Scriptures, either. He treats Esdras and the Maccabees as scripture, as Luther had not yet chosen to remove the 7 books from the bible yet. Melanchthon had translated 1 Maccabees from the Hebrew, and in keeping with all Christians throughout all time including the Reformers before Luther (Wycliffe for example), he considered the Deuterocanonical books to be canonical like all other books. Melanchthon also did not appreciate Luther’s attempts to remove other books from the bible (James, Jude, Hebrews and Revelations), and is one of the reasons Luther did not act on his belief that these books were “inspired by Satan”.
Melanchthon stood halfway in-between Prima and Sola Scripture, realizing that Luther was developing his own version of Christianity based off of his conflations of what the Bible says and his option of what the Bible says. Erasmus came to the same conclusion about the misleading nature of Protestantism that Melanchthon realized at the end of his life. Erasmus writes about the prideful intrinsic in his classic satirical novel In Praise of Folly:
And later in his 1533 "Explanation of the Apostles' Creed" (essentially a Catechism), he expands on this further, directly addressing Luther
Theodicy, Depravation Theory and the Privatio Boni
Perhaps there is no topic with greater Luther-Melanchthon unity on than Augustine’s Original Sin model:
In contrast with the later reformers, Melanchthon was quite orthodox in his condemnation of dualism and ascribes all evil to the will of the individual, but dogmatizes the Wittenberg reading of Augustine’s negation model:
This is due to the Wittenberg’s reliance on a specific reading of Augustine. Melanchthon specifically uses the Depravation theory regarding then nature of Evil in keeping with the Reformation’s reading of Augustine here “Sin is a lack or deprivation”. Luther’s double-predestination model would later challenge this idea of the Goodness of God, something Melanchthon rightly refured to as Neo-Manicheanism, but Luther kept this Privatio Boni theory intact. The semi-predestinarianism of his early years, he realized, was based on Naturalistic Rationalism via the Stoics, not Christology, and he recanted his positions later in favor of historic Orthodoxy. He wrote years later "not the cause of sin, and does not will sin, but the will of the Devil and the will of man are the causes of sin". He was deeply concerned about the moral implications of locating the drama of Good & Evil in the nature of God vice the nature of man, which is implied by double predestination.
Melanchthon is clearly using the 13th-century Anselmian Penal Atonement model of atonement, taken from Aristotelian-medieval Catholicism, which would become the definition of Protestantism. Imputed righteousness is taught clearly: “By imputation, because for Christ's sake we receive reconciliation, without which the Law is only a word of condemnation.” He draws a new distinction between the “law” of God and the “Gospel”, creating a new interpretive framework, a vital development for the Reformation. From this artificial dichotomy he re-interprets the whole Bible.
The Complete Works of Philipp Melanchthon
Loci Communes: https://bit.ly/3hCsUb2
Commentary on Romans and other Minor works: https://bit.ly/3X7Po42
Enchidirion and Instructions to the Visitors: https://bit.ly/3tvfdgx
The Augsburg Confession & Apology: https://bit.ly/3hAS89Q
The History and Life Stories of the Venerable Dr. Martin Luther: https://bit.ly/3G7icn6
The Loci Communes Rerum Theologicarum, commonly called the Loci Communes, was originally published in 1521 in New Latin. This was revised in 1535, 1543 and shortly before his death in 1559, and a German version was translated by Justus Jonas in 1538 and by Melanchthon in 1553. This German versions was called “Loci praecipui theologici: Die wesentlichen Grundbegriffe der Theologie”. In his own words, this book is about “the proper dogmas of the Church about God, about eternal things, about the Law of God, about Sin, about the Gospel, about Grace, Justice, and the Sacraments, and later also the doctrine about the civil life.” It is the first Protestant Systematic.
Philipp Melanchthon was born in Bretten, near Stuttgart in Baden-Württemberg in 1497. After studying at the University of Tübingen (where a school is still named after him to this day), he was made the chair of ancient Greek at the University of Wittenberg in 1518. He was a true Humanist, and focused on increasing literacy in the "three holy languages" ("drei heilige Sprachen“); Greek, Hebrew and Latin. Although self-taught, he was one of the best Greek students in Europe at the time second only to Bishop Erasmus, whom he had a life-long friendship with. When Luther was translating the Lutherbibel from the Vulgate, Melanchthon utilized Erasmus’ Greek New Testament to assist in the translation.
Melanchthon’s work was critical in the development of Luther’s theology and accompanied Luther to the early Leipzig Disputation in 1519. He was Luther’s personal proxy and a chief defender of the Wittenberg Theology. He wrote the Augsburg Confession and associated lengthy apology of it. From a politico-military perspective, he was instrumental in building the Schmalkaldic League and attempted a common doctrinal statement, which ultimately failed between the Lutherans and Zwinglians.
Beyond the Evangelical and Lutheran influence, Melanchthon was deeply influential on Reformed Theology. He has extensive personal correspondence with Calvin (who had mixed feelings about him) and Melanchthon’s pupil Zacharias Ursinus was the main author of the Heidelberg Catechism. Loci Communes, because it defends a type of Free Will, is not as directly crucial to the Calvinist flavors of Protestantism, but his influence on this branch was significant through secondary causes (see what I did there?).
Loci Communes is the first systematic formulation of Protestant theology and is a defense of the Wittenberg Reformation. Finished in 1521, Loci Communes was proofread by Luther and published the same year. Luther wrote "next to Holy Scripture, there is no better book" and at one point he talked about adding it to his Biblical canon. While overshadowed by his friend Luther and the second generation Reformers, Melanchthon is a critical nexus within European Christianity and offers a look 'behind the curtain' at the malevolent motivations and personalities which drove the Reformations of the 16th century. The real value of Loci Communes lies not in its logical reasoning, but its intimate look at the budding Reformations by an honest thinker dedicated to truth instead of power and respect.
Communes is thoroughly polemic, primarily towards the Scholastics, but is well-rounded and nuanced. He avoids the one-sentence absolutist dogmatism characteristic of Luther, encouraging reconciliation and communication “like the bees of the valley, working together”. He is striving to curb “the frenzy of all ages” from all sides. This was a unique characteristic of Melanchthon- he sought reconciliation when Luther preferred picking flights and namecalling anyone he perceived to disagree with any part of his opinions. Despite being largely loyal, he did criticize Luther’s warmongering and arrogance several times: "I also endured an almost dishonorable servitude before, since Luther often followed his temperament, in which there was a not insignificant φιλονεικία, than to pay attention to his reputation and the common good."
This is an erudite work, broad in historical scope, seamlessly weaving in Socrates, Cato, Plato, Cicero, Aristotle, Xenocrates, and other philosophers, but dismisses them as teaching nothing but "philosophic virtues" and caring for nothing except self-praise. Arians, Marcions, Manicheans, the “recent Jews”, Valentinians, Pelagians and the Samosates (turks) are treated briefly several times. He quotes a wide range of Latin authors and weaves in short quotations from Old and New Testaments to prove his logical treaties, oftentimes only two or three word. His understanding of Christianity’s metaphysical roots in the Greek Rationality religions is much deeper than any other Reformer's.
The historical parallax between Luther and Melanchthon is powerful but not perfectly linear. Luther respected Melanchthon enormously and vice versa yet they disagreed on several critical fields of belief. Melanchthon was drawn to the Wittenberg preacher due to his Humanism-centric philosophy, and Luther to Melanchthon due to his sharp and systematic mind as well as his humble and pious personality. It is believed that Luther never wrote a systematic theology because the Loci Communes was the perfect summary of essential Christian doctrine in his mind. At points, Luther plagiarized Melanchthon word-for-word and continuously praised his friend's contribution to the cause. At Luther's funeral, it was Melanchthon who eulogized his close friend and compatriot. And after Melanchthon died, he was buried next to Luther. Their friendship and intellectual partnership was a formative influence on the budding Reformation as a whole. Luther wrote about wanting to add Communes to his greater Lutheran canon:
We possess no work wherein the whole body of theology, wherein religion, is more completely summed up, than in Melanchthon’s Loci Communes... Melanchthon is a better logician than myself; he argues better. My superiority lies rather in a rhetorical way."
The Reformation's Continuation of Catholicism's Trinitarian Heresies
Quite a bit of this work is a defense of the Trinity, which had been a major debate within Protestantism from the very beginning. But Melanchthon, as with Luther, Calvin, Zwingli and all other Reformers after him continued the heterodoxy of the 6th-century Filioque of the Latin-turned-Catholic Church which led to the Great Schism of 1045 between Rome and Athos.
He writes here in Loci Communes casually: “...the Holy Spirit is the mover, proceeding from the Father and the Son”.
Ironically, this statement of double-procession is in the chapter on the defense of the Trinity, while simultaneously clearly denying the Trinitarian Formulation in Canon VII of the Council of Ephesus of 431. The Reformers had no understanding of these nuances, as they were immersed in debating the very existence of the Trinity against the anti-Trinitarian Protestants of the Radical Reformation, a debate which still rages today among “Bible-Believing” Protestants and has no end in sight (Oneness Pentecostalism etc). It wouldn’t be until the 20th century that some protestant theologians became aware of this debate between the Apostolic East and the Latin West over double procession, and views on it naturally varied widely, even within Lutheranism specifically.
Melanchthon, along with Luther and the entire Wittenberg circle, spoke highly of the Eastern Orthodox and corresponded with Patriarch Jeremiah in Constantinople and a few other Bishops. Melanchthon assisted in these efforts later in life. Luther called the Orthodox the “Truest Christians and the best followers of the Gospel on earth” at the Diet of Worms. The nascent conversation went nowhere because the Orthodox could not find any real difference between Protestants and Catholics, despite their insistence on being the antithesis of Medieval Catholicism, and the Reformers had not the slightest clue what the Orthodox were talking about. The fundamental categories and metaphysics of the Reformation were inherently Aristotelian-Medieval in nature, and the Reformers did not understand the roots of the differences of the West and East. The Trinitarian formulas and the Aristotelian collapse of the Noumena-Phenomena divide manifest in the “doctrine” of Sola Scriptura (a further apotheosis and individualization of Papal Infallibility) are merely a handful of the issues that went over the heads of the early Protestants. Here in Loci Communes, Melanchthon cites the ancient Orthodox Church as an example to model, despite committing several Orthodox heresies in this work alone:
Here let them adopt a nation worthy of their piety, and imitate the speech of the orἀκττονῃ of the Orthodox Church. And that answer must be held, some sayings speak of the essence of the external δὰς αἴστς, some of the offices…
Despite having a somewhat nuanced understanding of the Energy-Essence distinctions due to his Greek knowledge, he falls short when it comes to procession. He interestingly points out that the Latin language makes it all but impossible to preserve the Trinitarian doctrines composed and delineated in ancient Greek, illustrating at least part of the origins of the Filioque controversy.
He identifies the origins of the Non-Trinitarian Protestants as the influence of Stoicism, which is a bit of a stretch. He has a similar half-baked understanding of Islamic Unitarianism: “From Arius arose the furies of the Mohammedans”. But Unitarian Monotheism was the norm in several religions in Muhammad’s day. He certainly did not learn it from the monks of St. Katherine’s Monastery he stayed with briefly. If anything, this was a result of the Jews Muhammad encountered, not Arianism.
Protestantism resurrected every single heresy which had been extinguished by the Orthodox church- from Nestorianism to Arianism to Donatism, and Melanchthon was challenged on all sides.
Proto-Sola Scriptura
Melanchthon advocates for a type of Prima Scriptura model, as his debates with the Anabaptiststs, non-Trinitarians, Zwinglians and Antinominalists made him realize that the interpretation of the bible is inevitably rooted in pre-conceptions of some kind, i.e. tradition. He understood, thanks to his Greek studies, the influence of Metaphysics in these debates better than perhaps any other Reformer, and pushed back against some of the Wittenberg concepts. He realized the Aristotelan nature of the Scholastics, but also became away of how deeply Aristotelan the Reformed concepts were. He notes that Luther “learned Dialectica and Physica from Aristotle” in his Roman Theological studies. And in his 1519 “Report on the Leipzip Disputation to Oecolampadius”, he takes a balanced view and makes astute observations on how Tautological the Protestant-Catholic arguments were, being both deelpy Aristotelan in nature. Luther believed that the “Bible alone” was against Scholastic Theology, while Melanchthon realized is was a further development of Medieval-Aristotelean philosophy. He attempted to shape the reformation from Monergism and Sola Scriptura, to no avail.
Melanchthon heavily emphesizes the importance of the Bible, but does not go as far as Luther’s Claritas Scriptura concept, which allowed Luther and the following reformers to place their personal interpretations as absolute truth, even if it contradicted all teachings before it. Melanchthon still roots interpretation in the teachings of the historic church, citing the councils in passing. He pulls small excerpts from Gregory Neocaesari (St. Gregory of Nyssa) and Irenaeus, which is perhaps what caused his doubts about some of Evangelicalism’s dogmas as scripture is treated in the Apostolic writings as a product of tradition, not something separate from it as the Reformation considered it. He advocates for reading the Early Church fathers, something Luther would heavily discourage (apart from the “blessed Augustine):
Those who read the Prophetic and Apostolic books and symbols with true pious zeal, and seek the opinion of the purer Church, will easily judge with what human narratives they can then be helped, and understand what usefulness the pious explanations written correctly and correctly, the testimonies taken from the sources, bring.
He was not a fan of Luther’s edits to the Scriptures, either. He treats Esdras and the Maccabees as scripture, as Luther had not yet chosen to remove the 7 books from the bible yet. Melanchthon had translated 1 Maccabees from the Hebrew, and in keeping with all Christians throughout all time including the Reformers before Luther (Wycliffe for example), he considered the Deuterocanonical books to be canonical like all other books. Melanchthon also did not appreciate Luther’s attempts to remove other books from the bible (James, Jude, Hebrews and Revelations), and is one of the reasons Luther did not act on his belief that these books were “inspired by Satan”.
Melanchthon stood halfway in-between Prima and Sola Scripture, realizing that Luther was developing his own version of Christianity based off of his conflations of what the Bible says and his option of what the Bible says. Erasmus came to the same conclusion about the misleading nature of Protestantism that Melanchthon realized at the end of his life. Erasmus writes about the prideful intrinsic in his classic satirical novel In Praise of Folly:
They can deal with any text of scripture as with a nob of wax, knead it into what shape best suits their interest; and whatever conclusions they have dogmatically resolved upon, they would have them irrepealably ratified as an absolute force as the very decree of the papal chair.
And later in his 1533 "Explanation of the Apostles' Creed" (essentially a Catechism), he expands on this further, directly addressing Luther
You stipulate that we should not ask for or accept anything but Holy Scripture, but you do it in such a way as to require that we permit you to be its sole interpreter, renouncing all others. Thus the victory will be yours if we allow you to be not the steward but the lord of Holy Scripture.
Theodicy, Depravation Theory and the Privatio Boni
Perhaps there is no topic with greater Luther-Melanchthon unity on than Augustine’s Original Sin model:
as I was formed into an immense mass, and there was sin in me, that is, not only guilt, but an aversion to God and a low inclination arising with me…. The thinking of the human heart is evil childhood...sin is both a liability due to the fall of Adam, and also a deficiency, or an inclination, or an action that fights with the Law of God, etc.
In contrast with the later reformers, Melanchthon was quite orthodox in his condemnation of dualism and ascribes all evil to the will of the individual, but dogmatizes the Wittenberg reading of Augustine’s negation model:
He [God] is not the cause of sin, nor wills sin, nor impels the will to sin, nor approves of sin...Therefore God is not the cause of sin, nor is sin a thing created or ordained by God, but it is the horrible destruction of the work and order of the gods.
This is due to the Wittenberg’s reliance on a specific reading of Augustine. Melanchthon specifically uses the Depravation theory regarding then nature of Evil in keeping with the Reformation’s reading of Augustine here “Sin is a lack or deprivation”. Luther’s double-predestination model would later challenge this idea of the Goodness of God, something Melanchthon rightly refured to as Neo-Manicheanism, but Luther kept this Privatio Boni theory intact. The semi-predestinarianism of his early years, he realized, was based on Naturalistic Rationalism via the Stoics, not Christology, and he recanted his positions later in favor of historic Orthodoxy. He wrote years later "not the cause of sin, and does not will sin, but the will of the Devil and the will of man are the causes of sin". He was deeply concerned about the moral implications of locating the drama of Good & Evil in the nature of God vice the nature of man, which is implied by double predestination.
Melanchthon is clearly using the 13th-century Anselmian Penal Atonement model of atonement, taken from Aristotelian-medieval Catholicism, which would become the definition of Protestantism. Imputed righteousness is taught clearly: “By imputation, because for Christ's sake we receive reconciliation, without which the Law is only a word of condemnation.” He draws a new distinction between the “law” of God and the “Gospel”, creating a new interpretive framework, a vital development for the Reformation. From this artificial dichotomy he re-interprets the whole Bible.
The Complete Works of Philipp Melanchthon
Loci Communes: https://bit.ly/3hCsUb2
Commentary on Romans and other Minor works: https://bit.ly/3X7Po42
Enchidirion and Instructions to the Visitors: https://bit.ly/3tvfdgx
The Augsburg Confession & Apology: https://bit.ly/3hAS89Q
The History and Life Stories of the Venerable Dr. Martin Luther: https://bit.ly/3G7icn6
October 23, 2018
Some interesting points to glean from the unfolding of Luther's theology. The 1521 version is strictly monergistic, as contrasted with later versions. Melancthon's aversion to lawsuits runs steady throughtout the 1521 version, but is another area where he will change his view later. His elaboration on the distiction and utility of the law and gospel was superb.
July 17, 2017
Very fascinating early Reformation document. Especially interesting to trace themes that would flower in both Reformed and Lutheran theology in later generations. Could do without some of the invective against the "Sophists" though...
November 24, 2021
Excellent, readable translation with helpful footnotes, though I would disagree with Luther that this text belongs in the canon.
November 21, 2022
This is a clear summary of basic Lutheran beliefs. This is a good translation with helpful footnotes and explanations. The way Melanin organized things didn't really follow my thoughts well, and some if the issues he spends a lot of time on are not really relevant anymore. Others are constantly reasserting themselves!
August 29, 2024
Apart from the excessively inflammatory criticisms of the scholasticism to which Melancthon was to adhere in the future, this is a reading that is almost devotional in its pleasant writing. The best part of the book is where the Lutheran finding, Law and Grace, is expounded. It sounds like a Copernican revolution in theology, it's full of assurance, courage and hope. Here, I'm going to share some of my quotations and thoughts:
1. "I will not be relying on the opinions of men, I will explain the matter very simply and clearly" - I wonder if this simplistic model of interpretation survives our exceedingly relativistic world. Should we conform our theology to the expectations of the world?
2. "For just as we, in these latter times of the Church, have embraced Aristotle instead of Christ, so also immediately after the Church’s founding Christian doctrine was undermined by Platonic philosophy. So it has come about that no untainted literature exists in the Church outside of canonical Scriptures. Everything taught in the commentaries reeks of philosophy". - it seems that dehellenization is a form to attain "pure" scriptural knowledge. I like this idea. Melancthon offers a very concise way to understand the history of philosophy: NT production → Platonism → Aristotelianism → Reformed dehellenization.
3. "Again, they call the intellect, as it is joined with the will, “reason.” We will use neither the term “free will” nor “reason,” but will call the parts of man the faculty of knowing and the faculty that is subject to the affections, that is, to love, hate, hope, fear, and the like" - I found it lovely that they want to stick to bible's terminology. The sense of authority is much more noticeable and it avoids importation of categories into the bible.
4. "How unfathomable is the misery of humanity!" - indeed! I love this protestant desperation! Wasn't the corruption of the popes the death of our spiritual naivety? Wasn't the WWI and WWII the death of our rational naivety? There's no rest for the wicked as the bible prophesied. Only Grace can save us!
5. "Philosophy looks at nothing but the facades that men exhibit. Holy Scripture perceives the innermost affections" - amen.
6. "For such is the blindness of human reason that we cannot understand the full nature of sin and righteousness without the light of the Spirit. All the capabilities of human reason are but darkness" - it's impressive how early Protestantism is anti-reason.
7. "What do we care what Origen thinks anyway? We are discussing the judgment of Scripture, not of Origen" - Melancthon being mean like Luther in the Bondage of the Will. My gosh what a pissed redditor vibes.
8. "To use the words of Paul, the Law is the minister of death, the Gospel the minister of life and peace [2 Corinthians 3:7–10]" - the greatest Lutheran discovery in Paul.
9. "Just as the Law is that by which correct living is commanded and sin is revealed, so the Gospel is the promise of God’s grace or mercy, that is, the forgiveness of sin and the testimony of God’s kindness toward us" - its proper definition.
10. "Two cherubim were placed on the ark, representing the Law and the Gospel [Exodus 25:18–22]" - very fun spiritual interpretation coming from a guy who was advocating for radical literalistic readings!
11. "For the most precise definition of grace is nothing other than the kindness of God toward us or the merciful will of God for us" - Melancthon's definition of grace.
12. "Above I stressed that love of God is the fruit of faith. For whoever lays hold of God’s mercy by faith cannot help but love God in return" - he's reducing the rise of all Christian virtues to faith. I love this teaching. It seems that only understanding the gospel by this we can see that God's burdens are light as he promised!
1. "I will not be relying on the opinions of men, I will explain the matter very simply and clearly" - I wonder if this simplistic model of interpretation survives our exceedingly relativistic world. Should we conform our theology to the expectations of the world?
2. "For just as we, in these latter times of the Church, have embraced Aristotle instead of Christ, so also immediately after the Church’s founding Christian doctrine was undermined by Platonic philosophy. So it has come about that no untainted literature exists in the Church outside of canonical Scriptures. Everything taught in the commentaries reeks of philosophy". - it seems that dehellenization is a form to attain "pure" scriptural knowledge. I like this idea. Melancthon offers a very concise way to understand the history of philosophy: NT production → Platonism → Aristotelianism → Reformed dehellenization.
3. "Again, they call the intellect, as it is joined with the will, “reason.” We will use neither the term “free will” nor “reason,” but will call the parts of man the faculty of knowing and the faculty that is subject to the affections, that is, to love, hate, hope, fear, and the like" - I found it lovely that they want to stick to bible's terminology. The sense of authority is much more noticeable and it avoids importation of categories into the bible.
4. "How unfathomable is the misery of humanity!" - indeed! I love this protestant desperation! Wasn't the corruption of the popes the death of our spiritual naivety? Wasn't the WWI and WWII the death of our rational naivety? There's no rest for the wicked as the bible prophesied. Only Grace can save us!
5. "Philosophy looks at nothing but the facades that men exhibit. Holy Scripture perceives the innermost affections" - amen.
6. "For such is the blindness of human reason that we cannot understand the full nature of sin and righteousness without the light of the Spirit. All the capabilities of human reason are but darkness" - it's impressive how early Protestantism is anti-reason.
7. "What do we care what Origen thinks anyway? We are discussing the judgment of Scripture, not of Origen" - Melancthon being mean like Luther in the Bondage of the Will. My gosh what a pissed redditor vibes.
8. "To use the words of Paul, the Law is the minister of death, the Gospel the minister of life and peace [2 Corinthians 3:7–10]" - the greatest Lutheran discovery in Paul.
9. "Just as the Law is that by which correct living is commanded and sin is revealed, so the Gospel is the promise of God’s grace or mercy, that is, the forgiveness of sin and the testimony of God’s kindness toward us" - its proper definition.
10. "Two cherubim were placed on the ark, representing the Law and the Gospel [Exodus 25:18–22]" - very fun spiritual interpretation coming from a guy who was advocating for radical literalistic readings!
11. "For the most precise definition of grace is nothing other than the kindness of God toward us or the merciful will of God for us" - Melancthon's definition of grace.
12. "Above I stressed that love of God is the fruit of faith. For whoever lays hold of God’s mercy by faith cannot help but love God in return" - he's reducing the rise of all Christian virtues to faith. I love this teaching. It seems that only understanding the gospel by this we can see that God's burdens are light as he promised!
June 8, 2025
i read it initially hoping for a systematic theology but it wasn't complete in that sense, what I found interesting was it's categorisation of works salvation as pharisaism, it's political nominalism as politics as a pragmatic matter and Monasticism along with clericalism actually creating an elitism that dissuades piety among the masses.
October 14, 2020
Philipp Melanchthon was second only to Martin Luther in his influence on the early Lutheran reformation and this book reflects his way of thinking theologically through scripture. A good and easily readable approach to the theological thinking of the reformation in the 16th century.
November 14, 2017
This is a great book especially if your couple it with the thinking fellows podcast that goes through each chapter.
February 27, 2021
Excellent, edifying systematic summary of early Lutheran doctrine.
July 24, 2019
Melanchthon expounds upon the basic doctrines of the Christian Faith that remains true to Lutheran reformation. He has an especially clear exposition on the role and use of the Law in light of Christian freedom and daily living. A short work that is worth a read.
September 30, 2013
Меланхтон пише своите Loci между 1520 и 1521 (когато книгата е публикувана за първи път). По това време той е едва 24 годишен. Книгата отразява изключително силното влияние на Лутер, от харизмата на когото Меланхтон по това време е покорен. Поради тази причина в първото издание не може да се намери нещо особено оригинално. Все пак авторът демонстрира забележителна дълбочина на мисълта съчетана със солидни познания - заслужава си да обърнем внимание напр. на зрялото му виждане за формите на речта във връзка с буквалното и алегоричното тълкуване на писанието. Освен това неговата мисъл е изключително ясна и (за разлика от Лутер) не оставя място за съмнение какво точно иска да каже.
През живота си Меланхтон преработва цялостно своето съчинени на два пъти като втория път обемът е удовен. В тях се усеща не само узряване и развитие на неговата мисъл, но и формиране на една специфична оригиналност, която по някои въпроси води реформатора встрани от Лутер. Добре известен е спорът за синергията между Божията благодат и човеката воля избухнал след смъртта на Лутер и свързан именно с Меланхтон - позиция вече ясно израззена в последното издабие на Loci.
Важно съчинение, особено ако бъде четено заедно с полседващите преработки и в контекста на по-ши��окото лутеранско и реформаторско богословие.
През живота си Меланхтон преработва цялостно своето съчинени на два пъти като втория път обемът е удовен. В тях се усеща не само узряване и развитие на неговата мисъл, но и формиране на една специфична оригиналност, която по някои въпроси води реформатора встрани от Лутер. Добре известен е спорът за синергията между Божията благодат и човеката воля избухнал след смъртта на Лутер и свързан именно с Меланхтон - позиция вече ясно израззена в последното издабие на Loci.
Важно съчинение, особено ако бъде четено заедно с полседващите преработки и в контекста на по-ши��окото лутеранско и реформаторско богословие.
August 5, 2016
Melanchthon, which is a Greek translation of the guy's given name, seems like an interesting character: sort of the wonderkid of the Reformation, a powerful scholar, a friend and admirer of Luther. His book, the title of which means "Common Places," is a short (considering the project) theological treatment of different topics in the Bible. It's like training wheels: he is in effect saying "here's how to think about this issue, now go read about it." He insists many times that he wants his book to get everybody back as soon as possible to reading and rereading the Bible itself.
Initially I was disappointed when I started reading, because the thoughts seemed disconnected and didn't seem to argue well enough for their position, but by the end, the internal logic of the project won out: this is really a sort of vast scholarly shout of happiness that God has decided to save people, and that you, reader, are one of those people so long as you start believing that the promises in the Bible apply to you. It's kind of infectious, and even what I imagine is a pretty dry translation can't hide some great lines. This is a sort of impatient joy rather than what you might consider serious theology, but that was the author's plan.
Initially I was disappointed when I started reading, because the thoughts seemed disconnected and didn't seem to argue well enough for their position, but by the end, the internal logic of the project won out: this is really a sort of vast scholarly shout of happiness that God has decided to save people, and that you, reader, are one of those people so long as you start believing that the promises in the Bible apply to you. It's kind of infectious, and even what I imagine is a pretty dry translation can't hide some great lines. This is a sort of impatient joy rather than what you might consider serious theology, but that was the author's plan.
January 23, 2013
Back to basics. A thorough discussion of the law and the gospel. A great discussion of faith and the place of signs within the Christian religion. The book is well translated; however it never ceases to amaze me that academics who work so hard to translate a book from latin to English keep all their footnotes in Latin. Do they think we just can't read the main text in Latin, but all the German, Greek and Latin footnotes will not pose a problem? I must learn Latin - goal for 2013!! The introduction by the translator depicts PM as a humanist who temporarily fell under the influence of Luther's 'faith alone' theology but who later came to question this position. I don't agree with this analysis. I think Timothy Wengert's work stands in direct opposition to this understanding and for me is more persuasive.
September 20, 2015
This recent updated translation by Christian Preus of Philip Melanchthon's first version of his Commonplaces (1521) is essential reading for any student of the Reformation. This edition is a wonderfully accessible read with a wealth of notes that assumes the reader is new to the text and to the personalities and other sources mentioned within it. Readers whose Latin, Greek and Hebrew are shaky need not fear thanks to the helpful annotations. Preus' introduction fully explains his approach to translation and to the text itself and provides a solid sketch of the author and his subject. Melanchthon's work represents a watershed moment in the history of Christian theology and serves to establish the markers along which discussion and debate would continue for the five hundred years since.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews