On the Heidelberg Catechism

1 Q. What is your only comfort in life and in death?
A. That I’m not my own, but belong – body and soul, in life and in death - to my faithful Savior Jesus Christ.[1]

Thus begins the Q&A of the Heidelberg Catechism that was first published in German in 1563 amid the Protestant Reformation. At the Synod of Dort (1618-1619), representatives from the local Dutch Reformed Church as well as delegates from Reformed churches of Europe, offered warm praise for the Heidelberg’s Catechism’s “pedagogical and doctrinal features.”[2] Since then, Heidelberg’s Christian instruction has been solidified as one of the most ecumenical of the Reformed catechisms and has been translated into a variety of languages sufficiently reflecting the global body of Christ.  

While the grounding and growing of God’s people in the Gospel continues through a variety of methods in church ministries today, the practice of catechizing in many Protestant circles have sadly waned. Several years ago, I began to cultivate a deep interest in catechesis upon discovering that I hardly knew anything about the subject and historical practice (save that it is a common practice within the Roman Catholic Church). For this reason, I have been most eager to undertake my own study of this timeless catechism that has “stirred up love and good works” to so many of those who belong to our faithful Savior.

This following will feature a short study of the Heidelberg Catechism. Following a short historical survey and some noteworthy points on its construction and purpose, the remaining portion of this paper will be dedicated to the discovery of how the catechism appeals to both Lutheran and Reformed sensibilities. A brief note on the Heidelberg Catechism’s strengths and weaknesses will also be discussed. An integration of various readings and interaction with the Heidelberg text itself will be presented throughout. The aim of this work is to not only better understand some of the “pedagogical and doctrinal features” of the Heidelberg Catechism, but also that it will hopefully serve as a springboard to set the stage for strategizing as to how to move toward contemporary practices in a congregational setting.

Historical Context

Soon after Frederick III (1515-76) took his position as Elector of the German Palatinate territory in 1559, he found himself embroiled in a heated controversy over the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper.[3] On one side of the disagreement was Lutheran theologian, Tilemann Heshusius, who subscribed to Reformer Martin Luther’s view that Christ was really and physically present when the Lord’s Supper was celebrated.[4] On other end of the debate was Wilhelm Klebitz, who maintained that “believers have real, spiritual communion with Christ who is certainly spiritually, but not physically, present.”[5] Before the vigorous debate came to blows, Elector Frederick III wisely intervened and subsequently dismissed Heshusius and Klebitz from their respective positions. By 1563, the Elector commissioned the preparation for a new catechism that was to be “…a summary course of instruction or catechism of our Christian Religion, according to the word of God.”[6]  

Construction and Purpose

Authorship of the Heidelberg Catechism is attributed to a collaborative theological faculty that featured Dr. Zacharias Ursinus (1534-1583) and Caspar Olevianus (1536-1587). Together for the Gospel, a faculty of pastors and theologians pieced together the basic structure of the catechism by dividing it into three parts accordingly: 

1- our sin & misery (Lord's Days 2-4), 

2- deliverance from sin (Lord's Days 5-31), and;

3- our thankfulness to God for such deliverance (Lord's Days 32-52).

In keeping with the catechisms of Luther and Calvin’s Geneva Catechism, the Heidelberg Catechism pattern contains an explanation on the Apostle’s Creed (Lord's Days 8-22) as well as instruction on the Ten Commandments (Lord's Days 34-44) and the Lord’s Prayer (Lord's Days 46-52).[7]

Frederick III purpose for commissioning a new catechism is multi-faceted. First, the “exigencies of the times” called for him to “improve, reform, and further establish” Christian instruction by building on what his faithful forerunners had already constructed.[8] Second, the catechism was intended to expose wavering youth to “consistent doctrine of the holy Gospel” while simultaneously fostering “consistent and coherent preaching and teaching among pastors.”[9] Third, it was directed toward all believers who were without any “established, certain, and clear catechism” and thus were “growing up without the fear of God and the knowledge of His word.”[10]

 As already noted, the commissioning of the Heidelberg Catechism emerged out of the heated controversy over the Lord’s Supper. Gary A. Parrett observed that the Heidelberg Catechism had also been commissioned “in an effort to help unify Lutheran and Reformed churches of the German Palatinate.”[11] Dr. Parrett goes on to state: 

There are several features of the catechism that gives evidence of such an effort – including a             downplaying of the more distinctively Reformed doctrines of divine decrees, election and                      predestination, and an attempt to find common ground on the Lord’s Supper.[12]

How well does the Heidelberg Catechism bring together the Lutheran and Reformed sensibilities? To help answer this question, I will now turn to two distinguishing features of these unifying efforts: The Ten Commandments and the Lord’s Supper. 

A Unifying Effort

One feature that signifies the effort to help unify Lutheran and Reformed churches is evidenced in the section on The Ten Commandments. This is made apparent in the Heidelberg Catechism’s sequence and general flow within the three-part sections. For instance, the Law is first summarized as a means of double commandment of love and used to help us realize that we all fall short of obedience and are bound in misery and sin.[13] In Luther-like fashion, the Law then transitions to a Gospel summary pointing catechumens from their sin toward Christ, as the one who sets us free and reconciles us to God.[14] True to Calvin’s Geneva Catechism’s educational form, the Law appears once again by way of a “command by command exposition, as a guide to a life of grateful response.”[15]

Another indication of the unifying effort can be noted in the attempt to find common ground on the Lord’s Supper. As for the mode of Christ’s presence when the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, Luther and those in the Lutheran tradition placed emphasis on the Lord’s words at the Last Supper, “This is my body” (Luke 22:19), necessitating that Christ Himself is really and physically present. On the other end of the theological spectrum was the view of Swiss Reformer, Huldrych (Ulrich) Zwingli, who understood Christ to be symbolically present when the Lord’s Supper was celebrated, since Christ ascended into heaven and sits at the right hand of God.[16] Nestled between Luther and Zwingli on the Lord’s Supper is Reformer John Calvin. Worth noting is Philip Schaff articulation on Calvin’s middle ground approach where he states:

He [Calvin] combines the realism of the one with the spiritualism of the other, and saves the                 substance for which Luther contended, but avoids the objectionable form. He rests on the exegesis       of Zwingli. He accepts the symbolical meaning of the words of institution; he rejects the corporal       presence…But at the same time he strongly asserts a spiritual real presence, and a spiritual real           participation of Christ’s body and blood by faith…He combines the crucified Christ with the glorified    Christ, and brings the believer into contact with the whole Christ. He lays great stress on the agency    of the Holy Spirit in the ordinance, which was overlooked by Luther and Zwingli, but which appears       in the ancient liturgies in the invocation of the Holy Spirit. [17]

The Heidelberg Catechism efforts to unify Lutheran and Reformed churches on the Eucharist are thus signified in their adoption of Calvin’s via media position as exemplified in Lord’s Days 76-79:

76 Q. What does it mean to eat the crucified body of Christ and to drink his poured-out blood?
A. It means to accept with a believing heart the entire suffering and death of Christ and by believing to receive forgiveness of sins and eternal life. But it means more. Through the Holy Spirit, who lives in both Christ and in us, we are united more and more to Christ’s blessed body. And so, although he is in heaven and we are on earth, we are flesh and bone of his bone. And we forever live on and are governed by one Spirit, as members of our body are by one soul. 

78 Q. Are the bread and wine changed into the real body and blood of Christ?

A. No. Just as the water of baptism is not changed into Christ’s blood and does not itself wash away sins but is simply God’s sign and assurance, so too the bread of the Lord’s Supper is not changed into the actual body of Christ in keeping with the nature of the sacraments.

79 Q. Why then does Christ call the bread his body and the cup his blood, or the new covenant in his blood? (Paul uses the words, a participation in Christ’s body and blood.)

A. Christ has good reason for these words. He wants to teach us that as bread and wine nourish our temporal life, so too his crucified body and poured out blood truly nourish our souls for eternal life. But more important, he wants to assure us, by this visible sign and pledge, that we, through the Holy Spirit’s work, share in his true body and blood as surely our mouths receive these holy signs in his remembrance, and that all of his suffering and obedience are as definitely ours as if we personally had suffered and paid for our sins.

Both Calvin and the writers of the Heidelberg Catechism sought to find common middle ground on the Lord’s Supper by affirming Christ’s presence during the Lord’s Supper was not merely symbolic or absent, but rather spiritual, through the work of the Holy Spirit.[18] Quoting Calvin’s Institutes, Kevin J. Vanhoozer adds “What Calvin says about the presence of Christ in the bread goes for the presence of the saints to one another: “the Spirit truly unites things separated in space.”[19]

Strengths and Weaknesses

The Heidelberg Catechism has continued to be used as a teaching tool for 450 years since its inception.[20] This, in and of itself, testifies to its faithful Trinitarian, Christocentric, Gospel presentation and lasting fruit of theological strength of the Reformation. Other general strengths lie within the its harmonious structure and pattern as with other related statements such as Luther’s catechisms and Calvin’s Geneva Catechism. Doctrinal harmony is furthermore demonstrated in its alignment with the Belgic Confession and the Canons of Dort. As previously noted, another strength of the Heidelberg Catechism is underscored in how it brings together the Lutheran and Reformed sensibilities. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said with its predecessor or successor, albeit biblical faithful catechisms.

As with all Catechisms and confessions, there will always be weaknesses and limitations. The Heidelberg Catechism is not intended to be a replacement of Scripture, but rather meant to lead one deeper into the Word of God.[21] As with all catechisms, contemporary or historical/ancient, it does not leave every theological stone unturned nor is it God breathed and inspired of the Holy Spirit as with the Holy Scriptures. With these limitations in view, the Heidelberg Catechism must be used as a teaching tool to instruct believers in the faith with the purpose of drawing one nearer to Word of God.

Conclusion

Heidelberg’s Christian instruction has been solidified as one of the most ecumenical of the Reformed catechisms and it continues to be used to ground and grow God’s people in the Gospel today. To this very day the Heidelberg Catechism stands out as being one of the only catechisms that bring together the Lutheran and Reformed sensibilities. It has been a teaching tool treasure for 450 years. For this reason, pastors and ministers of the Word would do well to not let the hard work and efforts of those who have gone before us slip through the cracks and fall by the wayside. May we rather continue to use the Heidelberg Catechism for teaching and instruction, to the glory of God, whether for new believers or long-time followers, and all the more as we see the Day drawing near.

---

[1] The Heidelberg Catechism, Lord’s Day 1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Faith Alive Christian Resources, 1988), p.9.

[2] HC “Preface”, p.7.

[3] “The Heidelberg Catechism”, Canadian Reformed Theological Seminary. Retrieved from: http://www.heidelberg-catechism.com/en/history/.

[4] This view of the Lord’s Supper is held by all Lutherans. See Martin Luther’s Small Catechism “Part 6: The Lord’s Supper”, Confession Concerning the Lord’s Supper (1528), and The Augsburg Confession Article X.

[5] “The Heidelberg Catechism”, See History Section. Retrieved from: http://www.heidelberg-catechism.com/en/history/.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] The Heidelberg Catechism, The Tercentenary Translation, p.189.

[9] Ibid. *See also “The Heidelberg Catechism”, See New to Catechism? Section. Retrieved from: http://www.heidelberg-catechism.com/en/history/.

[10] Ibid., p.191.

[11] Gary A. Parrett & J.I. Packer, Grounded in the Gospel: Building up Believers the Old-Fashioned Way (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Publishing Group, 2010), p.64.

[12] Ibid.

[13] HC LD 2-4. Parrett, Grounded in the Gospel, 65.

[14] HC LD 8-22. Parrett, 65.

[15] Parrett, Ibid. HC LD 34-44.

[16] Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. VII. Modern Christianity. The German Reformation (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Publishers, 1950), p. 111.

[17] Ibid. See also John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion 4.17.10,18-19.

[18] In fairness to Zwingli it should be noted that he did indeed affirm Christ’s spiritual presence, however, this was unfortunately overshadowed by his stress upon the absence of Christ’s body. See Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, p.111.

[19] Kevin J. Vanhoozer, Faith Speaking Understanding (Louisville, KN: Westminster John Knox Press, 2014), p.167. Vanhoozer quotes Calvin’s Inst. 4.17.10.

[20] Today, the Christian Reformed Church (CRC) and other Reformed churches have officially adopted the Heidelberg Catechism as a guide for preaching and teaching.

[21] “The Heidelberg Catechism”, See What is a Catechism? Section. Retrieved from: http://www.heidelberg-catechism.com/en/new/