Need a little help with History. -- Niels Hemmingsen.

[davejonescue]

Hello all. Was browsing some books last night and came across one entitled "The Faith of the Church Militant" by a second generation Reformer by the name of Niels Hemmingsen. It looks very interesting, but I dont really know the ins and outs of what separates early Lutheran writers from general Reformed thought. Doing a little research it is said "Niels Hemmingsen is the single-most important figure among the second generation of Danish reformers." My question is, has anybody read this book, or, could someone give a concise overview on the areas it would be problematic. Him and Luther were alive at the same time, and it is said he was a student of Melanchthon. I have to admit I am attracted to the book by its title, not seeing many books titled as such, am just looking if anybody has some background info. Thank you all in advance.

 

[jwright82]

Hello all. Was browsing some books last night and came across one entitled "The Faith of the Church Militant" by a second generation Reformer by the name of Niels Hemmingsen. It looks very interesting, but I dont really know the ins and outs of what separates early Lutheran writers from general Reformed thought. Doing a little research it is said "Niels Hemmingsen is the single-most important figure among the second generation of Danish reformers." My question is, has anybody read this book, or, could someone give a concise overview on the areas it would be problematic. Him and Luther were alive at the same time, and it is said he was a student of Melanchthon. I have to admit I am attracted to the book by its title, not seeing many books titled as such, am just looking if anybody has some background info. Thank you all in advance.

The Church in the World, Militant and Wave-Tossed: Hemmingsen on Luke 5 - Ad Fontes

Yesterday’s Gospel reading for the Fifth Sunday after Trinity, according to the traditional...

adfontesjournal.com

I hope this helps. All I could see of interest in my "Dictionary Of Lutheran Theology" was that he wrote a book that seemed to lean a Calvinist direction on the Lord's Supper.

Niels Hemmingsen (1513-1600) / 210 titles, 345 vols. | PRDL

345 free public domain works of Niels Hemmingsen via Post-Reformation Digital Library (PRDL), a database of digital books for theology and philosophy ca. 1500-1800. http://fb.me/prdl.org

www.prdl.juniusinstitute.org

Niels Hemmingsen Archives - Ad Fontes

adfontesjournal.com

 

[davejonescue]

Thank you so much for those links. I saw the Davenant one yesterday as I was looking around for some info, but couldnt really find anything on this book. I guess he wrote almost always in Latin, and this book is no exception, but it was translated by a Thomas Rogers in the 17th century. Was wanting to know if anybody on the Board has more experience with the early Reformers, as I have read elsewhere that Lutheranism seems to become problematic kind of later on, and its the reason many people can read Luther and his early contemporaries, but not so much later writers as its theological positions become more distinct and different from Reformed orthodoxy. Will look around some more.

 

[jwright82]

Thank you so much for those links. I saw the Davenant one yesterday as I was looking around for some info, but couldnt really find anything on this book. I guess he wrote almost always in Latin, and this book is no exception, but it was translated by a Thomas Rogers in the 17th century. Was wanting to know if anybody on the Board has more experience with the early Reformers, as I have read elsewhere that Lutheranism seems to become problematic kind of later on, and its the reason many people can read Luther and his early contemporaries, but not so much later writers as its theological positions become more distinct and different from Reformed orthodoxy. Will look around some more.

I gave you all I got on him, sorry. I don't know about problematic, outside of not Reformed, but more tightened confessionally speaking. But your intuition of early Reformers is probably good and him being perhaps a crypto-calvinist doesn't hurt either.
But I have books by Lutheran theologian's and they're quite good at times.

 

[davejonescue]

I gave you all I got on him, sorry. I don't know about problematic, outside of not Reformed, but more tightened confessionally speaking. But your intuition of early Reformers is probably good and him being perhaps a crypto-calvinist doesn't hurt either.
But I have books by Lutheran theologian's and they're quite good at times.

Thank you. Yeah, I cant find much on him either. Will try and do some deeper research when I have time, just trying to avoid potentially doing the book, but then having a laundry list of reasons why he shouldnt be read come out by the better informed on the Reformers, and those who can read his Latin works, since that looks like mostly what he wrote in. Thank you for your help though, it is much appreciated.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

HEMMINGSEN, NIELS (Nicolaus Hemmingii): Danish theologian; b. at Erindlev, island of Lolland, Denmark, June 4, 1513; d. at Roskilde, Zealand, May 23, 1600. He studied under the humanist Niels Black at Roskilde, and at the age of twenty-four went to Wittenberg, where he was graduated B.D., and became a devoted follower of Melanchthon. In 1542 he returned to Denmark, and was appointed privat-docent at the University of Copenhagen; in 1543 he became instructor in Greek, and in 1545 lecturer in Hebrew and professor of dialectics; in 1553 he was appointed professor of theology.

In 1555 he published his De methodis, the second volume of which treats of hermeneutics and rhetoric. His Enchiridion theologicum appeared in 1557, and became popular in Denmark and abroad as a handbook of dogmatics and ethics. He was a pronounced adherent of Melanchthon, and he considers his own work merely an aid to the deeper understanding of Melanchthon’s opus sacrosanctum. His Enchiridion consists of four parts, the first treating of the covenant of grace and the kingdom of Christ; the second, of man’s duties toward God, dwelling especially on the ten commandments; the third, of the three articles of faith, the Lord’s Prayer, and the importance of traditional teachings; and the fourth, of the public and private duties of a Christian. Of still greater importance from an ethical point of view is his De lege naturœ apodictica methodus (Wittenberg, 1562).

When the waves of Crypto-Calvinism reached Denmark Hemmingsen was called upon to defend the Lutheran conception of the Lord’s Supper, which he did in his Tavle om Herrens Nadvere (“Table of the Lord’s Supper”); in consequence of this he came to be regarded as the foremost theologian in Denmark. In 1569 he was entrusted with the task of drafting the twenty-five articles of religion to which every foreigner who settled in Denmark had to conform; and in the following year he published his Livsens Vej (“The Path of Life”), a compendium of the teachings he himself followed during his long career.

When at the very summit of his greatness Hemmingsen published (1572 and 1574) certain writings which displayed a leaning toward Crypto-Calvinism, and King Frederick II. forbade him to engage in any disputations concerning the Lord’s Supper. Repeated accusations on the part of the duke and duchess of Saxony, who were related to the king, compelled Frederick II. further to demand that he renounce his Crypto-Calvinistic tendencies altogether; and he had to retract his utterances publicly. The accusations continued, and the king finally deposed Hemmingsen. On July 29, 1579, he was dismissed from his professorship, and ordered to leave Copenhagen. He went to Roskilde, where for twenty years he occupied himself with studies, officiating also as protector of the cathedral there. Upon the death of Frederick II. he again ventured to publish his writings, and his commentary on the Gospel of St. John, accompanied by a Tractatus de gratia universali (Copenhagen, 1591), showed that he was no adherent of Calvin as far as the latter’s teachings of predestination were concerned. In 1599, however, he wrote some Spórgsmaal og Svar om Alterens Sakramente (“Questions and Answers concerning the Lord’s Supper”), which proved that his conceptions of the Lord’s Supper were more Calvinistic than Lutheran.

(F. Nielsen).​

Bibliography: E. Pontokopidan, Annales ecclesiœ Danicœ, vol. iii., Copenhagen, 1747; H. Roerdam, Kjóbenhavns Universitets Historie 1537–1621, ii. 425 sqq., ib. 1869 sqq.; J. H. Paulli, Niels Hemmingsens Pastoraltheologie, ib. 1851.

---

sqq. and following
sqq. and following

 

[davejonescue]

Thank you guys for all your help. I am going to go ahead and pass on attempting this book in the future, as there are still quite a bit of Puritan and Non-Conformists books to do. I dont want to get too side-tracked from my main objective.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

HEMMINGSEN, NIELS (1513–1600)

Context. Educated in Wittenberg under Martin *Luther and Philipp *Melanchthon, Hemmingsen became the leading Danish churchman and biblical scholar of his time. His exegetical work reveals his concurrent engagement with ethics and dogmatics and the influence of the Wittenberg humanistic approach to biblical studies, coupled with a concern for pastoral care. His work on pastoral theology, Pastor (145–50), taught that the pastor’s first duty is to feed God’s flock his Word, from the books of Moses, the prophets, the apostles and Evangelists, delivering their teaching for the repentance and forgiveness of sins of God’s people. His careful treatment of the language and content of the texts made his biblical commentaries and postils useful tools for pastors.

Life and Work. Hemmingsen, a native of the island Lolland, began his university studies in Wittenberg in 1537 after preparatory training in Roskilde and Lund, where he learned Greek. He returned to Copenhagen in 1542 to accept a position as instructor of Greek, assuming a chair in dialectics in 1545 and in theology in 1553. His leadership helped shape Danish higher learning before and after his removal from office in 1579 because of his spiritualizing (“crypto-Calvinistic”) views of the Lord’s Supper. He spent the remainder of his days at the monastery at Roskilde, continuing to publish and serve as royal advisor. His work on scholarly method, the second half of which treated exegetical-homiletical method (1555, at least five subsequent editions to 1578), was a pioneering contribution to the formulation of rules for academic biblical studies. His postil on the traditional Gospel lessons for the church year appeared in 1561 and 1562 (at least six subsequent editions to 1585). His commentary on Romans (1562) was followed over the next decade by individual volumes on all the New Testament epistles, which were brought together in Commentaria in Omnes Epistolas Apostolorum (1571–1572, subsequent editions 1579, 1586). He also composed extended commentaries on Psalm 25 and Psalm 84 (1567, 1569) and on John’s Gospel (1590–1591). All his exegetical works were published in Latin; some were subsequently translated into Danish, German and English during the sixteenth century.

Interpretive Principles. Hemmingsen ascribed to Scripture the sole authority in the church for determining public teaching. Following Melanchthon’s example, the Danish theologian did not include a topic on Scripture in his dogmatic textbook, the Syntagma, but did treat its authority under “the certainty of the church’s teaching” (1578, 259–71). Philosophical demonstrations, though a good gift of God, cannot assure readers of Scripture’s truth, for they provide only the light of human reason and senses, whereas the teaching that the church derives from Scripture has the light of God. The Holy Spirit gives assurance that Scripture is true through external signs, such as miracles, the fulfillment of prophecies, the ongoing consensus of teaching in the true church and the endurance of the church under persecution. The internal sign of the reliability and authority of Scripture is experienced in the believer’s receiving the testimony of the Holy Spirit in the heart (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13–14). Hemmingsen ascribed authority also to the ancient creeds, Apostles’, Nicene and Athanasian, because they are digests of Scripture. Writings of the ancient church Fathers must be evaluated against the Word of Christ to determine whether they may be used or must be rejected as false.

Hemmingsen’s canon was that of his Wittenberg instructors. He distinguished the homologoumena from the antilegoumena, noting that for many Fathers, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, James and Jude (and “according to some” also Hebrews) lay “outside the canon.” In spite of this historical judgment, Hemmingsen treated these letters in his commentary on New Testament epistles in the same manner as he treated the other apostolic letters.

Hemmingsen’s De Methodo divides Scripture’s message into history and doctrine, doctrine into content (law and gospel) and signs (ceremonies and sacraments). God’s teaching became clearer at progressive stages of revelation, Moses expressing in aphorisms what the prophets explain fully, the prophets predicting what the apostles articulate fully. Hemmingsen’s commentaries emphasized the Old Testament foreshadowings and background of New Testament events. His expositions of the psalms interpreted them christologically. He regarded God’s provision of redemption for sinners in Christ as the heart of the message of all biblical writers (1578, on “Spiritus et Litera,” 201–9). The prophetic and apostolic writings are “the springs from which flow the Savior,” whose benefits, bestowed on the basis of God’s eternal plan through his universal grace, the church brings to those who are justified through faith (1571–1572, 5, 9). The analogia fidei, as taught in Wittenberg, is to guide all interpretation, according to the distinction of law and gospel, which Hemmingsen believed is found in God’s discourse after the fall with Adam and Eve and throughout his revelation thereafter.

Interpreters must command the original languages so that they can understand the text’s original sense. They must pay attention to the order and relationship among parts of a writing. Interpretation leads to proclamation of God’s truth and rejection of false teaching. This is accomplished through the uses of grammatical, dialectical and rhetorical analysis. Dialectical analysis examines the doctrine, authority, certainty, necessity and utility of a specific work. It identifies its principal question, or argument. Standard tools of analysis that Melanchthon developed out of the Aristotelian and humanist traditions aided Hemmingsen’s assessment of the biblical writers. Sermons fall into two categories, didactic and hortatory. The former treats topics or persons (as examples); the latter may persuade, rebuke or console.

The Copenhagen professor again formulated rules for biblical interpretation in a preface to his summary of Christian teaching for pastors, his Enchiridion (1557) (A1a-C2a). Much of the material in De Methodo was repeated, but Hemmingsen expanded his hermeneutical discussion with treatments of how to draw parallel passages together and how to evaluate seeming contradictions within Scripture. If the exact definition of terms in the contradicting passages, their precise contexts, concerns, purposes and modes of expression, as well as the times in which they are set, are examined, readers will see that the contradictions are only apparent (B1b–B8a). Hemmingsen recasts the order of Melanchthon’s loci communes, summarizing biblical teaching as gospel or promises in an initial section (treating God’s covenant of grace and Christ’s spiritual rule) and as law in three additional sections, regarding Christian living, the rule of the church and the societal walks of life.

In practice Hemmingsen’s treatment of biblical texts reflects the rhetorical/dialectical training and the theological orientation of his Wittenberg instructors, especially Melanchthon. He consistently employed the distinction of law and gospel and the Lutheran dogmatic categories within this distinction. The law disciplines the outer person and crushes the inner person with the accusation of sinfulness. The preaching of the gospel brings the forgiveness of sins to the repentant and results in the performance of good works. This takes place within the ongoing conflict between God and Satan (see the prefaces of the Commentarius … Epistolas and the Postilla). Sixteenth-century preachers were engaging in the same struggle against sin that those who proclaimed God’s Word had fought against the devil since Adam. Hemmingsen connected this preaching closely to the proper forms of worship in which it was set in the experience of the church.

In his commentaries, from the first in the 1560s to that on John in 1590 and 1591, Hemmingsen followed his method, introducing each epistle with a summary of its “argumentum,” including descriptions of its author; the occasion for writing; its scope, “question,” “status,” “material principle” or purpose; and its rhetorical structure. The chief idea of each chapter and a comment on its order and parts preceded the text’s “exegesis” and “observation regarding the teachings” of the chapter. (This was among the first uses of the word exegesis in this modern sense, according to Hagen, 183–84.) His comments guided readers through the organization of the epistles and their individual chapters, relating elements of the line of reasoning of the apostles to each other. Exegesis and doctrine were not presented in separate sections but were combined in extensive narrative glosses for each verse, occasionally with grammatical or philological treatment of a Greek word or phrase. Though he urged theological students to learn Hebrew, he did not comment on Hebrew vocabulary or syntax, not even in the commentaries on psalms. Hemmingsen did not formulate topics (loci communes) on each chapter, as did some contemporaries, but he did occasionally set forth the “members” or “articles” of the teaching of a passage, especially in his commentary on John, or offer readers theses on the doctrinal implications of a pericope. He frequently relied on biblical cross-references for interpretation. The voices of ancient church Fathers echo through his commentaries, providing explication or (rarely) a foil for his own construal of the text. He graced his comments with appropriate citations from ancient non-Christian authors as well. Although he consulted contemporary commentators, he did not enter into open criticism or appreciation of their interpretations.

Hemmingsen’s postil provides an enarratio that summarizes and organizes the content of the traditional Gospel lesson for each Sunday or festival. It then sets before the reader two to four topics (loci) that could form the chief thoughts for proclamation to the people. These sermon studies do not therefore present complete sermons, as did many contemporary postils, but only guidelines for study of the text and preparation of the homily. While not devoid of linguistic analysis and cross-references to enrich and reinforce the texts at hand, these notes tend more to offer direction for application to the lives of hearers.

Grounding his proclamation in the text, Hemmingsen included admonition to repentance, bestowal of the forgiveness of sins through the work of Christ and instruction for Christian living in his sermon notes.

Significance. Hemmingsen’s influence was not limited to his profound impact on the clergy of the kingdom of Denmark. His works were published in Germany and England and found widespread acceptance in his generation there. K. Hagen’s suggestion of Hemmingsen’s importance for the history of hermeneutics must be heeded. He was a significant representative of Wittenberg biblical interpretation in the period of confessionalization.

Bibliography. Works. Commentaria nes Epistolas Apostolorum … (Leipzig: Ernst Vögelin, 1571–1572); Commentariorum in Sacrosanctum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Euangelium Secundum Iohannem … (2 vols.; Basel: Conrad Waldkirch, 1590–1591); Commentarius in Epistolam Pauli ad Romanos (Leipzig: Ernst Vögelin, 1562); De Methodis Libri Duo … Posterior Uerò Ecclesiasten Siue Methodum Theologicam Interpretandi, Concionandique Continent (1555; Wittenberg: Johannes Crato, 1559); Enchiridion Theologicum Praecipua Verae Religionis Capita Breviter et Simplicter Explicate Continens (Wittenberg: Johannes Crato, 1557); Enarratio: Psalmi Octuagesimi quarti … (Copenhagen: Matthias Vinitor, 1569); Enarratio Psalmi Vigisimi Quinta … (Wittenberg: Schwertel, 1567); Pastor: Sive Pastoris Optimus Vivendi Agendique Modus (Leipzig: Ernst Vögelin, c. 1565); Postilla Seu Enarratio Evangeliorum, quae in Dominicis Diebus, et in Festis Sanctorum … Proponuntur … (Baltser Kaus: Christoph Barth, 1561); Syntagma: Institutionum Christianarum, Perspicuis Assertionibus ex Doctrina Prophetica et Apostolica Congestis … (Geneva: Eustathius Vignon, 1578).

Studies. K. Barnekow, Niels Hemmingsens Teologiska Åskådning (Lund: Gleerup, 1940); K. Hagen, “De Exegetica Methodo: Niels Hemmingsen’s De Methodis 1555,” in The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, ed. D. Steinmetz (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1990) 181–96; J. C. V. Johansen, “Preacher and Audience: Scandinavia,” in Preachers and People in the Reformation and Early Modern Period (Cologne: Brill Academic Publishers, 2001) 297–325; M. Jakubowski-Tiessen, “Niels Hemmingsen,” in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart Bd. 3, ed. H. D. Betz, et al. (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000) 1623; E. Madsen, “Er Calvin Niels Hemmingsens eksegetiske Forbillede?” Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 4 (1941) 1–10.

R. Kolb​

 

[davejonescue]

HEMMINGSEN, NIELS (1513–1600)

Context. Educated in Wittenberg under Martin *Luther and Philipp *Melanchthon, Hemmingsen became the leading Danish churchman and biblical scholar of his time. His exegetical work reveals his concurrent engagement with ethics and dogmatics and the influence of the Wittenberg humanistic approach to biblical studies, coupled with a concern for pastoral care. His work on pastoral theology, Pastor (145–50), taught that the pastor’s first duty is to feed God’s flock his Word, from the books of Moses, the prophets, the apostles and Evangelists, delivering their teaching for the repentance and forgiveness of sins of God’s people. His careful treatment of the language and content of the texts made his biblical commentaries and postils useful tools for pastors.

Life and Work. Hemmingsen, a native of the island Lolland, began his university studies in Wittenberg in 1537 after preparatory training in Roskilde and Lund, where he learned Greek. He returned to Copenhagen in 1542 to accept a position as instructor of Greek, assuming a chair in dialectics in 1545 and in theology in 1553. His leadership helped shape Danish higher learning before and after his removal from office in 1579 because of his spiritualizing (“crypto-Calvinistic”) views of the Lord’s Supper. He spent the remainder of his days at the monastery at Roskilde, continuing to publish and serve as royal advisor. His work on scholarly method, the second half of which treated exegetical-homiletical method (1555, at least five subsequent editions to 1578), was a pioneering contribution to the formulation of rules for academic biblical studies. His postil on the traditional Gospel lessons for the church year appeared in 1561 and 1562 (at least six subsequent editions to 1585). His commentary on Romans (1562) was followed over the next decade by individual volumes on all the New Testament epistles, which were brought together in Commentaria in Omnes Epistolas Apostolorum (1571–1572, subsequent editions 1579, 1586). He also composed extended commentaries on Psalm 25 and Psalm 84 (1567, 1569) and on John’s Gospel (1590–1591). All his exegetical works were published in Latin; some were subsequently translated into Danish, German and English during the sixteenth century.

Interpretive Principles. Hemmingsen ascribed to Scripture the sole authority in the church for determining public teaching. Following Melanchthon’s example, the Danish theologian did not include a topic on Scripture in his dogmatic textbook, the Syntagma, but did treat its authority under “the certainty of the church’s teaching” (1578, 259–71). Philosophical demonstrations, though a good gift of God, cannot assure readers of Scripture’s truth, for they provide only the light of human reason and senses, whereas the teaching that the church derives from Scripture has the light of God. The Holy Spirit gives assurance that Scripture is true through external signs, such as miracles, the fulfillment of prophecies, the ongoing consensus of teaching in the true church and the endurance of the church under persecution. The internal sign of the reliability and authority of Scripture is experienced in the believer’s receiving the testimony of the Holy Spirit in the heart (2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:13–14). Hemmingsen ascribed authority also to the ancient creeds, Apostles’, Nicene and Athanasian, because they are digests of Scripture. Writings of the ancient church Fathers must be evaluated against the Word of Christ to determine whether they may be used or must be rejected as false.

Hemmingsen’s canon was that of his Wittenberg instructors. He distinguished the homologoumena from the antilegoumena, noting that for many Fathers, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, James and Jude (and “according to some” also Hebrews) lay “outside the canon.” In spite of this historical judgment, Hemmingsen treated these letters in his commentary on New Testament epistles in the same manner as he treated the other apostolic letters.

Hemmingsen’s De Methodo divides Scripture’s message into history and doctrine, doctrine into content (law and gospel) and signs (ceremonies and sacraments). God’s teaching became clearer at progressive stages of revelation, Moses expressing in aphorisms what the prophets explain fully, the prophets predicting what the apostles articulate fully. Hemmingsen’s commentaries emphasized the Old Testament foreshadowings and background of New Testament events. His expositions of the psalms interpreted them christologically. He regarded God’s provision of redemption for sinners in Christ as the heart of the message of all biblical writers (1578, on “Spiritus et Litera,” 201–9). The prophetic and apostolic writings are “the springs from which flow the Savior,” whose benefits, bestowed on the basis of God’s eternal plan through his universal grace, the church brings to those who are justified through faith (1571–1572, 5, 9). The analogia fidei, as taught in Wittenberg, is to guide all interpretation, according to the distinction of law and gospel, which Hemmingsen believed is found in God’s discourse after the fall with Adam and Eve and throughout his revelation thereafter.

Interpreters must command the original languages so that they can understand the text’s original sense. They must pay attention to the order and relationship among parts of a writing. Interpretation leads to proclamation of God’s truth and rejection of false teaching. This is accomplished through the uses of grammatical, dialectical and rhetorical analysis. Dialectical analysis examines the doctrine, authority, certainty, necessity and utility of a specific work. It identifies its principal question, or argument. Standard tools of analysis that Melanchthon developed out of the Aristotelian and humanist traditions aided Hemmingsen’s assessment of the biblical writers. Sermons fall into two categories, didactic and hortatory. The former treats topics or persons (as examples); the latter may persuade, rebuke or console.

The Copenhagen professor again formulated rules for biblical interpretation in a preface to his summary of Christian teaching for pastors, his Enchiridion (1557) (A1a-C2a). Much of the material in De Methodo was repeated, but Hemmingsen expanded his hermeneutical discussion with treatments of how to draw parallel passages together and how to evaluate seeming contradictions within Scripture. If the exact definition of terms in the contradicting passages, their precise contexts, concerns, purposes and modes of expression, as well as the times in which they are set, are examined, readers will see that the contradictions are only apparent (B1b–B8a). Hemmingsen recasts the order of Melanchthon’s loci communes, summarizing biblical teaching as gospel or promises in an initial section (treating God’s covenant of grace and Christ’s spiritual rule) and as law in three additional sections, regarding Christian living, the rule of the church and the societal walks of life.

In practice Hemmingsen’s treatment of biblical texts reflects the rhetorical/dialectical training and the theological orientation of his Wittenberg instructors, especially Melanchthon. He consistently employed the distinction of law and gospel and the Lutheran dogmatic categories within this distinction. The law disciplines the outer person and crushes the inner person with the accusation of sinfulness. The preaching of the gospel brings the forgiveness of sins to the repentant and results in the performance of good works. This takes place within the ongoing conflict between God and Satan (see the prefaces of the Commentarius … Epistolas and the Postilla). Sixteenth-century preachers were engaging in the same struggle against sin that those who proclaimed God’s Word had fought against the devil since Adam. Hemmingsen connected this preaching closely to the proper forms of worship in which it was set in the experience of the church.

In his commentaries, from the first in the 1560s to that on John in 1590 and 1591, Hemmingsen followed his method, introducing each epistle with a summary of its “argumentum,” including descriptions of its author; the occasion for writing; its scope, “question,” “status,” “material principle” or purpose; and its rhetorical structure. The chief idea of each chapter and a comment on its order and parts preceded the text’s “exegesis” and “observation regarding the teachings” of the chapter. (This was among the first uses of the word exegesis in this modern sense, according to Hagen, 183–84.) His comments guided readers through the organization of the epistles and their individual chapters, relating elements of the line of reasoning of the apostles to each other. Exegesis and doctrine were not presented in separate sections but were combined in extensive narrative glosses for each verse, occasionally with grammatical or philological treatment of a Greek word or phrase. Though he urged theological students to learn Hebrew, he did not comment on Hebrew vocabulary or syntax, not even in the commentaries on psalms. Hemmingsen did not formulate topics (loci communes) on each chapter, as did some contemporaries, but he did occasionally set forth the “members” or “articles” of the teaching of a passage, especially in his commentary on John, or offer readers theses on the doctrinal implications of a pericope. He frequently relied on biblical cross-references for interpretation. The voices of ancient church Fathers echo through his commentaries, providing explication or (rarely) a foil for his own construal of the text. He graced his comments with appropriate citations from ancient non-Christian authors as well. Although he consulted contemporary commentators, he did not enter into open criticism or appreciation of their interpretations.

Hemmingsen’s postil provides an enarratio that summarizes and organizes the content of the traditional Gospel lesson for each Sunday or festival. It then sets before the reader two to four topics (loci) that could form the chief thoughts for proclamation to the people. These sermon studies do not therefore present complete sermons, as did many contemporary postils, but only guidelines for study of the text and preparation of the homily. While not devoid of linguistic analysis and cross-references to enrich and reinforce the texts at hand, these notes tend more to offer direction for application to the lives of hearers.

Grounding his proclamation in the text, Hemmingsen included admonition to repentance, bestowal of the forgiveness of sins through the work of Christ and instruction for Christian living in his sermon notes.

Significance. Hemmingsen’s influence was not limited to his profound impact on the clergy of the kingdom of Denmark. His works were published in Germany and England and found widespread acceptance in his generation there. K. Hagen’s suggestion of Hemmingsen’s importance for the history of hermeneutics must be heeded. He was a significant representative of Wittenberg biblical interpretation in the period of confessionalization.

Bibliography. Works. Commentaria nes Epistolas Apostolorum … (Leipzig: Ernst Vögelin, 1571–1572); Commentariorum in Sacrosanctum Domini Nostri Iesu Christi Euangelium Secundum Iohannem … (2 vols.; Basel: Conrad Waldkirch, 1590–1591); Commentarius in Epistolam Pauli ad Romanos (Leipzig: Ernst Vögelin, 1562); De Methodis Libri Duo … Posterior Uerò Ecclesiasten Siue Methodum Theologicam Interpretandi, Concionandique Continent (1555; Wittenberg: Johannes Crato, 1559); Enchiridion Theologicum Praecipua Verae Religionis Capita Breviter et Simplicter Explicate Continens (Wittenberg: Johannes Crato, 1557); Enarratio: Psalmi Octuagesimi quarti … (Copenhagen: Matthias Vinitor, 1569); Enarratio Psalmi Vigisimi Quinta … (Wittenberg: Schwertel, 1567); Pastor: Sive Pastoris Optimus Vivendi Agendique Modus (Leipzig: Ernst Vögelin, c. 1565); Postilla Seu Enarratio Evangeliorum, quae in Dominicis Diebus, et in Festis Sanctorum … Proponuntur … (Baltser Kaus: Christoph Barth, 1561); Syntagma: Institutionum Christianarum, Perspicuis Assertionibus ex Doctrina Prophetica et Apostolica Congestis … (Geneva: Eustathius Vignon, 1578).

Studies. K. Barnekow, Niels Hemmingsens Teologiska Åskådning (Lund: Gleerup, 1940); K. Hagen, “De Exegetica Methodo: Niels Hemmingsen’s De Methodis 1555,” in The Bible in the Sixteenth Century, ed. D. Steinmetz (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 1990) 181–96; J. C. V. Johansen, “Preacher and Audience: Scandinavia,” in Preachers and People in the Reformation and Early Modern Period (Cologne: Brill Academic Publishers, 2001) 297–325; M. Jakubowski-Tiessen, “Niels Hemmingsen,” in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart Bd. 3, ed. H. D. Betz, et al. (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2000) 1623; E. Madsen, “Er Calvin Niels Hemmingsens eksegetiske Forbillede?” Dansk Teologisk Tidsskrift 4 (1941) 1–10.

R. Kolb​

Thank you so much. That is more detailed info then I could find on any one site.