True Christianity. Arndt Johann
equivalent to a worship of the letter. He assigned, in his fanaticism and morbid mysticism, a rank to an inner and direct word of the Divine Spirit, which he asserted that he received, far above that of the written word of God. He refused to make any distinction between the divine act of the justification of the believer, on the one hand, and the progressive sanctification of the believer, on the other. He taught that the two natures of Christ, the divine and the human, were so fused together, or, rather, that the flesh of Christ was so absolutely deified or converted into God himself, that no distinction between them remained, – that the regenerate could live without sin, etc. He succeeded, in spite of the crudeness, one-sidedness, and unsoundness of his doctrines, in attracting many disciples. His death, which occurred in 1561, a few years after Arndt's birth, did not terminate the widespread confusion which he had created in the Protestant Church; the dread of that sickly form of mysticism which he attempted to establish, long remained. The fear was naturally entertained that it might lead many astray, who, while they did not otherwise fraternize with Schwenkfeldt in his wild and absurd course, might be deluded by his claims to superior religious intelligence and holiness.
§ 15. The disastrous influences of the demagogue Thomas Münzer (born in 1490), and of his fanatical party, the Zwickau prophets, on sound doctrine and sound morals, as well as the blood which they had shed, were still vividly remembered. – Servetus, the Unitarian, had perished, but he left a seed behind; the doctrine of Christ's deity still remained a point of attack. And besides these false teachers, several others, who were originally connected in various modes with the Lutheran Church, promulgated at various times opinions which seemed to be subversive of all Scripture doctrine. – Agricola, who had originally been an active adherent of Luther, gradually departed from the faith. He unquestionably betrayed the interests of Protestantism by sanctioning the Augsburg Interim of 1548. He engaged in a controversy, at first with Melanchthon, and then with Luther himself, on the subject of the proper “Use of the law” – the Antinomistic controversy – maintaining that the law was no longer of importance to the believer, and that the Gospel alone should be preached. He died in 1566, when Arndt was about eleven years old. The confusion in the church, which he created by his dangerous sentiments on several points, was long painfully felt. – The Osiandrian controversy, respecting Justification, and its relation to Sanctification, began in 1549, and closed only when Arndt was already a student. – The Majoristic controversy originated in the public declaration made by G. Major, that “good works are necessary to salvation.” The fears which such a doctrine, that savored of popery, produced among orthodox and devout Lutherans, were excessive. Those who opposed Major, were alarmed by his unguarded expressions, and apprehended that the Gospel doctrine of Justification by faith in Christ alone, without human works or merit, would be endangered, unless they silenced him. The controversy, in its most energetic form, terminated about seven years after Arndt's birth, but the indirect effects of the misconceptions connected with the great topic of this controversy, were deeply felt by him. – The Synergistic controversy, relating to the question whether man could co-operate with the Holy Spirit in the work of his conversion, began in the year in which Arndt was born, and was maintained with great energy during several years. – The so-called Cryptocalvinistic controversy, referring mainly to the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, and involving certain important questions respecting the Person of Christ, commenced about three years before Arndt's birth, and agitated the church during many years. – These, and other subjects on which also controversies had arisen, were, in the good providence of God, at length calmly considered by learned and devout Lutheran theologians, conscientiously examined in the light of the divine Word, impartially decided, and set forth, in the year 1580, in the Formula of Concord, the last of the special Lutheran creeds, all the doctrines of which Arndt cordially received, as he repeatedly declared in an official manner on various occasions, in his writings, in his last will and testament, and on his death-bed. (See below §§ 2424, 2525.) The very great reverence with which he regarded this noble creed, and his attachment to it, are to be ascribed not only to the spotless purity of the doctrines which it sets forth, but also to the good work which it performed in successfully and permanently deciding several very important questions which had latterly arisen, and on which the preceding creeds had not authoritatively and fully pronounced. It is, however, obvious, that even after these storms subsided, the waves would long remain in commotion, and it was precisely in these troublous times that Arndt labored in the ministry.
§ 16. The catalogue of the difficulties which awaited him, is not yet exhausted. We have to add, as a part of the history of the times, when an extraordinary number of political and ecclesiastical contentions prevailed, the excitement of feeling which certain differences of doctrine between the Lutherans and the Reformed engendered, and which would never have risen to the fearful height in which history now exhibits it to us, if political power, controlled alternately by the two religious parties in some of the German principalities, had not been invoked by them. The awful death by fire, which terminated the career of Servetus (Oct. 27, 1553, two years before the birth of Arndt, and more than six years after the death of Luther), was decreed by the civil authorities of Geneva, but was sanctioned by Calvin and even the gentle Melanchthon – a sad example of the clouded views of men at that time respecting religious liberty and the right of civil rulers to punish men for their errors in the faith.
§ 17. In the Palatinate (the ancient Pfalz, the territories of which are now distributed among Bavaria, Prussia, etc.) the Lutheran Church had been established, and popery ceased to exist. But in 1560, a few years after Arndt's birth, the Elector, Frederick III., withdrew from the church, and adopted the Reformed faith and usages. His successor, Lewis VI., endeavored to restore the ascendency of Lutheranism; but after his brief reign, the authorities which succeeded, established “Calvinism” (the term employed in Church History) on a permanent basis. A similar ecclesiastico-civil revolution occurred in Bremen in 1562; fourteen Lutheran pastors and the Lutheran members of the City Council were expelled, and the city became Reformed. Such changes occurred elsewhere. Both parties were undoubtedly more or less honest in adhering to their doctrinal views; and both claimed the right to depose and exile those of an opposite faith, whenever the civil and political power was, in either case, directed by them.
§ 18. Let it now be remembered that these contending Protestants, Lutheran and Reformed or Calvinistic, were led by men respectively, who were confessedly intelligent, learned, and endowed with great abilities, many of whom were not only honest in expressing their convictions, but also conscientious in their conduct, whether they were governed by an erring or an enlightened conscience. That the latter is historically true, is demonstrated by their readiness, when they lost power, to submit to imprisonment or exile, rather than to renounce their respective creeds. They were all too well acquainted with Bible truth to look with other feelings than with horror on the popish creed. But while their own Protestant creed was very precious to their souls, they could not tolerate any departure from it, even if that departure was not in the direction “towards Rome.” That departure must, as they judged, necessarily be equivalent to a denial of God's truth, as they believed that they had found it in the Bible. Thus all were alike sensitive – all seemed to feel that if they tolerated any error, that error could not be trivial – it was, as far as it extended, a denial of God's truth. Could they safely assume the shame and guilt of such a sin? We may add, that we are here speaking only of the honest leaders of the Lutherans and the Reformed, of whom each man judged and acted for himself, as one who was accountable to God. No honest Reformed theologian would have screened a Reformed heretic from condemnation; and no honest Lutheran would, for a moment, have tolerated a nominal Lutheran, who rejected any part of the creed of the church.
§ 19. At the same time, all these men were fallible creatures, subject to all the errors of judgment, and to all the passions and infirmities incident to fallen man. They often supposed that their intentions were pure, when selfish motives governed them, and their jealous guardianship of God's truth was combined with a jealous love for their personal opinions. It was under these circumstances, when each party watched with extreme jealousy over the purity of the faith, as adopted by it, and when, besides, many private interests – personal, political, and pecuniary – exercised vast influence, that Arndt entered on his labors. – We have introduced the above details, in order to explain his declarations in the preface to Book I. § 8Book I. § 8, that he rejects the Synergistic, Majoristic, etc., errors, and entertains no other views