Page 221

Page 221

221 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA syneretimm

preface, with express reference to the syncretism at Rinteln and a " synopsis of the errors of Calixtus and his accomplices." . The obvious

3. The purpose was the exclusion of all ;yn Wittenberg cretists from the. Lutheran Church, Consensus. and, in a less degree,, the binding of all, other Lutherans under a new confession, including, such eccentric doctrines as the knowledge of OldTestament believers of the whole doctrine of, the Trinity, the real faith of baptized infants, and the ubiquity of the human nature of Christ to all be-. lievers. The main effect of its adoption would. have been the rehabilitation of the idea of the one true. church, visible and invisible, namely, the Lutheran, with an absolute, unimprovable body of dogma as an exclusive ecclesiastical norm. Friedrich Ulrich Calixtus took up the defense of all his father's particular ideas, publishing Demonstrata liquidissima (1667), a running commentary on the Consensus,, attempting sometimes to show the baselessness of the meanings attributed, to his father and his followers, sometimes the accordance of these with the confessions, and sometimes the intrusion of the opinions. of the authors into the Consensus as. though they were doctrines of the church,, thus opening the, arbitrary multiplication. of dogmas indefinitely. A new and professional disputant appeared a+. Wit-, tenberg, fEgidius Strauch, who in a Vindicates (1668) discharged a flood of mendacious invective and sophistry against the younger Calixtus. This was followed by Do Deo uno (1667) by Deutsehmann, son-in-law of Calovius, who, in turn,: followed with Locos et controversias syntagmatis antisyncretistici (1668), in which the tabulated Calixtine errors reached the number of 120. Calixtus answered the last two with .writings, and against Strauch he brought formal charges of libel. Strauch responded by a joint legal opinion of the juristic faculties of the three universities, and now the conflict was waged back and forth from behind the battlements of legal authorities, while the. polemics of Strauch, said to have been prepared- by Calovius, now produced. in German, greatly incensed the public-

Seeing Seeing that the, proposed Consensus,:threatened the freedom of learning in .the universities and might .further disrupt the Lutheran 4. Her- Church, and jeopardized the benefits of mann the treaty of Westphalia over against

Coming. the .Roman Catholics, the ,university now put forth an abler champion, Hermann Conring (q.v.), who, in Pietas academice Julie, made reply to Strauch and others. He maintained that there was no school of Calixtus and none desired by him; that the latter regarded free inquiry as .the safeguard of the Church. Helmstedt had been singled out because here the Word of God was treated as trustworthy and of itself authentic, while the confessions were treated impartially and considered valid in so far as they accord with.Scripture. Calovius confounds heresy with error, whereas the Calixtine ideas do not violate .express dogmas. The masses are not to be thrown into religious;confusion with these controversial questions; yet the intelligent are not to be denied a voice in the acceptance of a new confession. . The Consensus should first be proved by Scripture; and the princes must exercise their

were pressed upon them as errors, and a retraction or closer explanation was urged. Before the receipt of this the Rinteln theologians had replied with an Epistola apologetica (1662). For the people H. M. Eckart prepared a memoir (1662) setting forth that by schisms the Church violated its foremost mark of distinction, the commandment of love, and made itself the laughing-stock of the wicked; that it was specially incumbent upon Protestants to remove the disgrace; and, without mixing confessions or organizations, to promote amity and peace. The more violently incensed by their failure, the Wittenberg theologians now published their Epicrisis (1663), with a preface in which they threatened another edition of collective censures, this time against the theologians of Rinteln. This was followed by a fusillade of polemical, writings, among which De puncto discrepitatione inter Lutheranos et Calvinianos (1664) by Andreas Kohn; and, by Calovius a Grundlicher Beweis (1664) of 1,000 pages, to the effect that the Calvinistic error threatened the syncretistic innovation at Rinteln, followed by an An tapologia (Wittenberg, 1666) of 700 quarto pages, a resum6 of all points of contention from Calvin to the Rinteln colloquy.

The renewal of this controversy soon brought on its revival in Prussia and Brandenburg. In Konigs berg. Dreier had been protesting against

2' In the stigmatization of the efforts for Prussia and

Branden- church peace as syncretism, and de- burg. clared that the common faith must be sought in the ancient Church and not in the sum of contents of the new cdnfessions. The great elector of Brandenburg, Friedrich Wilhelm, following the example of his brother-in-law; Land grave Wilhelm, in an edict (June 2, 1662) deplored the schisms and local religious demoralization, and enjoined that clergy to be appointed must be pledged to silence except as to what is edifying. He. called a colloquy (Sept., 1662TMay, 1663)_ at Berlin, of three theologians from each.party. ..But the sus picions and over-scrupulousness of the Lutherans (instigated from Wittenberg) to relent in the con demnation of points rejected. by their confessions defeated the effort. A new edict of Sept. 16, 1664, forbade the use of abusive epithets and .the attrib uting of doctrines to their opponents not acknowl edged by them. Soon after a pledge was demanded of all the clergy to this and previous edicts. In vain the Lutheran clergy of Berlin made appeal to the universities and miuisteria. The elector summoned them before the consistory and demanded the pledge under pain of removal. E. S. Reinhardt and C. Lilius, and finally Paul Gerhardt (q.v.) lost their positions. By an order of June 6, 1667, the pledge was no longer demanded, but strict maintenance of the edict was now enjoined upon the consistory. A declaration of May 6, 1668, guaranteed to the Lu therans not only full religious liberty, but the peace ful discussion of disputed points.

The Wittenberg theologians meantime resumed a fresh onslaught on the syncretists. They published their great collection of Consilia theologica Witebergensia (1664), in eluding the Consensus repetitus fidei vere Lwtherance (ut sup.) retired since 1655. Calovius issued a special, edition in 1666, with a