179 § 16. No violence was publicly offered to the fundamental articles of religion, as professed by the Lutheran church: nor Lutheranism, died 1617.-Hoe was nobly born at Vienna; was a court preacher, and a strenuous adversary of and died in 1645.the Reformed; Jo. Bened. Carpzov, prof. of theology at Leipsic, wrote Isagoge in Libros Symbol., and died 1657.-His son Jo. Bened. Carpzov, also prof. of theology at Leipsic, and famed for his Rabbinic learning, died 1699. His brother Sam. Bened. Carpzov, court preacher at Dresden, died 1707.-Jo. Tarnovius, prof. of theology at Rostock, a good interpreter, died 1629.-Paul Tarnovius, a kinsman of the former, and a prof. at Rostock, also a biblical interpreter, died in 1633.-Affelmann (or von Affeln,) was an acute but angry disputant, prof. of theology at Rostock, and died 1624.-Lubin,professor, first of poetry, and then of theology, at Rostock, was an elegant scholar, and a good interpreter of Paul's Epistles; died 1621. -Polycarp Lyser, prof. of theology at Wittemberg, a zealous defender of Lutheranism, died 1610.-His son, Polycarp, prof. of theology at Leipsic, also an acute polemic, died 1633.-The brother of the last, William Lyser, was prof. of theol. at Wittemb., and died in 1649.-Walther, the father prof. of theol. at Helmst., and then general superintendent of East Friesland, died at Zelle, 1662.-Walther, the son, was prof. of mathematics, and then of theology at Wittemberg, and died 1692. -Hildebrand, prof. of theology and ecclesiastical antiquities at Helmstadt, and then upper superintendent at Luneburg, died 1671.-J. V. Andreæ, the son of John, and grandson of the famous chancellor James Andrea of Tubingen, sustained various offices, court preacher, consistorial counsellor, &c. He was a great satirical genius, as well as profoundly learned; and was supposed to be the author of the Rosicrucian comedy; died 1654, aged 68.—Solomon Glass, author of Philologia Sacra, was born 1593, became prof. of Hebrew and Greek, and then of theology, at Jena, and lastly, general superintendent at Gotha, where he died, 1656. He was learned and pious.-Calovius, very prof. at Königsburg, rector at Dantzig, and professor of theology at Wittem- would any one easily have found toleration among the Lutheran doctors, if he had ventured to forsake, or to invalidate, the doctrines clearly defined and explained in what are called the Symbolical books. But in more modern times, from various causes, the high authority, once possessed by those rules of faith and doctrine, has, in many places, been much weakened and diminished. And hence arises the liberty, enjoyed by those who are not professed teachers in the church, of dissenting from the symbolical books; and of expressing that dissent at pleasure, both orally and in their writings. Formerly, such as opposed any article of the public religion, or disseminated new opinions among the people, were judicially arraigned; and could seldom escape without some loss of honour and emoluments, unless they would abjure their opinions. But no one feared any thing of this kind after the principle, which the Arminians first zealously propagated, had gradually made its way among the Lutheran churches in the latter part of the seventeenth century; namely, that every man is accountable died, 1698, aged 58.-Henry Müller, a friend of Spener, preacher and prof. at Rostock, known by his practical writings, died 1675, aged 44.-Jo. Müller, a preacher at Hamburg, and bitter opposer of Henry Müller and Jac. Boehman, died 1672, aged 74.-Schomer of Lubec, professor of theology at Rostock, died 1693, aged 45; and was a man of general knowledge.-Schmid, a native of Alsace and prof. at Strasburg, was learned in the oriental languages, and distinguished as a biblical interpreter. His Lat. translation of the Bible, and comment. on several books, did him much credit: he died 1696, aged 79.-Kortholt was professor of theology at Rostock, and then at Kiel, where he was vice-chancellor, and died 1694, aged 61. He advanced church history, and promoted piety and religious knowledge in the country around him.-Lucas Osiander, senior, (son of Andrew Osiander, senior,) was court preacher, and consistorial counsellor at Stutgard, and employed in promoting the reception of the Formula of Concord. He abridged and continued the Magdeburg centuries; and died 1604, aged 73.-Andrew Osiander, (son of the former,) became chancellor at Tubingen, and died 1617, aged 55, leaving nine children. He published a Latin Bible with notes.— Lucas Osiander, junior, (son of Lucas Osiander, senior,) prof. of theology, and chancellor at Tubingen; a violent polemic and particularly hostile to Menzer and Arnd; died 1638, aged 67.—John Adam Osiander, (son of Jo, Balthazar Osiander, superintendent of Vaihingen,) was court preacher at Stutgard, prof. of Greek, and then of theology, and finally chancellor, at Tubingen; a polemic divine; died 1697, aged 75.-Phil. Jac. Spener, of upper Alsace, preacher at Strasburg, Frankfort, and at the court of Dresden, and provost of Berlin, where he died 1705, aged 76. He was learned and eloquent, and a great promoter of piety; and will be noticed hereafter.- Meyer, well read in ecclesiastical antiquities, was professor of theology at Helmstadt, where he died, 1693. He wrote Commentar, de recondita Veteris Eccles. Theologia; and published Justell's Codex Canonum Ecclesia Universa.-Bechmann was professor at Jena, and died in 1703. Tr.] to God only for his religious opinions; and that it is wrong for the state to punish any man for his erroneous faith, provided he does nothing to disturb the public tranquillity. It were to be wished that this liberty of opinion, (which every one will approve in proportion to his equity and his confidence in his own virtue,) had not degenerated into the unbridled licentiousness of treating every thing sacred and salutary with utter contempt, and of attacking, with amazing wantonness, the honour both of religion and its ministers. § 17. The study of the sacred Scriptures was never intermitted among the Lutherans; nor were they, at any time, without skilful interpreters of them, and trusty guides of those interpreters. To say nothing of Tarnovius, Gerhard, Hackspan, Calixtus, Erasmus Schmid, and the many other famous expounders of the divine books, there was published, at the very time which some tax with the greatest neglect of this kind of studies, the immortal work of Solomon Glassius, entitled Philologia Sacra; than which, nothing can be a more useful help for understanding the language of the divine Scriptures. Still it must be confessed, that during a large part of the century, most of the doctors in the universities were more occupied in explaining and defending with subtilty the dogmas and tenets of the church, than in expounding that volume whence all solid knowledge of them must be derived. Yet if in this there was any thing reprehensible, the subsequent theologians caused the interests of the Lutheran religion to derive little injury from it. For as soon as the commotions produced by the wars and controversies, particularly with the papists, had begun to subside, great numbers applied themselves to the exposition of the Scriptures; to which they were excited and quickened very much, if I do not misjudge, by the industry of those Dutch theologians, who followed after Cocceius. At the head of these later interpreters may be placed, perhaps, Sebastian Schmid; whom at least, no one has exceeded in the number of his productions. Next to him, Abraham Calovius, Martin Geyer, Schomer, and others, most deserve to be mentioned. The reader may here consult Jo. lib. ii. cap. viii. p. 1686, &c. Fran. Buddeus, Isagoge in Theologiam, The Pietistic controversies, though otherwise most lamentable, were at last attended with this among other consequences, that greater numbers than before applied themselves to the careful reading of the holy Scriptures, and to meditation on their contents. The merits of these expositors, as is common, were unequal. Some investigated merely the import of the words and the sense of the text. Others, besides this, encountered opposers; and either confuted their false expositions, or applied the true to the subversion of their erroneous opinions. Others, after exhibiting briefly the sense of the [inspired] writer, applied it to morals and to instruction in christian duty. Some are represented, and perhaps not unjustly, as having, by assiduously reading the books of the Cocceians, fallen into some of their faults; and as inconsiderately turning the sacred histories into allegories, by searching after recondite and remote senses rather than the obvious sense of the words. § 18. The principal divines of this century, at first, presented the doctrines of religion derived from the Scriptures, in a loose and disconnected form, after the manner of Melancthon; that is, arranged under general heads (Loci Communes): yet this did not prevent them from employing the terms, the distinctions, and the definitions of the then reigning and admired Peripatetic philosophy, in the explanation and statement of particular doctrines. Afterwards, George Calixtus, who was himself addicted to the Aristotelian philosophy, first clothed theology in a philosophic dress; that is, reduced it to the form of a science, or system of truths: but he was censured by many, not so much for doing such a thing, as because he did not give to this most sacred science a suitable form. For he divided the whole science into three parts, the object, the subject, and the means; which, though accordant with the precepts of Aristotle, to whom he was exclusively attached, was, in the opinion of some, an unsuitable distribution'. 1 [This distribution into the object, subject, and means in theology, may be understood, by considering what parts of theology he placed under each of these heads. Under the first, he considered man's supreme good, the immortality of the soul, the resurrection, the last judgment, eternal blessedness and damnation. Under the second, he A number of the considered the doctrines concerning God, creation, man's state of innocency and apostasy, with its consequences. Under the third, he considered the doctrines concerning the grace of God, the merits of Christ, his person and offices, faith and justification, the word of God, the sacraments, conversion, good works, &c. Tr.] best teachers, however, eagerly adopted that arrangement; and even in our times there are some who commend it, and follow it in practice. Some arranged religious doctrines in a different manner: but they had not many imitators. In the meantime, there were many respectable and pious men, all through the century, who were very much displeased with this mode of teaching theology philosophically, and of combining sacred truths with the dictates of philosophy: they earnestly, desired to see all human subtilties and nice speculation laid aside, and theology exhibited just as God exhibits it in the holy Scriptures; that is, in a simple, perspicuous, popular form, cleared and freed wholly from any philosophical fetters. These persons were gratified to some extent, as the century drew to a close, when Philip James Spener, and not a few others, animated by his exhortations and example, began to treat on religious subjects with more freedom and clearness; and when the Eclectics drove the Peripatetic philosophy from the schools. Spener could not, indeed, persuade all to follow his method; yet he persuaded a great many. Nor can there be any doubt, that from this time onward, theology acquired a more noble and agreeable aspect. Polemic theology experienced much the same fortunes as dogmatic. For it was, for the most part, destitute of all elegance and perspicuity, so long as Aristotle had dominion in the theological schools: but after his banishment, it gradually received some degree of light and polish. Yet we must acknowledge, with regret, that the common faults of disputants were not effaced, even after those times. For if we turn over the pages of the earlier or the later religious controversialists of this century, we find few whom we can truly pronounce desirous of nothing but the advancement of truth, or not deceived and led away by their passions. § 19. Our theologians were tardy in cultivating moral theology. Nor, if we except a few eminent men, such as John Arnd and John Gerhard, and others who treated in a popular way of the formation of the soul to the true and internal worship of God, and of the duties of men; was there a single excellent and accurate writer on the science of morals in all the first part of the century. And hence those who laboured to elucidate what are called cases of conscience, were held in estimation: |