Читать книгу: «True Christianity»

Introduction By The American Editor

Both the general purpose of the venerable Johann Arndt in writing his “True Christianity,” and also his own character and spirit, will be best exhibited by submitting to the reader a statement referring to his personal history. He was born, December 27th, 1555, in Ballenstädt, a town in the Duchy of Anhalt, where his father, Rev. Jacob Arndt, long labored as the chaplain of Duke Wolfgang, and the pastor of one of the Evangelical Lutheran congregations of the place. The latter was a devout and faithful minister of the Gospel, and a wise and affectionate father. He had, from the earliest period, devoted much attention to the religious education of his son, in the performance of which holy duty he was faithfully sustained by his excellent wife. Their efforts were abundantly blessed. The son, even in his early years, took great pleasure in reading the writings of Luther, and also acquired a fondness for those of Thomas á Kempis, of Tauler, and of others who breathed the same spirit of devotion. That this feature of his religious character did not undergo any essential change in his riper years, appears from the circumstance that he was one of the first who collected, arranged, and republished the religious tracts of Stephen Prætorius, a Lutheran divine of an eminently devout spirit. These were subsequently re-edited by Martin Statius, who prefixed the title: Spiritual Treasury (Geistliche Schatzkammer), to the collection. This book of devotion was highly prized by Spener, has often been reprinted, is found in many German households, and well deserves to be translated, and thus made accessible to the English religious public.

§ 2. In his tenth year Arndt lost his father, but the orphan soon found friends who, in the good providence of God, enabled him to continue the studies which he had commenced with distinguished success under the guidance of his father. After completing his preparatory education in the schools of Halberstadt and Magdeburg, he proceeded, in the year 1576, to the university of Helmstedt, which had recently been established. In the course of the following year, 1577, he went as a student to the university of Wittenberg, soon after the official recognition of the principles embodied in the Formula of Concord (published in 1580), by which that institution received a strictly Lutheran character, and every tendency to any other doctrinal system was successfully arrested. It was here that he formed a very close union, first as a student, and then as a personal friend, with the eminent Polycarp Leyser, the elder of that name, whose firmness and devotion in sustaining the distinctive features of Lutheranism have assigned to him a high position in the history of his Church. – After Arndt had, even at this early age, acquired distinction as an accomplished private lecturer on Natural Philosophy, etc., as well as on the Epistle to the Romans, Leyser furnished him with an unusually favorable recommendation to the professors in Strasburg. This city, the government and population of which were exclusively Lutheran, had not yet been subjected to that great calamity which afterwards befell it, when the despot and bigot, Louis XIV., incorporated it with the French monarchy, and by assigning undue privileges to papists, and adopting other tyrannical measures, opened an avenue for the introduction, not merely of an inferior Romanic language, but also of the errors and superstitions of the Church of Rome.

§ 3. Arndt continued his theological studies in Strasburg, under the direction of Prof. Pappus, who was also distinguished for his devotion to the genuine Lutheran faith. In the year 1579 he proceeded to Basel, where, under the gentle sway of Sulcer, the Lutheran faith had acquired influence and authority. In this city he was temporarily engaged as the tutor of a young Polish nobleman; the latter, on one of their excursions, when Arndt had accidentally fallen into the Rhine, succeeded in seizing his sinking preceptor by the hair of his head, and thus became the means, in the hands of God, of saving a life of incalculable value, designed to prove an ever-flowing source of blessings to the Church.

§ 4. During this whole period Arndt occupied himself with the study of medicine, in connection with his strictly theological studies; it is possible that he would have ultimately chosen the practice of medicine as the business of his life, if a severe illness had not intervened. After his recovery, he believed it to be his duty to renounce his personal tastes, and he thenceforth consecrated himself entirely to the service of the Church. His medical and chemical occupations, although not abandoned, were afterwards regarded by him only as a recreation.

§ 5. He returned, in 1581 or 1582, to his native place, and labored for some time as a teacher, until he was called by his prince, Joachim Ernest, to be the pastor of the congregation in Badeborn, a village in the Duchy of Anhalt; he was, accordingly, ordained in the month of October of the same year. It was here, too, that he was married, October 31, 1583, to Anna Wagner, the daughter of an eminent jurist, with whom he passed the remaining thirty-eight years of his life in unclouded domestic happiness. She was a devout Christian woman, who cheered and encouraged Arndt amid his many cares, alleviated every burden to the extent of her ability, and was always regarded by him with tenderness and gratitude. They were childless; but many an orphan found that their hearts could overflow with love towards the young and destitute – a love as full of warmth as beloved children have ever experienced parental love to be.

§ 6. In this first pastoral charge of Arndt, the unhappy state of affairs subjected him, particularly during the latter part of the seven years which he spent in it, to a “Lutheran martyrdom,” as Tholuck expresses himself (Herzog. Encyk. I., 536). The duke, John George, who now reigned (a relative of the palsgrave, or count palatine, Casimir, a zealous Calvinist), after various inward struggles, abandoned the Lutheran faith, and, in the year 1596, publicly adopted the Reformed faith, a few years after the transactions to which we now refer. Even Protestant rulers, who had not yet learned the theory that a union of church and state can operate only perniciously, perpetually interfered in the internal affairs of the church. – At this period it was the custom of Lutheran pastors, when they administered the rite of Baptism, to follow the liturgical form which prescribed “exorcism.” This feature of the whole baptismal form, which was introduced as early as the third century, or even earlier (before the days of Tertullian and Origen), consisted simply in a sentence adjuring the evil spirit to depart from the subject of Baptism. The early practice had, like others, been gradually associated, after the rise and development of popery, with superstitious ideas, such as was also the case with the Lord's Supper, until it assumed an absurd and even revolting form. At the period of the Reformation, Zwingli and Calvin (Inst. IV., c. 15, 19; c. 19, 24) rejected the whole form of exorcism. Luther and Melanchthon, on the other hand, after discarding the popish excrescences, believed that the scriptural doctrine which the early form involved or suggested, authorized the retention of the practice, when restricted to a very plain and simple formula, expressive of a scriptural truth. – Now, at that period, as it is well known, unfriendly feelings, engendered by various causes, existed to a certain extent, between the heads respectively of the Reformed and the Lutheran churches, in consequence of which even harmless customs which none would, under ordinary circumstances, either advocate or condemn with partisan feeling, assumed a confessional character. Such was the case with the purified and simple Lutheran baptismal sentence containing the “exorcism.”

§ 7. Arndt's course in this matter has often been misunderstood; as it, however, demonstrates him to have been alike a very firm and conscientious man, and also an uncompromising supporter of the distinctive doctrines and usages of the Lutheran Church, the following details may be appropriately furnished. – The language which Luther retained in his form for Baptism (Taufbüchlein), after omitting all popish and superstitious practices, was the following. Between the prayer and the reading of Mark 10:13-16, the pastor says: “I adjure thee, thou unclean spirit, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, that thou go out and depart from this servant of Jesus Christ, Amen.” – Luther understood the form to be a declaration or distinct confession of the doctrine of Original Sin, and a renunciation of Satan. Still, the Lutheran Church, as such, never recognized the necessity of this ancient form, and its confessional writings never allude to it. After the excitement of feeling peculiar to Arndt's age, had been allayed by time, the Lutheran Church regarded the whole as a mere adiaphoron, that is, a “thing indifferent,” not essentially involving any principle whatever, inasmuch as the doctrine of Original Sin had already been very explicitly set forth and confessed in her Symbolical Books. Such was the opinion of the eminent Lutheran dogmatical writers, Gerhard, Quenstedt, Hollaz, etc.; and men like Baier and Baumgarten even advocated the discontinuance of the practice. It is no longer retained in any prominent manner in the Lutheran Church. – But in the age in which Arndt lived, who was not a man that would obstinately cling to a mere form, the rejection of the formula of Exorcism did involve a principle; for, under the peculiar circumstances, that rejection might be understood to be, first, a rejection of the doctrine of Original Sin, and, secondly, an affirmation that the children of believing parents were in the kingdom of heaven, even before they had received Baptism. But all this seemed to conflict with the Pauline doctrine that all are “by nature the children of wrath.” Eph. 2:3. While, then, J. Ben. Carpzov, the distinguished interpreter of the Symbolical Books, who died in 1557, decides that the “Exorcism” is in itself a matter of indifference, and may without scruple be dropped, he nevertheless holds that if the omission of it should be understood as a denial of the Scripture doctrine of the corruption of human nature (Original Sin), it becomes, in such a case, a matter of principle to retain the formula. (Isagoge, etc., p. 1122 ff.; 1608.) Walch, the other eminent interpreter of the Symbolical Books (Introductio, etc.), does not refer to the matter at all, as it is no essential part of the Lutheran Creed. But Arndt, who was a calm, sagacious, and conscientious observer, and who may justly be considered as claiming that, in forming a judgment respecting him, we should not overlook the spirit of his times, apprehended that the suppression of the “exorcism” was secretly designed to be the forerunner of the suppression of the entire Lutheran faith, which constituted the life of his soul; he could not, under such circumstances, consent to endanger his most precious treasure.

§ 8. Now the duke, John George, after his virtual adoption of the Reformed faith and practice, issued a peremptory order that the formula of Exorcism should no longer be employed in his dominions at the baptism of any infant. Arndt, who was characterized by a childlike submission to those in authority, as long as matters of principle were not involved, could not renounce his faith in God's word, and, especially, his personal conviction of the natural depravity of the human heart. He might have consented to drop a mere form; but he saw here an entering wedge, which justly alarmed him. His apprehensions were subsequently proved to have been only too well founded, when, soon afterwards, Luther's Catechism was suppressed, and another substituted in its place. Hence, as he could not renounce a prominent feature of the Lutheran creed, he firmly and positively refused to obey the ducal command. He remarked, in the written statement which embodied his reasons for refusing to obey, and which was submitted to the civil authorities, that his conscience would not allow him to comply with such a demand of the secular authority – that the orthodox fathers, who had, during thirteen centuries, connected “exorcism” with Baptism, understood it in accordance with the mind and true sense of the Scriptures (ex mente et vero sensu Scripturæ) – that it was, therefore, by no means “an impious ceremony” (as the civil ruler, a layman, had thought proper to designate it), – that he must necessarily abide by the decision of his conscience – and, that he would humbly submit to any sentence which his prince might pronounce in the case. The date which he affixed to the document, is Sept. 10, 1590. That sentence, which was soon afterwards proclaimed, deposed Arndt from his office, and banished him from the ducal territories. The reader of Book I. of the “True Christianity,” will now understand, after observing the earnestness with which the author insists on the doctrine of Original Sin, or the depravity of human nature, that he could not conscientiously take any step which would, even indirectly, involve a denial of that sad truth of the Bible, – a truth to which his knowledge of his own heart daily testified.

§ 9. But the Divine Head of the Church did not depose this faithful minister. At the very time when Arndt seemed to be homeless and friendless, two important posts were offered to him – one in Mansfeld, the other in Quedlinburg, an important city, which, after belonging to various rulers, has at last been incorporated with the monarchy of Prussia. The city adopted the Lutheran faith in 1539. Arndt decided to make this place his home, and he labored here with eminent success, during a period of seven years, as the pastor of the church of St. Nicholas. However, he also endured much affliction in this new charge, and his holy zeal and devout spirit, while fully appreciated by intelligent and enlightened believers, were misunderstood and even hated by others, so that he longed to be transferred to another field of labor.

§ 10. He was at length permitted to depart, and removed to the city of Brunswick, situated in the territory of the duke of Brunswick; it aspired at that time to become a “free city,” subject directly to the German emperor. The warfare between the duke and the city, during Arndt's residence in the latter, subjected him to many sore trials. His abode in it, extending from 1590 to 1608, is specially interesting, as he then presented to the religious community Book I. of his “True Christianity.” Dr. A. Wildenhahn, who has, in recent times, furnished us with various charming volumes, descriptive of the times, respectively, of Luther, Spener, Paul Gerhardt, etc., in which he combines “fiction and truth,” has selected this period of Arndt's history, as the one to which he dedicates his two delightful volumes, entitled “Johannes Arndt” (Leipzig, 1861). This author complains that he found it a difficult task to collect full and authentic accounts of Arndt's life. Still, he obtained access to various documents in the archives of the city of Brunswick, and in the royal library in Dresden, which had not been previously examined even by Arndt's best biographer, the Rev. Frederick Arndt, of Berlin; and these materially assisted him in preparing his own work.¹

§ 11. During the earlier years of Arndt's residence in Brunswick, as a co-pastor of the church of St. Martin, his life was comparatively peaceful and happy. The purity of his character, the soundness and power of his doctrine, and the diligence and fidelity manifested in his pastoral labors, could not fail to command the respect, and attract the love of all candid persons. But he was at length subjected to trials of a new and painful character, and became the victim of the hostile and persecuting spirit of men from whom a very different course of conduct might have reasonably been expected. The origin of these new difficulties has not always been clearly understood; while some have regarded Arndt as worthy of the censures of those who assailed him, others are disposed to condemn those assailants in unqualified terms. It is strange that, even at this comparatively remote period, such judgments are sometimes expressed in language which betrays personal feeling rather than it announces the calm judgment of a later and disinterested generation.

§ 12. It is here necessary to cast a glance at the history of the times which preceded and followed the eventful year 1555, in which Arndt was born, a year ever memorable as the one in which the signing of the articles of the Peace of Augsburg secured a temporary external repose for the Lutheran Church. This “Peace” terminated at least the horrors which had followed the introduction, in 1548, of the Augsburg Interim, by which the newly-established Protestant doctrine was seriously endangered. The provisions of this Interim were enforced with such merciless tyranny by popish authorities, that in South Germany alone about four hundred faithful Lutheran pastors, who could not conscientiously accede to an arrangement which might possibly restore the full authority of the errors and superstitions of Rome, were driven, as exiles, with their families, from their homes. The spirit of the Christian martyrs of the early ages of the Church revived in these heroic men, and they clung with undying tenacity to their holy faith.

§ 13. That faith now encountered new enemies, who did not resort to fire and the sword, but who adopted more insidious means for corrupting divine truth; and again, assaults like theirs, only increased the jealousy with which the genuine Lutherans guarded the purity of their doctrinal system. It was the only gift of heaven, which sin and Satan could not touch, and which retained all its unsullied holiness. The soul of man had become corrupt; the body was subject to disease and death; the world, fair as it was, and rich in the gifts of God, had nevertheless been made by sin to bring forth thorns and thistles. But the Gospel truth, which conducted men to Christ and heaven, remained in all its purity and power. These men were willing to suffer and die, but while they did live, they could not relax the grasp with which they held fast to evangelical truth. Now, amid the political and religious commotions of that stormy age, could we expect that devout men should say, “Peace, peace;” when there was no peace? (Jerem. 6:14.)

§ 14. Let us illustrate this subject. Schwenkfeldt, for instance (born in 1490; died, 1561), an opponent of both the Lutherans and the Reformed, as well as of the Papists, and, accordingly, constantly engaged in controversies with all parties, declared that Luther's uncompromising determination to maintain the authority of the written word of revelation, the Bible, was 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 except those which are set forth in the Lutheran Symbolical Books.

§ 20. When he commenced his labors in Brunswick, he was the youngest member of the “ministerium” of the city, that is, of the college composed of the pastors of the several city churches, all of which at that time strictly adhered to the Lutheran creed. He had long lamented that, in consequence of the infelicity of the times, which caused endless doctrinal controversies, the parties of which were many, Papists, Mystics, Unitarians, Reformed, Lutherans, etc., the attention of many persons was diverted from the practical duties of a Christian life, and directed exclusively to controversies on points of doctrine; the result was, that the understanding was actively exercised, but the heart was not properly affected. Such considerations induced him to write Book I. of his “True Christianity.” It was his object to show that God demands a holy life, proceeding from faith in Christ, and that no jealousy concerning the purity of the creed will atone for the absence of the fruits of the Spirit, as exhibited in the life and conduct of the individual. Hence he insists with a warmth unusual in that excited and controversial age, on repentance, on faith in Christ, and on a holy life. Possibly, the apparently sweeping assertions which occasionally occur in his writings, to the effect that the majority of his contemporaries lacked a heavenly spirit, acquired their sombre hue in consequence of the publicity given to human frailties, and the retirement and shade in which vast numbers of holy men preferred to dwell. His Book I., which constitutes the principal part of the work, was first published in Jena, in the year 1605; a second and improved edition appeared in 1607.