Of course it cannot be denied that the full development of this conception did not take place until late Lutheran times (Praetorius, Nicolai, Meisner). It is present, however, even in Johannes Gerhard, quite in the sense meant here. Hence Ritschl in Book IV of his Geschichte des Pietismus (II, pp. 3 ff.) interprets the introduction of this concept into Lutheranism as a Renaissance or an adoption of Catholic elements. He does not deny (p. 10) that the problem of individual salvation was the same for Luther as for the Catholic Mystics, but he believes that the solution was precisely opposite in the two cases. I can, of course, have no competent opinion of my own. That the atmosphere of Die Freiheit eines Christenmenschen is different, on the one hand, from the sweet flirtation with the liebem Jesulein of the later writers, and on the other from Tauler’s religious feeling, is naturally obvious to anyone. Similarly the retention of the mystic-magical element in Luther’s doctrines of the Communion certainly has different religious motives from the Bernhardine piety, the “Song of Songs feeling” to which Ritschl again and again returns as the source of the bridal relations with Christ. But might not, among other things, that doctrine of the Communion have favoured the revival of mystical religious emotions? Further, it is by no means accurate to say that (p. 11, op. cit.) the freedom of the mystic consisted entirely in isolation from the world. Especially Tauler has, in passages which from the point of view of the psychology of religion are very interesting, maintained that the order which is thereby brought into thoughts concerning worldly activities is one practical result of the nocturnal contemplation which he recommends, for instance, in case of insomnia. “Only thereby [the mystical union with God at night before going to sleep] is reason clarified and the brain strengthened, and man is the whole day the more peacefully and divinely guided by virtue of the inner discipline of having truly united himself with God: then all his works shall be set in order. And thus when a man has forewarned (= prepared) himself of his work, and has placed his trust in virtue; then if he comes into the world, his works shall be virtuous and divine” (Predigten, fol. 318). Thus we see, and we shall return to the point, that mystic contemplation and a rational attitude toward the calling are not in themselves mutually contradictory. The opposite is only true when the religion takes on a directly hysterical character, which has not been the case with all mystics nor even all Pietists. ↩
On this see the introduction to the following essays on the Wirtschaftsethik der Weltreligionen (not included in this translation: German in Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Religionssoziologie. —Translator’s Note). ↩
In this assumption Calvinism has a point of contact with official Catholicism. But for the Catholics there resulted the necessity of the sacrament of repentance; for the Reformed Church that of practical proof through activity in the world. ↩
See, for instance, Beza (De praedestinationis doctrina ex praelectionibus in Romans 9a, Raphael Eglinus exc. 1584), p. 133: “Sicut ex operibus vere bonis ad sanctificationis donum, a sanctificatione ad fidem—ascendimus: ita ex certis illis effectis non quamvis vocationem, sed efficacem illam et ex hac vocatione electionem et ex electione donum praedestinationis in Christo tam firmam quam immotus est Dei thronus certissima connectione effectorum et causarum colligimus. …” Only with regard to the signs of damnation is it necessary to be careful, since it is a matter of final judgment. On this point the Puritans first differed. See further the thorough discussion of Schneckenburger, Vergleichende Darstellung der lutherischen und reformierten Lehrbegriffe, Grüder, Stuttgart, 1855, who to be sure only cites a limited category of literature. In the whole Puritan literature this aspect comes out. “It will not be said, did you believe?—but: were you Doers or Talkers only?” says Bunyan. According to Baxter (The Saints’ Everlasting Rest, chap. XII), who teaches the mildest form of predestination, faith means subjection to Christ in heart and in deed. “Do what you are able first, and then complain of God for denying you grace if you have cause,” was his answer to the objection that the will was not free and God alone was able to insure salvation (Works of the Puritan Divines, IV, p. 155). The investigation of Fuller (the Church historian) was limited to the one question of practical proof and the indications of his state of grace in his conduct. The same with Howe in the passage referred to elsewhere. Any examination of the Works of the Puritan Divines gives ample proofs.
Not seldom the conversion to Puritanism was due to Catholic ascetic writings, thus, with Baxter, a Jesuit tract. These conceptions were not wholly new compared with Calvin’s own doctrine (Institutio Christianae, chap. I, original edition of 1536, pp. 97, 113). Only for Calvin himself the certainty of salvation could not be attained in this manner (p. 147). Generally one referred to 1 John 3:5 and similar passages. The demand for fides efficax is not—to anticipate—limited to the Calvinists. Baptist confessions of faith deal, in the article on predestination, similarly with the fruits of faith (“and that its—of regeneration proper evidence appears in the holy fruits of repentance and faith and newness of life”—Article 7 of the Confession printed in the Baptist Church Manual by J. N. Brown, D.D., Philadelphia, American Baptist Publication Society). In the same way the tract (under Mennonite influence), Oliif-Tacxken, which the Harlem Synod adopted in 1649, begins on page 1 with the question of how the children of God are to be known, and answers (p. 10): “
