The Lutheran emphasis on penitent grief is foreign to the spirit of ascetic Calvinism, not in theory, but definitely in practice. For it is of no ethical value to the Calvinist; it does not help the damned, while for those certain of their election, their own sin, so far as they admit it to themselves, is a symptom of backwardness in development. Instead of repenting of it they hate it and attempt to overcome it by activity for the glory of God. Compare the explanation of Howe (Cromwell’s chaplain 1656–58) in “Of Men’s Enmity Against God and of Reconciliation Between God and Man,” Works of the Puritan Divines, p. 237: “The carnal mind is enmity against God. It is the mind, therefore, not as speculative merely, but as practical and active that must be renewed,” and, p. 246: “Recondliation … must begin in (1) a deep conviction … of your former enmity. … I have been alienated from God. … (2) (p. 251) a clear and lively apprehension of the monstrous iniquity and wickedness thereof.” The hatred here is that of sin, not of the sinner. But as early as the famous letter of the Duchess Renata d’Este (Leonore’s mother) to Calvin, in which she speaks of the hatred which she would feel toward her father and husband if she became convinced they belonged to the damned, is shown the transfer to the person. At the same time it is an example of what was said above [see here] of how the individual became loosed from the ties resting on his natural feelings, for which the doctrine of predestination was responsible. ↩
“None but those who give evidence of being regenerate or holy persons ought to be received or counted fit members of visible Churches. Where this is wanting, the very essence of a Church is lost,” as the principle is put by Owen, the Independent-Calvinistic Vice-Chancellor of Oxford under Cromwell (Inquiry Into the Origin of Evangelical Churches). Further, see the following essay (not translated here. —Translator) ↩
See following essay. ↩
Catechismus Genevensis, p. 149. Bailey, Praxis pietatis, p. 125: “In life we should act as though no one but Moses had authority over us.” ↩
“The law appears to the Calvinist as an ideal norm of action. It oppresses the Lutheran because it is for him unattainable.” In the Lutheran catechism it stands at the beginning in order to arouse the necessary humility, in the Reformed catechism it generally stands after the Gospel. The Calvinists accused the Lutherans of having a “virtual reluctance to becoming holy” (Möhler), while the Lutherans accused the Calvinists of an “unfree servitude to the law,” and of arrogance. ↩
Studies and Reflections of the Great Rebellion, pp. 79 f. ↩
Among them the Song of Songs is especially noteworthy. It was for the most part simply ignored by the Puritans. Its Oriental eroticism has influenced the development of certain types of religion, such as that of St. Bernard. ↩
On the necessity of this self-observation, see the sermon of Charnock, already referred to, on 2 Corinthians 13:5, Works of the Puritan Divines, pp. 161 ff. ↩
Most of the theological moralists recommended it. Thus Baxter, Christian Directory, II, pp. 77 ff., who, however, does not gloss over its dangers. ↩
Moral bookkeeping has, of course, been widespread elsewhere. But the emphasis which was placed upon it as the sole means of knowledge of the eternal decree of salvation or damnation was lacking, and with it the most important psychological sanction for care and exactitude in this calculation. ↩
This was the significant difference from other attitudes which were superficially similar. ↩
Baxter (Saints’ Everlasting Rest, chap. XII) explains God’s invisibility with the remark that just as one can carry on profitable trade with an invisible foreigner through correspondence, so is it possible by means of holy commerce with an invisible God to get possession of the one priceless pearl. These commercial similes rather than the forensic ones customary with the older moralists and the Lutherans are thoroughly characteristic of Puritanism, which in effect makes man buy his own salvation. Compare further the following passage from a sermon: “We reckon the value of a thing by that which a wise man will give for it, who is not ignorant of it nor under necessity. Christ, the Wisdom of God, gave Himself, His own precious blood, to redeem souls, and He knew what they were and had no need of them” (Matthew Henry, “The Worth of the Soul,” Works of the Puritan Divines, p. 313). ↩
In contrast to that, Luther himself said: “Weeping goes before action and suffering excells all accomplishment” (Weinen geht vor Wirken und Leiden übertrifft alles tun). ↩
This is also shown most clearly in the development of the ethical theory of Lutheranism. On this see Hoennicke, Studien zur altprotestantischen Ethik (Berlin, 1902), and the instructive review of it by E. Troeltsch, Göttingische Gelehrte Anzeigen, 1902, No. 8. The approach of the Lutheran doctrine, especially to the older orthodox Calvinistic, was in form often very close. But the difference of religious background was always apparent. In order to establish a connection between morality and faith, Melanchthon had placed the idea of repentance in the foreground. Repentance through the law must precede faith, but good works must follow it, otherwise it cannot be the truly justifying faith—almost a Puritan formula. Melanchthon admitted a certain degree of perfection to be attainable on earth. He had, in fact, originally taught that justification was given in order to make men capable of good works, and in increasing perfection lay at least the
