Library

A Short History of Freethought Ancient and Modern, Volume...

§ 4. Conclusion

Project Gutenberg EPUB3 edition Robertson, J. M. (John Mackinnon)
Open passage
Thus concerning the Reformation generally “we are obliged to confess that, especially in Germany, it soon parted company with free learning; that it turned its back upon culture; that it lost itself in a maze of arid theological controversy; that it held out no hand of welcome to awakening science. Presently we shall see that the impulse to an enlightened study and criticism of the Scriptures came chiefly from heretical quarters; that the unbelieving Spinoza and the Arminian Le Clerc pointed the way to investigations which the great Protestant systematizers thought neither necessary nor useful. Even at a later time it has been the divines who have most loudly declared their allegiance to the theology of the Reformation who have also looked most askance at science, and claimed for their statements an entire independence of modern knowledge.”116 In fine, “to look at the Reformation by itself, to judge it only by its theological and ecclesiastical development, is to pronounce it a failure”; and the claim that “to consider it as part of a general movement of European thought ... is at once to vindicate its past and to promise it the future”—this amounts merely to avowing the same thing. Only as an eddy in the movement of freethought is the Reformation intellectually significant. Politically it is a great illustration of the potency of economic forces.
Open passage
While, however, the Reformation in itself thus did little for the spirit of freethought, substituting as it did the arbitrary standard of “revelation” for the not more arbitrary standard of papal authority, it set up outside its own sphere some new movements of rational doubt which must have counted for much in the succeeding period. It was not merely that, as we shall see, the bloody strifes of the two Churches, and the quarrels of the Protestant sects among themselves, sickened many thoughtful men of the whole subject of theology; but that the disputes between Romanists and anti-Romanists raised difficult questions as to the bases of all kinds of belief. As always happens when established beliefs are long attacked, the subtler spirits in the conservative interest after a time begin putting in doubt beliefs of every species; a method often successful with those who cannot carry an argument to its logical conclusions, and who are thus led to seek harbour in whatever credence is on the whole most convenient; but one which puts stronger spirits on the reconsideration of all their opinions. Thus we shall find, not only in the skepticism of Montaigne, which is historically a product of the wars of religion in France, but in the more systematic and more cautious argumentation of the abler Protestants of the seventeenth century, a measure of general rationalism much more favourable alike to natural science and to Biblical and ethical criticism than had been the older environment of authority and tradition, brutal sacerdotalism, and idolatrous faith.
Open passage
Men continued to hate each other religiously for trifles, to quarrel over gestures and vestures, and to wrangle endlessly over worn-out dogmas; but withal new and vital heresies were set on foot; new science generated new doubt; and under the shadow of the aging tree of theology there began to appear the growths of a new era. As Protestantism had come outside the “universal” Church, rearing its own tabernacles, so freethought came outside both, scanning with a deepened intentness the universe of things. And thus began a more vital innovation than that dividing the Reformation from the Renaissance, or even that dividing the Renaissance from the Middle Ages.

Source notes

Open passage
1 Ranke, History of the Popes, Bohn tr. 1908, p. 60; Hardwick, Church History: Reformation, ed. 1886, p. 250. ↑
Open passage
2 Much of this has never been published. Most of it is in a MS. Codex of the City Library at Frankfurt. Extracts in Tentzel’s Supplementum Historiæ Gothanæ, 1701, in the Narratio de Eobano Hesso of J. Camerarius, 1553, etc. See Strauss’s Ulrich von Hutten, 2te Aufl. 1871, p. 32, n. (ed. 1858, i, 44) et seq. ↑
Open passage
4 Strauss, Ulrich von Hutten, as cited, pp. 33–35; Bezold, Gesch. der deutschen Reformation, 1890, p. 226. Bezold describes Mutianus as “der freigeistige Kanonikus zu Gotha,” and points out, concerning his universalism, that “the historic Christ thus slips through his fingers.” ↑
Open passage
5 Bezold, as last cited. “Here is the skepticism kept in the background by Mutianus and Celtis, popularized in the rudest way.” ↑
Open passage
6Briefe, ed. De Wette, iii, 60. ↑
Open passage
7 Karl Hagen, Deutschlands lit. u. relig. Verhältnisse im Reformations-zeitalter, 1868, ii, 110; letter of Capito to Zwingli, Ep. Zwinglii i, 47; F. C. Baur, Kirchengeschichte, iv, 450; Trechsel, Die protestantischen Antitrinitarier vor Faustus Socinus, 1839–44, i, 13–16, 33; Wallace, Antitrinitarian Biography, 1850, i, art. 3, 4, 5. ↑
Open passage
8 Schlegel’s note to Mosheim, Reid’s ed. p. 689; Baur, iv, 450; Trechsel, i, 13–16. ↑
Open passage
9 See a good account of him by Beard, Hibbert Lectures on The Reformation, p. 204 sq. ↑
Open passage
10 For an impartial criticism of their language see Henderson’s Short Hist. of Germany, i, 321–23. Cp. Baur, Kirchengeschichte, iv, 73–76; A. F. Pollard in Camb. Mod. Hist. ii, 192–95; Beard, Hibbert Lect. on The Reformation, p. 200; and Kautsky, Communism in Central Europe in the Time of the Reformation, Eng. tr. 1897, pp. 117–28. ↑
Open passage
11 Kohlrausch, Hist. of Germany, Eng. tr. p. 397. ↑
Open passage
12 To the same effect Menzel, Gesch. der Deutschen, Capp. 391, 492. ↑
Open passage
18 Ranke, as cited, pp. 459–64. ↑
Open passage
20 Cp. Michelet, Hist. de France, x, La Réforme, ed. 1882, pp. 104, 332. ↑
Open passage
21 Cp. Burckhard, De Ulrichi Hutteni Vita Commentarius, 1717, i, 65. For a general view see Ranke, pp. 126–39. ↑
Open passage
22 Jakob Marx, Die Ursachen der schnellen Verbreitung der Reformation, 1847, § 12. ↑
Open passage
23 Prof. J. M. Vincent, in Prof. S. M. Jackson’s Huldreich Zwingli, 1901, p. 37. ↑
Open passage
24 Cp. Ullmann, Reformers before the Reformation, i, 19; ii, passim; Mosheim, 15 Cent. Pt. ii, ch. ii, § 22; and Bonet-Maury’s thesis, De Opera Scholastica Fratrum Vitæ Communis, 1889. ↑
Open passage
25 Burton, History of Scotland, iii, 399–401. But the end in view was probably, as Burton half admits, the recruiting of the Church. Cp. Cosmo Innes, Sketches of Early Scotch History, p. 134 sq., and Scottish Legal Antiquities, pp. 129–30. ↑
Open passage
27 Menzel, Cap. 492 (ed. 1837, p. 762). ↑
Open passage
28 Ranke (p. 466) becomes positively lyrical over the happy lot of the peasant who received Luther’s Catechism (1529). “It contains enduring comfort in every affliction, and, under a slight husk, the kernel of truths able to satisfy the wisest of the wise.” Such declamation holds the place that ought to have been filled by an account of economic conditions. ↑
Open passage
29 Bishop Stubbs, Const. Hist. of England, iii. 627. The bishop, however, holds that in the time of Lollard prosperity the ability to read was widely diffused in England (p. 628); and it seems certain that in the first half of the sixteenth century printing multiplied enormously. Cp. Michelet. Hist. de France, x, ed. 1884. p. 103 sq. ↑
Open passage
30 Cp. Willis, Servetus and Calvin, 1877, bk. ii. ch. i; Audin, Histoire de Calvin, éd. abrég. ch. xxiv–xxvii; and essay on “Machiavelli and Calvin” in the present writer’s Essays in Sociology, 1903. vol. i. ↑
Open passage
31Werke., ed. Walch. viii. 2043 (On Ep. to Galat.), cited by Beard. ↑
Open passage
32Id. viii, 1181 (On 1 Cor. xv). Cp. other citations in Beard, pp. 161–65. ↑
Open passage
33 Green, Short History, ch. vi, § v, p. 315. ↑
Open passage
34 Cp. Stäbelin, Johannes Calvin, 1863. ii, 282–83. ↑
Open passage
35 He was educated at Basel and Berne and at Vienna University, and of all the leading reformers he seems to have had most knowledge of classical literature. Hess, Life of Zwingle, Eng. tr. 1812, pp. 2–7, following Myconius and Hottinger. ↑
Open passage
36 Chr. Sigwart, Ulrich Zwingli, der Charakter seiner Theologie, mit besonderer Rücksicht auf Pico von Mirandula, 1855, pp. 14–26. Prof. Jackson, Huldreich Zwingli, p. 85, note, states that Sigwart later modified his views. ↑
Open passage
37 So states Melanchthon, cited by Jackson, p. 85, note. Cp. pp. 201, 390–92. ↑

Source attribution

A Short History of Freethought Ancient and Modern, Volume 1 of 2 Third edition, Revised and Expanded, in two volumes, Project Gutenberg eBook #51793

§ 3. The Netherlands § 1. The Italian Influence