The inference has frequently been drawn that the two tendencies — the dogmatic and the pietistic — which marked the religious life of Germany at the opening of the 18th century, ministered indirectly to the production of scepticism; the dogmatic strictness stimulating a reaction towards latitude of opinion, and the unchurchlike and isolating character of pietism fos- tering individuality of belief. This inference is, how- ever, hardly correct. Dogmatic truth in the corporate Church, and piety in the individual members, are ordi- narily the safeguards of Christian faith and life. The danger arose in this case from the circumstance that the dogmas were emptied of life, and so became unreal ; and that the piety, being separated from theological science, became insincere, nationalism in Germany, without pietism as its forerunner, would have been fatal for centuries. But the relation of these tendencies, so plainly seen in the ecclesiastical histor\r of Germany, is one of long standing. From the days of Neo-Platonism to the present they have existed, the good to balance the evil, faith to limit reason. They have been called by different names; but Christianity could little afford to do without it or its equivalent in the past, and the Church of the future will still cling as tenaciously and fondly to it or to its representative. A recent author who has shown a singular facility in grouping historical
periods and discovering their great significance, says: "Pietism went back from the cold faith of the L7th century to the living faith of the Reformation. But just because this return was vital and produced by the agency of the Holy Spirit, it could not be termed a lit- eral return. We must not forget that the orthodoxy of the 17th century was only the extreme elaboration of an error, the beginning of which we find as far back, as Luther's time, and which became more and more a power in the Church through the influence of Melanc- thon. It was this: Mistaking the faith by which we believe for the faith which is believed. The principle of the Reformation was justification by faith, not the doc- trine of faith and justification. In reply to the Catholics it was deemed sufficient to show that this was the true doctrine which points out the way of salvation to man. The great danger lay in mistaking faith itself for the doctrine of faith. Therefore, in the controversies con- cerning justifying faith, we find that faith gradually came to be considered in relation to its doctrinal aspects more than in connection with the personal, practical, and experimental knowledge of men. In this view pie- tism is an elaboration of the faith of the lGth century. . . . So far from being heterodox, Spener even expressed himself in the most decided manner in favor of the doc- trines of the Church. He would make faith consist less in the dogmatism of the head than in the motions of the heart; he would bring the doctrine away from the angry disputes of the schools and incorporate it into practical life. He was thoroughly united with the Be- formers as to the real signification of justifying faith, but these contraries which were sought to be re-estab- lished he rejected. . . . From Spener's view a new- phase of spiritual life began to pervade the heart. The orthodoxy of the state Church had been accustomed to consider all baptized persons as true believers if only they had been educated in wholesome doctrines. There was a general denial of that living, conscious, self faith which was vital in Luther, and had transformed the world. The land, because it was furnished with the Gospel and the sacraments, was considered an evangel- ical country. The contrast between mere worldly and spiritual life, between the living and dead members of the Church, was practically abolished, though there still remained a theoretical distinction between the vis- ible and invisible Church. As to the world outside the pale of the Church, the Jevs and heathen, there was no thought whatever. Men believed they had done their whole duty when they had roundly combated the other Christian churches. Thus lived the state Church in quiet confidence of its own safety and pure doctrine at the time when the nation was recovering from the dev- astations of the Thirty-years' War. ' In the times suc- ceeding the Reformation,' says a Wurtemberg pastor of the past century, ' the greater portion of the common people trusted that they would certainly be saved if they believed correct doctrines; if one is neither a Ro- man Catholic nor a Calvinist, and confesses his opposi- tion, he cannot possibly miss heaven ; holiness is not so necessarv after all'" (Auberlen, Die gottliche Offenba- runff, i. -278-281).
The enemies of pietism have confounded it with mys- ticism. There are undoubted points in common, but pietism was aggressive instead of contemplative ; it was practical rather than theoretical. Both systems made purity of life essential, but mysticism could not guard against mental disease, while pietism enjoyed a long season of healthful life. The latter was far too much engaged in relieving immediate and pressing wants to fall into the gross errors which mark almost the entire career of the former. Pietism was mystical in so far as it made purity of heart essential to salvation; but it was the very antipodes of mysticism when organized and operating against a languid and torpid Church with such weapons as Spener and his coadjutors employed. Bohme and Spener were world-wide apart in many respects, but in purity of heart they were beautifully in unison.