28. 1834, excited universal indignation, while tlic im- prisonment, at a later period, of the archbishops of * '"- logne and Gnesen for their conduct in regard to the vexed question of mixed marriages involved the king in a long and fruitless dispute with the pope. In his ecclesiastical regulations, the king was generally assist- ed by the gentle Altenstein, hi- minister for public wor- ship, with whose preferences lor the Hegelian philoso- phy in the Church and in the schools he was often dis- pleased, but whom be never would quite abandon. \\ hen the civil power had absorbed all authorities pe- culiarly ecclesiastical, the king estabhshed I L817 lpro\ in- cial consistories, whose duties wen- confined to matters exclusively spiritual, and did not include the location of clergymen; district and provincial Bynods, composed only of clergymen, and restricted within a narrow cir- cle of duties, I > 1 1 1 intended to be an introduction to an imperial synod; and a ministry tor public worship, which was to be the organ through which the n>_\al authority was exercised over the Church. The oath which the clergymen were to take hound them to be the servants of the State as well as of the Church. The development which had taken place in the principles of Protestantism, and the modes of speech occasioned by the new scientific and literary education of the peo- ple, ue\t rendered some alteration of the language of the Church indispensable. New liturgies were there- lore introduced into some established churches without attracting much attention. A common form of worship seemed to become necessary by the union which by the year 1821 had been outwardly effected. The theolog- ical commission appointed for composing such an in- strument in Prussia accomplished nothing. The king then published an Agenda which had been adopted by his cabinet ( L822) for the use of the court church, gave orders that it should be introduced into the garrison Churches of his kingdom, and recommended it to all the congregations of the realm, instead of the conflicting ami arbitrary forms which had previously been used in the different provinces. But it met with much opposi- tion. The Reformed complained that it savored too much of the old ecclesiastical formula. They objected. too, to the burning of candles in broad daylight, and the kneeling and singing of the preacher before the altar, and the like, which seemed to them to betray a Roman Catholic spirit. The rigid Lutherans com- plained that it was not sufficiently orthodox, and was too much reformed. On the other hand, the adherents of the early theology of illuminism found it too ortho- dox, too much in sympathy with the old ecclesiasti- cism. They did not perceive in it their own theological opinions, but just the reverse; and it was from their standpoint that they very properly hesitated to make use of expressions and ceremonies with which they could connect no other sense than one contradictory to their convictions. Some, also, were displeased with a heterogeneous political element which they discovered in il. Put no general opposition to it was apparent un- til the government took some steps to draw over the churches by various temptations or by coercion, and Some author- contended that a Strict conformity to the liturgy should lie required by a law on the territorial system. In the midst of this confusion, no synodal con- stitution was carried into effect ; for even the victorious political parly took no pleasure in a measure which so
forcibly reminded them of the promised representative Bystem. It was only in Westphalia and the Rhenish that a synodal form on the basis of ancient is introduced (1835), but even there the Bys- tem left a- much to be desired a- it actually fulfilled. The appointment of general superintendent- (1829), with means at command for a very extensive sphere of persona] influence, was looked upon a- a restoration of the titular bishops to their former prelatical position, and bence as the commencement ofa Protestant episco- pacy The controversy now became legal, and the jurists and theologians pronounced their different opin-
r26
PRUSSIA
ions in answering the question as to how far the king, a- the prince of the country, was authorized in prescrib- ing hi- ecclesiastical usages to the people and in foist- ing a particular service upon them. It was only after new negotiations and revisions, in which all possible consideration was shown lor personal wishes and the tradition- of the country, that the liturgy entered into full force (1830) as that of the United Evangelical State Church. By the union it was opposed even after this; and. a- we have already seen, a second decree wa- ni c- essary (1834) to give tin- -tamp of the government anew to the effort The result was a public outbreak. In .Silesia, especially, there was much trouble, and the re- fractory spirit assumed an alarming form. Removals, military force, and emigration were the sad results : and finally there occurred a disunion among the Lutherans themselves -some \ ielding to the force of circumstance -. other- pushing their cause to the utmost, and still others going to ruin in sectarianism. See Li hhkanism.
The accession of Frederick William IV. in 1840, seemed to open a better prospect to the friends oi con- stitutional freedom, but the reality was scarcely equal to the expectations which had been warranted by the professions of the government. Still, new hopes and requirements had been excited, and a new life was in- fused into every department of the State. Every branch oi science, art, and literature was understood to receive the attentive consideration of the sovereign, who pro- fessed to be actuated by a love of universal progress. He made similar professions in regard to religious tol- eration, but the pietistic tendencies of his government exerted a forced and prejudicial influence in public ad- ministration everywhere.