Footnotes

1. This deliverance will now appear less strange than it did at first. At that time, looking from one side, it was easy to believe that both churches would unite in unbelief, in indifferentism; from the other, that they would soon be two forms of superstition, only outwardly and accidentally different. Lately, however, many events have not only quickened the consciousness that the opposition still actually exists, but have made it very clear what holds the two sections apart. We cannot deny that the chief seat of the opposition is in Germany. In England, indeed, it is strong enough, but it is more political, in France again it plays a very subordinate part. It becomes us Germans above all to comprehend it both historically and speculatively. This happens, alas! too seldom. We have fallen sadly into impassioned ways. If anyone among us would speak of the matter impartially, he will certainly be suspected by his brethren as a crypto-catholic, and he would be exposed to many importunate and flattering advances from the Romanists. Praiseworthy exceptions, when truly thorough-going moderation is acknowledged, are very rare. Leaving quite aside, therefore, the present state of things, I will indicate, in few words, wherein this opposition, regarded from the point of view of its historical development, seems to me still to exist. There is in both churches an evident disposition to be exclusive, and as far as possible to ignore each other. Of this the almost inconceivable ignorance of one another’s doctrine and usages gives sufficient proof. This disposition is natural enough in the mass of men, for each section finds religious stimulus and nourishment enough in its own narrow circle, and the other section, though but little may be wanting to it, appears, if not as impure as members of alien religious to the Jews, at least utterly strange. This tendency rules in quiet times. It is only interrupted in the mass of men by outbreaks of passion, when one section gains some decisive advantage in political matters or, in a large number of single cases in private life. As the educated, however, in whom a historical consciousness should dwell, ought not to share this lazy exclusiveness, neither should they share this hurtful passionateness. Between both churches there should be a living influence, even though it should not be direct. Quiet contemplation should stir up a keen rivalry in whatever in the other section is acknowledged to be good. The contrast in the character of both churches involves at least that one is receptive of the imperfections that the other more suppresses. May the Catholics be edified by seeing that the more prominently the religious tendency appears among us, the more any return to any kind of barbarity is hindered. And if they would not deceive themselves as though there were no difference in this respect between us, let them see how far they can advance in the demand for individual freedom. And we should, as passionlessly as possible, observe the secure position which in all outward matters the Catholic Church knows how to secure by strong organization. Let us then try how far we can attain to unity and coherence, yet it must be done in our own spirit and not by setting the spiritual order over against the laity in a way quite opposed to this spirit. Such healthy influences appear, and the results are seen from time to time. But the lazy exclusiveness of the mass checks them and all passionate moments interrupt them. It may therefore be long before the purpose of the disagreement is attained. Till then, we cannot say that the variance has reached its climax and has begun to diminish. When that comes to pass, there will be a common duty to exercise a vitalizing influence on the Greek Church. As it is almost quite defunct, both churches will need for along time to employ all their powers and all their remedies. But, until they have succeeded in waking the dead, they cannot have fulfilled the destiny of their division. ↩

2. How seldom anyone in lands belonging entirely to one church, without interested views or artful suasion, but by a true inward impulse, is driven to the other church is apparent. In regions where the two sects commingle, how calmly we educate the children of parents of one faith in the paternal religion, and it does not in the least occur to us that they may have an inward destination for the other. As the different national character of Christian peoples was not without influence on the course the Reformation took, should it not be thought that this spiritual attitude is a matter of inheritance or birth? And is not this confirmed by the fact that when the adherents of another faith come over to Christianity, we do not consider the Christian sense pure and steadfast till after two generations. For children of mixed marriages, therefore, the natural rule would not be for the sons to follow the father and the daughter the mother, but for each to follow the parent with whom there is more inherited resemblance. On the other side, however, it is not to be denied that the original relation of the two churches is not favourable to the hypothesis of a strictly innate inclination. It would rather lead us to expect a self-determination for one or other form, according to personal character. From this view the natural principle for mixed marriages and the principle that without extraneous interference would have effect, would be for the children to follow the more strongly religious parent. Under the special influence of this parent, the religious element would be most strongly developed, and then the child’s own choice could be calmly and hopefully waited for. Were there no foreign motives, no influences that are almost violence, and were this natural course generally followed, change in the prime of life would be rarer. After a faith has been apprehended with love, and has for a long time guided the life, this step is always the result and the cause of confusion. It would be only taken by individuals who are in other respects exceptions, as it were capricious sallies of nature, or by persons who, from perverse guidance, have been made to see very clearly the imperfection and narrowness of the accepted faith, and are thereby driven to the opposite faith—a thing not rare at present in both churches. ↩

3. Only a few will require a defence of this position, that the Catholic Church, not merely in the old sense, but in the sense we understand when we contrast it with the Evangelical Church, might shake off the papal authority and return from the monarchical to the aristocratic form of the episcopal system, without removing the difference between the churches, or, in any marked degree, facilitating their union. Nor does it need much proof that the papal authority, whether considered in its rise or in its prevailing tendency, has striven for aims almost always false and beyond the church’s sphere. It is noteworthy, however, that almost all who fall away from our church become strong papists. It is hardly possible to avoid the conclusion that they have not apprehended the true character of the Catholic Church, and an only destined to display their religious incapacity in two different forms. ↩

4. It would be bad if the very conclusion of a work could cause a smile that might efface any earlier good impressions. Yet this may do it in two respects. First, there is the dread that Bonaparte could have some design against Protestantism, for did he not afterwards threaten to go over with a large part of France to Protestantism, and, quite recently, were not the Protestants in the south of France persecuted as his most attached followers? Then, again, I almost always speak as if all Germany were Protestant, and now many are hoping that sooner or later it will be once more altogether or almost Catholic. In respect of the former possibility, what I said expressed too accurately our feelings in the years of ignominy that I should not let it stand as I then wrote it. So much had been taken from us that we might well fear that all was threatened. Undeniably Napoleon acted in a quite different way in Protestant and in Catholic Germany, and it could not remain hidden from him that our religious sentiment and our political were intimately connected. On the other point let everyone take heed not to laugh too soon. However firmly he holds his hope, I hold mine as firmly. Further progress of a Papistical Catholicism in Germany on many grounds necessarily involves a return to every kind of barbarity. As the freedom of the Evangelical Church will remain the surest support of every noble endeavour, it cannot lie in the ways of Providence to weaken it and, at its expense, to allow Catholicism to prevail. ↩