[British Critic, vol. 28, July 1840.]
The former of these little works is an account of the expatriation of certain Protestants from the Catholic Tyrol, and the latter of certain Protestants from Protestant Prussia. They are both addressed to “the Protestant public;” the former being intended to promote “a juster appreciation and improvement of our own privileges, civil and religious”—p. xi.; while the latter appeals to the Protestant Churches of Great Britain, in the confidence that they will, on the grounds of an enlightened humanity, “bind up the wounds” of “their Lutheran sister.” The former is intended as an argument against the Pope; the latter carries it on in its application to Protestant monarchs. In this “keen encounter of wits,” we feel obliged injustice to award the prize to the Liberal over the more Conservative writer. The compiler of the second volume certainly proves against the translator of the former, that persecution is no peculiar badge of Rome; besides that it is more preposterous to persecute for not abjuring than for abjuring a received faith, and more unnatural that Protestants should suffer from Protestants than from Catholics. Austria harasses those who desert their own faith as well as hers; Prussia those who will not desert her own faith as well as theirs. One further observation deserves attention; Prussia receives “the Protestant exiles of Zillerthal” into the very country (Silesia) from which she drives her own Lutherans.
As to these Zillerdalers, their story, as contained in the friendly narrative before us, is us follows:—In the summer of 1826 nine heads of families among them informed their respective priests of their intention to become Protestants, and expressed a wish to take the preliminary steps required by law for a change of religion. The Dean of Zell and other ecclesiastics met this demand with moderation and kindness; but elsewhere angry feelings showed themselves on both sides. The application, however, was refused, and the government confirmed the refusal. So matters stood till the beginning of 1832, by which time the numbers of Protestantizers had increased to 240. They then sent a deputation to the emperor, to petition for leave to organize a Protestant Church; and opposite petitions were presented by the Catholics, deprecating the introduction of religious division into a peaceful region. The emperor’s decision was received in the spring of 1834, and seems to have had it in view, as far as might be, to satisfy both parties; it prohibited the Protestants from introducing a schism into a united country, but allowed them to betake themselves to provinces of the empire where Protestant congregations already existed. Persecution even in a mitigated form is always invidious; but those who take up strong religious views should not be unwilling to suffer for them; and whatever is to be thought of the conduct of the imperial government, we must confess our opinion that the Zillerdalers had not so much cause to complain of it as our canons prebendaries of the penalty of præmunire, which lies against their rejection of a crown candidate for the episcopate. To lose goods and chattels, and to be outlawed, is somewhat worse than to be told to depart with bag and baggage to another part of the country. “To such a transportation,” however, as our narrator tells us, “the greater number showed no disposition. They had already directed their eyes to a foreign country, and accordingly in the summer of this year, some of them requested a passport.”—p. 20. But they had not yet given up the hope of remaining at home; again they petitioned for toleration in the Tyrol; and nothing was done up to 1836. In the course of this year their bishop, the Prince Archbishop of Saltzberg, visited them. “His mild demeanour,” we are told, “inspired them with confidence; but on their requesting his permission to attach themselves to the Protestant Church, he answered, ‘That would be as if you wished to throw yourselves into the fire; to that I cannot consent.’”—p. 20. In the beginning of the following year they resolved on emigration, and received the imperial sanction for so doing.
It was not in human nature but that during these years of agitation and suspense, much angry collision should go on between the hostile parties. Specimens of such disputes are given in Dr. Rheinwald’s narrative; of these, some were unavoidable; in others, the blame at one time lay with the Catholics, at another with the Protestants. One of the greatest grievances of the latter was their inability to obtain the rite of matrimony. The Catholics of course could not be expected to administer it; and the government did not allow a merely civil contract except to such as were members of specific denominations, whose toleration was formally recognized. In consequence, “it cannot be denied,” says our panegyrist, “that there were instances among the Protestants of children being born out of wedlock.”—p. 63. Here again, we do not pronounce what was the State’s duty; but looking at these Zillerdalers, we do think that persons engaged in so momentous and awful a step as changing their religion, might have been expected, if in earnest, to suspend for the time any thought of marrying and giving in marriage.”