RM - Early Modern Intellectual History

THESE ADIAPHORISTIC DEVILS

Thu, 01 Aug 2013 00:00:01 GMT

Johnston, W

Matthias Flacius Illyricus (1520-1575) was a prominent and influential theologian in the Adiaphoristic Controversy after Luther’s death and the Schmalkaldic League’s defeat in the Battle of Mühlberg. Bolstered by his victory, Emperor Charles V introduced the Augsburg Interim. This new law applied only to the Lutherans and demanded a return to a number of ceremonies and practices of the Roman Church. Through the jurisdiction of bishops, it also restored Roman authority over the Lutheran churches in Germany. Some Lutherans, including prominent Wittenberg theologians like Philipp Melanchthon, put forth a compromise formula, the Leipzig Proposal, or Leipzig Interim, as Flacius dubbed it in a publicity coup. Flacius vigorously opposed the concessions made to the Roman Catholic Church and secular authorities in both formulae, but especially the Leipzig Interim. He considered the latter blatantly traitorous, open and shameful infidelity to Luther’s Reformation. Together with several other prominent Lutheran pastors and theologians like Nicholas Amsdorf, he spearheaded the literary campaign of the besieged city of Magdeburg, which boldly refused to submit to the new imperial law. While Flacius has been studied biographically or as part of the broader Lutheran opposition to Wittenberg compromise, his writings have largely been neglected. This thesis examines some of his key publications from the Adiaphoristic Controversy and explicates Flacius’ worldview and perspective, as well as his prominent themes, methods of argumentation, and imagery, upon the basis of these texts. It argues that, as other scholars have contended, Flacius certainly did, like Luther, operate with a keen apocalyptic sense. Importantly, though, it argues that there are a number of other crucial and instructive aspects to his writings beyond the apocalyptic, that the apocalyptic is not necessarily the only noteworthy or exclusively definitive feature of his works. Indeed, Flacius understood history as a sequence of cycles and was aware that the current crisis might simply be a new chapter in a repetitive story of the church militant in the crosshairs of the devil, the Antichrist, and oppressive temporal authorities. The theology of the cross and an emphasis on the church as a remnant run throughout his texts. For Flacius, suffering was part and parcel of the Christian life and even a mark of the true church. Furthermore, while Flacius grounded his teaching in the New Testament, he predominantly appealed to the Old Testament for examples and support, especially regarding resistance to ecclesiastical and secular authority. There he found ample evidence for his picture of the church as the steadfast few, frequently downtrodden yet consistently defiant. Men throughout history had attempted to reconcile Christ and Belial through human wisdom, compulsion, or sophistry, but Flacius left no doubt that the faithful were obligated to resist every attempt. Finally, this thesis also demonstrates that Flacius’ theology in no way developed in a vacuum, but was shaped and defined by the political circumstances of the day. In this way, Flacius’ personal and theological evolution provides perspective for and insight into broader questions and issues of confessionalization in Germany, the process by which the list of theological teachings and ecclesiastical practices upon which agreement was necessary for fellowship expanded and was more narrowly demarcated.

Power, politics and Propaganda

Wed, 03 Dec 2014 00:00:01 GMT

N.S.D. Linkels

A trade model to promote Dutch welfare during a period of decline

Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:01 GMT

G. Schutte

Between 1771 and 1796, Dirk Hoola van Nooten (1747-1808) published translations of works written by Bonnet, Condillac, Montesquieu and Smith, while he also wrote several books on Dutch and natural law. In my thesis I argue that Van Nooten’s ideas should be seen in the context of an ongoing debate about Dutch foreign trade policy. As described by Koen Stapelbroek, a number of thinkers debated in the 1740’s and 1750’s about the question whether there still was a relation between ‘the flourishing of the linen industry in Haarlem and Leiden and the Dutch staplemarket’ and about the question whether this dynamic still prevailed in the modern ‘jealousy of trade’. Van Nooten’s translation of Condillac’s Le Commerce et le Gouvernment and his translation of Montesquieu’s De l’Esprit des lois conceptualised the problems of Dutch trade and manufacturing. Van Nooten explained the structure of the Dutch mercantile system and elaborated on its weaknesses, which were exploited by countries like France and England. Van Nooten thought that Dutch industry was essential for the Dutch mercantile system. Manufacturing offered an opportunity to transform raw materials into more valuable products, which could be exported to other countries. The government had to support this practice by enabling manufacturers to import raw materials as cheap as possible. Trade and manufacturing were both essential elements of the Dutch mercantile system. This strategy was threatened by England, which limited Dutch imports by its Navigation Acts. Van Nooten’s translation of The Wealth of Nations of 1796 should be seen in the context of his other proposals to reform the Dutch mercantile system. His earlier proposals highlighted the role of the government in promoting commerce, but his introduction in De Rijkdom der Volkeren was very critical about commercial policy of the state. He adopted Smith’s vision of the mutual benefits of international commerce, which implied that the Dutch Republic was not involved in a commercial war with France and England. Instead, the Republic could profit from the commercial success of its neighbours. This development should not be seen as an adoption of the idea of ‘free trade’, but as the adoption of an alternative ‘trade model’. Smith’s model had an important advantage. It did not require sophisticated commercial policy. The political decline of the Dutch had forced Van Nooten to reconsider his earlier opinions about commerce. The Fourth Anglo-Dutch War and the war with France during the 1790’s had made it clear to him that the Dutch were not able to compete with their neighbours. This failure would also imply that the Dutch government would no longer be able to support domestic commerce. Smith’s model offered a remedy to this problem, since his model did not require such support. It rejected such support as harmful. The state should only protect property, build infrastructure, and prevent the emergence of monopolies. The state only had to enforce the rules in order to facilitate economic competition.

Maiestas in the Dutch Republic

Fri, 27 Oct 2017 00:00:01 GMT

W.W.P Damen