Catholic Moral Teachings

Catholic moral teachings can be divided roughly into two types: social teachings (involving all of society) and personal teachings (involving each individuals' call to live a moral life). Social teachings have to do with the social order, with what we often call "social justice." This is based on the dignity of human beings created by God and on a focus on the common good of all. Over the last century there have been many papal encyclicals on social justice, enumerating the rights of all people to a just wage, freedom from oppression, fair treatment, freedom from discrimination, adequate food, shelter and clothing, etc. Such issues were included in the Second Vatican Council's Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et spes). These recognize that working for justice in the social arena is not something extra, but an intrinsic part of living the gospel. If we are not doing something, we are not fully living the gospel!

Individual Christian Morality

The individual teachings are based on trying to help individuals be the kind of person a Christian is called to become. Again, this is not a light or easy undertaking. Rather than following a set of rules, we are called to constant conversion: a process by which our whole life is shaped by the gospel message. We are to make God the center and source of our being. We are to allow ourselves to be transformed by that redemptive, healing presence of God and then allow God to continue to work through us to redeem and heal others and the whole world, enemies as well as friends, the outcasts as well as the respectable, the poor as well as the rich, sinners as well as the righteous; a constant process of conversion. How do we do this? We have to keep trying to find our way. One person asked if it meant that we give up all we had. Jesus did ask a rich young man to do just that. If we cannot, then perhaps we are too materialistic. If much of our time is focused on having a BMW, Porsche, a big house, monthly vacation, a large varied wardrobe, etc., then maybe we have strayed from the gospel message that says we are to share our surplus with those who have less.

Guilt? Sin?
Within the context of conversion, one always needs to look at the past in order to critique our actions, such as during Lent. This is important so that we can choose how we want to act in the future. We are not to keep looking back! Guilt, as a motivation to do better next time, can be good; guilt, as a looking back, cannot be good. We are generally familiar with the latter, since it is used by many parents. A general focus on individual sin in the past has lead often to an emphasis on guilt. A focus on continued conversion can get away from too strong an emphasis on guilt and sin. Because of an overemphasis on sin and guilt, they have not been strongly preached in the last couple decades. It does not mean that we somehow no longer believe in personal sin. With an

emphasis on our relationship with God, we can recognize when we do not live up to that relationship (when we sin) without an overemphasis that focuses too much on the act itself. Interestingly, an overemphasis on relationship with God can, if we let it, undermine our own sense of ongoing conversion. We can get to the point where we think of our individual relationship as "good enough" and have no sense of all the more we could do, if we only recognized it.

Conscience
The basis for moral decisions is an informed conscience. We have the responsibility to "train" our conscience based on studying the gospel message, Church teachings, our own education and experience and follow it! This does not mean doing whatever we want, but what we come to know as right, even if it is difficult, especially if it is difficult! We know that following our conscience does not guarantee that we will not make mistakes. One of the best gauges we can use to try to prayerfully evaluate our conscience is to look back on our actions periodically and compare them to the ideals in the gospel stories (e.g. Luke 6:27-38: Love your enemies, turn the other cheek, do good to those who hate you, give to others).

Catholic Morality: Life in Christ

Catholic morality is about life: "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly." (John 10:10) Faith & baptism give us new life in Christ. That life involves far more than simply following a set of rules. This article provides an overview of basic principles of Catholic morality. It is essential to know these principles: they are the how-to manual for living fully your new life, for obtaining that abundant life Christ has promised you. The Catholic Catechism starts its section on Catholic morality with St. Leo the Great's beautiful words: Christian, recognize your dignity and, now that you share in God's own nature, do not return to your former base condition by sinning. Remember who is your head and of whose body you are a member. Never forget that you have been rescued from the power of darkness and brought into the light of the Kingdom of God. ( Catechism, #1691)

Morality is a call to recognize our dignity as men and women who have received a free gift of new life in Christ. We must live accordingly.

The Law of Love

Our Lord Jesus himself clearly taught us the first principles of Catholic morality: "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets." (Mt 22:37-40) Love, or charity, is the great commandment of the Lord. Love of God and love of neighbor are the source & summary of Catholic morality. "All the law and the prophets" flow from this starting point. This means that what love requires is the essence of all moral rules, all of the Ten Commandments, and all aspects of morality spoken of by the prophets and even by Christ himself. The only things needed are those things which love makes necessary. It is also important to say that love does, indeed, require many things! In fact, it takes only a few simple steps of logic to deduce the Ten Commandments and most of the rest of Catholic morality from this starting point. Those moral precepts describe the minimum that love requires.

"What do you mean, the minimum?"

Catholic morality's basic moral code describes the minimum necessary to live in union with Christ. If we fall below that level, then the life of Christ cannot live within us. That's the meaning of mortal sin: an action which shows God that we refuse his offer to become "children of God" (John 1:12) and "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Pet 1:4). So if that's the minimum, then what's the maximum that love requires? Again, Jesus provides the answer: A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another." (John 13:34-35) The maximum, then, is to completely give ourselves for others, even as Christ did for us. To put it more simply: there is no maximum! We'll always find that we can give more. Challenging? Yes!

So how do we ever live up to this demand?

Grace to the rescue!

The demand to love without limit is very demanding. Christ's disciples thought so, too! They couldn't believe that the demands of discipleship far exceeded human ability: "When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astounded and said, 'Then who can be saved?'" (Mt 19:25) Jesus's response to them reveals the key: "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible" (Mt 19:26). It is not you who will save yourself, it is God who saves you! If you let him, God will give you the strength and ability to do more than you can believe is possible. And the more you give, the more help God will give you. We call this grace. It is the Holy Spirit himself who gives us the gift of grace. He not only calls us to holiness, but he sanctifies us (makes us holy) and gives us the grace we need to respond to his own call. Once you begin to accept grace, you'll find that it changes you in wonderful ways: There are seven specific Gifts of the Holy Spirit. For the beginning Catholic, they are particularly important: they help us to make progress with greater ease and stronger love during the challenging early stages of Christian life. The Holy Spirit will develop many excellent qualities in your life. These fruits are countless, but following St. Paul, the Church lists twelve specific Fruits of the Spirit. Much of the spirit's work within us involves developing the virtues and helping us avoid the vices.

More than anything, though, the Holy Spirit gradually moves us toward the ultimate goal of virtue: to love and act with the heart of Christ himself. This state is described by The Beatitudes, which begin the beautiful "Sermon on the Mount" in Matthew's Gospel, chapters 5-7. They are not just a set of nice ideals: "The Beatitudes are at the heart of Jesus' preaching" (Catechism, #1716). They are a radical call to live according to a new set of standards. The Beatitudes are a self-portrait of Christ. If you aspire to live in Christ, you will strive to make the Beatitudes your own.

Foundations of Catholic Morality

It's important to understand a few basics about Catholic morality before we look at the actual moral code itself. These basics used to be a part of our culture, but now they're under widespread attack by the culture. There is a lot of confusion in the Church about these basics right now. You need to know them well yourself, or you're at risk for being steered off the right path. (See the importance of orthodoxy for more.) These are basic concepts in Catholic moral theology: Freedom Truth Natural law Law Conscience

There's a lot to say about these, but I'll keep it short. It boils down to this: God creates us in the state of freedom. We are at liberty to choose, based on reason and will, whether to act or not in a specific situation. We are responsible for our choices. With these choices, we choose our own ultimate destiny: that of eternal life with God, or that of death. We believe that moral truth is objective, and not relative to the subjective whims of culture or taste. It is valid at all times & everywhere. God is the ultimate source of all moral truth. People have an innate sense of basic moral truth. Using human reason, we can deduce the principles of this natural law. But because sin clouds our vision of the truth, God has chosen to directly reveal the law to us. We use our natural facility called conscience to apply the general principles of the law to specific situations, judging specific actions to be right or wrong in accordance with objective law. (Conscience is not the source of those moral principles!)

Understanding these basic principles of Catholic morality will help you avoid a lot of trouble. (Believe me, it's hard enough to avoid trouble even when you do understand these!)

"But what are the rules?"

Okay, so Catholic morality does have an actual moral code that you need to know! But just remember: this moral code doesn't represent the summit of Catholic morality. It is a description of the most basic requirements of the command to love God and love neighbor. Focus on the Beatitudes as your goal, but make sure that you don't fall below the minimum level of Christian living. Here's the basic content of these "minimum requirements", the moral law:

The Catholic Ten Commandments describe "the conditions of a life freed from the slavery of sin" (Catechism, 2057). Each Commandment is simply a summary of a whole category of actions. For example, "bearing false witness against your neighbor" covers any kind of falsehood: perjury, lying, slander, detraction, bragging, rash judgment, etc. (I address some specific issues in the next section, below.) The Commandments must be understood in relation to the "law of love." (That's why we discussed it at length above!) The Precepts of the Catholic Church are a small number of things related to the Church that any good Catholic must do at an absolute minimum. They describe things like the necessity to worship at Mass at least each Sunday and on Catholic holy days of obligation, go to Confession at least once a year, etc.

(Also be sure to read the section on Catholic morality in your Catechism of the Catholic Church.) Willing & knowing violation of one of the above items (the Ten Commandments and Precepts of the Church) is considered a mortal sin: it constitutes rejection of God's law, and of God himself. Such rejection can be repaired only by true contrition, repentance, and seeking forgiveness in the Sacrament of Reconciliation as soon as possible. (A detailed Catholic examination of conscience is essential for preparing for Confession.) Again, remember that this moral code is only a description of some of the minimum requirements of Catholic morality. True Christian life not only requires much more of us, but... ...it is also incredibly positive in the blessings that it brings! As Jesus himself said, "theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven." (Mt 5:3).

Specific issues
There are certain moral issues that people have a lot of questions about. I've addressed some of these special topics in Catholic morality in separate articles. There's a special article about Christian sex that takes a detailed look at that important topic of Catholic morality! It describes the basic principles of Catholic sexual morality. Also see Christian oral sex, Catholic teaching on masturbation, Catholic natural family planning, and contraception and religion for applications to those specific topics. The article Catholic annulment discusses Catholic marriage and annulment in detail.

Onward... to life!
I hope you've found this tour of the basics of Catholic morality to be useful. These principles are a description of how we live the life of Christ. It is essential for every Catholic to know them! Remember above all else: The law of love is primary. The "law and the prophets" are summarized by the command to love God and neighbor. The basic moral precepts of Catholic morality are a minimum level below which we must not go. This is about life "I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly" (John 10:10).

In Christ, God is making you the most incredible offer. Will you accept it?

What is the definition of a protestant? What are protestant beliefs? What are the major branches and movements within Protestantism?

The term "Protestant" is today utilized to broadly define those professing Christians who stand apart from Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. Not surprisingly then, there are many "Protestants" who don't appreciate being called "Protestant," and who outright reject any such categorization. This makes understanding Protestantism all the more problematic.
What is Christianity?

Before one can fully appreciate Protestantism or basic Protestant beliefs, it's important to understand Christianity.

Read more at Suite101: Basic Protestant Beliefs: Principles, Branches, and Movements Within

Protestantism | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/basic-protestant-beliefsa115886#ixzz1yvLUO843

The term "Christian" comes from the New Testament book of Acts, where Luke (the likely author) explains that followers (or "disciples") of Jesus were first called "Christians" in the city of Antioch (Acts 11:26). The term stuck, and quickly came to define all those who believed in and followed Jesus of Nazareth. Christianity is therefore a monotheistic faith that holds the first-century Jewish leader named Jesus of Nazareth to be the divine Son of God (John 3:16) sent to redeem the world from its sins (Romans 10:9-10). Christian beliefs about Jesus are drawn essentially from the New Testament. Though the Christian faith is arguably in decline in western Europe and, to some extent, in North America, Christianity remains the world's largest religion, with more than two billion adherents. Yet Christianity itself is divided into three main branches, which are Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy,

Read more at Suite101: Basic Protestant Beliefs: Principles, Branches, and Movements Within Protestantism | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/basic-protestant-beliefsa115886#ixzz1yvLZGs00
Definition of Protestant

Protestantism, as a historical movement, began in October 1517, when a monk named Martin Luther nailed his Ninety-Five Theses to the wall of a German church. Luther's protests against the Roman Catholic Church and his enunciation of doctrinal differences gave him and his followers the name "Protestant" and launched the Protestant Reformation. While the term "Protestant" historically referred to those who broke their allegiance to the Roman Catholic Church during the tumult of the Protestant Reformation, it has since come to describe virtually all non-Catholic Christians (particularly in the West), including Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists and Presbyterians, among others.
Principles of Protestantism

Luther's protests against Roman Catholicism united many who had long held disagreements with the Vatican and encouraged others to explore new differences. In addition, the printing press and the wider distribution of Bibles fueled more of the reformation. While there was some diversity in the Protestant movement then (and much more today), there was general Protestant agreement on the following main points:

Sola Scriptura - Doctrine is "by Scripture alone" as opposed to papal decree or council edict. Sola Fide - Justification is received "by faith alone" as opposed to works or sacraments.

Sola Gratia - Salvation comes "by grace alone." Sola Christus - Atonement for sins is "by and through Christ alone." Soli Deo gloria - All glory is to be given "to God alone."

Major Branches and Movements Within Protestantism

Since the Middle Ages, Protestantism has grown to encompass a wide array of beliefs, traditions, and denominations. Most Protestants could be categorized in the following philosophical branches:

Anglicanism - When the Church of England broke from papal authority, the Anglican tradition was born. At first, the split was primarily personal (King Henry VIII wanted a divorce) and political. It later became theological, as English Protestants laid out key differences with the Vatican. Mainline Protestantism - Churches and structured denominations that trace their origins to the European Reformers (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, etc.) or Anglicanism. Modern or Postmodern Liberalism - A school of thought within Protestantism that encourages conscience, Enlightenment-driven inquiry, and (in some cases) postmodern thought as a balance to Sola Scriptura. Evangelicalism - Christians who emphasize personal conversion to Jesus Christ, Bible study (and Sola Scriptura), morality and ethics (as defined scripturally), and the spreading of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Pentecostalism and "Spirit-Filled" Christians - Those who believe that all the apostolic gifts, including faith healing, speaking in tongues, etc. are available to the church today. Some within this camp believe that these gifts are at the discretion of the Holy Spirit, while others believe they are a sign of salvation or spiritual maturity.

There are, of course, spin-offs and variations with the above categories, and some "Protestants" who don't lend themselves well to any category. Indeed, many "Protestants" don't consider themselves part of Protestantism at all. All labels come with limitations and difficulties. Rather than categorize and compartmentalize people according to certain denominations or movements, it's best to let each person speak for himself or herself. Understanding the major movements and branches of Protestantism is important, but such understanding should be held with an open hand and considered with an open mind.

Read more at Suite101: Basic Protestant Beliefs: Principles, Branches, and Movements Within Protestantism | Suite101.com http://suite101.com/article/basic-protestant-beliefsa115886#ixzz1yvLcvAJx

Protestantism is the branch of Christianity that split away from the Roman Catholic Church as a result of the Reformation during the 15th and 16th centuries in Europe. Originating in the "95 Theses" of Martin Luther and heavily influenced by John Calvin during its early development, denominations of Protestantism are now the dominant religions in much of central and northern Europe as well as North America and are widely practiced throughout much of the rest of the world.[1]

Name
The name "Protestant" originated from the "protestation" in which the leading German princes friendly to the Reformation united with fourteen cities of Germany on Apr.\il 25, 1529, against the decree of the Roman majority of the second Diet of Speyer. It was a designation quite colorless from the religious point of view, and was first used as a political epithet by the opponents of those who signed the protest. It was not necessarily applied in an opprobrious sense, however, so that the adherents of the new doctrines could interpret it as testifying to their steadfastness and courage. It has always been less common in Germany than elsewhere, though later, in the time of the Enlightenment, the implication it carried that the type of Christianity which it designated stood for freedom and tolerance commended it to many. In the nineteenth century it became the shibboleth of the "liberal" ecclesiastical and theological schools; more recently the growth of ultramontanism as a political power has given it a wider currency; and it is very frequent for any non-Roman Catholic to term himself a Protestant, whether he professes Christianity or not.

The adherents of the Reformation at first preferred to call themselves "Evangelicals," while their opponents styled them "Lutherans," "Zwinglians," "Calvinists," etc., thereby emphasizing their sectarian and heretical character, and implying at best that they were a schismatic body separated from the true Catholic Church. The same names were employed by the Protestants themselves in their factional disputes. After 1530 the expression "Adherents of the Augsburg Confession" came into use. The French name, "Huguenots," originated in Tours.

The early Protestants shrank from styling themselves a church, Luther asserting merely that he and his adherents belonged to the universal Church. The idea that the Evangelicals or the Lutherans were the Church arose in connection with the concept of the Church as a school, helped on by the course of events. It was customary to speak of "our churches" (congregations) and hence, after the churches of the states were consolidated and had adopted more or less generally one creed, the phrase "our Church" came into vogue, and was perverted into "we are the Church."

Lutheranism
The German Protestants, when they found it necessary to speak of themselves as a distinct organization, used at first, and as late as the Formula of Concord, the term "Reformed Church." It was after 1580 and during the controversy over the doctrine of ubiquity that the "Lutheran Church" was first heard of, though circumstances did not tend to make the name popular. About 1600 the Calvinists and Philippists began to appropriate to themselves the name "Reformed," and to call those "Lutherans" who differed from them. During the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648) this usage became general and was promoted by custom outside of Germany. In France and Holland the Protestants always called their churches "Reformed," implying that they were Calvinistic or Zwinglian rather than Lutheran; and in England other names were given non-Roman Catholic organizations, such as "Established Church," "Presbyterian Church," and the like, none of them being named after any of their leaders.

External Development
Territorial Conquests

About 1600, or at the outbreak of the Thirty Years' War in 1618, the rising tide of the Reformation had reached the climax of its first impulse. Meanwhile the Counter-Reformation by the Catholics was largely successful in Poland, Italy, France and Spain. In Germany, however, the Protestant estates were the more numerous and the more powerful; the Huguenots in France had attained an assured position by the Edict of Nantes; the northern Netherlands had renounced Catholicism; in England the only question was whether the established Church of England or the Puritans should prevail; and the Scandinavian north had become thoroughly Lutheran. In general the Germanic countries retained the gains of Protestantism during the Reformation period, although some parts along the Rhine always were Catholic. The secure position guaranteed to the Protestants of Germany by the Peace of Westphalia were permanent. The royal house of Saxony became Catholic; the leadership of Protestant Germany was now Prussia; in England and in Scandinavia Roman Catholicism was, and remained, excluded. In France, on the other hand, Protestantism was well-nigh exterminated by the revocation of the Edict of Nantes, and Protestants lost ground in Poland Bohemia, Austria, and Hungary.
Concept of Toleration

The Enlightenment had great influence upon the external development of Protestantism; it created the idea of tolerance and changed the position of the State churches. The Reformation

had originally held to the old doctrine of a single Christian Church and but one true Christian faith, and in its way it went as far in actually constituting this Church and faith as the old Church had done. In the opinion of Luther the word of God and the sacraments were the marks of the Church and the faith; and, with Melanchthon's help, he thought he had formulated these marks in articles of faith which might serve as legal bases for deciding between conflicting parties, each of which claimed to represent the Church and the faith. Luther also believed that the Christian authorities should lend their aid to the Gospel, so that, with his approval, the medieval theory of the relations between the Church and the State was carried over into Protestantism. The Peace of Westphalia (1648) marked the beginning of the idea of toleration, decreeing that Catholics and Protestants should no longer regard one another as heretics, and providing that in case a Protestant prince went over from the Lutheran to the Reformed confession or vice versa, his subjects should be free to follow or not. Increasingly, the states tolerated small Protestant sects. By the late 18th century Pietism and the progress of theological thought made princes question whether it was to their interest to uphold pure doctrine with too great zeal, while new theories of the relation of Church and State prepared the way for the belief that the State should exercise only a general supervision over the Church and should treat different religious bodies alike. Theological toleration was first granted among the Protestants in the Netherlands, where the Remonstrants and other sectarian congregations were tolerated as early as the seventeenth century. In Prussia Frederick the Great was the first German prince to give freedom to the Mennonites, Unitarians, and others. By the 19th century all German states place the Catholic and Protestant Churches de facto on an equal footing, and the equality of individuals before the law is guaranteed, although that did not stop Bismark from attacking Catholics politically in the Kulturkampf. A Protestant presence has grown up in Roman Catholic territories and vice versa. In addition to the Lutheran and Reformed established churches a number of "Free Churches" have sprung up, so that Protestantism in Germany at the present time is highly complex. In almost all other Christian countries toleration was made a principle of the law of the land during the 19th century, at least with reference to Catholics and Protestants, in most cases with reference to all sorts of Christian sects, old and new. At the same time the principle of an Established Church has not been abandoned, though it has been restricted. There are still many established or rather privileged churches, both Catholic and Protestant, in Europe. The United States and France are the only countries in which before World War I there was complete separation of Church and State.
20th century

A characteristic of later Protestantism is the very general tendency of groups to combine, though often by the loosest of bonds. [Gatherings like those of the Evangelical Alliance may be mentioned as manifestations of the tendency. Denominational lines are less closely drawn than of old, there is a disposition to set aside minor differences in the interest of Christian fellowship, and separate organizations have been united in England and America among the Congregational, Methodist, and Presbyterian Churches. Above all, there is an ever-increasing disposition to combine for practical Christian work (see Church Federation).] A "German Evangelical Church Committee" was formed in 1903 as the result of the recognized need of a confederation of the national Churches and to work for their common interests. The missionary activity of the

nineteenth century, both at home and abroad, and the manifold forms of benevolent and charitable work which are sometimes loosely comprehended under the term "home missions," are notable and vital characteristics of modern Protestantism; and articles on work for special classesemigrants, Jews, seamen, workingmen, etc. The Bible and Tract societies, societies like those for the Propagation of the Gospel and the Promotion of Christian Knowledge, and many others have been active. They reveal the the great development and achievements of organized Christian work in the 19th and 20th centuries by modern Protestants. In connection with home missions the work of Salvation Army (in Britain and the U.S.) is notable, both for its results and because it well illustrates certain differences between German and Anglo-Saxon Protestantism.

The Fundamental Principles: Luther

A theory of Protestantism which has been widely prevalent makes it consist of a formal and a material principle, the former grounded in the doctrine of the all-sufficiency of Scripture for everything in the Church, the latter in the concept of justification by faith. Attempts to expound the theory have usually suffered from lack of clearness and faulty method, the attempt having been made to construct without sifting the concrete historical material, so that only too often the result has been to confuse the two questions, how Protestantism actually presents itself in history and how the investigator would like it to be. Perhaps the most satisfactory method is to begin with a sketch of certain of the ideas of Martin Luther, the main founder of Protestantism. The chief points wherein Luther appeared as a new messenger of the Gospel may be grouped under the five heads which follow.
Norms of Faith

Regarding the Bible as the only indubitable source of authority in religion, Luther rejected the Roman Catholic teaching regarding tradition. Concerning inspiration he stood on the same ground as the Roman Church, but he declared that the latter did not accord to the Scriptures their full rights. In controversy as to whether he might really and justly appeal to the Scriptures, he asserted what has become the distinctively Protestant positionthat the Scriptures are not obscure and in need of the explanation of the Fathers, and, secondly, that they have not a twofold sense, a historical and a spiritual, but a literal sense only. Along with his unreserved readiness to follow blindly the authority of Scripture as the word of Godqualified, however, on occasion by recourse to experienceLuther recognized the ecumenical creeds, and with them the old dogmas of the Trinity and the two natures of Christ, which he found confirmed by the Scriptures. It was his method to press forward from the human nature of Christ to true knowledge of God, and this method has always been important in Protestantism. It has regulated the pericopes in the Lutheran Church, has pointed inquirers to the practical way, and has centered attention upon edification and the knowledge of God in the benefits of Christ as the essence of knowledge. Of the creeds, Luther held the Apostles' to be the most important, regarding it as a precious document of antiquity which confirmed his understanding of the Gospel, and appealing to it to prove that he taught nothing new, but only the genuine old doctrine. He consistently represented that the ecumenical creeds formed a bond, and the strongest bond, between the "kingdom of the pope" and the Evangelical churches; and in the dogmas of the Trinity and the two natures of Christ he saw in like manner a certain measure of common ground. On the other hand, while both the Roman Catholic Church and Luther maintained the inspiration of the Scriptures, their

mode of treatment was too divergent to permit the German Reformer to feel any special sympathy with the ancient Church on this score.
Private Judgment

When Luther fell back upon his experiences with reference to the Bible and Christ, and renounced all church teachings contrary to these experiences after, in his hour of need in the monastery, he had failed to find comfort in what she authoritatively offered him, he followed a conviction of individual responsibility and compulsion which Protestants since his time have designated as "private judgment." In thus exalting his personal religious and moral convictions above authority and tradition he acted in the spirit of the Renaissance. At the same time, while the Renaissance relied without reserve upon the autonomy of the individual, and, in the last analysis, on purely empirical, egoistic, and unmoral individualism, Luther added from the word of God the concept of man created in the image of God, and understood Christianity as both freedom and compulsion. It has ever since been the problem of Protestantism to reconcile the freedom of the world of man, and of the Church, with God's revelation, and to assign to the conscience its proper function as guide of conduct and belief when enlightened by the Gospel, or the law of Christ. Luther well knew the limits of conscience in judging others, and he was willing to leave each one to God, even the heretics if they would only keep silence and refrain from disturbing civil affairs by agitation. For himself, he recognized that he was a debtor to the Gospel, and he asserted his independence in matters of belief only in so far as the new man in him had taken the place of the Old Adam. He never lost the consciousness of sin, and by word and act he made clear the true place of conscience in Christianity.
Justification by Faith

Luther's concept of justification was derived immediately from the Bible, although he always defined it in the sense and words of Augustinian and scholastic tradition: justificatio"a setting right""a making over of the sinful man to a righteous one." His view differed from the Roman only in that this making over comes to pass through faith alone, and not in any way through works or merit. Luther's dissent from Roman teaching developed from opposition to the doctrine of penance as it was then presented. Roman Catholicism taught that justification is attained through the means of grace of the Church, that is, first through baptism, which removes the taint of original sin, then through penance by those who, after baptism, fall into mortal sin. In the monastery Luther became convinced that he had lost the forgiveness and grace of baptism, and with burning zeal he turned to the sacrament of penance. Here the system of laying down stern conditions of absolution, which were almost invariably modified in virtue of the "power of the keys" (see Keys, Power of the), both terrified him and filled him with doubt. In reading the Pauline epistles, moreover, he came to believe that God offers his grace without conditions and without regard to merit, provided only that there be faith. He likewise came to the conclusion that justification abides, while grace is ever ready for the acceptance of faith without need of any intermediary. It was in asserting this free and unconditional offer of God's grace to faith that Luther broke with the Roman doctrine of justification, which teaches increasing degrees of grace, and that to become worthy to share in grace man must in each degree do "what in him lies."

Luther's doctrine of justification is nothing less than a new concept of God. It means that God is love. Love is, to be sure, one of the attributes of God in the Roman Catholic system, but it is there placed after God's freedom and omnipotence, and is not the essence of his being. To Luther God, both as he is revealed in Christ and as he is still concealed from man, is unlimited, positive love. His love is so great and mighty and mysterious that the human mind can not fathom it; it is in every sense too high for reason, and is revealed in Christ, who is God in human form.
New Ethical and Legal Standards

To Luther it seemed an incomprehensible misunderstanding when it was alleged that his doctrine of justification opened the way to moral laxity; in his opinion it alone gave real life and constancy to moral earnestness and joyousness. Faith did not free from the obligation of works, but only from excessive valuation of them. The certainty of pardon, he thought, assured to the guilty one that he who pardoned would help, and furnished the strongest impulse to the will to do penance, that is, to forsake sin and perform good works. Luther's opponents, on their part, could not comprehend how he was able to find the Roman Catholic form of penance too lax and yet hold to the thought of a God whose mercy was without limit. But Luther saw no incompatibility in a merciful and a holy God. He believed in a twofold destiny of men, blessedness and condemnation. God's unlimited mercy is the most effective means he can use to win men to the former; not fear, but gratitude, is the strongest motive to obedience; and it is inconceivable that the merciful, pardoning God will not supply moral power where it is needed. Luther broke through the external character of the law by explaining it, not as the inscrutable will of God which must be accepted implicitly as a revelation, but as based in the divine nature itself. In like manner the German Reformer transformed the concept of the blessedness of heaven. To the Roman Catholic Church the blessedness of heaven is the "beatific vision," which is the comprehensible aim of a Christianity whose God is blessed by virtue of his exalted nature. For Luther, too, God is blessed according to his nature, but this nature is love, and when one has on earth experienced proof of God's unwavering and unfathomable love in the forgiveness of sins, then there is life and blessedness in the present world, a foretaste of what will be fully enjoyed only in heaven. For the Roman Catholic the ecstatic visions of mysticism are the foretaste of heaven on earth. Luther was at times influenced by mysticism, but he never longed for visions and ecstasies, and his mysticism was only a means of learning and drawing near to God. This new idea of blessedness, with his concept of God, made it possible for Luther to speak of the certitude of salvation; and he could even make confidence in it a Christian duty, since God is love. The thought of God's ever certain grace meant to him, not indifference and weakness on the part of God toward sin, but God's power over sin; and blessedness meant for him, not a morally neutral good, but good as good, and the vital element of heaven. Luther likewise had a new idea of the content of the good, or the law. For Roman Catholicism the moral law in its final analysis is a collection of statutes commanding and forbidding definite things, a code decreed by God instead of man. For Luther, the law (which the natural man can not understand) becomes a single idea applicable to every individual and every situation. As God is love and can not help giving forth love, so he requires nothing but love from any one. Faith feels an inner compulsion to show forth love, and makes the Christian the servant of all, even while exalting him as lord of all things.

Church and Sacraments

Luther regarded the Church as in principle nothing but a community of individuals. The only necessary mark of the Church is the presence of believers, who are united through Christ, the head of the body of which each believer is a member. The thought of the body of Christ means for Luther that the Church is not an organization, but an organism, which lives in and with Christ himself. Christ's spirit and word are the medium by which the Church works. In Roman Catholic teaching the presence of priests properly ordained is essential to the Church, not the attendance of worshipers; and in so far as the Roman theory is not that of a sacred order, it is expressed in legal ordinances. Luther thinks in principle only of an attitude of mind which can not be expressed in terms of law. Luther's new ideas concerning the constitution of the Church are developed in his An den christlichen Adel. He preferred to say "Christendom" rather than "Church," and in this work he represents Christendom as ordered in estates and callings. He declares that the worldly estates belong to the body of Christ and are on an equality with spiritual persons, both in their religious quality and from the point of view of their moral actions. A rightly chosen priest is no different from a public official, and all men are alike fit for the service which Christ has appointed to Christendom, namely, to work together for the good of body and soul. Luther by no means had in mind only the nobles, to whom he addressed his appeal, but expressly mentioned shoemakers, smiths, and farmers. They must all know that they are all spiritual estates, all equally ordained priests and bishops, to the end that each in his way may be useful and serviceable to the other and help him to live and grow as a Christian in his appointed place. Luther often declared that, while all are spiritual priests, there are also priests of the Church, that is, those whose duty it is to administer the word and the sacraments. This leads to his theories of the Church in relation to its rites and ceremonies. He never doubted that there should be special provision for all the elements of worship in Christendom; what was new with him was that he distinguished between the concepts "Church" and "organization for public worship," considering the latter, so to speak, as only a province of the former. He found no difficulty, however, in regarding the Church, in its capacity of an organization for public worship, as instituted by God and ordered by Christ, endowed by him with special gifts. Its function is to extend the kingdom of Christ, its foundation the command to baptize. He was convinced that any Christian could read the Bible and profit from it, but he believed that all, himself included, needed also the instruction of well-ordered preaching. He would not, however, have the hearing of sermons made a "commandment of the Church," aiding in salvation by compliance with a law. Hence, in ordering the Evangelical service Luther put all emphasis on the preaching of the word of God, to the end that the Bible might be understood and have its full efficiency as the true means of grace. He put the sacraments by the side of preaching, because in his own experience he had found help and comfort in the sacraments. In his doctrine of the Lord's Supper he retained more of the old doctrines than elsewhere; but he utterly rejected the concept of sacrifice, and put no other interpretation on the mystery of the Supper than that it inspired the trembling, guilty conscience to faith. His regard for church services and rites never became a snare to him. He was convinced that unjust excommunication does not exclude from the Church; he taught that if the priests of the Church will not serve, any Christian brother may officiate in their place; and he regarded

parents' reading of the Bible, catechetical instruction, and prayers at home as supplementary to the similar offices of the Church, and filled with the same sort of power.

The Lutheran Church The Reformed Church

Character and Foundation

Not withstanding various creeds and confessions prepared for different lands, it is allowable to speak of the Reformed Churches, since the characteristic features of these formulations are not essentially different. No more will be attempted here than to note the peculiarities of the Reformed body in comparison with the Lutheran. The later was the earlier form of Protestantism; for this reason it is necessarily considered first in a historical treatment of the subject. Numerically the Reformed Church is to-day by far the stronger. Originally the reformation was a single movement, but before long it was carried forward by very different personalities. The greatest man of the time beside Luther who renounced the ancient faith was Zwingli, though conflict ensued when the two leaders met. This fact was due in great measure to the natural limitations of each, and to Luther's inability to understand his fellow Reformer, particularly with reference to the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, even though the real divergence of the Reformed from the Lutherans on the latter tenet was due not to Zwingli, but to Calvin. Zwingli, hoever founded no school, and the only region which can be regarded as Zwinglian, even in a limited sense, is German Switzerland, though a few survivals of his system may be traced in Reformed organization and modes of worship. The true founder of the Reformed Church was Calvin, who was, in some respects more influential even than Luther.
Theory and Use of the Bible

To Calvin the Bible was in a peculiar sense the one thing and everything. This does not imply that he believed more fully in the inspiration of every word than did Luther, or that Melanchthon was less convinced that the Bible alone gives man certainty; but that Calvin took the concept of the whole Bible as the very word of God more deeply than did either Luther or Melanchthon, and it had for him more practical consequences. He applied his theory of the Bible more logically than did Luther or Melanchthon. Luther, like Melanchthon, was concerned primarily only with what "brings Christ," so that he could disregard much of the Old Testament. For Calvin, Christ (or our salvation) is the center of the Bible. But he was in a certain sense more of an exegete than Luther or Melanchthon. He saw much in the bible which they did not see, and he let much work upon his mind which Luther put off with the reflection that it did not concern Christ, and which Melanchthon, with his pedagogic interests passed over as too dark or too subtle. Furthermore, Calvin found relations with Christ where Luther did not find them, and he had a more abstract or legalistic intuition of Christ than had Luther. Luther looked into the heart of Christ and there found the heart of God, but for Calvin neither Christ nor God had much heart. He found the doctrine of reprobation in the Bible, and therefore accepted it calmly and unmoved, reserving all recognition of divine mercy and long-suffering for the elect. Luther was disturbed by the twofold

predestination which he found in the Bible and pronounced it a riddle. For Calvin this riddle did not exist; he held that what God does is right because he does it; and he ignored the presence of any moral problem. With this Calvin made the divine motive in creation and redemption not love, but glory, so that he could write: "Our salvation was the care of God in such a way that, not forgetful of himself, he set his own glory in the first rank, and therefore created the world to the end that it should be the scene of his own glory." Divine omnipotence, working evil as well as good, stands first in Calvin's system, preeminent over divine justice, and supreme above every law, whether natural or revealed. This Calvinistic concept of the divine omnipotence was momentous for the Reformed Church because its originator succeeded in convincing many that it is the fundamental Biblical concept of God. Nevertheless, many of the Reformed have revolted against it. Arguments against predestination can be found in the Bible, and therefore this dogma has always been the chief source of controversy in Reformed theology.
Legalism and Otherworldliness

With Calvin, as with Melanchthon, the thought of repentance went with that of promise. Repentance must precede, although it does not produce, justification. How repentance manifests itself, what God requires as sanctification, and how the moral demands on the Christian are satisfied, Calvin determined from the Bible as a code of statutory laws. He would have a purification of the acts and forms of life after a Biblical pattern which Luther and Melanchthon never dreamed of. As a matter of fact, he succeeded in divesting Geneva of its old national customs, and everywhere in the Reformed Church appears the same tendency to conform the external matters of life to the words of the Bible in a manner quite foreign to Lutheranism. At the same time, Reformed morality has never spent itself in striving after "apostolic simplicity" and the like, and while the "weightier matters of the law" are never forgotten, there has always been a sharp line of demarcation between the Lutherans and Reformed, as seen, for instance, in the development of Puritanism. A noteworthy trait in Calvin's personal piety is due to the large part which the future life had in his thinking. If the world is all for God's glory, the Christian has nothing else to do in the world and in his calling than to serve God. That it is well to fight against every worldly pleasure is the fundamental thought of Calvin's ethics; and the abnegation of self is held to be the height of Christian achievement. The Christian can find joy only in the hope of heaven and in the vision of God in his immediate glory. The Reformed Church, furthermore, shows a tendency to direct its thoughts to heaven in a way which works on the imagination more than is the case with Lutherans. Calvin was no mystic; but the long list of independents and sects among the Reformed shows a propensity to mysticism, ecstasy, and fanaticism. Chiliastic expectations and the like are also more at home among the Reformed than among Lutherans.
Theocracy and Church Freedom

Concerning the State, Luther and Calvin agreed only in holding that it had a duty from God with respect to the Gospel. Luther believed that Church and State are independent, each in its sphere, but mutually bound to help one another. Only when the institutions of the Church (bishops,

synods, etc.) prove insufficient, is the State called on to intervene outside of its peculiar field (justice, defense, oversight of civil life, trade, etc.). The Church may advise the State, but the latter should finally determine what it will do. It may be inefficient or wholly indifferent, but this does not justify open resistance; the Christian attitude toward the government must then become one of passive endurance (so both Luther and Melanchthon). In marked contrast with this, the Reformed never scrupled to take arms against the State when it opposed them (in France, the Netherlands, England); they held that a government which sets itself against God and the Bible thereby forfeits its rights. Neither may the government decide upon its course of action in concrete cases; its duty is laid down by God in the Bible. The Old-Testament pattern was ever in Calvin's mind; the Old Testament furnished him with his basis of criminal law; and the end in view was to produce a "people of God" by governmental agencies. Unlike Melanchthon, Calvin desired to set up a theocracy, though not a hierocracy; he required obedience to God, to Christ, and to the Bible, not to himself or to the Church. While Lutheranism, as a rule, remained subject to the jurisdiction of even unfriendly civil authority, non-German Protestantism assumed a less pliant attitude, even proceeding, as in the case of the Huguenots and Puritans, to armed resistance. This position, however, was not merely caused by surrounding conditions, but was a matter of actual principles derived from the Bible, which also furnished the theory of the internal organization of the Reformed Churches (see Presbyter, Presbyterate, II.). The Reformed Church often assumed the character of a State Church, particularly in Zwinglian territory, where ecclesiastical administration even became part of the department of State; but in such cases the State was either so strong or so friendly that no one thought of claiming independence. Secessions have been not infrequent (cf. Scotland). The principle has always been that the Reformed congregation of God is sovereign, subject to but one lord, Christ. All members stand on an equality, and officials are appointed and controlled directly by the congregation as a necessary inference of this independent sovereignty. Church government for Calvin meant independent discipline, whereas the Lutherans made this a duty of the State (see Church Discipline). In the opinion of Calvin the Church was the congregation. Its rites and ceremonies were a part of the general apparatus for the glory of God, and the pedagogic element in divine service sank into the background. It was a duty to exclude the unworthy. Desire to fulfil this duty led to a most minute and active pastoral care, and, in general, it may be said that the Reformed Church puts more stress than the Lutheran upon this part of the pastor's work. The Reformed Church has also shown great missionary and proselytizing zeala direct consequence of its concept of the glory of God as the chief end of man.
The Lords Supper and Liturgy

The difference concerning the Lord's Supper was originally felt (by Lutherans at any rate) to be the greatest distinction between the two branches of Protestantism (see Lord's Supper for full statement of both Lutheran and Reformed views and practise), although, as a matter of fact, the bitter controversy was concerned chiefly with differences in the form of the ceremony. The theory of worship differs throughout in the two Churches. Here also Calvinism claimed to follow the Biblical pattern. Calvin tried to arrange all festivals according to the New Testament, but in so doing he had to introduce many "necessary" innovationsSunday (from the seventeenth century, first among the Puritans, = the Sabbath) as the only holy day (no more saints' days, and scarcely a trace of Christmas), no pictures or images, no candles, no altar (only a table), no

vestments, no organ, no hymns (only the Psalms), no liturgy, or a most meager one. Lutheranism, on the other hand, retained all of the old and familiar service that could be interpreted as Evangelical and modeled its liturgy for Sunday and for the Eucharist on the service of the mass. The Reformed Lord's Supper, on the contrary, is held to be based simply upon the apostolic pattern. A noteworthy fact in Reformed church history is the continued production of creeds or "confessions" (as the Reformed prefer to call them). It shows a different attitude toward symbols from that of the Lutherans; the confessions are regarded as actual statements of the chief doctrines, and of late it has sometimes been declared in credal form that this or that tradition is no longer believed in. The great weight laid on the forms of life as well as of the service and constitution of the Church has promoted the growth of sects, since where such things are supposed to be derived from the Bible alone, there is often much room for difference of opinion as to what the Bible requires. Lastly it may be noted that in the time of orthodoxy the Reformed Church was much more productive in scholarship than the Lutheran.

Internal Development in 19th century

Pietism and the Enlightenment

The great movement of Pietism was, properly speaking, only an earnest attempt to give practical realization to the standards of the time of orthodoxy, especially in private life. The Bible was not made the sole authority of faith and life to the satisfaction of many earnest but one-sided souls. The Protestant Church was distrusted as having become in its way as much bound to its system and as authoritative as the Roman. The Reformed Church, however, for all its precision of definition, had a vein of underlying mysticism, while Lutheranism had an impulse from its founders to interpret repentance and conversion as a violent change in the individual life. The result was that form of Pietism which is, perhaps, the most importantthe painful striving of individuals to make their Christian calling surer and strenuous efforts to attain personal Christianity, true inwardness, and depth. As a whole, however, Pietism exercised a conservative influence on Protestantism, and afforded orthodoxy the new strength to arise to a veritable renaissance after the decline of the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century. The Enlightenment gave Protestantism a distinctly new character. It signified for Protestantism as such the letting loose of its secular interests, and in spirit was more akin to the Renaissance than to the Reformation. Clericalism and orthodoxy it regarded as its foes because of their claim to possess an authoritative, divine truth which the human mind might not criticize. The rapid growth of the commerce of England and Holland in the seventeenth century and the wealth which followed brought to these non-Roman Catholic lands questions of all sortssocial, political, philosophical, and religious. Bacon's attempt to found a new practical science was in part a reaction against Melanchthon's method. The time had come for Protestantism to have a deductive philosophy, at least of the world, and it is hardly an accident that, with the exception of the Jew, Spinoza, all great philosophers since Descartes have sprung from Protestantism, and that most of them have had a certain sympathy with it.

The Passing of Orthodoxy

As a system Protestantism is intellectual and spiritual rather than liturgical and legalistic. Protestant theology of the seventeenth century addressed itself to the common people. One might say that it aimed to make every Christian a theologian. The specific endeavor was to make the Bible plain and widely known, since only thus, it was believed, could piety be rightly grounded and real. Before the end of the century, however, theologians were rudely disturbed in this work by the demand to judge the results of reason simply by the weight of the evidence for them. When this was applied to orthodox notions of natural knowledge of God and his law, a yawning chasm opened, for theology regarded natural knowledge as a remnant of an earlier knowledge which was supernatural in its origin as was all truth, which is revealed in full in the Bible; and in the background lurked the conviction that the unaided mind is impotent. The doctrines of the Enlightenment set up a new kind of mind, confident in itself, and feeling no need of instruction from religion. There was a revival of the spirit of the Renaissance, which had been repressed by the Reformation, although sympathy with the Reformation was not lacking. Luther had appealed to his experience as a witness to truth, but his time was not able to understand and explain fully the functions of experience in relation to religion. The Enlightenment took up this problem. The controversy in principle concerned the place of supranaturalism in the search for truth. All sorts of compromises were tried by both sides. The enlightened were ready to defend revelation after they had proved that its content agreed with the investigations of reason, and the orthodox reversed the process. Finally, a new point of view was won in a changed apprehension of what is credible. The contest was fought out chiefly in the fields of the natural sciences and history. The faith of the Church, inevitably from its dependence on the Bible, was closely bound up with the ancient notions of the world and the Ptolemaic system. In spite of orthodox opposition, the new Copernican system steadily won more and more the adherence of thinking minds, and the new science even invaded the domain of religion with the so-called physico-theological argument for the existence of God. Herein it vindicated the power of the reason to attain real and sure belief in God. Had the new science issued only in skepticism or materialism, it must have disintegrated Protestantism. But when it brought the proof that reason is capable of independent and convincing achievement in the religious sphere, it opened the way to a general revision of the concept of God with the help of reason. Incidentally it cut at the root of the belief in miracles, and tended to make such things as the belief in a devil, in witches, and in magical powers obsolete in Protestant piety. In the field of history actual experience first shook faith in a special and positive revelation. The wrangling of denominations and sects and the misery of the religious wars indeed justified a doubt whether the true criterion of truth had been found. This was the background of the first deistic essays, which sprang expressly from religious interest. Then came deeper and wider study of past history, an expansion of geographical and ethnographical knowledge, and the first real acquaintance with heathen religions. It had to be admitted that antiquity offers many examples of a noble religiosity, and when it was asserted that all religions have an identical kernel, orthodoxy, because of its theory of a primitive revelation, at least could not deny that this was probable. The way was opened wide to the acceptance, in the name of Christianity itself, of general moral reason as the supreme guide in religious things. Then the very citadel of orthodoxy

was attacked. Locke declared the Bible the palladium of rational Christianity, and so simplified its moral teaching that the natural law seemed no longer a hinting at the latter but its real content. The conviction became established that orthodoxy had fallen far short of understanding the Bible. About the middle of the eighteenth century Protestantism looked back upon its orthodox period as sunken in deep error, and considered pure Christianity the champion of a natural religion, rational in its metaphysics and its morality. The idea of striving after perfection, immanent in the human spirit, and to be educated and molded by Church and State, was now its guiding-star in morals. The solution of its problems, both moral and religious, was sought not so much by laying down statutory requirements as by seeking underlying principles. Differences of individual opinion came to be tolerated, not because of an indifference to truth, but because it was recognized that the way of the Gospel is. to convince.
Late Nineteenth Century

The first half of the nineteenth century witnessed a revival of orthodoxy, which was followed by a new pietism that repeated all the excesses of the older in its recoil from the Enlightenment. The eager and fruitful interest in world history which characterized the century had its influence on church history and Biblical history, and made these departments the foremost in theological study. It seems to some that Albrecht Ritschl has rendered a distinct service to Protestantism by his powerful combination of the historical and the religious aspects of the person of Christ, but the time has not yet come for a system of dogmatics on the basis of investigable history. Neither is it possible at present to say what will be the ultimate significance for Protestantism of the latest school, that of comparative religion. It betokens a real gain in its interest in what was once thought alien and remote, while in its antagonism to all supranaturalism it betrays sympathies with the Enlightenment. The social and political changes inaugurated by the French Revolution, and the rapid and unprecedented development of industry and commerce, have brought moral problems which at first inspire more alarm than courage. Under the burden of the day's work and duties it is easy to forget that the mills of God grind slowly. The century has made the different denominations better acquainted with one another. During the last generation North America has come vigorously to the front in the field of scientific theological work. That the old conceptions of the Bible have their stronghold there at present is not strange. It must be admitted that in both the Lutheran and the Reformed Church the old types everywhere live on in spite of many readjustments.
Relation to the State

The rationalizing of the lex natur gave a new character to the jus natur as well as to natural religion and morality. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the State became continually more and more secularized under the influence of the new school of jurists (Grotius, Hobbes, Pufendorf, Thomasius, Pfaff, etc.), who found its basis in the consent of the governed rather than in divine right, and made its aim the welfare of the citizens, at the same time limiting welfare to the things of this world. Under this concept of the State every citizen has freedom, including the privilege of thinking as he pleases so long as he does not disturb public order. Religion becomes a private matter of the individual, and the State renounces all attempts to

support and govern or control the Church, except in so far as the functions of the latter have points of contact with the interests and aims of the State. Of course, the old order was-not done away with in radical manner all at once, and governments adopted the new idea in different measure. In general, however, the spirit of the time seemed to threaten the complete disorganization of the Church, especially in Germany, where the existing order rested on the very different conceptions of Melanchthon. On Reformed territory the danger was less, since the Protestant Churches there were generally independently organized from the beginning. Anglicanism and Scandinavian Lutheranism had also a conserving force in the retention of the episcopate. After the founding of the Union in Prussia there was a reaction, due, in part, to the Reformation jubilee in 1817, which directed attention to the historical origin of Protestantism and the concrete ideas and aims of the Reformers. By 1900, however, the complete separation of Church and State has begun everywhere in Germany. The Protestant people still cherish their old church customs, with the possible exception of the Lord's Supper, and the interest shown by the laity in the scientific work of theology is full of promise.