A History of the Moravian Church Part 29

Hermann Romer: Nicolaus Ludwig, Graf von Zinzendorf (Gnadau, Unitats-Buchhandlung. 1900).

E. W. Croeger: Geschichte der erneuerten Bruder-Kirche (Gnadau, Unitats-Buchhandlung. 1852-1854).

David Cranz: Ancient and Modern History of the Brethren (translated by Benjamin La Trobe. 1780). By no means out of date for Zinzendorf's times.

John Beck Holmes: History of the Protestant Church of the United Brethren (Vol. II. 1830).

J. Taylor Hamilton: History of the Moravian Church during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Bethlehem, Pa. Times Publishing Co. 1900).

Augustus Gottlieb Spangenberg: Life of Zinzendorf (English translation by Samuel Jackson. 1836).

Gerhard Reichel: August Gottlieb Spangenberg, Bischof der Bruderkirche (Tubingen, J. C. B. Mohr, 1906. Of exceptional value and delightfully candid.)

Original Sources: For lack of s.p.a.ce these cannot be enumerated here, but the student may find them all referred to in the foregoing works by Becker, Muller, Schmidt, Cranz, and Reichel.

IV.--MORAVIANS IN ENGLAND.

Gerhard Wauer: Beginnings of the Brethren's Church in England.

Translated by John Elliott. (32, Fetter Lane, E.C. 1901.)

Bishop A. C. Ha.s.se: The United Brethren in England (32, Fetter Lane, E.C.).

Daniel Benham: Memoirs of James Hutton (Hamilton, Adams and Co. 1856).

J. P. Lockwood: Life of Peter Boehler (Wesleyan Conference Office.

1868).

Daniel Benham: Life of Rev. John Gambold (Mallalieu and Co., 97, Hatton Garden. 1865).

John Wesley's Journal.

Charles Wesley's Journal.

Of the sources in the Moravian Archives at Fetter Lane, those that I have found most useful are the following: (1) A miscellaneous collection, ent.i.tled "Pamphlets"; (2) MS. and Note-books, containing congregation diaries, copied out by the late Bishop A. C. Ha.s.se; (3) Minutes of British Provincial Synods.

For other sources see: (1) The above work by Gerhard Wauer, (2) My own article, "The Moravian Contribution to the Evangelical Revival in England," in the Owens College "Historical Essays" (Manchester University Press. 1907). (3) My own John Cennick; a sketch (32, Fetter Lane, E.C. 1906). (4) Catalogue of the Moravian Archives at 32, Fetter Lane, E.C. (5) L. Tyerman: Life and Times of John Wesley. (6) L.

Tyerman: The Oxford Methodists.

V.--MORAVIANS IN AMERICA.

W. C. Reichel: Memorials of the Moravian Church (Philadelphia, Lippincott and Co. 1870).

L. T. Reichel: Moravians in North Carolina (Salem, N. C. O. A. Keehln.

1857).

L. T. Reichel: Early History of United Brethren in North America (Nazareth, Pa. 1888).

Abraham Ritter: Moravian Church in Philadelphia (Philadelphia, C.

Sherman. 1857).

Transactions of the Moravian Historical Society (Nazareth, Pa. 1859 to 1907).

VI.--THE FOREIGN MISSIONS.

J. T. Hamilton: History of the Missions of the Moravian Church during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (Moravian Publishing Office, 32, Fetter Lane, E.C. 1900).

Adolf Schulze: Abrisz einer Geschichte der Bruder-Mission (Herrnhut, Missionsbuchhandlung. 1901). This is the standard work on the subject.

It contains an elaborate bibliography.

FOOTNOTES

[Footnote 1: De Ecclesia.]

[Footnote 2: Calixtine = Cup-ite, from the Latin, calix, a cup. Utraquist = in both kinds, from the Latin, utraque.]

[Footnote 3: p.r.o.nounced: Kelchits. The ch is a guttural like the Hebrew kaph, or like ch in the word loch.]

[Footnote 4: A common saying in Peter's day.]

[Footnote 5: p.r.o.nounced Rockitsanna.]

[Footnote 6: This outbreak made a great sensation, and was frequently quoted by the Brethren in their writings.]

[Footnote 7: Rockycana's character is rather hard to judge. Some of his sermons have been preserved, and they have the ring of sincerity. Perhaps, like Erasmus in later years, he wished to avoid a schism, and thought that the Church could be reformed from within.]

[Footnote 8: These settled, not at Kunwald, but close by.]

[Footnote 9: For many years there has been a tradition that the Moravian Church was founded on March 1st, 1457; but this date is only a pious imagination.

We are not quite sure of the year, not to speak of the day of the month.

If the Moravian Church must have a birthday, March 1st, 1457, will do as well as any other; but the truth is that on this point precise evidence has not yet been discovered.]

[Footnote 10: This division into three cla.s.ses is first found in a letter to Rockycana, written in 1464.]

[Footnote 11: De Schweinitz (p. 107) says that the Brethren now took the t.i.tle of "Fratres Legis Christi," i.e., Brethren of the Law of Christ. This is a mistake. This t.i.tle is not found till towards the close of the sixteenth century, and was never in general use; see Muller's "Bohmische-Brueder"

in Hauck's Real-Encyclopaedie.]

[Footnote 12: The best way to understand the Brethren's att.i.tude is to string together their favourite pa.s.sages of Scripture. I note, in particular, the following: Matthew xviii. 19, 20; Jeremiah iii. 15; John xx. 23; Revelation xviii. 4, 5; Luke vi. 12-16; Acts iv. 32.]

[Footnote 13: And this raises an interesting question: If the lot had decided against the Brethren, what would they have done? They have given us the answer themselves. If the inscribed slips had remained in the vase, the Brethren would have waited a year and then tried again. The final issue, in fact, did not depend on the use of the lot at all. They used it, not to find out G.o.d's will, but simply to confirm that faith in their cause which had already been gained in prayer.]

[Footnote 14: It is here stated by De Schweinitz (p. 137), on Gindely's authority, that the members of the Synod were now re-baptized. The statement is not correct. It is based on a letter written by Rockycana; but it is unsupported by any other evidence, and must, therefore be rejected. As the Brethren have often been confounded with Anabaptists (especially by Ritschl, in his Geschichte des Pietismus), I will here give the plain facts of the case. For a number of years the Brethren held that all who joined their ranks from the Church of Rome should be re-baptized; and the reason why they did so was that in their judgment the Romanist baptism had been administered by men of bad moral character, and was, therefore, invalid. But in 1534 they abandoned this position, recognised the Catholic Baptism as valid, and henceforth showed not a trace of Anabaptist views either in theory or in practice.]

[Footnote 15: 1. The "Six Commandments" are as follows:--

(1) Matthew v. 22: Thou shalt not be angry with thy brother.