261 religious encyclopedia exile of the Israelites Extreme Unction

Download 6.59 Mb.
Size6.59 Mb.
1   ...   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   ...   65

FITZGERALD, JAMES NEWBURY: Methodist Episcopal bishop; b. at Newark, N. J., July 27, 1837; d. at Hongkong, China, Apr. 3, 1907. He was admitted to the New Jersey bar in 1858, but in 1862 gave up his practise and entered the Methodist ministry. After holding various pastorates in the Newark Conference he was recording secretary of the Missionary Society of‑the Methodist Episcopal Church, from 1880 till in 1888 he was elected bishop. Besides being presiding elder of the Newton, New‑


ark, and Jersey City districts and secretary of the Newark Conference for eleven years, he was a member of the General Conference in 1876, 1880, 1884, and 1888.
FIVE MILE ACT: An Act of Parliament passed in 1665, and completing the system of measures intended to repress the non‑conformists known as the Clarendon Code. By its provisions no clergy­man who had been expelled from his living by the Act of Uniformity of 1662 was to come within five miles of a city or corporate town, or of any parish where he had formally preached, unless he declared that he would not " at any time attempt any alter­ation of government either in Church or State," under a penalty of forty pounds; and no one who had not taken the oath of passive obedience and conformed was to teach in any school or take pupils in his house. As the Puritan congregations were mainly in the towns, this act cut them off from the ministrations of their chosen leaders and in most cases from even private education, and hastened the decline of Puritanism throughout England.

BrBweoBAFBY: The text is printed in Gee and Hardy, Documents, pp. 6211‑623. Consult: D. Neal, History of the Puritans, ii. 255 sqq. of Harper's ed., New York, n.d.; J. H. Overton, Church %n England, ii. 143, London, 1897.

FIVE POINTS OF CALVINISM: The five charac­teristic tenets of Calvinism as opposed to Armin­ianism, defended by the Synod of Dort (1618‑19) in answer to the Five Articles of the Arminians or Remonstrants, put forth in 1610. They are par­ticular predestination, limited atonement, natural inability, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of saints. See ARMINIUB, JACOBUS, AND ARMINIANISM; CALVINISM; REMONBTRANTs.

Early Life (§ 1).

In Wittenberg. Opposition to Melanchthon (§ 2).

In Magdeburg. The Adiaphoristic Controversy (§ 3).

The Majoristie, Osiandrian, and achwenekfeldian Con­troversies (§ 4).

Fruitless Attempts at Reconciliation (§ 5).

Flacius Professor in Jena (§ 6).

The Synergistic Dispute (§ 7).

Flacius a Wanderer (§ 8).

Last Days at Frankfort (§ 9).

Flacius' Literary and Scholarly Work (§ 10).

Flacius (Latinized from Vlacich, or Francovich)

was born at Albona (42 m. s.s,e. of Trieste), Istria,

Mar. 3, 1520, and died at Frankfort‑on‑the‑Main

Mar. 11, 1575. From his birthplace he was sur­

named ZRyricus. His father, a prominent citizen

of Albona, died when Flacius was a

x. Early mere boy. He received his early

Life, education from the celebrated human­

ist. Baptists Egnatius in Venice.

Baing a good Catholic he decided to become a monk,

study theology, and preach, but his uncle, Baldo

Lupetino, provincial ( f the Minorites, commended

Luther to him as a restorer of the true Gospel and

sent him to Germany in 1539. He now continued

his studies at Basel, but went to Tubingen in 1540,

and to Wittenberg in 1541, where he was favorably

received and assisted by Melanchthon. After an

inner conflict that lasted three years, Bugenhagen




directed him to Luther and it was through him that Flacius attained peace of soul by accepting the free grace of God. He had personal experience of the consolation of the Evangelical doctrine of justification by faith alone, and henceforth the defense of this doctrine in its purity and invio­lability became the guiding star of his life.

In 1544 he accepted the chair of Hebrew at the university, in 1545 he married, and in 1546 received the master's degree. His extraordinary gifts excited great expectations with Luther and Melanchthon. He lectured on the Old Testament,

2. In Wit‑ epistles of Paul and on Aristotle; but

tenberg. his activity was suddenly interrupted

Opposition by the outbreak of the Schmalkald to Melanch‑ War. In 1547 he fled to Brunswick,

thon. where he lived by teaching. After

a few months, however, he was able

to return to Wittenberg, but the time of rest was

now over for him. After the Augsburg Interim in

1548 the Elector Maurice of Saxony entered into

negotiations with the theologians and estates of his

realm which resulted in the Leipsie Interim (see

INTERIM). It was then that Flacius as a strict

Lutheran protested against the concessions of

Melanchthon and the men who shared his views.

From now on his relations with the head of the

conciliatory party became more and more strained

and his position at Wittenberg untenable. After a

short sojourn at Hamburg he settled in 1549 at

Magdeburg, where printing and publication were

still free.

In Magdeburg he developed a comprehensive

literary activity against the Melanchthonians, and

now those unfortunate and often petty quarrels

arose which injured the Evangelical cause more

than the opposition of the Roman Catholics. The

fault was not altogether on one side. In Witten­

berg Flacius' departure was ascribed to the most

unworthy motives. Flacius contributed not a little

by his arrogant and obstinate char‑

3. In Mag‑ acter and by assuming the role

deburg. of dictator. He published treatises

The Adi‑ against the Interim, and the Adi‑

aphoristic aphora (q.v.) and their defenders.

Controversy. His criticism was sweeping, and it was

due to him more than to any one else

that public protest made the execution of the In­

terim impossible, and thus Luther's great work

was saved. From that point of view he rendered

inestimable services to the Evangelical. Church;

especially in his fight against the Adiaphora he

proved himself to be on the right side and Melanch­

thon had to acknowledge his victory. When Magde­

burg fell into the hands of the elector Maurice (1551)

attempts were made to reconcile the two opposing

parties, the Magdeburg and the Wittenberg circles.

In the absence of Flacius, Gallus and his associates

agreed to negotiate under the condition that no

compromise with the pope should be made. Cer­

tain articles were drawn up, but Flacius, full of

suspicion, declared them unsatisfactory and so the

pacificatory work was disrupted. .

The adiaphoristic dispute was followed by that concerning Georg Major (q.v.), Who in a sermon preached at Eisleben had maintained the necessity


F~,,gellatioa 822


of works for salvation. This controversy was against the Romanists, but nothing was achieved

carried on with the same relentless, cruel, and bitter at this conference because the Evangelicals

personal insinuations. In 1552 the themselves did not agree. This was owing, of

4. The Osiandrian dispute arose (see Osi‑ course, chiefly to Flacius. His conduct was gen­

Majoriatic, ANDER, ANDREAs). Osiander taught erally criticized, and he incurred the displeasure

psiandrian, that justification is attained by the of many who had hitherto aided him. The so­

and indwelling of the essential justice of called Frankfort Recess (q.v.), convoked in 1558 by

Schwenck‑ Christ through faith. In this case the leading Evangelical princes, was no more suc­

feldisa Con‑ Flacius put himself on the side of the cessful than the other attempts at unity. Then

troversies. Melanchthonians, showing thereby that Flacius proposed a synod and fifty prominent theo­

the fight against his former teachers logians signed the Supplicatio pro libera, christiana

was not personal. Again as a strict Lutheran, he et legitirna synodo, but all was in vain. A similar

developed clearly the doctrine of forensic satis‑ outcome resulted from the Naumburg Convention

faction. In 1553 he attacked the mystic subjec‑ (q.v.) of 1561.

tivism of Caspar Schwenckfeld, who made a dis‑ In. the mean time the Synergistic dispute had

tinction between an inner word of God and the arisen in Jesus (see SYNER(n6M). Victorinus

letter in Holy Scripture, and here also Flacius pre‑ Strigel (q.v.) and Superintendent Hilgel of Jena

pared the way for Lutheran orthodoxy as laid down criticized Flacius' doctrine concerning free will,

in the Formula of Concord by maintaining the and Duke John Frederic immediately imprisoned

identity of the external word and the word of God. them. In 1560 a disputation be­

In the mean time further attempts were made to 7. The tween Flacius and Strigel took place

assuage the dissensions of the Magdeburg and Synergistic at Weimar, the result of which was that

Wittenberg circles for the sake of concord in the Dispute. the duke confirmed the orthodoxy

Evangelical party. As early as 1553 Flacius and of Flacius' doctrine. John Frederic,

Gallus desired to have a committee of arbitration however, becoming tired of these perpetual con­

appointed, but Melanchthon was silent troversies, instituted a consistory which possessed

g. Fruitless in the matter; then Duke Christopher the right of excommunication and of censorship

Attempts of Wittenberg proposed a convention in regard to theological treatises. Flacius pro­

at Recon‑ of theologians, but the Thuringian tested against this procedure as an act of violence,

ciliation. theologians Amsdorf and his asso‑ and thereupon he was deposed together with others

ciates were not in favor of it and re‑ in 1561.

quested the Wittenberg circle to condemn their He left Jena in 1562 with the bold idea of found­

heresies publicly. Jena in those days was the strong‑ ing a Lutheran academy of learned men at Regens­

hold of Lutheran orthodoxy against the unionistic burg. Gallus received him kindly. From here

tendencies of Wittenberg. Several other attempts he continued with untiring zeal his fight against

to unite the dissenting parties also failed. Now Strigel and the Calvinistic tendencies, against the

Flacius published his treatise Von der Einigkeit in arrogance of secular authorities in encroaching upon

which he addressed himself to the whole Church, the rights of the Church, and many other antago­

attempting to justify his character against sus‑ nists. With these polemical treatises hatred against

picions and indicating the necessary steps to be him grew and his travels began to become danger­

taken for the insurance of peace. Shortly after‑ ous. The Elector Augustus of Saxony

ward he wrote a letter to Melanchthon in spite of 8. Flacius especially persecuted him, and the

the fact that the latter had written some verses a Wanderer. Council of Regensburg found it im­

accompanying a picture which represented Flacius possible to protect him longer. In

as an ass crowned by other asses. With relentless Antwerp William of Orange had allowed at this

severity Flacius exposed in this letter his oppo‑ time to the Lutherans as well as the Calvinists the

nent's shortcomings concerning Adiaphorism and public exercise of their religion. The Lutheran

admonished him to relieve his conscience by con‑ congregation, needing the counsel of experienced

fession of defeat. This Melanchthon professed to German theologians, called Flacius. He arrived in

be willing to do, yet he rejected the articles of peace 1566, but the following year he had to leave the

proposed by Flacius. The latter was not satisfied country before the progress of the Spanish army.

with this informal confession; again and again he He attempted now to settle at Frankfort‑on‑the­

requested written statements, official declarations, Main and then at Strasburg, but the cruel hatred

common signatures of articles and public revoca‑ of the Elector Augustus reached him even here;

tions. In this way the breach became irreparable. in 1569 the elector sent an envoy to Strasburg

The friends of Flacius spoiled matters by treating with the commission to capture Flacius. He fled to

Melanchthon as an impenitent sinner and the Basel, but was not allowed to remain, so he returned

younger Philippists not less by their insolent trea‑ to Strasburg and in spite of the pressure exerted

tises against Flacius. In 1557 Flacius was called by the elector was tolerated. But now he spoiled

to Jena as professor of the New Tes‑ his good relations with the Strasburg clergy by his

6. Flacius tament and superintendent. Shortly opposition against the efforts at union made by

Professor after his arrival a colloquy took place Jacob Andrei! (q.v.) and by his doctrine concerning

in Jena. in Worms (see WORMS) at which it original sin; for he was accused of the Manichean

was proposed to array Melanchthon heresy. In 1573 the Council of Strasburg decreed

and his associates together with the Thuringi‑ his expulsion.

am and other theologians of the stricter school In a treatise De pewati originalis out vderis



Adami appellationibus et essentia Flaeius main­

tained that original sin is the substance of man him­

self and not an accident as Strigel taught. This

doctrine was chiefly aimed at the Synergists.

Flacius was altogether orthodox on this point.

The whole controversy amounted to nothing since

he attached to the word substantia two different

meanings, it was a mere quibble of words, and yet

there were men like Hesshusen (q.v.) who absurdly

believed that Flacius considered the devil as the

creator of substance.

After his expulsion from Strasburg he settled at

Frankfort, where he was ably protected by

Catharina von Meerfeld, prioress of

g. Last the nunnery Zu den weissen Frauen,

Days at although the Council of the city had

Frankfort. not given him permission to remain.

Thanks to entreaties and interces­

sions his order of banishment was deferred from

time to time until his death.

In spite of all quarrels and turbulences of his

life Flacius possessed such a tenacity and deter­

mination that he found time for scientific works

which required the most extensive preparation and

gradual ripening. He was not only

Io. Flacius' the most learned Lutheran theolo­

Literary gian, but also the promoter and foun­

and der of theological disciplines. He was

Scholarly chiefly prominent in the sphere of

Work. church history. In Magdeburg he

conceived the great plan of two his­

torical works in which he could deal heavy blows

at Romanism. He undertook a catalogue of all

those who before Luther had combated the heresies

of the papacy, and in this way originated his

Catalogue testium veritatis, qui ante nostram eetalem

reclamarunt Papte (Basel, 1556) and its complement

Varia doctorum pwrumque virorum de corrupto

ecclesitv statu poemata [(1557) in which for the

first time was printed Bernard of Cluny's De

contemptu mundij. Still more important was his

other plan to write a church history from the

original sources which should show how the Church

of Christ had deviated from her right course since

the time of the apostles, and include a history of

antichristianity from its beginning to the develop­

ment of its highest power and to the restitution of

true religion in its purity by Luther. The out­

come of this plan was the so‑called " Magdeburg

Centuries " (Basel, 1562‑74; see MAGDEBURG CEN­

TURIES). Flacius found many patrons who aided

his great undertaking financially and he also made

extensive travels in Germany, searching for sources

and documents. Many assistants helped him.

Many manuscripts and books were bought or do­

nated by patrons. The Magdeburg Centuries

denotes a great progress in the science of Church

history, not only on account of its extensive

tracing of the sources, but also on account of its

method. The anti‑Roman interest had sharpened

the vision and made it capable of critical achieve­

ments that marked a new epoch. [In reply Baro­

nius produced his superior "Annals."] Finally

Flacius produced two works of importance in

the sphere of Biblical science: his Clovis seriP­

turtB sacra seu de sermons sacraruin literarum

(1567) and Glossacompendiaria in Novum Testa­mentum (1570).

Flacius compels admiration by his learning and

extraordinary scholarly achievements, his inde­

fatigable capacity for work, his indomitable zeal

in defense of pure doctrine, but it is impossible to

overlook certain grave defects in his nature, such

as arrogance, obstinacy, and even malice‑in

fact an entire inability to appreciate the rights of

others and their motives. [It is more charitable

to suppose that he was mentally slightly unbal­

anced.] (G. KAwERAU.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: Some of his letters are in CR, viii. and ix. and the Supplementum. His merits were long insuffi­ciently appreciated and his rehabilitation is largely due to A. Twesten, Matthias Flaccius Illyricus, eine Vor­lesung, Berlin, 1844, and W. Preger, Matthiae Placcius Myricw and seine Zeit, 2 vols., Erlangen, 1859‑61 (a list of his many publications is given ii. 539‑572). Con­sult also J. J. I. D611inger, Die Reformation, ii. 224 sqq., Regensburg, 1848; A. Ritschl, Theologie and Metaphysik, pp. 52 sqq., Bonn, 1881; ADB, vii. 88 sqq.

I. Flagellation.

Corporal Punishment as a Penalty of the Church (§ 1).

Self‑scourging or Flagellation (§ 2). II. Flagellants.

The Flagellants of 1260. Venturinus of Bergamo, 1334 (§ 1).

The Flagellants of 1348‑49 (§ 2).

The Albati or Bianchi of 1399 (§ 3).

Flagellants in Thuringia about 1360. Konrad Schmid (§ 4).

Later Italian Brotherhoods (§ 5).

Later Manifestations and Developments (§ 6).

I: Flagellation: Corporal chastisement as an ec‑

clesiastical corrective pena4y for clerics appears

in the Western Church as early as the fifth century

transferred from the Roman penal law,

I. Corporal but resorted to only in rare instances.

Punish‑ From the Merovingian times onward,

ment as a it became more widely diffused, and so

Penalty of late as the seventeenth century was

the Church. appointed as a punishment in cases of

blasphemy, simony, concubinage, and

other offenses committed by the clergy. In

corrective establishments of the Church, corporal

chastisement has continued in practise against

clerical delinquents confined in the same, down to

the present time. Flagellation as a monastic pun­

ishment for misdeeds of monks dates back to the

earliest period of monasticism, and the rule of Bene­

dict of , Nursia makes extensive use of corporal

chastisement. The congregations which had their

origin in the Benedictine Order, as well as the other

monastic orders, sisterhoods, and knightly orders

founded in the twelfth century and later, adopted

flagellation; but various orders which arose after

the Council of Trent did not include this penalty

in their rules. For certain offenses of laymen, too

(desecration of Sunday, fortune‑telling, etc.), the

Church from the sixth century prescribed cor­

poral chastisement as the penalty, and flogging in

particular teas threatened against such offenses

until the eighteenth century. Lastly, the Inqui­

sition applied flogging and flagellation as one of the

lightest penalties in case of the voluntary recanta­

tion of heresy. In penitential discipline, corporal

chastisement and particularly flagellation came to



have a rapidly increasing importance after the beginning of the tenth century. Corpora, chas­tisements in this connection are first mentioned (evidently as something newly in vogue) in the collection of canons of Regmo of Prism (c. 960); they appear as a substitute for public penance, and at first were doubtless always executed by some outside hand, mostly by the priest. The sermons of the well‑known crusade‑preacher Fulco of Neuilly (q. v.) so intensified ascetic zeal in Paris about 1195 that great throngs of the penitent submitted their bared bodies to Fulco's chastising.

The beginnings of ascetic self‑scourging, or flag­ellation proper, are still obscure. It is supposed to have originated about 1000 among certain Italian hermits, whose glowing penitential fervor became heightened into visionary and ecstatic enthusiasm, and started a religious movement which spread

throughout all Italy. The hermit s. Self‑ Marinus, who lived on an island of the

Scourging Po, and his pupil Romuald (d. 1027),

or Flagel‑ as well as the latter's disciples on

lation. Monte Sitrio, mutually chastised one

another with rods and lashes. Flag­ellation at their own hands was a customary prac­tise, in the first half of the eleventh century, among the monks of Fontavellana (near Faenza) in Um­bria, a foundation of the miracle‑working hermit and penitential preacher Dominic of Foligno (d. 1031); likewise among the hermits of Luceoli in Umbria, who styled themselves disciples of St. Romuald. In both places the monk Dominicus Loricatus (d. 1060) distinguished himself by his severe self ‑caetigations, and they found an enthu­siastic admirer and imitator in Peter Damian (q.v.), who entered the cloister of Fontavellana about 1035. To the far‑reaching influence of Peter Damian, who also became prominent as the literary

a‑'0 t of Ila! tion it" rapid extension then and

P Zd is p Ltinen'tly

afterw due.

The monastic reform movement which emanated from Cluny with the more acute sense of sin awa­kened by Bernard of Clairvaux, and especially the ascetic enthusiasm propagated among the people by the mendicant orders and their preaching of Christ's Passion speedily made flagellation a most widely extended and impressive means of penance and expiation. Many of the monastic orders and sisterhoods adopted the provision of systematic self‑castigation, or flagellation, in their rules. No doubt, mainly through the influence of the two great mendicant orders, this ascetic practise was then further popularized in the ranks of the laity. With most of the stricter orders (among others the Trappists, Carthusians, Priests of the Oratory, Fathers of Christian Doctrine, Discalced Carmelites, Capuchins, Redemptorists, Brothers of Charity), flagellation has continued in practise down to this day. It is exercised for the most part as a devo­tional act, usually once or several times in the week, according to a definitely prescribed ritual. The opposition to the practise incited by the monastic reformer Jan Busch (q.v.) is an incident without parallel.

II. Flagellants: The great flagellant pilgrimage of the year 1260 was the first of its kind. A sig‑


nificant prelude thereto was the powerful religious movement called forth in Italy in 1223 by the preaching of repentance and pardon by a num‑

ber of mendicant monks, particularly r. The the Dominican Giovanni da Vicenza.

Flagellants Deeper causes of both movements were

of :260. the religious excitement and peni‑

Download 6.59 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   ...   65

The database is protected by copyright ©sckool.org 2020
send message

    Main page