Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T20:36:06.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reclaiming Theology for the Enlightenment: The Case of Siegmund Jacob Baumgarten (1706–1757)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

David Sorkin
David Sorkin
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin at Madison
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The new millennium appears to be ushering in a new view of the Enlightenment. The synthesis of the 1930s to the 1970s had posited a unitary Enlightenment that was the matrix of a modern secular or secularizing culture. The authority of reason and science either fully displaced, or fundamentally challenged and thus forced the reconstruction of, the claims of belief and tradition. From the 1970s a social history of ideas and institutions explored the Enlightenment's seemingly infinite regional and national variations, subverting the unitary notion and yielding a mass of new information. The works of J.G.A. Pocock and Jonathan Israel, James E. Bradley and Dale K. Van Kley, have begun to build on this accumulated scholarship, offering a new synthesis that rests on two related notions.

Type
Articles
Information
Central European History , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , December 2003 , pp. 503 - 530
Copyright
Copyright © Conference Group for Central European History of the American Historical Association 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I would like to thank Suzanne Desan, Tom Broman, Ken Barkin and an anonymous reader for their comments on this paper.

1. Cassirer, Ernst, The Philosophy of the Enlightenment, trans. Koelln, Fritz and Pettegrove, James (Princeton, 1951)Google Scholar; Hazard, Paul, European Thought in the Eighteenth Century (Cleveland, 1963)Google Scholar; Berlin, Isaiah, Against the Current (New York, 1980)Google Scholar; and Gay, Peter, The Enlightenment, 2 vols. (New York, 1966–1969)Google Scholar. For philosophers see Horkheimer, Max and Adorno, Theodor, The Dialectic of Enlightenment (New York, 1972)Google Scholar and Foucault, Michel, Madness and Civilization (New York, 1965)Google Scholar and Discipline and Punish (London, 1977)Google Scholar.

2. Representative was Porter, Roy and Teich, Mikulas, The Enlightenment in National Context (Cambridge, 1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Influential was Habermas, Jürgen, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, trans. Burger, Thomas (Cambridge, 1989)Google Scholar. For this scholarship see Outram, Dorinda, The Enlightenment (Cambridge, 1995), 1–13Google Scholar.

3. Pocock, J.G.A., Barbarism and Religion, 2 vols. (Cambridge, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Israel, Jonathan, Radical Enlightenment: Philosophy and the Making of Modernity, 1650–1750 (Oxford, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Bradley, James E. and Van Kley, Dale K., eds., Religion and Politics in Enlightenment Europe (Notre Dame, 2001)Google Scholar.

4. Pocock, , Barbarism and Religion, 1:5Google Scholar.

5. For “Arminian” origins see Hugh Trevor Roper, “The Religious Origins of the Enlightenment,” in idem, The European Witch-Craze of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (New York, 1969), 193–236. For the “conservative Enlightenment” see Pocock, J. G. A., “Clergy and Commerce,” in L'Eta dei Lumi: studi storici sul settecento europeo in onore di Franco Venturi, 2 vols., ed. Crocker, L.G. et al. (Naples, 1985), 523–68Google Scholar and Pocock, , “Post-Puritan England and the Problem of the Enlightenment,” in Culture and Politics from Puritanism to the Enlightenment, ed. Zagorin, P. (Berkeley, 1980), 91–111Google Scholar. Also Porter, Roy, The Creation of the Modern World: The Untold Story of the British Enlightenment (New York, 2000)Google Scholar.

6. Israel, , Radical Enlightenment, 445–562Google Scholar.

7. Bradley, & Kley, Van, Religion and Politics, 15Google Scholar.

8. See Pocock, , The Enlightenment, 1:4Google ScholarPocock, , Barbarism and Religion, 1:9, 138Google Scholar. Porter, Roy has argued for “plurality” in, The Enlightenment, 2nd ed. (Houndmills, Basingstoke, 2001), 9CrossRefGoogle Scholar. May, Henry stressed diverse Enlightenments in, The Enlightenment in America (New York, 1976)Google Scholar.

9. This bipartite view emerges despite Israel's assertion of “a single highly integrated intellectual and cultural movement.” See, Israel, , Radical Enlightenment, vGoogle Scholar.

10. Ward, W. Reginald, Christianity under the Ancien Regime, 1648–1789 (New York, 1999), ix, 237Google Scholar.

11. See Beck, Lewis, Early German Philosophy: Kant and his Predecessors (Cambridge, Mass., 1969), 283–86Google Scholar and Cassirer, , Philosophy of the Enlightenment, 338–57Google Scholar.

12. See Schloemann, Martin, Siegmund Jacob Baumgarten: System und Geschichte in der Theologie des Überganges zum Neuprotestantismus (Göttingen, 1974), 22 n. 38 and 51CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a contemporary account of Voltaire's visit see D. Johan Salomo Semlers Lebensbeschreibung von ihm selbst abgefasst (Halle, 1781), 108Google Scholar. Baumgarten appears in Israel only in regard to the size of his library (Radical Enlightenment, 130) and in Ward only as Semler's teacher (Christianity under the Ancien Regime, 175).

13. Reill, Peter H., The German Enlightenment and the Rise of Historicism (Berkeley, 1975), 6Google Scholar.

14. “Vorrede” zu Arnolds Abbildung des ersten Christen, in KTS, 77; “Vorrede” zur Samlung von Predigten” in ibid., 301; “Vorrede” zu Is. Watts ‘Reden von der Liebe Gottes’ in ibid., 346; and D. Siegm Jac. Baumgartens Erläuterung der christlichen Alterthümer hsg. Bertam, M. Joachim Christoph (Halle, 1768), 11Google Scholar.

Baumgarten was a renowned teacher and his students ranged across the spectrum of eighteenth-century Lutheranism: from conseratives, both pietist and orthodox (Goeze, Dietelmair, Riederer, Urlsperger, Wöllner), to neologues (Busching, Töllner, Lüdke, Nösselt, Steinbart), to the founder of the historical-critical method (Semler).

For an overview of the religious Enlightenment see Sorkin, David, “‘A Wise, Enlightened and Reliable Piety:’ The Religious Enlightenment in Central and Western Europe, 1689–1789,” Parkes Institute Pamphlet no. 1, University of Southampton (2002)Google Scholar.

15. For Friedrich Wilhelm (1640–1688) see Press, Volker, Kriege und Krisen: Deutschland, 1600–1715 (Munich, 1991), 306Google Scholar; for Friedrich III (1688–1713) see Deppermann, Klaus, Der hallesche Pietismus und der preussische Staat unter Friedrich III (Göttingen, 1961), 24–26Google Scholar.

16. Schrader, Wilhelm, Geschichte der Friedrichs-Universität zu Halle, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1894), 1:1–8, 36Google Scholar; and McClelland, Charles E., State, Society, and University in Germany, 1700–1914 (New York, 1980), 33–35Google Scholar.

17. Lau, F., “Orthodoxie, altprotestantische,” in Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 6 vols., ed. Galling, Kurt (Tübingen, 1957–1962), 4:1719–30Google Scholar; Preus, Robert D., The Theology of Post-Reformation Lutheranism: A Study of Theological Prolegomena (St. Louis, 1970)Google Scholar; and Hagglund, Bengt, History of Theology (St. Louis, 1968), 299–324Google Scholar.

The best apology for Orthodoxy is Leube, Hans, Die Reformideen in der deutschen lutherischen Kirche zur Zeit der Orthodoxie (Leipzig, 1924)Google Scholar. Recent local studies are Haag, Norbert, Predigt und Gesellschaft: Die Lutherische Orthodoxie in Ulm, 1640–1740 (Mainz, 1992)Google Scholar and Rublack, Hans-Christoph, “‘Der wohlgeplagte Priester’: Vom Selbstverständnis lutherischer Geistlichkeit im Zeitalter der Orthodoxie,” Zeitschrift für historische Forschung 16 (1989): 1–30Google Scholar. On the problem of toleration see Haag, , Predigt und Gesellschaft, 412–14Google Scholar; Leube, , Die Reformideen, 84–85, 109Google Scholar; and Whaley, Joachim, Religious Toleration and Social Change in Hamburg, 1529–1819 (Cambridge, 1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For individuals see Greschat, Martin, Zwischen Tradition und neuem Anfang: Valentin Ernst Löscher und der Ausgang der lutherischen Orthodoxie (Witten, 1971), 56Google Scholar; and Schultze, Harald, “Toleranz und Orthodoxie: Johann Melchior Göze in seiner Auseinandersetzung mit der Theologie der Aufklärung,” Neue Zeitschrift für systematische Theologie 3–4 (1961–1962): 197–219Google Scholar.

18. On Pietism see Fulbrook, Mary, Piety and Politics: Religion and the Rise of Absolutism in England, Württemberg and Prussia (Cambridge, UK, 1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wallmann, Johannes, Der Pietismus (Göttingen, 1990)Google Scholar; Brecht, Martin ed., Der Pietismus vom siebzehnten bis zum frühen achtzehnten Jahrhundert (Göttingen, 1993)Google Scholar; Deppermann, Der hallesche Pietismus; and Gawthrop, Richard, Pietism and the Making of Eighteenth-Century Prussia (Cambridge, 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19. Jacob Baumgarten (1668–1722) became a Pietist during the controversies at the University of Leipzig. For these events see Leube, Hans, Orthodoxie und Pietismus: Gesammelte Schriften (Bielefeld, 1975), 170–211Google Scholar. On Siegmund Jacob's education see Johann Salomon Semler, “Kurzer Entwurf des Lebens des wohlseligen Herrn D. Baumgartens,” in idem ed., Ehrengedächtnis des weiland Hochwürdigen und Hochgelarten Herrn Seigmund Jacob Baumgartens (Halle, 1758), 74–92.

20. Schrader, , Friedrichs-Universität zu Halle, 1:110Google Scholar; Podczeck, Otto, “Die Arbeit am Alten Testament in Halle zur Zeit des Pietismus: Das Collegium Orientale theologicum A. H. Franckes,” Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg 7, no. 5 (08, 1958): 1059–74Google Scholar.

21. Semler, “Kurzer Entwurf,” 96–99; and Schrader, , Friedrichs-Universität zu Halle, 1:122Google Scholar.

22. On Thomasius see Wundt, Max, Die deutsche Schulphilosophie im Zeitalter der Aufklärung, 2nd ed. (Tübingen, 1964), 19–61Google Scholar; and Schröder, Peter, Christian Thomasius zur Einführung (Hamburg, 1999)Google Scholar. On Wolff's method see de Vleeschauwer, H.J., “La genèse de la méthode mathématique de Wolff,” Revue Belge de philologie et d'histoire 11 (1931): 651–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For his mathematical textbooks see Wundt, , Die Deutsche Schulphilosophie, 132Google Scholar.

23. For Thomasius, Wolff and the Pietists see Hinrichs, Carl, Preussentum und Pietismus, (Göttingen, 1971), 388–96, 399–418, 421–22Google Scholar; and Schrader, , Friedrichs-Universität zu Halle, 1:74, 205–19, 2:459Google Scholar. On Wolff's theological attitudes see Casula, Mario, “Die Theologia naturalis von Christian Wolff: Vernunft und Offenbarung,” in Christian Wolff, ed. Schneider, Werner, 129–38Google Scholar. For the role of the controversy between Pietism and Orthodoxy in the emergence of the Enlightenment see Gierl, Martin, Pietismus und Aufklärung: Theologische Polemik und die Kommunikationsreform der Wissenschaft am Ende des 17. Jahrhunderts (Göttingen, 1997)Google Scholar.

24. Alexander organized a Wolffian study circle. See Schloemann, , Baumgarten, 34–35Google Scholar and Meier, G.F., Alexander Gottlieb Baumgartens Leben beschrieben (Halle, 1763), 12–14Google Scholar.

25. For the failure of Orthodoxy and Pietism to confront contemporary culture see Scholder, Klaus, The Birth of Modern Critical Theology: Origins and Problems of Biblical Criticism in the Seventeenth Century, trans. Bowden, John (London, 1990), 4, 109, 114Google Scholar.

26. For the Halle Theology Faculty see Schrader, , Friedrichs-Universität zu Halle, 1:223–24Google Scholar.

Reinbeck's, work was, Betrachtungen über die in der Augsburgischen Confession enthaltene und damit verknüpfte Göttliche Wahrheiten, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1733)Google Scholar. For Reinbeck, see, Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, 56 vols. (Leipzig, 1875–1912), 28:2–5Google Scholar; Tholuck, D.A., Geschichte des Rationalismus: Geschichte des Pietismus und des ersten Stadiums der Aufklärung (Berlin, 1865), 142–43Google Scholar.

On Baumgarten introducing logical rigor to Pietist students unaccustomed to it see Knothe, Paul, “Siegmund Jakob Baumgarten und seine Stellung in der Aufklärungstheologie,” Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 46, no. 9 (1928): 510Google Scholar; and Hirsch, Emanuel, Geschichte der neuern Evangelischen Theologie, 5 vols. (Gütersloh, 1951), 2:373Google Scholar. Semler described Baumgarten's impact in his Lebensbeschreibung von ihm selbst abgefasst, 1:95–122.

27. Hinrichs, , Preussentum und Pietismus, 433–34Google Scholar; for the directive (22 September 1736) see Schrader, , Friedrichs-Universität zu Halle, 2:462–63Google Scholar. The book was UrVC.

28. See Hirsch, , Geschichte, 2:318 & 373Google Scholar; and Schloemann, , Baumgarten, 62Google Scholar.

29. These elements appear in his inaugural lecture (SJBöA 4–5) and found full expression in his dogmatic theology (EG) which Bengt Hagglund hailed as “the first major dogmatics written in German.” See, History of Theology (St. Louis, 1968), 345Google Scholar. Just as Wolff coined vernacular equivalents for Latin philosophical terms, Baumgarten coined vernacular terms that permanently entered German theological language. See Knothe, “Siegmund Jakob Baumgarten,” 522; and Hirsch, , Geschichte, 2:371Google Scholar.

30. Baumgarten largely followed his Pietist predecessors in the design of his dogmatics. See, EG 1:97 and Hirsch, , Geschichte 2:186–93Google Scholar. For the meaning of “union with God” see, SJBöA, 4–5; EG,1:84–95; and UrVC, 92–93, 115–16, 693–94, 731–66. For Pietist terminology see Langen, August, Der Wortschatz des deutschen Pietismus (Tübingen, 1954), 107–300Google Scholar.

31. EG, 1:85; UrVC, 134. See, Knothe, “Siegmund Jakob Baumgarten,” 528; and Hirsch, , Geschichte, 2:375Google Scholar.

32. EG, 78–79; UrVC, 697–706, 833–34. On nature and grace see Hirsch, , Geschichte, 2:379–83Google Scholar.

33. EG, 1:40.

34. For the opposition to scholastic speculation see, EG, 1:30–32.

35. UrVC, 12.

36. EG, 1:31.

37. EG, 1:35–37; 46. Wolff defined reason as “the ability to perceive the coherence (Zusammenhang) of truths.” See Vernünftige Gedancken von Gott, der Welt und der Seele des Menschen (Frankfurt am Main, 1729), 224 (par. 368)Google Scholar.

Baumgarten asserted that theology is a science (Wissenschaft) when, “all truths are derived from [scripture] in a demonstrable and orderly manner, so that the necessity of the conclusions can be referred back to their causes.”

EG, 30. For the notion of coherence in his works see ibid., 1:38–39, 46, 54–55, 82–83, 96–97; and SJBöA, 4–6, 11.

38. EG, 1:83. Emphasis in the original.

39. He thought medieval scholasticism was based on a naive exegesis while Orthodox theology lacked solid scriptural foundation. EG, 1:9, 64–66. For the “double truth theory” see Scholder, , Modern Critical Theology, 121–23Google Scholar.

40. EG, 1:83.

41. UAhS, 29–54.

42. EG, 3:12–13. See Schloemann, , Baumgarten, 221Google Scholar. For his intentionalist view of the text see, UAhS, 7–8. See also Danneberg, Lutz, “Siegmund Jacob Baumgartens biblische Hermeneutik,” in Unzeitgemässe Hermeneutik: Verstehen u. Interpretation im Denken der Aujklärung, ed. Bühler, Alex (Frankfurt am Main, 1994), 98–99Google Scholar.

43. This was the “Nachdruck” that designated God's immediate impact on the individual or His impact as mediated through reading or the model of other converts. See Langen, Der Wortschatz des deutschen Pietismus, 64–65. For Pietist exegesis see Dilthey, Wilhelm, “Das hermeneutische System Schleiermachers in der Auseinandersetzung mit der älteren protestantischen Hermeneutik,” in Dilthey, Wilhelm: Gesammelte Schriften 21 vols. (Göttingen, 1957), 14, 2:618–20Google Scholar; Peschke, E., “August Hermann Francke und die Bibel,” in Pietismus und Bibel, ed. Aland, Kurt, vol. 9 (Witten, 1970), 59–88Google Scholar; and Martin Schmidt, “Philipp Jakob Spener und die Bibel,” in ibid., 9–58.

44. UAhS, 26. See also 10, 226–27, 229. For Baumgarten's definition of edification see UrVC, 691. He warned against introducing “arbitrary misinterpretations” unwarranted by historical circumstances. See, Christian Richters genaue Übersetzung der Psalmen mit einer Vorrede Hrn. Siegmund Jacob Baumgartens (Halle, 1736), 27Google Scholar. For his general statement of this point see, UAhS, 202 and 208. See also Danneberg, “Siegmund Jacob Baumgartens biblische Hermeneutik,” 140–42.

45. For the principle of accommodation see, Benin, Stephen D., The Footprints of God: Divine Accommodation in Jewish and Christian Thought (Albany, NY, 1993)Google Scholar; and Funkenstein, Amos, Theology and the Scientific Imagination from the Middle Ages to the Seventeenth Century (Princeton, 1986), 213–70Google Scholar. For the Orthodox Lutheran doctrine of the inerrancy of scripture see Preus, Robert D., The Inspiration of Scripture (Edinburgh, 1957), 77Google Scholar.

46. For the notion of “scope” see Scholder, , Modern Critical Theology, 127Google Scholar. An early religious Enlightenment figure such as Christoph Wittich (1625–1687) had connnected the notion of scope to the principle of accommodation.

47. UAhS, 2, 12. Cf. 140–41. Semler called this work, “the first scientific German outline of hermeneutics.” See Semlers Lebensbeschreibung, 208. Dilthey emphasized the importance of this two-step process. See, “Das hermeneutische System Schleiermachers,” 624. Francke also distinguished between the exegetical and dogmatic. See Peschke, “August Hermann Francke und die Bibel,” 65–66.

48. UAhS, 115–36, 140–41, 173–90, 213.

49. Schloemann, , Baumgarten, 144–45, 155–56Google Scholar. Reill dismisses him with a single sentence. See, The German Enlightenment, 43.

50. Übersetzung der Algemeinen Welthistorie, 8–9, 24, see n. 83.

51. “Vorrede,” Samlung von merkwüridgen Lebensbeschreibungen grösten Theils aus der britannischen Biographie (Halle, 1754), unpaginatedGoogle Scholar.

52. AKg, 1.

53. Übersetzung der Algemeinen Welthistorie, 7.

54. Ibid., 10.

55. Ibid., 10–13.

56. Ibid., 9, 19.

57. On contingency/necessity see, Wolff, , Vernünftige Gedancken, 353–58 (pars. 575–80)Google Scholar.

58. AKg, 1. For Baumgarten on a separate logic of history see, Üersetzung der Algemeinen Welthistorie, 19–20. He anticipated the efforts of such later eighteenth-century historians as Johann Martin Chladenius, Johann Christoph Gatterer and Jacob Wegelin. See Reill, , The German Enlightenment, 100–26Google Scholar.

59. Baumgarten lumped freethinking and enthusiasm together (“Schwermerey sowohl als Freigeisterey”). See, for example, “Vorrede,” AKG unpaginated. In his inaugural address (1734) Baumgarten advocated that students study history in Gymnasium in order to be able to concentrate on theology at university; a decade later (1744) he was suggesting that history be studied through out the university years to complement theology. See Schloemann, , Baumgarten, 127–28Google Scholar.

60. Introduction to Abhandlung von der Beschaffenheit und den Quellen der Freigeisterei, (1741) in KTS, vol. 1 (Halle, 1743) 209. For the deists' and freethinkers' use of history see, AKg, 10; and Introduction to D. Nathanael Lardners Glaubwürdigkeit der evangelischen Geschichte trans. Bruhn, David (Berlin, 1750) unpaginatedGoogle Scholar.

61. KTS, 1:205–6.

62. Each volume of the Nachrichten von einer hallischen Bibliothek, 1748–1751, for example, contained lengthy reviews of the work of an English deist [Thomas Woolston (1:479–540); Anthony Collins (2:133–70, 268–84, 354–82, 441–76); John Toland (3:299–330); Matthew Tindal (4:448–56)] or an English apologist [William Whiston (4:237–62; 350–60; 420–40); Samuel Clarke (4:334–51)]. Revealing the vapidity of recent attacks on religion was one of the journal's major goals (“Vorbericht,” n.p.; between 1:84–85).

63. KTS, 219–21, 241. See Schloemann, , Baumgarten, 184–85Google Scholar.

64. Arnold, Gottfried, Unpartheiische Kirchen- und Ketzerhistorie von Anfang des NT bis 1688, 2 vols. (Frankfurt am Main, 1699–1700)Google Scholar. See Seeberg, Erich, Gottfried Arnold: Die Wissenschaft und die Mystik seiner Zeit (Meerane, 1923)Google Scholar and Dörries, Hermann, Geist und Geschichte bei Gottfried Arnold (Göttingen, 1963)Google Scholar.

65. The original work was Arnold, Gottfried, Denkmal des alten Christentums, bestehend in des Heil. Macarii und anderer hocherleuchteter Männer … Schriften (Goslar, 1699)Google Scholar. Arnold's translation of Macarius had appeared three years earlier (Des h. Marcarius Homilien, verdeutscht) (Leipzig, 1696)Google Scholar. Baumgarten's introduction (1739) was reprinted in KTS, vol. 1 (Halle, 1743), 3–48Google Scholar.

66. KTS, 47. Dörries makes this same point about the translation. See, Geist und Geschichte bei Gottfried Arnold, 160–64.

67. Arnold's, work was, Die erste Liebe der Gemeinen Jesu Christi, das ist wahre Abbildung der ersten Christen (Frankfurt am Main, 1696)Google Scholar. For Baumgarten's criticism see, Abbildung des ersten Christen, 86–87.

68. Bertram, M. Joachim Christoph, ed., D Siegm. Jac. Baumgartens Erläuterung der christlichen Alterthümer (Halle, 1768), 21Google Scholar.

69. “Vorrede,” Denkmal des alten Christentums in KTS, 4–13, 45.

70. Vorrede, , Abbildung der ersten Christen, 58, 62–70, 90Google Scholar.

71. AKg, 5.

72. Introduction, Richters genaue Übersetzung der Psalmen, 20–21.

73. Introduction, Joh. Salom. Semlers erleuterung der egyptischen Altertümer durch Übersetzung der Schrift Plutarchs von der Isis und dem Osiris und der Nachricht von Egypten aus Herodots (Breslau, 1748) unpaginatedGoogle Scholar.

74. Introduction, Johan Legers algemeine Geschichte der Waldenser oder der evangelischen Kirchen in den Thälern von Piemont, trans. von Schweinitz, Hans (Breslau, 1750), 2Google Scholar.

75. Introduction, Herrn Bakers vollständige Historie der Inquisition, trans. Tieffensee, M. Christian (Copenhagen, 1741), unpaginatedGoogle Scholar.

76. Introduction, Geschichte der Waldenser, 13.

77. Ibid., 14–15.

78. Abbildung der ersten Christen, 77; Baumgartens Erläuterung der christlichen Alterthümer, 11–12.

79. Abbildung der ersten Christen, 72–85.

80. AKg, 113.

81. Baumgartens Erläuterung der christlichen Alterthümer, 11–12.

82. AKg, 7–11.

83. The English original was An Universal History From the Earliest Account of Time to the Present, 7 vols. in 9 (London, 1736–1744)Google Scholar, of which there were numerous editions. The primary authors were Archibald Bower, 1686–1766; John V. Campbell, 1708–1775; George Psalmanazar, 1679–1763; George Sale, 1697–1736; and John Swinton, 1703–1777. Gibbon, for example, read the English original as a youth. See Pocock, , Barbarism and Religion, 1:29Google Scholar.

The history had been translated into Dutch and Baumgarten used the commentary of the Dutch edition. The German edition was Übersetzung der Algemeinen Welthistorie die in England durch eine Geselschaft von Gelehrten ausgefertiget worden. Nebst den Anmerkungen der holländischen Übersetzung. Auch vielen neuen Kupfern und Karten. Genau durchgesehen und mit häufigen Anmerkungen vermeret von S.J. Baumgarten, 30 vols. (Halle, 1744–1767)Google Scholar. Volume 17, the last one on which Baumgarten worked, appeared in 1758. The work was continued by J.S. Semler among others.

Baumgarten's notes were published in English as, A supplement to the English Universal history, lately published in London … designed as an improvement and illustration of that work … The whole carefully translated from the original German of the eminent Dr. Baumgarten, 2 vols. (London, 1760)Google Scholar.

His notes turned the work into a history of scholarship (“historia literaria”) which allowed the reader to come to an independent judgment. For “historia literaria” (circa 1690–1730) see Gierl, , Pietismus und Aujklärung, 514–19Google Scholar.

84. AKg, 5–6.

85. Vorrede, , Übersetzung der Algemeinen Welthistorie, 36–47Google Scholar.

86. Ibid., 27.

87. Ibid., 31.

88. Ibid., 32.

89. For Budde's eclecticism see Sparn, Walter, “Auf dem Wege zur theologischen Aufklärung in Halle: Von Johann Franz Budde zu Siegmund Jakob Baumgarten,” Wolfenbütteler Studien zur Aufklärung 15 (1989): 71–76Google Scholar.

For Mosheim's historical work see, Institutiones historiae ecclesiasticae novi testamenti (1726); and Anderweitiger Versuch einer vollständigen und unpartheyischen Ketzergeschichte (Helmstedt, 1748)Google Scholar. In the statutes for the Faculty of Theology at Göttingen he used history to free theology from polemics and confessional strife. See, “J.L. v. Mosheims Entwurf der Statuten der Theologischen Facultät” (Juli 1735) in Die Gründung der Universität Göttingen, ed. Rössler, Emil F. (Göttingen, 1855), 281–83Google Scholar. In his ecclesiatical law he showed the historical origins of laws. See Mosheim, , Allgemeines Kirchenrecht der Protestanten (Helmstedt, 1760), 36, 48–50, 215–32, 502–6Google Scholar.

90. See Pfaffen, Christoph Matthai, Academische Reden über das so wohl allgemeine als auch Teutsche Protestantische Kirchen-Recht (Tübingen, 1742), 229–43Google Scholar.

91. In this respect Sparn groups Baumgarten with Jerusalem and Spalding. See, “Auf dem Wege zur theologischen Aufklärung,” 35–36. In contrast, Schloemann would argue that Baumgarten excluded history from dogmatics. See, Baumgarten, 211.

92. Some recent scholarship has emphasized the religious sources of ideas of toleration but has neglected the German variations. See Fitzpatrick, Martin, “Toleration and the Enlightenment Movement,” in Toleration in Enlightenment Europe, ed. Grell, Ole Peter and Porter, Roy (Cambridge, UK, 2000), 23–68 esp. 27–29Google Scholar; Jonathan Israel, “Spinoza, Locke and the Enlightenment Battle for Toleration,” in ibid., 102–13; and Joachim Whaley, “A Tolerant Society: Religious Toleration in the Holy Roman Empire, 1648–1806,” in ibid., 175–95, who points to the seventeenth-century origins of the German tradition of ecclesiastical natural law (Pufendorf, Johann Caspar Barthels) but does not trace its eighteenth-century development. T.J. Hochstrasser entirely ignores the ecclesiastical law tradition. See, Natural Law Theories in the Early Enlightenment (Cambridge, 2000)Google Scholar.

93. For Thomasius see Thomasen, D. Christian and Brenneysen, Enno Rudolph, Das Recht evangelischer Fürsten in theologis: Streitigkeiten und wider die papistischen Lehrsätze eines Theologi zu Leipzig (Halle, 1696)Google Scholar. For collegialism see Schlaich, Klaus, Kollegialtheorie: Kirche, Recht und Staat in der Aufklärung (Jus ecclesiasticum, vol. 8) (Munich, 1969)Google Scholar.

94. Schlaich, , Kollegialtheorie, 52, 76–80, 121–23Google Scholar. For Pufendorf's importance see Thomasius, , Das Recht evangelischer Fürsten, 43–44Google Scholar. Pfaff, , Academische Reden, 21, 270fGoogle Scholar; and Mosheim, , Allgemeines Kirchenrecht, 7Google Scholar.

95. Pfaff, , Academische Reden, 43–78Google Scholar. For Mosheim's, defense of toleration see, Allgemeines Kirchenrecht, 260–64, 339–45, 595–617Google Scholar.

96. Mosheim, , Allgemeines Kirchenrecht, 586Google Scholar, where he speaks of the “jus retrahendi.” Pfaff also defended the right of rebellion, especially against the pope, but thought that under Protestant sovereigns it was unnecessary. See, Academische Reden, 155–59.

97. Pfaff, , Academische Reden, 159–68Google Scholar; Mosheim, , Allgemeines Kirchenrecht, 506–41Google Scholar. Schlaich, , Kollegialtheorie, 179–80Google Scholar.

98. Baumgarten, Introduction, Historie der Inquisition, 3.

99. UrVC, 477.

100. Ibid., 437. Other collegialists also permitted the minor ban. See Pfaff, , Academische Reden, 267Google Scholar; and Thomasius, , Das Recht evangelischer Fürsten, 150–67Google Scholar. Mosheim recognized the ban but opposed using it. See his, Allgemeines Kirchenrecht, 395–417, 478.

101. Introduction, Historie der Inquisition, 3.

102. UrVC, 438. For the same argument see Pfaff, , Academische Reden, 49Google Scholar.

103. UrVC, 112. Other collegialists saw Holland as the model of a successful multiconfessional society. See Pfaff, , Academische Reden, 41–42, 73, 127, 144Google Scholar.

104. UrVC, 424.

105. Preface, TG, unpaginated. For a similar sentiment see ibid., 419.

For the multiple origins of Catholic persecution see, Introduction, Historie der Inquisition; and Baumgartens Erläuterung der christlichen Alterthümer, 12–13. Mosheim's views are similarly scathing. See, Vollkommene Emigrations-Geschichte von denen aus dem Erss-Bistum Salzburg vertriebenen, und Grossentheils nach Preussen gegangenen (Frankfurt, 1734)Google Scholar.

106. For the responsa see Arnoldi, Udo, Pro Judaeis: Die Gutachten der hallischen Theologen im 18. Jahrhundert zu Fragen der Judentoleranz (Berlin, 1993) (Studien zur Kirche und Israel, ed. von der Osten-Sacken, Peter, vol. 14)Google Scholar. In the period 1702–1767 the Halle faculty issued twenty-two responsa pertaining to the Jews. Responsa were written when the king or another official brought an issue to the university faculty. The issue was assigned to the dean and perhaps one other faculty member who drafted a responsum and then brought it to the full faculty for approval. In that case a fee was paid to the entire faculty. Or private parties approached an individual faculty member for a responsum that he wrote and for which he collected a fee.

Baumgarten's responsa were considered to be exemplary. Ibid., 14–16. See also Semler, “Kurzer Entwurf des Lebens des wohlseligen Herrn D. Baumgartens,” 101–2.

107. Arnoldi, , Pro Judaeis, 107–35Google Scholar.

108. TB, 6–67. For Baumgarten's opinion see Arnoldi, , Pro Judaeis, 136–56Google Scholar.

109. TB, 7–26. Gotthilf Francke, Baumgarten's colleague at Halle, thought that the Jews' worship could be curtailed. See Arnoldi, , Pro Judaeis, 149Google Scholar.

110. TB, 5. For Catholic responsibility see ibid., 11. The expulsion of Jews from Prague (1745) may have influenced Baumgarten's views.

111. Ibid., 67. For reactions to Baumgarten's opinion see Arnoldi, , Pro Judaeis, 152–56Google Scholar.

112. “Von eines zum Christentum getretenen Juden Scheidung von seiner jüdischen Frau, und der Erziehung ihrer gemeinschaftlichen Kinder, auch nötigem Verhalten desselben gegen seine Eltern,” (November 1752) in TG, 287–336 and, “Prüfung der Schrift, vom Recht eines bekehrten Juden über seine im Judentum erzeugte Kinder,” ibid., 337–420. Baumgarten was approached by partisans of the wife. See Arnoldi, , Pro Judaeis, 173Google Scholar.

113. “Von eines zum Christentum getretenen Juden,” 289–309.

114. “Prüfung der Schrift, vom Recht eines bekehrten Juden,” 356.

115. Ibid., 315. When Protestants were expelled from Salzburg in 1731–1732 their children were forced to remain to be raised as Catholics. See Ward, , Christianity under the Ancien Regime, 107–8Google Scholar.

116. “Prüfung der Schrift, vom Recht eines bekehrten Juden,” 329.

117. Ibid., 347–48. For Jewish education see 311.

118. Ibid., 353.

119. For another neglected theologian of the period see Sorkin, David, “William Warburton: The Middle Way of ‘Heroic Moderation’,” Dutch Review of Church History 82 no. 2 (07 2002): 1–39Google Scholar.