Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T00:15:00.164Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Key Concepts in Caspar von Schwenckfeld's Thought: Regeneration and the New Life1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

E. J. Furcha
Affiliation:
Associate Professor of Church History, Union College of British Columbia

Extract

Any one looking at Schwenckfeld through the spectacles of a historian who approaches the age of the sixteenth century Reformation with a neatly devised system will find his thought rather confusing. The strange Silesian nobleman wrote voluminous pamphlets on theology without ever aspiring to be a theologian; he preached widely and served as pastor to his adherents without ever claiming to be a clergyman (Predikant).He insisted that his expositions were in keeping with the best and most catholic of Christian thought, yet one finds it next to impossible to delineate his theology within a “system.” He was involved in too many arguments and pursued too many theological interests to allow every one of his utterances a fitting place within a well-structured theological system.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1968

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

2. The Corpus Schwenckfeldianorum, edited by Chester Hartranft, et. al., published under the auspices of the Schwenkfelder Church, Penna., 19071961Google Scholar, contains all known writings by Schwensckfeld or one of his adherents during the sixteenth century in nineteen volumes. Hence referred to by volume number and page.

3. Schwenckfeld's essential writings on this subject were written between 1525–1530; cf. cf. II-IV. He denied a corporeal presence in the elements and took exception to the current “Lutheran” interpretation of the words of institution in the Lord's Supper. Eventually he decided to abstain from outward participation in the Eucharist; cf. III, 383–384 and elsewhere.

4. The documents of this controversy are found in XIII and XIV. For a recent analysis of Illyricus' position, cf. Haikola, Lauri, Gesetz und Evangelium (Lund, 1952).Google Scholar

5. Cf. XII, 417ff., Von der Heiligen Schrift,

6. Schoeps, J., Vom Himmlischen Fleisch Christi (Tübingen, J. C. B. Mohr, 1951)Google Scholar. The author makes a careful study of the interpretation Franck, Hoffman and Schwenckfeld give to the term “celestial flesh of Christ.”

7. E. J. Furcha, op. cit., chapter 2.

8. At one point he describes the indwelling of Christ as a “communicatio in corporis Christi.” Cf. III, 248:5.

9. Cf. IX, 845:6ff. However, it can be said that the force of temptations decreases with increased spiritual growth. Cf. IV, 313:26ff.

10. Cf. III, 572. The document comes from the year 1529 and outlines the stages in the growth of the new-born man in ten consecutive steps. Statements about the gradual growth are scattered throughout his work.

11. The images “putting off,” “mortifying the old,” burial of the old” and synonyms thereof appear frequently in Schwenckfeld 's writings. Cf. III, 86: 4; 279, margin; 697: 18; IV, 433: 21; 775: 32ff.

12. Cf. VII, 21ff.; VIII, 12: 5ff.; however, note also XIV, 888:10ff. and IV, 647: 5ff.

13. Schwenckfeld had long groped for a way of expressing the reality of the regenerate man as the new creation “in Christ.” This new being stood over against the “natural man.” By differentiating between flesh and creature, Schwenckfeld believed to have found a means of speaking of the undefiled original work of God as distinct from the fallen natural state of life. Furthermore, he sought to underscore the sinlessness of Christ's true humanity by employing the celestial-flesh-concept. Thus he can say that the celestial flesh was undefiled from the beginning (VIII, 837:8ff.). It becomes ours in the act of new birth by divine appropriation.

14. The place of knowledge in Schwenckfeld's theology is discussed by P. Maier and G. Maron. Cf. Maier, P., Caspar Schwenckfeld on the Person and Work of Christ (Assen: Royal van Gorcum, 1959)Google Scholar, chapter VII and Maron, G., Individualismus und Gemeinschaft bei Caspar von Schwenckfeld (Stuttgart: Ev. Verlagswerk, 1961)Google Scholar, chapter I. See also, E. J. Furcha, op. cit. p. 125ff.

15. Scriptural support for the image of the school of Christ comes to Schwenckfeld from passages such as Jeremiah 31, John 6, Heb. 8 and. 1 Jn. 2.

16. See Heb. 11:3. According to Rom. 10, faith comes by what is preached. Preaching, however, is aimed to give ‘Erkenntnis.’

17. Schwenckfeld is in line with the Christian,, tradition when he retains both “pistis” and “gnosis” as complementary to each other. Clement of Alexandria (c. A.D. 200) has described the Christian gnostie as one who is brought by the Father “from faith to knowledge by means of the Son” (Stromateis V, I).

18. G. Maron, op. cit., pp. 80–82.

19. E. J. Furcha; op. cit. p. 157ff.

20. Scriptural support for this view may be found in John 6:56; Eph. 3:17 and in Phil. 3:20.

21. Cf. E. J. Furcha, op. cit., pp. 147–157 for a more detailed discussion of the so-called “Stilistand” and his reasons for it.

22. The Biblical references are: Mt. 10:18; 2 Cor. 5:6; Eph. 2:20–22; 1 Pet. 2:4–7; Heb. 3:4; 11:10; 12:22.

23. It seems to me that Schwenckfeld struggles here with the problem which those modern theologians face also who deny any value to the study of history, but limit theological truths to existential encounters.

24. Furcha, E. J.; A Pilgrim People Becomes Established, unpublished essay at the Hartford Seminary, 1964Google Scholar. See also Schwenckfeldiana Vol. I; no. 2 and H. Kriebel; The Schwenckfelders in America, chapters 4–7.

25. Schwenfeld asserts that God supported the Children of Israel (IV, 434 ff.). Contrary to Flacius Illyricus—an orthodox Lutheran—he states. elsewhere that the Old Testament Fathers were also justified by the blood of Christ, though not yet in ‘rerum natura’ (XIII, 879, margin). Support for this assertion is drawn from the Book of Hebrews.

26. Schwenckfeld defends the sharp distinction between “man” and “creature” against Frecht, von Zell, and others. Later, Bucer joins their ranks against him. His own insistence on the distinction, however, is not too apparent before 1529. Cf. E. Furcha, op. cit., pp. 131–136.

27. The terms and definitions remain basically the same whether he uses them in 1528 (III, 246:30ff.) or in 1555 (XIV, 320ff.).

28. Periods of orthodoxy or barrenness within the visible church usually brought forth some prophet-like Reformer who reminded churchmen of their spiritual origins. Men like G. Boehme, the English Dissenters, Graf von Zinzendorf are but a few of the numerous company of spiritual leaders.

29. For a pentrating analysis of the prevalent philosophy of life in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, cf. Dilthey, W., Weltanschauung und Analyse (Leipzig, 1929).Google Scholar

30. His argument for man's free will is much like that of Erasmus. For an expression of Erasmus’ liberal thought, cf. Eramus, Desiderius, In Praise of Folly (London: Reeves & Turner, 1876).Google Scholar

31. See e.g. his correspondence with the Landgrave Philip of Hesse. The letters are collected by French, J. Leslie; The Correspondence of Caspar Schwenckfeld von Ossig (Leipzig: Breitkopf, 1908).Google Scholar

32. Calvin, J.; Institutes. 4. XX.Google Scholar

33. Cf. Littell, Franklin H., The Anabaptist View of the Church (Boston: Starr King, 1958)Google Scholar. The author discusses Anabaptist leanings toward separation. Schwenckfeld's agreement with these is only partial. He elevates the spiritual rule to a primary position without thereby denying validity to secular government in matters temporal.

34. Dilthey, W., Weltanschauung und Analyse des Menschen seit Renaissance und Reformation. (Leipzig: Teubner, 1929), p. 80Google Scholar. Personally, I take exception to many of the author's assertions, although his insights are generally most helpful.

35. E. J. Furcha, op. cit., p. 24ff.

36. The concluding statement is believed to have been Schwenckfeld's personal motto. It appears among other places on a Schwenckfeld portrait, dated 1556. The original of this portrait is preserved in the Schwenkfelder Historical Library, Pennsburg, Penna.