1. See Brown, Peter, “St. Augustine,” in Smalley, Beryl, ed, Trends in Medieval Political Thought 11 (Blackwell, 1965)Google Scholar.

2. The Confessions of St. Augustine 317–18 (Dutton, E.P., Pusey, E.B., trans, 1907)Google Scholar; Augustine, St., The Trinity 271-89, 308–09 (Deferrari, Roy, ed, & McKenna, Stephen, trans, 1963)Google Scholar. Cf. Boff, Leonardo, Trinity and Society 56 (Orbis Books, Burns, Paul, trans, 1988)Google Scholar; Berman, Harold J., Law and logos, in 44 De Paul L Rev 149–50 (1994)Google Scholar.

3. See Berman, Harold J., Law and Revolution: The Formation of the Western legal Tradition 92-93, 581–82 (Harv U Press, 1983)Google Scholar. Although priests generally were called “spirituals,” the priesthood itself was divided between “secular” clergy, incardinated in particular dioceses and subject to the discipline of the local bishop, and “regular” clergy, who were members of religious orders and subject to the orders' rules (regulae). In addition, the name “spirituals” was appropriated by the radical wing of the Franciscan movement in the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.

4. Letter of Pope Gregory VII to Bishop Hermann of Metz, March, 1081, quoted in Berman, id at 110.

5. Although canon law as a whole was called ius spirituale, a division was made between those aspects of the canon law that dealt with strictly secular matters, called ius temporale, and other temporal matters that were connected to spiritual causes, called ius annexum spiritualibus. For example, the law of patronage, which dealt with the power of laymen to present candidates for ecclesiastical office, was said to be “not spiritual but annexed to the spiritual.” See Hostiensis, Commentaria, X.1.6.28.

6. Thus the great fourteenth century Italian jurist Baldus, who was both a Romanist and a canonist, wrote that in cases of conflict involving spiritual or mixed causes, canon law should be preferred since it is connected to divine law. See Ermini, Giuseppe, Ius Commune e Utrumque Ius, in 2 Acta congressus Iuridica International at 522, note 32 (Romae, 1935)Google Scholar.

7. Luther stated that marriage is “the source of the economy and the polity and the seed-bed of the Church.” Quoted in Heckel, Johannes, Lex Charitatis: Eine juristische Untersuchung über das Recht in der Theologie Martin Luthers 101–02 (Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaft in Kommission bei Beck, 1953)Google Scholar.

8. Cf. Strohm, Christoph, “Ius divinum und ius bumanum: Reformatorische Begründung des Kirchenrechts,” in Rau, Gerhard, Hans-Richard Reuter, andSchlaich, Klaus, eds, Das Recht der Kirche 145 Bd. II, Zur Geschichte des Kirchenrechts (C. Kaiser, 1994)Google Scholar. Stroh m states that the law of the invisible church (“the church as a creature of the word and the spiritual community of love”) is “Law sui generis” and that its uniqueness “lies above all in the fact that in its obligatory character it can be really known and recognized by those to whom faith has awarded the promise of salvation.” Id at 145, in note 108. See also Heckel, Lex charitatis (cited in note 97).

9. See Ebeling, D. Gerhard, Zur Lebre vom triplex usus legis in der reformatorischen Theologie in Wort und Glaube 50–68 Bd. I (Mohr, J.C.B., Paul Siebeck, 1960)Google Scholar; Witte, John Jr. and Arthur, Thomas C., The Three Uses of the law: A Protestant Source of the Purposes of Criminal Punishment?, 10 J Law & Relig 433–65 (1993–1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10. These specific types of Ordnungen were sometimes incorporated into large “welfare ordinances” (Polizeiordnungen). See Schmelzeisen, Gustav K., Polizeiordnung und Privatrecht (Böhlaus-Verlag, 1955)Google Scholar.

11. See Berman, Harold J. and Reid, Charles J. Jr., Roman Law in Europe and the Jus Commune: A Historical Overview with Emphasis on the New Legal Science of the Sixteenth Century 1-31, 20Syracuse J Int'l Law & Commerce (1994)Google Scholar.

12. The theologians included Luther, Melanchthon, Johannes Bugenhagen, Antonius Corvinus, Kaspar Cruciger, and many others. See Sprengler-Ruppenthal, Anneliese, Kircbenordung, evangelische 679–81Google Scholar Bd. XVIII in Theologische Realenzyklopädie (1989).

13. Church, marriage, disciplinary, and other ordinances promulgated in Calvinist cities and principalities are not included in the present discussion.

14. See Sprengler-Ruppenthal, , Kircbenordung at 670–77Google Scholar (cited in note 12) and sources cited therein. Private confession and absolution from sins was retained by the Augsburg Confession of 1530. It eventually ceased to be obligatory. See Myers, W. David, ‘Poor Sinning Folk’-. Confession and Conscience in Counter-Reformation Germany 61–75 (Cornell U Press, 1996)Google Scholar.

15. The chief Lutheran modifications in the liturgy of the Church are reviewed by George, Timothy, Theology of the Reformers 92-95 and 145–58 (Boardman Press, 1988)Google Scholar.

16. Luther's translations of the Ten Commandments and the Lord's Prayer were drawn from his translations of the New and Old Testament.

17. See Hillerbrand, Hans J., ed, The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation 439–41 vol 2 (1996) (“Protestant Liturgy”)Google Scholar.

18. See discussion infra at 108-10.

19. LW 35: 501.

20. LW 35: 53-54.

21. Lindberg, Carter, The European Reformatiom 116 (Blackwell Pub, 1996)Google Scholar.

22. Id at 116.

23. Id at 117.

24. Luther, , The Order of Baptism 95–103 LW 53Google Scholar.

25. Quoted in Tonkin, John, Luther's Understanding of Baptism: A Systematic Approach, 11 Lutheran Theolog J 101–02 (1977)Google Scholar.

26. See Nettl, Paul, Luther and Music 82 (The Muhlenberg Press, Best, Frida & Wood, Ralph, trans, 1948)Google Scholar.

27. See Riedel, Johannes, The Lutheran Chorale: Its Basic Traditions 38 (Augsburg Pub House, 1967)Google Scholar.

28. Id at 35.

29. This hymnal was called Achtliederbuch (“Eight Song Book”). Four of the eighthymns were written by Luther. See Senn, Frank C., Liturgy 441Google Scholar, in Hillerbrand, ed, Oxford Encyclopedia of the Reformation (cited in note 17). Luther intended that his hymns, through reliance on traditional German folk melodies and strong, simple, vernacular language would reinforce popular belief in Evangelical theology. “Music,” Luther said, “makes people milder and more gentle, more civil and more sensible.” Id at 36. A leading interpreter of the Lutheran Reformation has written that “music was the audible symbol of a church struggling against too much clarity and too much visibility.” Rosenstock-Huessy, Eugen, Out of Revolution: the Autobiography of Western Man 423 (1938)Google Scholar.

30. Leupold, Ulrich, ed, Liturgy and Hymns, in Lehmann, Helmut T., ed, vol 53 Luther's Works 194 (Fortress Press, 1965)Google Scholar.

31. In addition to the Creed and the Sanctus, other parts of the mass for which Luther introduced congregational hymns were the Introit, the Gradual, and the Agnus Dei. See Leaver, Robin, Theological Consistency, Liturgical Integrity, and Musical Musical Hereneutics, in Luther's Liturgical Reforms 117–38, in 9 Lutheran Q (new series, 1995)Google Scholar.

32. Letter to Georg Spalatin, quoted in Lambert, James F., Luther's Hymns 15 (Gen Council Pub House, 1917)Google Scholar.

33. LW 53, 225.

34. Quoted in Nettl, , Luther and Music at 75 (cited in note 26)Google Scholar.

35. Leupold, , Liturgy and Hymns at 225 (cited in note 30)Google Scholar.

36. See Rosenstock-Huessy, , Out of Revolution 417 (cited in note 29)Google Scholar.

37. Lambert, J.F., Luther's Hymns 441–50 (1917)Google Scholar; Nettl, , Luther and Music at 53 (cited in note 26)Google Scholar.

38. George, Timothy, Theology of the Reformers (1988)Google Scholar, citing LW 39 at 22; WA 6 at 75.

39. Quoted by George, id at 92. The references were to Johann Bugenhagen, Justus Jonas, and Philipp Melanchthon, respectively. (Jonas, who taught law at the University of Erfurt, graduated from Wittenberg in 1514 and was an early member of Luther's circle.).

40. Luther, , A Reply to the Twelve Articles 223 LW 4Google Scholar.

41. As late as 1527, Luther spoke out against official persecutions of Anabaptists, stating:

Quoted in Roland Bainton, The Travail of Religious Liberty 61 (Harper Torchbooks, 1958). Id at 64. Later, however, Luther supported the imposition of the death penalty on Anabaptists.

42. The purpose of the sermon was “to present the teaching and the exhortation of the Gospel of Christ in freedom.” See Nembach, Ulrich, Predigt des Evangeliums: Luther als Prediger, Pädagoge und Rhetor 25–29 (Neukirchner Verlag, 1972)Google Scholar. In interpreting the Gospel of Christ, the preacher was not to be bound by tradition but was to be free to follow his Christian conscience.

43. Quoted in Sprengler-Ruppenthal, Annaliese, “Das kanonische Recht in Kirchenordnungen des 16. Jahrhunderts,” in Helmholz, Richard H., ed, Canon Law in Protestant Lands 49 (Duncker & Humblot, 1992)Google Scholar. See also Sprengler-Ruppenthal, , Bugenhagen und dasproteslantische Kirchenrecht 205–07Google Scholar, in ZSS 88 (kan. Abt.) (1971).

44. See the Calenberg-Gottinger Kirchenordnung of 1542, in Sehling, Emil, ed, Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI Jahrhunderts 732, Bd. VI, 2 (Scientia Verlag, 1955)Google Scholar discussed in Sprengler-Ruppenthal, , Das kanonische Recht 50 (cited in note 43)Google Scholar.

45. Id at 91-92.

46. See generally Dieterich, Hartwig, Das Protestantische Eherecbt in Deutschland bis zur Mitte des 17. Jabrhunderts (1970)Google Scholar. See also Witte, John Jr., The Transformation of Marriage Law in the Lutheran Reformation57–98, in Witte, John Jr. and Alexander, Frank S., eds, The Weightier Matters of the Law: Essays on Law and Religion—A Tribute to Harold J. Berman (Scholars Press, 1988)Google Scholar. See generally Witte, John Jr., From Sacrament to Contract: Marriage, Religion, and Law in the West ch 2 (Westminster John Knox, 1997)Google Scholar.

47. See Witte, , The Transformation of Marriage Law 70 (cited in note 46)Google Scholar. See also idem at 76-94 (analyzing some of the chief reforms of the marriage law found in the Eheordnungen). See also Dieterich, Das Protestantische Eherecht (cited in note 46) passim.

48. See Witte, The Transformation of Marriage Law (cited in note 46) passim.

49. See Dieterich, , Das Protestantische Eherecht 147-66, 177–80 (cited in note 46)Google Scholar.

50. The following section draws in part on Witte, John Jr., The Civic Seminary: Sources of Modern Public Education in the Lutheran Reformation of Germany, 12 J Law & Relig 173–223 (1995–1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

51. Some two dozen German cities (chiefly of the Hanseatic League) had established both Latin and vernacular schools to train officials and businessmen; also some large craft and merchant guilds maintained their own schools, and there were in addition some private boarding and day schools run by one or more lay teachers. See Witte, , The Civic Seminary 182–83 (cited in note 50)Google Scholar.

52. See id at 186. In asserting the importance of education, Luther was following Jesus' last instruction to the apostles to “Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you ….” (Matt 28: 18-20).

53. Quoted in Witte, , The Civic Seminary 187 (cited in note 50)Google Scholar.

54. Quoted in Witte, id at 188.

55. This set of concepts found expression as early as 1520 in Luther's revolutionary Appeal to the Ruling Class of German Nationality as to the Amelioration of the State of Christendom, in which he advocated compulsory universal public schooling as a Christian responsibility of the local civil magistrate. See Witte, id at 191-92.

56. See Strauss, Gerald, Luther's House of Learning: Indoctrination of the Young in the German Reformation 194–98 (John Hopkins U Press, 1978)Google Scholar.

57. Id.

58. Cf. Wright, William J., The Impact of the Reformation on Hessian Education, 44 Church History 182–98 at 183 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Wright states: that “[t]he scholarship system was … a Lutheran idea.”

59. [I]t was said that, like a natural father attending to the raising of his children, ‘government as a common father’ [memorandum of the theologians of the University of Rostock to Dukes Albrecht and Ulrich of Mecklenburg, 1556] should establish and maintain schools in the great household of a territory or city.

‘This,’ wrote Urban Rhegius in a catechism for the instruction of princes, ‘is why magistrates are called patres patriae.’ It follows that rulers owe their subjects effective instruction in Christian principles. ‘I consider it a gross error,’ Urban writes, using the vivid words of his time, ‘to think that a ruler is like a cowherd who cares only about the skin and bellies of his beasts. Rulers are called to a much higher duty, namely the enforcement of God's commandments; … and of all the matters that concern them they must show the greatest regard for the instruction of their subjects in the Christian religion according to the word of God. They must establish schools and see to it that these remain in good working order and provide sound instruction in Christian virtue and all other good things.’ Strauss, , Luther's House of Learning at 11 (cited in note 56)Google Scholar.

60. See Witte, John Jr., Law and Protestantism at 97Google Scholar (unpublished paper on file with author).

61. Id.

62. See Apology of the Augsburg Confession 287 article VI, in Concordia Triglotta (1921).

63. Id.

64. See Myers, , ‘Poor Sinning Folk’ at 63–76 (cited in note 14)Google Scholar.

65. See Heun, Werner, Konsistorium 483–88Google Scholar, in Theologische Realenzyklopädie, Bd. XIX (1990).

66. See Schuster, Peter, Das Frauenhaus: Stadtische Bordelle in Deutschland (1350-1600) 85–91 (Ferdinand Schöningh, 1992)Google Scholar; Brundage, James A., Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe 521–30 (U Chi Press, 1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67. Schuster, , Das Frauenhaus at 195–96Google Scholar (cited in note 66). Schuster states that publicly operated bordellos came to be thoroughly discredited within thirty years of Luther's attack upon them, thanks to the “alliance of the church, the Obrigkeit, and Housefathers.” Id at 199.

68. See Tierney, Brian, Medieval Poor Law: A Sketch of Canonical Theory and lis Application in England (U Cal Press, 1959)Google Scholar.

69. Id at 84-86. The word “hospital,” derived from the Latin hospites, meaning “guests,” referred to various types of places where people went for succor.

70. The following analysis draws principally on data presented in Robert Jütte's important book, Poverty and Deviance in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge U Press, 1994)Google Scholar and Bronoslaw Geremek's masterful work, Poverty: A History, (Blackwell Pub Ltd, Kolakowska, Agnieszka, trans, 1994)Google Scholar, but differs substantially with their view that there was no substantial shift from Roman Catholic to Protestant policies of poor relief, and that such shift as did take place was not due to changes in religious beliefs. Thus Jütte states at 105: “Today historians see litde or no religious influence, either of Catholicism or Protestantism, in the development of the characteristic features of sixteenth-century poor relief organization ….” In supporting this view, which is widely shared by other contemporary historians, though not by their predecessors, Jütte points to several examples of Roman Catholic precursors of Lutheran policies and methods of poor relief as well as to several examples of Roman Catholic adoption of such policies and methods during and after the Lutheran Reformation. He states at 108: “We have shown that the Reformation created neither the communal nor the governmental system of poor relief, since both had their counterparts in Catholic countries.” Yet immediately after that statement he adds:

And in the Conclusion of his book, especially at 194 and 198, Jutte emphasizes strongly the influence of Lutheran theological concepts and of parallel changes in Roman Catholic theology in the development of new systems of poor relief.

Likewise, Natalie Zemon Davis, in her otherwise excellent account of the system of poor relief introduced in 1534 in the predominantly Roman Catholic city of Lyons, discounts the specific influence of pre-existing German Protestant models. She attributes the establishment of a common chest in Lyons, effectuating the centralization of charitable activities in the secular municipal authorities, primarily to the “urban crisis, brought about by a conjuncture of older problems of poverty with population growth and economic expansion.” Such welfare reform, she states, took place in Protestant and Catholic cities as well as cities of mixed religious composition, and “rested on values and insights common to both groups.” Davis, Natalie Zemon, Poor Relief, Humanism, and Heresy: The Case of Lyons 217 at 267, in 5 Studies in Medieval and Renaissance History (1968)Google Scholar. She grants that “Protestant and Catholic religious sensibility and doctrine found their own paths to justify the elimination of begging and the establishment of centralized organizations to provide relief and rehabilitation,” but adds that for Catholics in Lyons, and perhaps in other Catholic cities, “the path was ordinarily opened … by Christian humanists following an Erasmian program of reform.” Id at 268. Only touched on, in Davis' account, is the role of the substantial Protestant population in Lyons in pressing for the reform, and the substantial opposition of Roman Catholic authorities to the reduction or elimination of the Roman Catholic charitable endowments. As for humanism, both Davis and Jütte emphasize the role played by the writings on poor relief of the great Roman Catholic humanist Juan Luis Vives, Spanish exile and friend of Erasmus. But Vives, like Erasmus, was a radical Roman Catholic, some of whose books were put on the papal Index. Like the Lyons preacher and humanist Jean de Vauzelles, a principal Roman Catholic leader of the Lyonnais reform of poor relief, Vives was a friend of Protestants; indeed he was considered by the Lutheran historian Andreas Osiander to be a secret admirer of Luther and was attacked by some Roman Catholic theologians as a heretic and Lutheran. See Norena, Carolos G., Juan Luis Vives 3 (Martinus Nijhoff, 1970)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Jütte 117 (cited in note 70); Geremek 189 (cited in note 70). Davis is certainly right in saying that Roman Catholics and Lutheran Protestants shared many common values, but the substitution of secular for ecclesiastical control of poor relief came to Lyons only after a bitter struggle with Roman Catholic ecclesiastical authorities whereas it came to Nürnberg at the initiative of Lutheran ecclesiastical authorities.

These and other contemporary historians who discount the impact of Lutheranism on poor relief fail to make the proper connections between Lutheran theology and Lutheran politics. They make no connection, for example, between Luther's theology and his advocacy of the establishment by town councils of a common chest for poor relief. Luther himself, however, and his colleagues such as Johann Bugenhagen, saw the common chest as a manifestation of the theological doctrine of the priesthood of all believers. See discussion infra at 123-26.

That there were examples of the establishment of systems of poor relief by royal authorities and local town councils in Catholic countries before, during and after the Reformation hardly affects these conclusions. The Protestant Reformation, and the accompanying expansion of the powers of the secular authorities, had been increasingly foreshadowed in the preceding century.

71. Geremek, id at 8ff, 179ff, and elsewhere gives substantial data and an acute analysis concerning the controversy between pro-Catholic and pro-Protestant historians in this matter. He notes that the transfer of poor relief from ecclesiastical to secular authorities was much more extensive in Protestant than in Catholic territories. He attributes this to the more precocious development of capitalism in Protestant territories. Geremek also pays more attention than do Jutte and Davis to the resistance of the Roman Catholic Church to the dissolution of its many charitable foundations and its mendicancy orders.

72. Thesis forty-three of Luther's 95 Theses states: ‘Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.’” See Aland, Kurt, ed, Martin Luther's 95 Theses: With the Pertinent Documents from the History of the Reformation 54 (Concordia Pub, 1967)Google Scholar. See also Lindberg, Carter, Reformation Initiatives for Social Welfare: Luther's Influence at Leisnig 86 in Annual of the Society of Christian Ethics (1987)Google Scholar.

73. Id at 87.

74. See Lindberg, Carter, ‘There Shall be No Beggars Among Christians:’ Karlstadt, Luther, and the Origins of Protestant Poor Relief, 46 Church History 322–23 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

75. Luther expressed the desire

LW 45: 190. See also Lindberg, , Reformation Initiatives at 92 (cited in note 72)Google Scholar.

76. See Jütte, at 107 (cited in note 70).

77. See Grimm, Harold J., Luther's Contribution to Sixteenth-Century Organization of Poor Relief 228, in 61 Archives for Reformation History (1970)Google Scholar.

78. See Lindberg, , Reformation Initiatives at 93 (cited in note 72)Google Scholar.

79. See Grimm, , Luther's Contribution at 227 (cited in note 77)Google Scholar.

80. This was the case in Wittenberg and Nürnberg. Id at 226, 229 (discussing Wittenberg); and 229-31 (discussing Niirnberg). But most did not include, as Leisnig did, aid to pastors, artisans, merchants, or others. Cf. Lane, Frank Peter, Poverty and Poor Relief in the German Church Orders of Johann Bugenhagen, 1485-1558 at 177–78 (PhD dissertation, Ohio State U, 1973)Google Scholar (comparing Leisnig's arrangements with Braunschweig, Lübeck, Hamburg, and Hildesheim, among other places).

Lane, id at 1.

82. This is the language of the introduction to the Braunschweig Church Ordinance of 1528, which Bugenhagen drafted. Id at 141.

83. Id at 146. Ernst Wolf adds that “the spirit of faith, God's love, and the reliance on Holy Scripture: these three things are the basis of Bugenhagen's church orders.” See Wolf, Ernst, Johannes Bugenhagen 62, in Schmidt, Wilhelm, ed, Gestalten der Reformation (Jugenddienst Verlag, 1967)Google Scholar.

84. See Lane, , Poverty and Poor Relief at 160 (cited in note 80)Google Scholar.

85. Id at 155-56.

86. Id at 174-75 (discussing Nobbe, H., Die Regelung der Armenpflege im 16. Jahrhundert nach den evangeliscbe Kirchenordnungen Deutscblands 574, in 10 Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte (1889)Google Scholar.

87. See text at 315-16 supra.

88. See Weber, Max, Science as a Vocation138–39, in From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (Oxford U Press, Mills, C Wright, ed, & Gerth, Hans H., trans, 1958)Google Scholar. See also Kronman, Anthony T., Max Weber 166–70 (Standord U Press, 1983)Google Scholar.

89. Troeltsch, Ernst, Die Bedeutung des Protestantismus fur die Entstebung der modernen Welt. (1911)Google Scholar. Troeltsch, the theologian and Weber, the sociologist were close friends. Troeltsch's book was an expanded version of a 1906 lecture at a large conference on German history. The lectureship was offered first to Weber but he declined. See Lübbe, Hermann, Säkularisierung: Geschichte eines ideenbpolitiscben Begriffs 74 (K. Albert, 2 Auflage 1965)Google Scholar.

90. A bibliography in Schrey, Heinz-Horst, ed, Säkularisierung (Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1981)Google Scholar contains 368 titles! Two important recent books on secularization in the sixteenth century in Germany and England, respectively, are Crusius, Irene, ed, Zur säkularisierung geistlicher Institulionen im 16. und im 18./19. Jahrbundert (Vandenhoeck und Rupprecht, 1996)Google Scholar, and Sommerville, C. John, The Secularization of Early Modern England: From Religious Culture to Religious Faith (Oxford U Press, 1992)Google Scholar. The present article is the first attempt, so far as I know, to identify as “spiritual” certain branches of law that are directly inspired by what Sommerville refers to as religious faith, whether or not they are promulgated by ecclesiastical authorities.

91. Blumenberg, Hans, The Legitimacy of the Modem Age 10–11 (MIT Press, Wallace, Robert M., trans, 1983)Google Scholar.

92. See Oestreich, Gerhard, Strukturprobleme des europäiscben Absolutismus 179–97Google Scholar in his Geist und Gestalt des frühmodernen Staates. Ausgewählte Aufsätze (Duncker und Humblot, 1969)Google Scholar. See also Schulze, Winfried, Gerhard Oestreichs Begriff ‘Sozialdiszplinierung’ in der frühen Neuzeit 265–302Google Scholar, in 14 Zeitschrift für historische Forschung (1987) (critically reviewing Oestreich's thesis).

93. See Stotleis, Michael, ‘Konfessionalisierung’ oder ‘Säkularisierung’ bei der Entstehung des frühmodernen Staates1–23, in 29 Jus Commune (1990)Google Scholar; and Schilling, Heinz, Die Kirchenzucht im frühzeitlichen Europa in interkonfessionell vergleichender und interdisziplinärer Perspektive—eine Zwischenbilanz11–40, in Schilling, , ed, Kirchenzucht und Sozialdisziplinierung (im frühneuzeitlichen Europa, 1994)Google Scholar.

94. See Jütte, Robert; Obrigkeitliche Armenfürsorge in deutscben Reichsstädten der frühen Neuzeit: städtisches Armenwesen in Frankfurt am Main und Köln (Böhlau, 1994)Google Scholar.

95. On the Roman Catholic theology of mendicancy, see Mollat, Michael, The Poor in the Middle Ages: An Essay in Social History 119–34 (Yale U Press, Goldhammer, Arthur, trans, 1986)Google Scholar.

96. See Huber, Wolfgang, Kirche und Öffentlichkeit 58–59 (E. Klett, 1973)Google Scholar. The ultimate goal of such collaboration of church and state, Huber writes, is “die Verkirchligung der Offentlichkeit.”

97. See Heckel, , Lex charitatis 45Google Scholar (cited in note 8). Cf. the church ordinance of the principality of Luneberg: “The first and greatest concern of the prince must be that God's Word be preached purely and rightly.” Radtslach to nodtroft der kloster der förstendoms Lüneborch, Gades wort unde ceremonien belangen, in Sehling, Emil, ed, Die evangelischen Kirchenordnungen des XVI Jabrbunderts 586 Bd. VI/1 (1955)Google Scholar. Rosenstoch-Huessy, , Out of Revolution 369 (cited in note 29)Google Scholar.

98. Rosenstock-Huessy, , Out of Revolution 369 (cited in note 29)Google Scholar.

99. Löwith, Karl, Meaning in History: The Theological Implications of the Philosophy of History (U Chi Press, 1949)Google Scholar (published in German under the title Weltgeschichte und Heilsgeschichte: die theologischen Vorraussetzungen der Geschichtsphilosophie 2 Aufl. (W. Kohlhammer, 1953)Google Scholar.

100. See Blumenberg, Hans, Die Legitimität der Neuzeit (erweiterte und überarbeitete Neuausgabe) (1966)Google Scholar (published in English under the title The Legitimacy of the Modern Age, (cited in note 91)). See also Blumenberg, Hans, Säkularisierung und Selbstbehauptung (Suhrkamp, 1974)Google Scholar. Cf. Wallace, Robert M., Progress, Secularization, and Modernity: The Löwith-Blumenberg Debate 63–79, in 22 New German Critique (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.