Paul Gerhardt was born in Graefenhainichen in Electoral Saxony, where his
father, Christian Gerhardt, was Burgomaster. There is some doubt as to
the precise year of his birth, owing to the destruction of the church
books when the place was burnt by the Swedes on the 16th of April, 1637.
According to some, the event took place in the year 1606; according to
others, in 1607. The probability is in favour of the former date, for
General Superintendent Goltlob Stolze, of Lübben,[1] says that he died,
in the 70th year of his age, in the year 1676.
There is no information concerning his youth and education. He was still
very young when the Thirty Years' War broke out, and his preparation for
his profession and entrance on it took place in those troublous times,
which may account for his late settlement in a ministerial sphere. In the
year 1651, when in his forty-fifth year, we find him still only a
candidate[2] of theology, and resident as a tutor in the family of
Andreas Bertholdt, Chancery Advocate in Berlin, whose daughter he
subsequently married. In that year a vacancy occurred in the ministry at
Mittenwald, by the death of Probst Caspar Göde. The magistracy of that
place applied to the clergy of Berlin to recommend a suitable man to them
for the office. Paul Gerhardt was their unanimous choice. They
recommended him as an honourable, estimable, and learned man, whose
diligence and erudition were known, of good parts and incorrupt doctrine,
of a peace-loving disposition and blameless Christian life, which
qualities had procured for him the love of all classes, high and low, in
Berlin. They furthermore added that he had frequently, at their friendly
invitation, exercised the excellent gifts with which God had endowed him
for the edification of the church, and had thereby deserved well of the
people, and endeared himself to them. The clergy met together for
consultation, and sent this recommendation to Mittenwald without the
knowledge of Gerhardt; no higher testimony, therefore, could have been
given to his character, learning, and abilities. He was accordingly
appointed and set apart to his office in St. Nicholas' Church, Berlin, on
the 18th of November, 1651, and entered before the close of the year on
his duties. The church book which he kept from Jan. 1, 1652, till Dec.
31, 1656, bears testimony to his fidelity and conscientiousness in the
discharge of this part of the duties of his office.
On February 11th, 1655, he was married to Anna Maria, daughter of the
Chancery Advocate Bertholdt, in whose family he had been tutor. Before he
left Mittenwald, his first child, a daughter, was born and died. There is
a slab to her memory still standing in the church. Several circumstances
in his position at Mittenwald conspired to make Gerhardt desire a change,
and welcome a translation to Berlin when an opportunity offered. The
relation between his colleague, Deacon Allborn, and himself was not
friendly: Allborn had been passed over by the magistrates in favour of
Gerhardt. The want of cordiality which prevailed in consequence must have
been very trying to a man of Gerhardt's disposition. The income of the
office was also small, and his circumstances consequently straitened. His
ties and associations in Berlin would also be strong inducements of
themselves to the acceptance of an appointment there.
The welcome relief came when the magistrates appointed him to the third
Diaconate of St. Nicholas' Church, vacant by the death of Probst Peter
Vher, and the consequent promotion of the other ministers. The spirit in
which he received and accepted the invitation is shown in his letter to
the magistrates on accepting their offer. He humbly and gratefully
recognized the hand of God in the matter; and, owning his own weakness,
earnestly solicited the prayers of the faithful. His letter is dated June
4, 1657, and in the register of St. Nicholas there is an entry of a
baptism made by him on the 22nd of July. Consequently he must have
entered on his duties soon after. Gerhardt, doubtless, joyfully returned
to Berlin, anticipating a happy ministry there; but it was there his
greatest trials awaited him. These trials arose out of the measures taken
by Frederick William,[3] at that time Elector of Brandenburg, to allay
the animosity prevailing between the adherents of the Lutheran and
Reformed Confessions respectively. The feud was of long standing, and the
efforts made to heal it had been hitherto in vain.
With the laudable desire of pacifying party strife, the Elector appointed
a conference to be held between the Lutheran and Reformed clergy of
Berlin and Cöln-on-the-Spree, under the direction of the Lord President,
Baron Otto von Schwerin, on the Reformed side, and Chancellor Lorenz
Christian von Somnitz, of Pomerania, and others, on the Lutheran side.
The Lutheran clergy of the three chief churches in Berlin and Cöln, and
the Reformed court preachers, Bartholomew Stosch and Johann Kunschius,
the rector of the Joachimsthal Gymnasium, and the philologue Joh.
Vorstius, constituted the membership of the conference. Kunschius, being
soon after summoned to accompany the Elector to Königsberg, took no part
in the conferences, and his place was filled by Gerson Vechner, of the
Joachimsthal Gymnasium.
The object of the Conference, according to the Electoral Rescript, was to
consider the following points:--
I. Whether in the Reformed Confessions, particularly in those named in
the last Electoral Edict (January 2nd, 1662), viz.:--The Confessio
Sigismundi, the Colloquium Lipsiacum, the Declaratio
Thoruniensis,--anything is taught or affirmed, in teaching, believing, or
affirming which any one is, _judicio divino_, accursed.
II. Whether anything is denied or passed over in silence, without
acknowledging or practising which no one could be saved.
The Berlin clergy were reluctant to enter on the conference. They thought
that as it concerned the Church of the Mark generally it should not be
limited to Berlin and Cöln, and that it was a subject requiring mature
consideration. At length, however, having protested in vain, they
consented, but manifestly determined to concede nothing.
The conference met at various times during the years 1662-63. Gerhardt
took no public part. The speaking devolved first on Probst Lilius, but
soon afterwards, and for the remainder of the meetings, on Archdeacon
Reinhardt. Gerhardt wrote a judgment unfavourable to the conferences,
because he thought nothing but syncretism would come out of it--_i.e._,
the confusion of the two confessions, into which the Rinteln theologians
had permitted themselves to be seduced. By his votes he evinced his
interest in all its proceedings.[4]
As might be surmised, from the state of party feeling, the conference was
not only fruitless, but left matters in a worse condition than they were
when it first met. Furthermore, at the last sitting but one, on the 22nd
of May, 1663, the Berlin clergy incurred the high displeasure of the
Elector, by defending and approving the conduct of their speaker
Reinhardt on an occasion when he had given great offence to his Highness.
It is thought, that at this time Gerhardt wrote his heart-stirring and
beautiful hymn,--Ist Gott für mich, so trete? (Is God for me, t'oppose
me?) The Elector, in consequence of the result of the conferences, issued
an edict on the 16th of September, 1664, in substance the same but more
stringent than the previous one. All were required to pledge themselves
to obedience to this edict, whereas subscription to the former one had
been required only from candidates at ordination. The edict required the
clergy of both confessions, on pain of dismissal from office and other
penalties, to refrain from vituperating each other, from deducing absurd
and impious doctrines from each other's dogmas, and imputing them to
their opponents. The edict also commanded that the ordinance of baptism
should be administered without exorcism, when the parents desired it. The
edict produced the most profound consternation. It was regarded as
endangering religious liberty and the freedom of conscience. The Lutheran
preachers felt themselves hampered by it in the discharge of their
duties. Regarding, as they did, their symbolical books and ecclesiastical
customs as sacred things, using their authorized formularies in the
instruction of the people, and introducing the element of controversy
largely into their ministrations, they felt themselves quite crippled in
the discharge of their functions. It seemed to them that if they gave up
their liberty in the pulpit, they would be necessitated to give up their
customs also, and so violate their solemn obligations. They thought that
compliance would imperil the Lutheran Church, the welfare of their
congregations, and the peace of their own souls. Such was the view taken
of the matter by many strict and conscientious men. We cannot help
thinking that their view was mistaken and exaggerated, that these things
were not endangered, that it was perfectly possible for them to have been
loyal to their church, to have instructed their people faithfully in all
the peculiar doctrines of their system, and yet have rendered obedience
to the Electoral edict.
Many were actually conducting themselves both according to its letter and
spirit, and yet were filled with those alarms which we must call
groundless, at the very thought of binding themselves by a pledge to act
as they were doing. While we hold them to have been mistaken, we cannot
but respect their fidelity to their honest convictions, and their
fortitude in accepting the sad consequences,--the severing of the ties
that bound them to beloved flocks, the loss of office and emolument, and
expatriation. The principles of toleration were not rightly understood,
either by the Church or State at the time.
As we read the painful annals of the time, the thought often arises in
the mind, how much better had it been if the evil which it was the
laudable intention of the Elector to correct, had been permitted to work
its own cure. There were doubtless many, who had given too much cause for
complaint by the licence they allowed themselves in the pulpit in
attacking their theological adversaries, but those who suffered most
would probably be those, who, like Gerhardt, were not open to reproach,
yet felt themselves constrained by conscience to refuse obedience to the
Elector's command. Hundreds signed the edict. Some who had scruples
yielded on account of their wives and children. There was a witticism
current at the time which was put into the mouths of the pastors'
wives:--
"Schreibt, Schreibt,
Lieber Herre, auf dass ihr bei der Pfarre bleibt."