BOGUE, DAVID: English Congregationalist; b. at Hallydown, near Coldingham (10 m. n.w. of Berwick), Berwickshire, Feb. 18, 1750; d. at Brighton Oct. 25, 1825. He studied at Edinburgh (M.A., 1771), was licensed to preach, and taught school in England; in 1780, while minister of a Congregational chapel at Gosport (opposite Portsmouth), he undertook the instruction of young men for the ministry, and from this beginning was


developed the London Missionary Society. He was also active in founding the British and Foreign Bible Society and the Religious Tract Society. In 1796 with two other ministers and Robert Haldane he offered to go to India as a missionary, but the plan was not approved by the East India Company. Besides sermons and tracts he published An Essay on the Divine Authority of the New Testament (London, 1801), and with James Bennett wrote the History of Dissenters from the Revolution to 1808 (4 vols., 1808-12; 2d ed., 2 vols., 1833).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: James Bennett, Memoirs of the Life of Rev. David Bogue, London, 1827; DNB, v, 302-303.



  1. Origin and History to 1496.
    Origin of the Sect (§ 1).
    Early Organization (§ 2).
    First Priests of the Brethren (§ 3).
    Relations with the Waldensians (§ 4).
  2. The Brethren under Lukas.
    Oppressive Measures of Vladislav (§ 1).
    Overtures to the Protestants (§ 2).
    Later Organization (§ 3).
  3. Development from 1528 to 1621.
    Johann Augusta (§ 1).
    Cessation of Persecution (§ 2).
    The Brethren Merged in the Utraquists (§ 3).
  4. The Brethren in Prussia and Poland.

I. Origin and History to 1496:

1. Origin of the Sect.

The Compactata of Prague, which marked the political end of the Hussite Wars in 1433 (see HUSS, JOHN, HUSSITES), proved unsatisfactory to the religious and ecclesiastical demands of the majority of the Bohemians. Many scattered communities accordingly arose throughout the country, seeking to carry out the Reformation in life and doctrine, independent of the Waldensians who had long been settled in Bohemia. In 1453-54, moreover, the preaching of the Utraquistic archbishop Rokycana (pastor of the Teinkirche at Prague after 1448) resulted in the formation of a community at Prague, headed by his nephew Gregory. The conviction that the validity of the sacraments, sermons, prayer, and the like depended on the moral and religious character of the priest caused them to seek for "good" pastors, and this congregation, together with others and at the suggestion of Rokycana, became closely allied with the Chelcic Brethren, the followers of a layman named Peter of Chelcic, who first appeared at Prague in 1419 and seems to have died before 1457. He had refused to join any of the Hussite parties, since he rejected all temporal defense of the Gospel, and recorded his peculiar views in his writings, of which the most important were his Netz des wahren Glaubens (1455) and his Postilla (1434-36). His ideal of Christian life, the fulfilment of the "law of Christ" (Matt. xxii, 37-39; Gal. vi, 2) in public and in private life without regard to consequences, and his rejection of all that could not be reconciled with this law, such as temporal power, wealth, war, and trade, made a profound impression on Gregory and his followers, and inspired them to attempt to realize this ideal. At their request their friend and counselor Rokycana secured permission from King George Podëbrad for them to settle in the village of Kunwald in the district of Lititz, which belonged to him, and they accordingly established their colony there in 1457 or 1458, Michael, the pastor of the neighboring town of Senftenberg, becoming their spiritual head. How large it was, whether including only individuals or entire families, is not known, although the latter seems to have been the case. At all events, families were soon attracted to Kunwald, for the oldest document of the Brethren, a synodical resolution of 1464, presupposes the existence of households with civil occupations, as well as of widows and orphans.

2. Early Organization.

This sketch of the origin of the Bohemian Brethren renders it clear that the current view which represents them as remnants of the Taborites is incorrect. In 1471 they designated themselves as disciples of Rokycana and his colleagues, and declared that they had been developed from the older communities mentioned above. The main outlines of the organization are contained in certain synodical resolutions of 1464-67. The community was divided into three groups: beginners or penitents, comprising children under the age of twelve and all who sought to enter the community from the time they made profession of their desire until they were received; the advanced, forming the majority of the community and devoting themselves to various civil callings, with masters and matrons appointed to supervise and counsel them; and the perfected (also called priests; although the community then had no specially appointed priesthood), who had renounced private property and given their possessions to the poor, particularly to those who "journey for the sake of the word of God." It was the duty of the perfected to proclaim the word and to hear confessions; they were required to travel in pairs, instead of alone, to earn a livelihood by the work of their hands, and to collect alms regularly, which were destined partly for the poor and partly for themselves, in case their work was insufficient to support them. Those of the laity, either male or female, who had voluntarily chosen poverty, also belonged to this class. At the head of the communities stood one or more elders, although no details of their duties are known, and information is equally scanty regarding the imposition of their frequent synods. The Brethren at Kunwald gained an increasing number of adherents in Bohemia and Moravia, while their opposition to the dominant Church became stronger and stronger, especially as a result of the persecution instituted against them by King George in 1460. They accordingly felt themselves obliged, seven years later, to break entirely with the Church by the creation of an independent priesthood, the historical course of events being as follows, according to Goll's proposed combination of the sources, which are not always in entire agreement.

3. First Priests of the Brethen.

By a meeting with the Waldensians and their "bishop" Stephen, with whom they had become acquainted through Rokycana, the Bohemian Brethren had entered into relations with the Waldensians


previous to 1467. These negotiations proved fruitless, however, since the Waldensians as a body would not countenance an open break with the Roman Catholic Church. Some of them, on the other hand, joined the Brethren, and among this number was an old Waldensian priest, who was present, together with certain representatives of the German Waldensians, at a conference of about sixty Brethren from various parts of Bohemia and Moravia which was held, according to a later tradition, at Lhotka, a village near Reichenau, in 1467 to choose and ordain priests of their own. Fully aware of the momentous nature of their proceeding, they wished God himself to decide by lot whether the time had come for them to venture the step, and which persons should be the first priests. Nine candidates were proposed, each of whom was required to draw one of twelve slips, nine blank and three containing the word jest ("he is"). In case all the candidates drew blanks, the synod was to be adjourned for a year. Thomas, Matthias, and Elias, however, drew the three written slips, whereupon they were "confirmed" by the laying on of hands by the old Waldensian priest, apparently assisted by the priest Michael(?), in the name and authority of the synod. By a more restricted lot Matthias was chosen from the three to have "the first place in authority," or as "bishop," as Michael called himself in a conference with the Utraquistic consistory in 1478. It was not until May of the following year (1468) that the Brethren informed Rokycana of what had occurred, and they then seem to have broken definitely with him. They themselves, however, were soon divided as to "whether it should so remain," and the result was the decision that Matthias should be consecrated bishop by the Waldensian bishop Stephen. Strangely enough, the priest Michael was sent, instead of Matthias himself. Michael met Stephen in southern Moravia, received consecration from him, and gave it, when he returned, to Matthias, whereupon he resigned both the authority of bishop, which he had received only for this purpose, and also his Catholic priesthood, having himself reordained by Matthias as a priest of the Brethren, while the new bishop likewise ordained Thomas and Elias. This is the account of Michael and other eye-witnesses, while later sources, even of the early sixteenth century, present many deviations, partly in an endeavor to conceal the cooperation of the Waldensians so far as possible.

4. Relations with the Waldensians.

The members of this newly constituted community called themselves "Brethren," and were known in different portions of the country by the names of their chief centers, such as Kunwalders, Bunzlau Brethren, and the like. As a whole they termed themselves Jednota Bratrská, which they later rendered into Latin as Unitas Fratrum. Their characteristic designation was Brethren, which had already been current in various older Bohemian communities. The name Fratres legis Christi first arose in the second half of the sixteenth century, but never became general. Their opponents usually termed them Waldensians or Pickards (a corruption of Beghards), and this designation, found even in the royal decrees, became so general that they themselves employed it in the titles of many of their writings, terming themselves "the Brethren who for envy and hatred are called Waldensians or Pickards." The first result of the events of 1467 was a renewal of the persecutions, which lasted until the death of George and Rokycana in 1471, and which also involved the Waldensians, Stephen being burned at the stake in Vienna during this period. This persecution may also have been the cause of the renewed attacks on them in Brandenburg, and about 1478 two Waldensians accordingly went from that country to the Brethren, thus inaugurating an intercommunication between the two sects which resulted in a number of Waldensians joining the Brethren after 1480 and settling at Landskron in Bohemia and at Fulneck in Moravia. In the latter country both sects were tolerated under King Matthias, until the end of his reign, when a decree of expulsion was issued in 1488, although it was soon revoked at the petition of some patrons of high rank. A portion of the Brethren had already emigrated to Moldavia, but apparently returned within a few years.

Internal strife, centered about the ideal of Peter mentioned above, was more perilous to the maintenance of unity than external oppression. A "small" party clung to this ideal, and accordingly rejected temporal power, law, service in war, the oath, and the like as unchristian, while a "great " party regarded all these as dangerous, yet not to be rejected unconditionally. The controversies ended in 1494 with the victory of the "great" party, the "small" party, who called themselves Amosites after their leader Amos, separating as an independent community and preserving an existence for several decades. During these dissensions two leaders of the "great" party, Lukas and Thomas, journeyed to North Italy to visit the Lombard Waldensians in their own homes, possibly seeking, in view of their disagreement with the "small" party, to make a final effort to induce the Waldensians to break openly with Rome. A correspondence between the Brethren and the Waldensians was associated with this journey, the three Waldensian treatises, preserved either entire or in fragments, La epistola al serenissimo Rey Lancelau; Ayczo es la causa del nostre departiment de la gleysa Romana; and De l'Antichrist, as well as the catechism Las interrogations menors, being apparently translations or revisions of Bohemian writings composed by the Brethren, although the mutual relations are not yet altogether clear.

II. The Brethren under Lukas:

1. Oppressive Measures of Vladislav.

The period between 1496 and 1528 is marked by the activity of Lukas. Although he was not appointed presiding bishop until 1517, his influence was potent during the administration of his predecessors in office, Procopius (1507) and Thomas of Prelouc (1517). His special task was the restoration of the Unity which had become necessary in consequence of the secession of the "small" party. A mass of ordinances, touching on all the relations of life,


was prepared to build up the Christian community on the principles newly won. The doctrines, which had thus far been formulated but feebly, were now systematized on other foundations, and from these various points of view Lukas developed a noteworthy literary activity. The external existence of the Unity was seriously threatened at the beginning of the sixteenth century, when Vladislav, who had tolerated them hitherto, was induced to proceed against them by Bohuslav of Lobkowitz, the foremost representative of Bohemian humanism, who saw the roots of manifold evils in religious disunion. At the same time Alexander VI sent the Dominican Heinrich Institoris to Olmütz as censor of books for Bohemia and Moravia (bull of Feb. 4, 1500), and he, after a fruitless disputation with certain representatives of the Brethren, preached against them with extreme severity. The overtures toward a reconciliation between Rome and the Utraquists (1501) led the latter to make common cause in opposition to the Brethren, and a decree of the king, dated July 5, 1503, forbade all further toleration of the sect in Prague and the royal cities, while the Roman Catholic estates voluntarily enforced this prohibition in their districts. A conference held at Prague between the Utraquistic clergy and some of the Brethren failed to convince the latter of their "errors," nor did a Latin creed given them by the king in 1503 meet with their approval. He was still more incensed at them by two venomous letters of the Olmütz canon Augustine Käsebrut, so that he issued a sharp decree against them in 1507. These decrees, however, could not become valid until accepted by the diet, and Vladislav accordingly proposed a law against the Brethren at the diet convoked on July 25, 1508. This was accepted by the estates and placed on the code, as in force throughout the country. It forbade all public and private gatherings of the "Pickards," and ordered the destruction of all their books and writings, while they were commanded to attend Roman Catholic or Utraquistic churches, their clergy and teachers being prisoners of the king unless they should consent, after receiving instruction, to join one of these religious bodies. The law is said to have been obeyed by all estates until Christmas, and those who still tolerated "Pickards" were mulcted. This measure conditioned the position of the Brethren in Bohemia for almost the entire period of their existence, but the Moravian diet refused to accept it. In 1541 the code was destroyed by a fire at Prague, so that it became necessary to draft the laws anew at following diets. Thereupon the Brethren endeavored to secure the abolition of the law, but in vain; nor was it repealed until an imperial letter of Rudolf II in 1609. It is strikingly suggestive of the political conditions of Bohemia in the sixteenth century, however, that a community which was legally prohibited, like the Brethren, could attain such wide extension and importance. This was possible only because the nobles obeyed the laws as they pleased, for the king was generally too much occupied with foreign affairs to be able to insist rigidly on compliance with his statutes, and in case he did attempt to execute them, he was resisted by a coalition of the estates, who sought to check all growth of the royal power. At first the law was strictly observed, and the Brethren were severely oppressed, their meeting-places being closed, their priests expelled, and imprisonment and even occasional execution serving as deterrent measures. Lukas himself was imprisoned, and was freed only by the death of Vladislav on Mar. 13, 1516. This event lessened the severity of a persecution which had been opposed by some estates from the very beginning. During the reign of Vladislav's son Louis, which marked a further decay of the royal power, the persecution of the Brethren ceased altogether, and the governmental center of the Unity, which had been transferred to Prerau in Moravia during the period of oppression, was again removed to Bohemia, and located at Jungbunzlau, the residence of Lukas. While he was presiding bishop, the Brethren first came into contact with the German Reformation, when Luther learned of their short catechism, of which he seems to have received a German translation in 1521.

2. Overtures to the Protestants.

Although Luther at first declared himself at least in sympathy with their doctrine of the Lord's Supper, he became estranged from the Brethren after 1524, while their tendency to remain aloof, so far as possible, from the Lutheran movement was strengthened by the vagaries of Gallus Cahera in Prague (1523-29), especially since it resulted in the enforcement by the diet of the decree of Vladislav (1525). The Brethren also sent a fruitless deputation to Erasmus, apparently in 1520. In the closing years of his life Lukas found himself obliged to break with the Habrovanites or Lultish Brethren in Moravia, who were closely associated with the "small" party, and rejected celibacy, spiritual and temporal authority, and the taking of oaths, in addition to following Carlstadt in the doctrine of the Lord's Supper, and wishing to substitute baptism of the spirit for baptism by water. After a fruitless conference, letters were exchanged with considerable frequency for a number of years, while an effort made by the Anabaptists who had emigrated from the Tyrol to Moravia to unite with the Brethren ended in 1528 in a complete schism. Lukas died at Jungbunzlau on Dec. 11, 1528, and was buried in the local house of the Brethren, which had formerly been a monastery. The organization, however, which he had given the Unity remained unchanged until its end.

3. Later Organization.

In principle the supreme judicial power was lodged with the synod, which consisted of all the clergy, although it contained no delegates chosen from the communities. It was, at the same time, the supreme court of appeal, although the chief administrative body, the "Close Council" (úzká rada), which was composed of some ten members chosen by the synod for life, apparently constituted the real government. The legal relation of the "Close Council" to the synod seems never to have been accurately defined. At the Synod of 1497 the "Close Council" was treated with all submission


and obedience, and was empowered to make whatever changes and ordinances it deemed best without awaiting a decision of the synod. According to tradition, it never abused its privileges, and held a general council yearly whenever this was possible, while other synods also existed in individual districts. The presiding officer of the "Close Council" was called a "judge" (sudi), and this office was originally united with that of bishop in the person of Matthias, although he proved himself unequal to the position in the strife with the "small" party, so that Procopius was appointed sudi, Matthias retaining only the episcopal power of ordination. Authorized by the "Close Council," he associated Thomas and Elias, whom be had already ordained priests, and after the death of Matthias and the resignation of Procopius in 1500, the power of direction and ordination was again united, and given to four newly chosen Brethren, Thomas, Elias, Lukas, and Ambrose, the first two already possessing the episcopal ordination and the last two now receiving it. Each of them was placed over a diocese which he controlled and in which he ordained the priests. The priest next in age to these four was called the judge, and had special functions. Jafet, writing in 1605, sought to show that this organization existed from the first and that four bishops had ruled simultaneously since 1467, and this erroneous view was so widely disseminated by Wengierski (Regenvolscius) that it is still found sporadically. At the head of each community stood the priest or director (správce), who lived in the "house of the Brethren" and supported himself as an artisan or farmer. He might possess property, although he was bound by certain restrictions, so that when, for example, he received a legacy, he was required to deposit it with the "Close Council," which deprived him of it in case of need or inability to discharge his office. While there was no insistence on the celibacy of the clergy, it was regarded as desirable, in view of the unsettled position of the community, and was the rule until the second half of the sixteenth century. With the priest lived his assistant or deacon, who aided him both in his daily toil and in teaching school, and especially in the instruction of the acolytes (young men in training for the priesthood), who resided in the "house of the Brethren." The deacon accompanied the priest in all his pastoral journeys, and was permitted to preach, to baptize in case of need, and to aid in the Lord's Supper, although he could neither consecrate the elements nor pronounce the benediction at the close of the service of the community. A council of the community aided, and in part supervised, the priest in controlling the property of the congregation and in distributing alms. The income consisted, in addition to gifts and foundations, of two collections, taken at Christmas and St. John's Day. Three persons were deputed to oversee the giving of alms, while the council of the community was required to reconcile antagonistic members of the congregation with each other or with the priest, to control morals, and to maintain the discipline of the church. The bodies next in rank were the "Close Council" and the synods. The council of the community found its counterpart in a committee of aged widows and spinsters appointed to supervise the morals and the conduct of the sisters. This organization, the genesis of which is known chiefly from the Dekrety, remained unchanged after Lukas. It was first described in full detail by Lasicius in the eighth book of his history of the Brethren, and was officially formulated by them at the General Synod of Žeravic in Moravia, held in 1616.

III. Development from 1528 to 1621:

1. Johann Agusta.

The independent development of the Unitas Fratrum closed with the death of Lukas. The Lutheran party among the Brethren, headed by such men as Johann Horn (Roh), Michael Weisse, Johann Augusta, and Mach Sionsky, now became more prominent and assumed the leadership. After the brief administration of the insignificant Martin Skoda, Horn became judge in 1532, but was surpassed in importance by his colleague Johann Augusta, a man characterized by meager education, yet of great firmness, energy, and eloquence, and deeply impressed with a sense of the peculiar advantages of the community. He sought to associate the Brethren with the foreign Evangelicals, and found a favorable opportunity shortly after 1530, when the margrave George of Brandenburg requested Conrad of Krajek to instruct him in the doctrines of his sect. A confession was prepared, and Luther was induced to have it painted at Wittenberg with a eulogistic preface. At the same time, however, Augusta made overtures to the Strasburg theologians, and Matthias Cervenka, his envoy to Butzer, unexpectedly met Calvin. On the other hand, his relations with the Utraquistic Church of Bohemia were strained, especially during the administration of Mistopol. Another trait which characterizes the history of the Brethren after Lukas (1528-47) is the prominence of their nobility. The country estates were required to take part in the country diets just as the estates of the kingdom shared in the royal diets, and it thus became necessary for the estates of the Brethren to enter the former to defend the existence of their ecclesiastical union. In 1535, therefore, they gave King Ferdinand the creed of the Brethren, signed by all members of the nobility among them, twelve lords and thirty-five knights. Since ten of the twenty-six nobles tried by Ferdinand after the suppression of the so-called Bohemian revolt in 1547 were members of the Unity, he found a long-desired pretext to crush the community so far as possible. The decree of Vladislav was reenforced, certain estates which had been the centers of the brotherhood were confiscated by the king, and the former protectors of the Brethren were no longer able to evade the execution of the decree under the existing circumstances. The community was practically destroyed in Bohemia. Its seat of government was transferred to Moravia, but the majority of the Brethren were banished from the entire kingdom. Augusta himself was betrayed to Ferdinand, and regained his freedom only after repeated tortures and an imprisonment of sixteen years.


2. Cessation of Persecution.

The sixth decade of the century ushered in a period of comparative peace for the Brethren, and they now sought, under the leadership of Johann Blahoslav, to gain state recognition of their Church, their chances seeming especially favorable in view of the supposed Protestant tendency of Maximilian. In 1555 and the following years they accordingly endeavored to win the favor of the archduke through repeated conferences between Blahoslav and Maximilian's court preacher, Pfauser of Vienna, but their efforts to secure definite promises for the future bore little fruit. The same object was pursued by Utraquism, which had now become essentially Lutheran, and which had prepared a new creed for the Lutheran Church in Bohemia in 1575, after the compacts had been annulled by the diet of deputies in 1567 as antiquated. Through their representatives the Brethren sought to have their independence clearly expressed in the preface of the new creed, but their chance of recognition by the side of the "Neo-Utraquists" steadily decreased, while their essential community of interest with the new body became more and more clear. In 1609, when the estates forced Rudolf to issue his charter, the Brethren shared the religious liberty which it granted by joining in the Bohemian Confession of 1575, after having already given a full explanation of its acceptance in the previous year.

3. The Brethren Merged in the Utraquists.

All special names were now to cease, and the members of the united Bohemian Evangelical Church were henceforth to be called "Utraquistic Christians." The Brethren were represented in the common consistory, but despite the abolition of a separate name, this was, strictly speaking, not a union, but rather a confederation between the Unitas Fratrum and the Bohemian Church. The Brethren, therefore, retained their own organization and regulations, and even their independent creed (1564), while the Bohemian Lutherans, in like manner, held to the Augsburg Confession, although both creeds are declared to be in full harmony with the Bohemian Confession of 1575. Definitive form was accordingly given the church discipline of the Brethren at the Synod of Žeravic in 1616 under the title Ratio disciplinœ ordinisque ecclesiastici in unitate fratrum Bohemorum, but the plan of making this valid for the whole Bohemian Church was not realized. This organization, however, had but a brief period of prosperity, for the battle at the White Hill (Nov. 8, 1620) destroyed Protestantism in Bohemia and Moravia for more than a century and a half.

IV. The Brethren in Prussia and Poland:

The Brethren expelled from Bohemia in 1547 in consequence of the Schmalkald War emigrated partly to Moravia and partly to Prussia, where they were received by Duke Albert. After his death in 1568 they returned to Moravia and Poland, exercising an important influence on the introduction of the Reformation in the latter country, and attempting to establish friendly relations between the various Evangelical bodies at a synod held at Sendomir in 1570. Their scanty remnants still exist in the five so-called communities of Unity in the Prussian province of Posen: Posen, Lissa, Lasswitz, Waschke, and Orzeszkowo.


BIBLIOGRAPHY: For full bibliography of the subject consult W. G. Malin, Catalogue of Books relating to or illustrating the History of the Unitas Fratrum or United Brethren now generally known as the Moravian Church, Philadelphia, 1881.

For general history consult: J. Camerarius, Historica narratio de fratrum orthodoxorum ecclesiis in Bohemia, Moravia, at Polonia, Heidelberg, 1605; J. Lasicius, De origine et institutis Fratrum libri viii (only the eighth book was published, ed. J. A. Comenius, 1649); Historia persecutionum ecclesiœ Bohemicœ, Amsterdam, 1648, Eng. transl., London, 1650; J. A. Comenius, Ecclesiœ Slavonicœ historiola, Amsterdam, 1660; idem, Historia fratrum Bohemorum, ed. Buddeus, Halle, 1702; Martyrologium Bohemicum, oder die böhmische Verfolgungsgeschichte, 894-1632, Berlin, 1766; D. Cranz, Alte und neue Brüder Historie, Barby, 1771, Eng. transl., London, 1780; The Reformation and Anti-Reformation in Bohemia, ib. 1845; V. Krasinski, Religious History of the Slavonic Nations, Edinburgh, 1851; A. Gindely, Geschichte der böhmischen Brüder, 2 vols., Prague, 1857; A. Bost, Hist. of the Bohemian and Moravian Brethren, London, 1863; E. W. Cröger, Geschichte der alten Brüderkirche, Gnadau, 1865; D. Benham, Notes on the Origin and Episcopate of the Bohemian Brethren, London, 1867; B. Czerwenka, Geschichte der evanelischen Kirche in Böhmen, 2 vols., Bielefeld, 1870; E. Jane Whately, Sketches of Bohemian Religious History, London, 1876; E. de Schweinitz, Hist. of the Church known as the Unitas Fratrum, Bethlehem, 1885.

For the church order consult: Ratio disciplinœ ordinisque ecclesiastici in unitate fratrum Bohemorum, Leszno, 1632, Amsterdam, 1660, and Halle, 1732; B. Seifferth, Church Constitution of the Bohemian and Moravian Brethren. The Original Latin with a Transl., London, 1866.

The original text of the Confession is reproduced in A. Gindely, Quellen zur Geschichte der böhmischen Brüder, p. 354 sqq., Vienna, 1861, and in de Schweinitz, History, ut sup., pp. 648 sqq. Consult also J. C. Koecher, Die drey letzten und vornehmsten Glaubensbekenntnisse der böhmischen Brüder, Leipsic, 1741; H. A. Niemeyer, Collectio confessionum, pp. 771 sqq., ib. 1840.

For catechisms consult: J. G. Ehwalt, Die alte und neue Lehre der böhmischen Brüder, Danzig, 1756; C. A. G. von Zezschwitz, Die Katechismen der Waldenser und böhmischen Brüder, Erlangen, 1863; J. Müller, Die deutschen Katechismen der böhmischen Brüder, Berlin, 1887.

On the Hymnology consult: P. Wackernagel, Das deutsche Kirchenlied, iii, 229-368, iv, 346-485, Berlin, 1870-75; J. Zahn, Die geistlichen Lieder der Brüder in Böhmen, Mähren und Polen, Nuremberg, 1875; Julian, Hymnology, pp. 153-160.


CCEL home page
This document is from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library at
Calvin College. Last modified on 05/10/04. Contact the CCEL.
Calvin seal: My heart I offer you O Lord, promptly and sincerely