Associate professor of church history princeton theological seminary baker book house

RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA

Griswold

Qroaincen

worked, though it originated at the sister university of Utrecht, under the influence of Philip Willem

van Heusde, a Platonist, who was pro­Origin. fessor there of history and Greek from

1804 to his death, in 1839, and exerted

much influence. He studied Christianity, accord­

ing to his own statement, by reading the Bible and

"then only Plato." Christianity was to him a

doctrine of love, "which by its very nature is,_by

the fear of God, to reconcile men with men as chil­

dren of the same Father." A number of disciples

gathered around Van Heusde, who all aimed at

reaching a deeper and independent knowledge of

Christianity and the truth by the study of the Gos­

pel. At Groningen there existed a similar circle of

students who were not satisfied with the orthodox

doctrine of the Reformed Church of Holland. The

leading spirit of this circle was Petrus Hofstede de

Groot (q.v.). They pursued before everything else

the study of the New Testament, but were also

greatly influenced by German theologians like

Usteri, Twesten, and Ullmann. They too began to

study Plato and soon became acquainted with Van

Heusde. From Benjamin Constant's De la religion

(6 vols., Paris, 1824 32) they adopted the idea­

to them wholly new = "that religion has its source

in a special religious feeling which is innate, nat­

ural." The two circles of students came into closer

contact when certain of them were called from

Utrecht to Groningen as professors (J. F. van Oordt

in 1829; L. G. Pareau, 1831; W. Muurling, 1840).

Hofstede de Groot became professor in 1829; and

his friends, C. H. van Herwerden and M. A. Ams­

hoff, gained wider influence as pastors in Groningen.

They met together once a week to read the New

Testament, and it became evident to them that

the older Reformed theologians had understood

the Gospel better than they. In 1835 a

theological society came into existence, which

met once every month. This society, called Waar­

heid in Liefde ("Truth in Love"), in 1837 be­

gan to publish a magazine which bore the same

name and spread the fruit of the studies of its mem­

bers in larger circles. The "Groningen School"

then began to be talked about, and while violent

opponents arose, its influence among the churches

spread farther and farther.

The great merit of the Groningen School con­sisted in the fact that its system centered in the personality, work, and example of Christ. In this way it set a check to the intellectualistic orthodoxy

which overemphasized the teachings Distinctive of Christ. According to the school,

Doctrines. Christ is subordinated to God. He is

not God and man at the same time. He has in his heavenly as well as in his earthly life only one nature, namely the divine or spiritual na­ture, which is possessed by both God and man. God has given his revelation in Jesus Christ in order that mankind may become more and more similar to himself. In regard to its form, the revelation of God m Christ was new and peculiar, and accord­ingly was confirmed by miracles; but in regard to its content, it was the development and perfection of what God granted from the beginning. It must be conceived and explained as a historical phenomenon V. 6

that was prepared by everything which God did before the birth of Christ, especially among the Greeks and Romans, and, in an extraordinary degree, in Israel; it was realized by the sending of Jesus, by his.activity among men, and the end to which he was destined; it is continued by his rule of the faithful, whose head he is, neat to God. The entire theology of the Groningen School was naturally closely connected with these Christo­logical views, and it is self evident that the School had decisively to oppose Reformed dogmatics and to depart from the confessional standards. The dogma of the Trinity was rejected. The doctrine of predestination was restricted to the acceptance of election, while reprobation was rejected and its sense was changed. Christ did not die in order to satisfy God's justice which demands punishment; the death of Christ is a revelation of God's love which impels and guides man to crucify his sensual life and rise to the spiritual life. The Groningen School denied the infallibility of the Bible, and attributed higher authority to the New Testament than to the Old. It declared itself decisively against restrictions on liberty of doctrine, and against the obligation of the teachers of the Church to agree with the confessional standards.

In 1835 the General Synod of the Reformed

Church of Holland approved of liberty of doctrine

in the sense of the representatives of the Groningen

School. In 1842 a new dispute arose concerning

its theology, but the synod adopted no measures

against the school. Although the op 

Growth position to the new tendency did not and cease, for a time it seemed as if the

Decline. influence of the Groningen School

would continue dominant. Its ad­

herents filled various chairs in universities, and thus

many future theologians were won for its views.

Among its preachers it counted many adherents who

distinguished themselves by scholarship and ability

to popularize their ideas A. Rutgers van der

Loeff of Zutphen and Leyden, L. S. P. Meyboom of

Amsterdam and Groningen, A. T. Reitsma of Gron­

ingen, J. Donwes of Leens, and others. The

periodical Waarheid in Liefde lasted many years.

In 1867 a second periodical, Geloof en Vrijheid

("Faith and Freedom") was started and is still

in existence. The adherents of the school dis­

tinguished themselves also by their practical labors

for home and foreign missions, circulation of the

Bible, schools for children, etc. For along time

they constituted the majority of synods. But con­

ditions have changed. In the judgment of many,

the Groningen School did not go far enough; it was

not sufficiently negative for the more modern tend­

encies; and, on the other hand, it did not satisfy

others because it was not positive enough. The

older Reformed principles, which give Christian

life a firmer basis, revived. The founders of the

school are dead, and their successors in professorial

chairs represent other views. Of the nineteen mem­

bers of the synod, only one or two can now be

classed with the Groningen School.

(S. D. VAN VEEN.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. Hofatede de Groot, De Groninger God 

geleerden in hunne eipenaardigheid, Groningen, 1855; idem,

Groote THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG

VOftip iaar in do 7h®ologie, ib. 1872; G. J. Voe Asn, Groen roan Prinsterer en ziin tijd, i. 87 8b, passim, Dort, 1888; J. H. Gunning, Hot prwestantxhe Nederland onzer dagen, pp. 26 30, Groningen, 1889. The teachings of the school were embodied in Series oompendiorum theoiogi­corurn in   edwlarum academioarum, 7 vols., 1836 81, embracing treatises on theological encyclopedia, herme­neutiM church history, Christian ethics, practical the­ology and dogmatics, and apologetice.
GROOTE (Groot, Groet, Groete, de Groete), GEERT (Gerrit, Gerhard): Founder of the Brethren of the Common Life (see COMMON LIP'S, BRETHREN oh Tim); b. at Deventer (8 m. n. of Zutphen), Holland, Oct., 1340; d. there Aug. 20, 1384. He was educated at the cathedral school of his native place, after which he studied theology, philosophy, medicine, canon law, astronomy, magic, and He 

brew at the University of Paris. He Life. then went to Cologne, and even to

Prague (1360), and visited the papal court of Urban V. at Avignon in 1366. Two canon­ries and his private fortune enabled him to lead a gay and luxurious life, but while seriously ill in 1374 his early friend, Henry of Kalkar (q.v.), became the agent of his sincere and deep conversion. Groote now resigned his income, retaining only as much as was necessary for a modest living; in shabby attire he wandered about as a preacher of repentance, but he kept his books, and spent much of his time in study and prayer, associating only with his friends of like sentiments, Jan Cools, Henry of Kal­kar, and Jan van Ruysbroeck, whom he had visited as early as 1377. For a time he retired to the mon­astery of Mbnnikhuizen, but after three years he came forward as public preacher of repentance. He declined ordination, and wished only to labor as a missionary preacher with episcopal permission. Before entering upon his work, he devoted the last part of his possessions to a dwelling for virgins and widows without monastic profession.

From place to place Groote went, preaghing in the vernacular at Deventer, Zwolle, Kampen, Amers­foort, Amsterdam, Haarlem, Gouda, Leyden, Delft,

and Zutphen. The churches were too His small to hold his hearers, on whom he

Preaching. impressed the vital question of the sal­

vation of the soul. He revealed the

iniquities of clergy and laity, preaching against

avarice, simony, and unchastity, while his fiercest

invectives were launched against "focaristee"

(priests living in concubinage) and against here­

tics (the Brethren of the Free Spirit, q.v.).' His

influence upon the laity and clergy was profound

and lasting,. his followers including Florentius

Radewyns, Johannes Voss, Johannes a Rempis

(brother of Thomas), Heinrich Wilde, Berthold

ten Have, Johannes Waater, and the priests Jo­

hannes Scutken, Johannes Klingerbiel, Werner

Keyenkamp, as well as Hendrik van Wilson,

burgomaster of Kampen, and the physician Ever

hard of Almelo or Eza. Groote's life and words

influenced his auditors deeply. His bishop often

invited him to preach, once before the General

Synod, and urged him especially to inveigh against

concubinage (1383). The secular clergy, on the

other hand, attacked him for his castigation of their

luxury, simony, and usury, while the monks assailed

him on account of his diatribes against their idleness and assumed poverty. The magistrates and laymen sided with them, even accusing him of heresy, and the bishop was induced to forbid preach­ing by those who had not been ordained, this pro­hibition naturally including Groote with the rest. In refutation of the charge of heresy he wrote his Publics proteatatio, while to offset the prohibition of preaching he referred unsuccessfully to the canon law. His influence was not diminished by these attacks, however, but showed itself especially in the school through which he wished to educate a better and wiser clergy, while his prestige was still more evident at Deventer and Zwolle, where the houses of the Brethren and Sisters of the Common Life and the congregation of Windesheim were founded.

In his teaching, Groote was in full accord with his Church, though his mode of life showed a certain legalistic trait. His day's work was strictly regu­lated. He slept seven hours, ate only once, and declined every invitation from outside. Prayer, meditation, and reading of the Bible and the Church Fathers filled the day. He heard mass each day, and also .ministered constantly to his fellow men, besides conducting an extensive correspondence. His control of the school was exercised chiefly through his devoted teachers, although he aided the pupils, whom he employed to copy manuscripts, and influenced them profoundly. He bad preached but three years and a half when! he died of the plague.

Groote's literary activity was essentially prac­tical and pastoral. The most complete lists of his writings, some of which are still unpublished, are given by Bonet Maury (pp. 91 sqq.)

His and Anger (p. 272). Among his ser­Sermons. mons special mention may be made of the following: De fgatrinis (reprinted in the Archief vLeyden, 1829, pp. 365 379); Sermo in feato palmdrum de paupertate (ed. W. Moll, in Studien en bijdragen op 't gebied der historlsche theologie, ii., Amsterdam, 1872, pp. 432 169); an informal sermon (ed. J. Van Vloten, in his Vemameling van nederland prowatuk­ken, Leyden, 1851, and again in the Nieuw archief voor kerkehjke geechiedenis insanderheid van Neder­laad, ii., Leyden, 1854, pp. 299 sqq.); De vajf poente, die Meeater G. de Groot in den vnlke t' Utrecht predide, discovered in a Vienna manuscript of the year 1393 by F. Hellwald (ed. W. Moll in Studien en bijdra­gen, i., Amsterdam, 1870, pp. 404 411); Sermo de septem mrbia Domini penderdw in eruee (not yet published); Sermo de nativitate Christi, mentioned by J. Foppens; Publica proteatatib de veridica evan­gelai prmdiratwne, written before he was forbidden to preach (ed. J. Clarisse from a Utrecht manu­script in Archief voor kerkelijke geechiadmis, i., Leyden, 1829, p. 359); Concluaa et proposita, non vota in nomine Domini a Mag. Gerardo edits, in the Vita by Thomas A Kempis, comprising rules of life and admonitions, often with slight relevance; Canaalium cuidam juveni datum, cut collate Pit eecleaia quadam, curatta ad inetantiam aororts sues (ed. J. Clarisse, in Archief, iii., Leyden, 1831, supple­ment 3, pp. 13 sqq.); Tradotus de matKmonio (ed.

as

RELIGIOUS

ENCYCLOPEDIA

Gxoots

GroDDer

J. Clarisse, in Archief, viii., 1836, pp. 129 sqq.), a eulogy of celibacy; and De locatiotte eedevamm, a discussion on leases of livings.

Groote's personality is reflected in his epistles. Twelve are given by Jan Busch in his Chroniaon

WindeMemenae (ed. K. Grubs, Halls, His 1886; ed., with other letters of Groote, Letters. J. Clarisse, in Archief, iii., Leyden, 1831, supplement 2, pp. 5 sqq.; ed. J. Acquoy, Gerardi Magni epidolw XIV., Amster­dam, 1857); eight were edited by P. de Ram in Compte rendu des a6ances de la Commission . . . bdgique (Brussels, 1860), pp. 66 sqq.; seven by Nolte in TQ, 1870; one in German addressed to a nun, by W. Moll in Studien en bijdragen, iii., Am­sterdam, 1876, pp. 434 sqq.; and sixteen by W. Preger in AMA, iii., class xxL, part 1 (Munich, 1894). Many of his epistles were copied as inde­pendent treatises, such as the De mainmonio and De imUtutione noviciorum (the latter ed. L. Schulze, in ZHG, xi. 577).

Groote also rendered three works of his friend Ruysbroeck from Dutch into Latin: Ornatus ap tualium nu#iarum; De seem gradZta amoras; De duodecim virtuttbua; and translated from Latin into German for the sister houses several brief treatises (ed. W. Moll, Geert Groote's didache ver­Wingen, Amsterdam, 1880).

The theological standpoint of Groote was that of Thomism.   Accepting the theological teachings of his time, he rejected the mystic concepts of Ruys 

broeck, although he shared the ascetic

His doctrine of renunciation of the world,

Theology. even while opposing it since the new

devotion established and advocated

by him was to be promoted and spread in the world.

All his efforts were intended to lead souls to God,

but he can be called a Reformer before the Reform­

ers only in a relative sense. He sought to carry

out hill principles in the community of brethren and

sisters, by the common life of clergy and laity, by

work (especially copying), and by the rejection of

mendicancy and monastic vows. He never opposed

the Church, but assailed the abuses among the clergy

and laity, and strongly advocated the reading of the

Scripture in the monasteries and schools, and by the

members of his communion, also urging the need

of a translation of the Bible into the vernacular for

the benefit of the laity. L. SCHULZE.

BIHwoa8APH7: Sources of knowledge are the writings of

Rudolph Dier de Muden, in G. Dunbar, Analecta, Daven­

try, 1719; the writings of Johannes Busch, q.v.; and

the work of Thomas 8 Kemple, The Poundem o/ the New

Devotion, good edition in English by J. P. Arthur, Lon­

don, 1905. Consult: C. Ullmann, Reformers before the

Reformation, ii. 59 81, Edinburgh, 1877; G. Bonet­

Maury, Gerard de Groote, un pr€curseur de la rt/orme au

1.(. *WU, Paris, 1878; idem, De opera wholaetica fralrum

vita; communie in Nederlandia, ib. 1889; idem, Lea PTf­

euraeurB de la rbfmme . dams les pays Wine, Paris,

1903; A. Anger, in hfinoiree . pubii6e par l acadhnie

royale . . . de Belpique, alvi. 266 aqq., Brussels, 1892;

W. Preger, Geuhidhte der rdigifen Bewepunp in den Nis­

derlanden im . . 1#. Jahrhundert, Munich, 1894; M.

SchOngen, Die Schule in Zwoile, vol. i., Freiburg, 1898;

RL, v. 1288  89; end the literature under CouaoN LzF$,

BBxTaBEN OP T81..

CROPPER, JOHANN: Roman Catholic church politician of the Reformation period; b. in Soest

(65 m. n.e. of Cologne) Feb. 24, 1503; d. in Rome Mar. 13, 1559. After being made keeper of the seal of the archbishopric of Cologne, he was appointed scholasticus of St. Gerson in 1527. Gropper was an adherent of Erasmus, and aided the

At First a reform efforts of Hermann van Wied, Follower archbishop of Cologne (see HERMANN of Erasmus. VON WMD). This led him, after having completed his legal studies at Cologne in 1525, to devote himself to theological study. He edited the LandrecU of Cologne, and also the canons of the provincial council at Cologne held in 1536 (both published in 1538, together with a detailed manual of Christian doctrine [Enchiridion) which he had composed). In both of these Gropper's Emsmian tendency showed itself; in both he took pains to make the Bible and the Church Fathers his point of departure. In many matters, espe­cially in the doctrine of justification, he approxi­mated Protestant views, but he did not approve of the doctrine of the Reformers concerning the con­cept and the organization of the Church. He championed the seven sacraments and the venera­tion of images and relics. He rejected the doctrine of the priesthood of believers, he defended the hier­archical order of the Middle Ages and the primacy of the pope, though on these very points his differ­ences with the representatives of the papal system were apparent. Protestant and Jesuit writers alike censured the book.

Gropper took a zealous part in the negotiations for church union and in the religious colloquies held in 1540 and 1541 in Hagenau, Worms,

Later and Regensburg. In the latter place

opposes the he secured agreement on the formu 

Reforma  lation of the doctrine of justification; lion in but he and his sympathizers could not

Cologne. reach an understanding with the

Protestants about the organization of

the Church. When, therefore, Archbishop Her , felt himself committed to a far reaching
reform of ecclesiastical affairs in his archdiocese, and invited the Strasburg Reformer Martin Butzer for that purpose, Gropper came forward as the spokesman of the clergy of Cologne in opposition to the plans for Evangelical reform proposed by his former patron; as a representative of the cathe­dral chapter he sought in the Landtag of March and July, 1543, to persuade the Estates to oppose Her­mann and Butzer. As he was unsuccessful, he prepared an answer to the memorial for reformation which the archbishop laid before the latter Landtag. The answer was approved by a committee of the cathedral chapter and was published in 1554 in its name, in German and Latin. When even this docu­ment did not convert the archbishop, Gropper and the members of his party lodged complaints against him with the emperor and the pope. Gropper now negotiated eagerly with imperial counselors. Ile addressed to the emperor his Wahrhaftige Antwort against what he claimed were false accusations by Butzer, but the latter proved the falsehood of Cropper's allegations. In connection with this fight against the heretics, Gropper came to favor the settlement of the Jesuits in Cologne. Canisius, who was especially advanced by him, praises in the

THE NEW SCHAFF HERZOG

highest terms Gropper's merits in saving Roman­ism within the archdiocese of Cologne. When the victory was won, and in place of Hermann the previous coadjutor, Adolf von Schaumburg, had been enthroned with his assistance, Gropper re­ceived the provostahip in Bonn formerly held by a brother of Hermann. Under the new archbishop, Gropper worked by word and pen against the Protestants; he likewise acted as imperial com­missioner for the carrying out of the Interim in his native city of Soest.

How little in accordance with his wishes, how­ever, ecclesiastical affairs developed in the neat years, he himself states in a letter of 1556, in which he seta forth the reasons why he did Disappoint  not wish to accept the dignity of the ment of cardinalate which had been offered to his Later him. A letter of the following year

Years. betrays a still gloomier mood; he

begged Canisius not to be suspicious

of him if he held aloof from the religious colloquy

soon to be held in Worms. In 1558 he saw new

dangers arise for those near him, when Johann

Gebhard von Manafeld was chosen archbishop of

Cologne. In order to prevent his confirmation by

the pope, Gropper decided to make the journey to

Rome, whither Paul IV. had formerly invited him in

vain. The pope received him with honor and

demanded his opinion in weighty matters; never­

theless not only did he not accomplish that which

he wished in the Cologne affair, but he was de­

nounced to the Inquisition by the Venetian Del­

fino. On Mar. 13, 1559, he died in poverty, and was

buried in the church of Maria dell' Anima. The

pope, probably convinced by Gropper's defense that

he was innocent, spoke before a consistory on Mar.

15 in praise of the services of the deceased and

transferred his benefices to his brother Kaspar.

As a papal nuncio Kaspar was later the zealous

servant of the Counterreformation, which directed

its efforts against the Erasmian tendency which

Gropper had once represented; with the result

that in 1596 Gropper's Enchiridion, "the most

detailed and most important pre Tridentine dog­

matic of the Reformation period," was put upon

the Index. K. VAl11tENT1tAPP.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: The writings of Cropper and the literature on him are recorded in a careful article in Ersch and Gruber, Encyclopadie, section L, vol. acii., 1872. For later investigations consult ZKG, xx (1899), 37 sqq.; KL, v. 1239 sqq. Consult also: F. H. Reuseh, Der Index der roerbotenen Bfcher, i. 318, 468 et passim, Bonn, 1883; A. Hasenelever, Die Politik derSchmalkaldenerroorAuabruurh des achnwlkaldiachen Kriega, pp. 25 eqq., Berlin, 1901.

GROSSETESTE, gr6s'test, ROBERT: Bishop of Lincoln; b. in Suffolk c. 1175; d. at Buckden (4 m. s.w. of Huntingdon), Huntingdonshire, Oct. 9, 1253. He was of humble birth, but studied at Oxford and Paris. On his return to England he entered the service of William de Vere, bishop of Hereford, on whose death in 1199 he went to Oxford as teacher, becoming later rector scolarum, and in 1224 the first rector of the Franciscans at Oxford. During the Oxford period he held .several preferments, in­cluding two prebends in Lincoln, and the arch , deaconries of Wilts., Northampton, and Leicester.

In 1235 he became bishop of Lincoln, then the

84

moat extensive see in England. His episcopal administration was marked by zeal in advancing its spiritual interests, and not seldom by the use of arbitrary and high handed measures. He attacked the corruption and condemned the incompetency of the clergy, and instituted a systematic visitation of his diocese. With the monastic institutions he was especially severe, removing in the first year seven abbots and four priors. His vigorous course aroused such opposition that in 1237 an attempt was made to poison him. In 1239 began his long quarrel with the Lincoln chapter, which denied him the right of visitation. Finally he suspended the dean, excommunicated the prior, and went to Lyons to secure a papal decision of the case, which was decided entirely in his favor by a bull of Inno­cent IV., Aug. 25, 1245. Groaseteate returned to England as an obedient agent of the pope; but his attitude toward papal claims soon underwent a complete change. In 1250 he again visited the pope at Lyons. Here on May 13 he delivered a celebrated sermon, in which he declared that the papal court was the origin of all the evils in the Church, and urged the necessity of appointing competent pastors. On his return to his diocese he assailed the Italian ecclesiastics who were flee­cing English parishes. He found by computation that the annual incomes of the foreign clerks in England appointed by Innocent amounted to seventy thousand marks, more than three times the clear revenue of the king. For refusing to admit an Italian ignorant of English to a rich benefice in his diocese he was suspended tempo­rarily in 1251. Early in 1253 he refused pointblank to induct Frederick of Lavagna into a canonry at Lincoln, to which he had been appointed by his uncle, Innocent IV. In a plain but respectful letter the bishop told the pontiff that it was his duty to make appointments for the edification, not for the destruction, of the Church (Epist., caxviii.). This letter has done more to perpetuate G`rosse. testes fame than any of his other works.

Groaseteste's relation to the state was one of independence. He rebuked ecclesiastics for hold­ing civil offices, and asserted that to St. Peter belonged both swords, and that a bishop did not in any sense derive his authority from the civil power. He not only .dared to refuse to execute the royal commands in his diocese, as the one re­garding the legitimization of children born before wedlock, but told the king the plainest truths, and on more than one occasion refused to install his appointees in office, threatening even to excommu­nicate the royal offender.

Like Luther, previous to the Diet of Worms, Groeeeteste had trusted in the pope, and hoped for relief from Rome for the ecclesiastical corrup­tion of England. Once undeceived, he was drifting rapidly away from all veneration for the pontiff, when death overtook him. In a conversation on his death bed with the scholarly cleric and physi­cian, John of St. Giles, he gave a definition of heresy, and asked whether the pope did not fulfil it. "He was the open rebuker of both the pope and the king, censor of prelates, corrector of monks, instructor of clerks, and unwearied examiner of the books of Scrip