Main
	Noble Birth
	A Community at Herrnhut
	Life Among the Moravians
	Into All the World
	VI. Into All the World
	VII. Troubled on every side
	VIII. The Pilgrim Count
	His Last Years

VII. TROUBLED ON EVERY SIDE

A. Distractions from Christ

1. Peculiar inspiration

In the early 1730’s fellowship with some neighboring congregations, referred to as churches of the inspired, led to an acquaintance with John Frederick Rock, a leader among them. Rock was highly regarded by Zinzendorf and was described as grave, sincere, modest, and humble. He was, however, keen to utter prophecies as he fell into peculiar fits, convulsing violently and moving his head backward and forward with incredible speed. These prophecies, which expressed Rock’s own opinions, were written down and sent to the people to whom they referred. The whole matter was repugnant to Zinzendorf, but he refrained from judging it prematurely. Later he wrote, “… I restrained my judgment. It was necessary that the thing itself, and how the spirit should afterwards declare itself with respect to the word of God, and what it enjoined, should decide the point.” [6]

When Rock visited Herrnhut again in 1732, his inspirations still offended Zinzendorf. At one point the elders of the church of the inspired insisted on the Lord's supper and baptism. But Rock, in an inspirational fit, opposed these practices in a crude and irrational manner. Thus the evil source of his inspiration was exposed. Following this Zinzendorf wrote, “…I had no occasion to hesitate any longer, in entirely rejecting the inspiration.” [7]

2. Miracles

Another test to the church was the attraction to miraculous works. Spangenberg describes the situation:

“About this time, various gifts and spiritual powers manifested themselves in the church at Herrnhut, and, in particular, many miraculous cures. Its members believed, in filial simplicity, the words which the Saviour spoke respecting the hearing of prayer; and when any particular affair pressed itself upon them, they spoke with him concerning it, and expected every good thing from Him; and it was done unto them according to their faith. The Count heartily rejoiced at this, and secretly praised the Saviour, who looks with such condescension on the poor and the needy. He acknowledged this confidence in our Lord Jesus Christ, as a fruit of the Holy Spirit, which ought reasonably to be esteemed, and not prove a stumbling-block to any. However, he did not wish that the brethren and sisters should regard such things as extraordinary, and thus attach themselves to them; but whenever they occurred, as, for instance, when anyone experienced an instantaneous cure, either by a word spoken in faith, or by prayer, were it even from the most dangerous injuries or the most painful illnesses – he regarded it as a thing that was known, and spoke little about it. He also frequently asserted, both in public and in private, that wonders were not granted for the sake of believers, but of unbelievers – that wonder-working faith was a gift, which did not make its possessor a better child of God, but that he might even be inferior to others who did not possess such gifts, nor strove for the possession of them – that to love Christ, be resigned to Him in all things, and submit everything to His will, was a much safer way, etc. Hence when he saw that anyone was urgently desirous of being miraculously healed, it excited his suspicions, and he refused to interfere.” [8]

Zinzendorf saw that the overemphasis on the miraculous distracted the brothers and sisters from the Lord. The church also became clear. The brothers and sisters were not carried off by these things, but instead they made it their aim to taste and see how good the Lord is.

B. Opposition from the Religious

There was also opposition from the religious people outside of Herrnhut. The clergy published and circulated a pastoral letter which leveled hostile criticisms against Zinzendorf. He was accused of having unsound, unscriptural teaching and of being a “sentimental mystic.” They also considered those with him to be mystics like himself.

The Pietists, to whom Zinzendorf had once been close, also began to oppose him. After Francke’s death, a party spirit developed with them. They insisted on a particular kind of salvation experience – a painful struggle followed by a breakthrough - and questioned the authenticity of any other. Zinzendorf’s salvation did not fit their formula:

The count, having practiced the presence of Christ from his tenderest years, could not fit this pattern to his own experience. Even if he could have done so, he objected to ascribing uniformity to God's ways of dealing with individuals. His conception of the believer’s relationship to the Saviour had a much more joyful and personal note in it than was the case with his early teachers. [9]

It was Zinzendorf’s longstanding practice not to respond to his critics. This is apparent from the following by Weinlick:

Frequently he answered public attacks by a personal, private letter to the author. When he did answer publicly, it was usually not in the form of direct reply but in the form of information, prepared either by himself or by his colleagues, to acquaint the general public with the Moravians. Of course, all during his career he had been forced to explain his position, and his apologetic writings were already extensive. [10]

Zinzendorf’s attitude was the same as his Master’s, seeking not to vindicate himself, but to express God’s truth. He states:

“I hate controversy with God-fearing people and zealous professors as always. I will not seek to justify myself against them, neither by letter, nor by mouth, nor in print.” He stuck by this principle with reference to himself but did not refrain from replying to attacks upon his friends. [11]

The church should display this same attitude, as Zinzendorf himself describes:

A chief characteristic of such a church is the intertwining of faith and godliness. Its true members know how to bear with and be kind to others and to strangers. With themselves they are uncommonly strict and severe.… They acknowledge themselves unworthy of divine grace, freedom and blessing, and carry their treasure about with them as if it were only loaned to them and might easily be lost. They shun persecution at a distance and gladly prevent it, but at close quarters they meet it boldly and stand immovable. [12]

C. Political Opposition

1. Investigation Commission

Not only did the religious oppose Zinzendorf with their word, but due to their jealousy and suspicion they also aroused political opposition. A commission was formed to determine: 1) whether the emigrants had been seduced or enticed to leave Moravia, and 2) what it was in the doctrine and practice of the church in Herrnhut that drew so much opposition.

Spangenberg describes the inspection that took place in 1732:

The chief magistrate then caused each of the emigrants to come forward, and they spoke of the manner of their leaving home, the persecution they had endured (of which more than forty living witnesses were present), and of their hope of salvation, in such a sincere and convincing manner that the commissioners were much affected. [13]

As a result of the investigation, the commission found everything essentially in order. The Count subsequently decided to receive no more emigrants, due both to the loss of the lives of two brothers who had returned to Moravia to aid emigrants and also to a new policy of the king prohibiting the immigration of Moravians.

2. Order of Banishment

The political opposition, however, which had subsided for a while, became so severe that in 1736 an order of banishment was issued against Zinzendorf. He was accused of enlarging his community by stealing tenants off the estates of other landlords and was ordered to leave Herrnhut immediately. He was, in effect, being accused of “sheep-stealing.” Zinzendorf reacted this way:

It matters little. I could not have returned to Herrnhut anyway for ten years, for the time has come to gather the pilgrim congregation and preach the Saviour to the whole world. Our home will be that particular place where at the moment our Saviour has the most for us to do. [14]

Concerning how to handle church matters in the Count’s absence, the brothers unanimously decided on the following points:

First, that none of them would suffer himself to be induced to do anything contrary to his conscience and the Holy Scriptures. Secondly, to avoid all particular opinions, abide by the most simple fundamental truths of the Bible, and have nothing to do with that which has no reference to the practice of Divine truths. Thirdly, to be very careful that no separation [i.e., division] take place. [15]

After the Count left Herrnhut, he encouraged a certain practice with his family and the church. Wherever they settled, they would meet together as they did in Herrnhut to sing, pray, and spend time in the Word of God. Zinzendorf felt that the meetings on the Lord’s Day and on holidays, as well as the daily meetings, should be continued just as the Lord had already instituted among them.

3. Second Investigation

An edict of toleration was later issued in favor of the church in Herrnhut, but it proved to be limited in coverage and much delayed in application. Another investigation was held in 1736, and again everything was found to be in good order. Spangenberg’s account puts it this way:

The Commissioners therefore found no difficulty in ascertaining the real state of the case. Hence they bore this public testimony to the church, on their departure: “You have acted like honest people, and have honourably stood the test.” But notwithstanding this, no resolution was issued upon this minute investigation, until fifteen months afterwards. [16]

The resolution, when finally issued, put the seal of approval on Herrnhut but said nothing concerning the banishment of Zinzendorf. His banishment remained in force, and for some time to come he was to be a pilgrim count.