27 January 2021

Some Notes and Comments on: The History of the Protestant Church in Hungary

The History of the Protestant Church in Hungary from the beginning of the Reformation to 1850 is a commendable historical work. It value is both inherent as a historical text and in what can be extrapolated from it – which in some cases may result in observations and applications beyond the intention of the anonymous author. The work first appeared about 1854 and was translated into English by one Dr. Craig.


I was eager to purchase the work in 2001 when it was newly re-printed by Sprinkle Publications. My 1997 trip to Hungary was still fresh in my mind and over the years I have continued to probe the nation's rich historical and cultural tapestry. I read the book in 2002 and have perused and re-read sections of it ever since but I just recently decided to revisit the work from cover to cover along with notes and maps – in other words to fully engage the work.

I was already familiar with the broad strokes of the story but this time the read proved to be more profitable due to twenty years of acquired knowledge and reflection. There was so much more I was able to contextualise and having some knowledge of the larger regional geography I was able to make connections that an earlier reading might have glossed over.

Large sections of the book deal with the Counter-Reformation and not just in Hungary (as it appears in contemporary maps) but it also touched upon the situation in neighbouring regions such as Carinthia and Styria (today's Austria and parts of Slovenia) and the larger region of old pre-1920 Hungary which included Slovakia, much of Croatia, and in particular Transylvania. These lands (as well as portions of Serbia, Austria, Slovenia, and even Ukraine) were lost to crown of St. Stephen in the aftermath of WWI – an issue which vexes Hungarian nationalists and irredentists to this very day.

The reader is reminded of the brutality of the Jesuit-led campaign that in addition to tearing congregations and families apart, their Counter-Reformation programme oppressed any hint of resistance and sought to penetrate and transform every facet of society – bringing all into conformity with Rome. The evil fraternity laboured for centuries to roll back any attempt at Biblical reform. The functional loss of these histories has certainly played no small role in today's Evangelical rapprochement with Rome – an absolute betrayal of their forebears. Rome was and remains a false church, a veritable anti-christ and though today's Jesuits are much different – no longer the shock troops of the papacy, they nevertheless remain enemies to the Gospel of Christ.

And yet sadly the Magisterial Protestants of Hungary fell into some of the same political traps and schemes as their cousins in other lands and their utterly wayward Evangelical descendants in our own day. Often in connivance with the Turks (who were certainly better than the Habsburgs), they plotted and pushed at every opportunity to get an upper hand – and eventually just to get a place at the table. By the mid-17th century, they had lost all, and after joining in with a series of revolts led by Transylvanian princes (such as Bocskai, Bethlen, the Rakoczis, and Imre Thököly), they were reduced to defeat and subjugation.   Their last gamble had been to urge the Turks to invade the Habsburg domains once more in 1682, culminating in the famous Siege of Vienna the following year. Defeated by Sobieski and his Catholic coalition, the Turks and their Protestant allies were driven back, and the Habsburg alliance would not only break the siege and drive the Turks out of Austria, they were able to re-capture Budapest and eventually drive the Ottomans out of Central Europe and back into the Balkans. The Protestants of Hungary had backed the losing side and would pay a terrible price in the 1700's. The tolerant (by comparison) Ottoman Turks were in decline and one cannot help but also question the morality of the Hungarian alliance with Louis XIV. For Hungarian Protestants he was an enemy of their enemy (the Habsburgs) but at the same time Louis was a monster and brutal persecutor of Protestants in his own land. All their schemes and attempts to wrest away control of Hungary from the Habsburgs ultimately failed.

The Habsburgs for their part were devious and evil. The political arm of Rome in Central and Eastern Europe, the Habsburgs had exploited Hungarian misfortune in the aftermath of the 1526 catastrophe at Mohacs and had claimed Royal Hungary (Western Transdanubian Hungary, along with a sliver of Western Slovakia) for the Reichsadler of the Habsburg crown. When the Hungarian lands were liberated during the 1683-1699 rollback of the Turks, the Habsburgs then claimed the lands of St. Stephen as their own – viewed as an outrage by the Magyar princes of Transylvania who viewed themselves (with cause) as the heirs of St. Stephen and the House of Arpad.

But once again all the Hungarian schemes failed and the princes were subjugated to Vienna. And the Lutherans and Calvinists who supported these princes and their many uprisings and wars against the Habsburgs were also subjugated.

Overall it's a frustrating but moving story. In the midst of the wearisome political intrigues and politicking there are stories of harrowing winter escapes, fugitives hiding in the mountains, crossing frontiers and seeking shelter abroad. There are terrible tales of torture, of stolen children, intrepid preachers and evil sadistic clerics. Largely it is the tale of churches trying to remain faithful as bit by bit, year by year, they are worn down and defeated. And then (as if from nowhere) they were granted respite – and it is with no small bit of irony that their deliverance came in the form of an Enlightenment monarch – Joseph II, the son of Maria Theresa.

Their Catholic persecution was not ended by the fulfillment of Magisterial Protestant dreams and political projects but by the social pluralism born of the Enlightenment. Its concepts, while far from Christian were nevertheless tolerant and willing to endure differences for the greater social peace and its concept of flourishing freedom. It was the secular triumphing over the sacral that brought respite. But as always there's a dynamic at work and nothing is stable. That same force in another generation can quickly turn against the Church – as indeed it would.

In this sense the situation in Hungary finds a parallel with that of France. The Huguenots suffered terrible persecution when Louis XIV revoked the Edict of Nantes in 1685 and they would suffer a century of persecution – relief only coming with the 1789 Revolution which smashed the Catholic sacral state once and for all. In the case of both of these Protestant groups the Enlightenment proved a blessing.

But for the Hungarians it would also prove a curse as they (like the Protestants in so many other lands) would drink from its polluted wells and begin to recast their Magisterial Protestant impulses in the form of Enlightenment Classical Liberalism. In other words they continued their political activism but it took on an Enlightenment revolutionary form – just as it would in the American colonies. This would begin a process of syncretism – the blending of Christian doctrine with concepts such as nationalism, democracy, political and economic rights, the social contract, and even the prerogative to rebel, all notions that either have no basis in New Testament thought or are explicitly opposed to its doctrinal frameworks and ethical imperatives.

Nineteenth Century Romanticism lionised the Reformation but it was recast in nationalist terms. My mind went back to the powerful sacralist imagery of Heroes' Square (Hosök Tere) in Budapest. Angels guide the Magyar chieftains to the holy land and they are surrounded by the heroes of the nation. The Right Colonnade is remarkable for its significant Protestant presence. There are the great Transylvanian Princes, the Protestant lords who fought against Habsburg rule, the aforementioned men: Bocskai, Bethlen, Thököly, and Francis II Rakoczi. Men of blood all, Protestant historians celebrate their piety, Renaissance humanism, and nationalism. Catholics and secular historians will point out their brutality and in some cases their outright murder. It was an ugly time in history and Protestant historians will excuse and justify their bloody ethics as appropriate and necessary to the time – that they were no worse than the Catholic ethics and entities which persecuted the Protestant movement. It would be plausible argument but for the fact that many contemporary Christians condemned these actions and spoke against them. It's not as if there wasn't a Christian witness to the contrary.

And yet any student of history must admit it's easy to judge with 20/20 hindsight. The circumstances were undoubtedly difficult and it isn't difficult to see how people were caught up in thorny and even insoluble situations but it's interesting that for all their efforts, the Protestant cause never made any real gains. Every seeming victory was always followed by a series of defeats. 'Victory' only came in the aftermath of the Enlightenment and the reorganisation of principles to that end. And yet the 'victory' would ultimately lead to a great defeat.

The final statue in Heroes' Square is one of Lajos Kossuth – a Protestant, but in reality an Enlightenment-motivated 19th century revolutionary who became a hero not just to Hungarians but to likeminded people worldwide. Kossuth was the Hungarian champion of the 1848 uprisings which swept across continental Europe. Ultimately the move to displace the Habsburgs failed. After fleeing to the Ottoman lands, he would wander for many years, and became a sensation in the United States where one still finds towns and Masonic halls named after him – though virtually no one seems to know who he is anymore. He was one of the very few foreigners to be granted the privilege of addressing a joint session of the US Congress – at the time the only person apart from the Marquis de Lafayette. He was a significant figure in the 19th century and undoubtedly his impact and memory played a role in the US-led dismantling of the Habsburg Empire during the WWI settlement.

But by the 1860's, Hungary had hitched its wagon (so to speak) to the Habsburgs. The book ends with Kossuth and an endorsement of his uprising – itself something of a betrayal of Reformation principle, though this is not explored. In many respects it's an unfortunate point to end the book because not only is the story far from over, in the years after it would take a dramatic turn.

This is but one of the shortcomings of the book. Rather than include the unhelpful and condescending foreword by the Theonomist Byron Snapp, an afterward outlining of events from 1867 to the present would have been helpful, to finish the story.*

For though Kossuth failed and lived in exile, the pressure on the Habsburgs continued and not just from Hungary. The breakup of the Holy Roman Empire by Napoleon in 1806 and the continued ascent of Prussia and its quest to create a unified German state continued to squeeze and constrain Austrian interests and by 1867 Vienna was forced to make concessions. They could not prevent German unification which would happen just a few years later when the Bismarck-led Prussians marched into Paris – an impulse that would find its culmination in the Anschluss of 1938. And likewise they were forced to grant Hungarian autonomy. Though Kossuth had been defeated in 1848, these were the days of nationalism and the momentum could no longer be restrained. Ignoring the protests and warnings of Kossuth, the Hungarians (led by Count Andrassy) compromised and agreed to the Dual Monarchy. Hungary was still under the aegis of Habsburg rule but it had its own parliament and governed its own affairs. In time Hungary would actually become almost the dominant partner in the new political arrangement known to history as Austria-Hungary. The nation experienced a cultural renaissance and this period was the first since the Reformation that Protestantism was able to exist unhindered.

And yet the Protestant churches also wed themselves to the Hungarian state and its policies of Magyarisation – the oppressive and authoritarian subjugation of the kingdom's minorities in the name of creating a unified Hungarian society. These hated policies helped to bring about the collapse of the Austro-Hungarian state during World War I and fueled the nationalism that led to the Treaty of Trianon and Hungarian partition in 1920.

Kossuth had warned of this – warned against a compromise with the Habsburgs. The Hungarian Establishment viewed 1867 as a victory as an uncompromising radical Kossuth faded from the scene. And yet he warned that in becoming 'partners' with Austria they would bring the whole nation down when the Habsburgs themselves collapsed. And he was right.

Hungarian Protestantism enjoyed something of a golden age from 1867 on, however the greatest enemy of all – theological liberalism was knocking at the door. After WWI the various churches were nationalised and many (such as the Slovak and Croat Reformed) have survived but only as empty shells. Centuries of Catholic persecution and decades of Communist oppression could not eradicate them but theological liberalism has done the work. Today these churches are largely liberal and no longer hold to the Scriptures as authoritative.

After World War I there was the brief communist interlude under Bela Kun and then the dictatorial 'regency' established by Admiral Horthy – leader of a nation with no navy and no king. Horthy would rule until he was ousted by the Nazis in 1944 and then after the brief but incredibly violent fascist period, and a few years of transition at the end of the war – the communists would take control. It's no great surprise that a man like Viktor Orban would emerge, gain traction and come to power in the years after the end of the Cold War.

The Hungarian Church has experienced a minor revival since the 1990's – but as of yet I'm not sure how deep are its roots nor if they've been planted by the Spirit or by a revival of the sacral impulse – that which motivates one such as Orban. He (like Trump) is the sort of figure that myopic Christians think is a hero and redeemer and yet in reality he and what he represents are the worst thing for the Church as it becomes confused and entangled with a particularly odious form of nationalism.

It's a long and sad story with some of its most tragic aspects taking place after 1850 – after the conclusion of the historical volume.

Overall I enjoyed re-reading the work and benefitted from it however it does have serious problems in the area of accessibility. At some future date I hope it is republished with notes and study aids. A gazetteer is badly needed as the place names are largely in German. Many locales in central Europe are known by multiple names and in the Hungarian world it's not uncommon for towns to have both Hungarian and German names. And in Transylvania you can often add a third option – that of Romanian.

I'm already familiar with many of the names and thus I didn't have too much trouble, but I was conscious that most readers would be lost. On occasion I would pause and walk over to the computer to look up a German name from the volume to discover its Hungarian and contemporary equivalent. For many readers this would be an essential tool unless they're simply going to ignore the names and geography.  

On that note, the volume could certainly use some maps that could go alongside the gazetteer. The volume also provides little if no historical context when covering great events. Its scope is fairly narrow and the author either expected readers to know the larger context or to discover it elsewhere. An edited volume could have some nice 'help' pages and sidebars which would provide the requisite information for those unfamiliar with the events. In other words as it stands, it's not a book for a historical novice. If you don't know the broad strokes of Central European history from the 16th to 19th century, you're going to struggle. And for those who do but are unfamiliar with the geography of Greater Hungary – then they too are likely to have some difficulty following events and the general flow.

As mentioned many will be surprised at just how much Protestant history was taking place in nations such as Slovakia, Romania, Croatia, Austria, and Slovenia – nations that few today would associate with Protestantism. There is a rich history here and as hinted at elsewhere, one even older that has been forgotten.

It's a worthy work but it needs some editing for modern readers. My hope would be that such an edited and updated work would kindle an interest in not only Hungary but the whole of Central and Eastern Europe. There is a great deal to be learned and a lot of history that many in the West have forgotten.

----

*Snapp's comments are tiresome. As a Theonomist he's critical of their less than comprehensive 'world and life view' – because they tolerated social pluralism and apparently their less than prosperous sometimes guild-connected economics weren't sufficiently capitalist enough (viz. wealthy) for him. And thus borrowing from Weber's more than slightly erroneous thesis, he laments their loss of the so-called Protestant work ethic. I found his commentary pedantic and even offensive.

But it was to be expected. While I was glad to see the volume republished I count it unfortunate that it came from Sprinkle Publications. A Baptist (with a name that doesn't fit), the late Mr. Sprinkle in addition to publishing the works of his faction, also seemed to have an appreciation for Theonomic and in particular Confederate-oriented works. I'm not entirely certain as to what motivated his republishing of this work other than the fact that there was a great deal of excitement about Eastern Europe in the 1990's and the possibility of Christian revival in the lands formerly behind the Iron Curtain.