Frederick the Great, Discussion Post 19

[cahn]

Yuletide nominations:

18th Century CE Federician RPF
Maria Theresia | Maria Theresa of Austria
Voltaire
Friedrich II von Preußen | Frederick the Great
Ernst Ahasverus von Lehndorff
Friedrich Heinrich Ludwig von Preußen | Henry of Prussia (1726-1802)
Wilhelmine von Preußen | Wilhelmine of Prussia (1709-1758)
Anna Amalie von Preußen | Anna Amalia of Prussia (1723-1787)
Catherine II of Russia
Hans Hermann von Katte
Peter Karl Christoph von Keith
Michael Gabriel Fredersdorf
August Wilhelm von Preußen | Augustus William of Prussia (1722-1758)

Circle of Voltaire RPF
Emilie du Chatelet
Jeanne Antoinette Poisson (Madame de Pompadour)
John Hervey (1696-1743)
Marie Louise Mignot Denis
Lady Mary Wortley-Montagu
Pierre Louis Moreau de Maupertuis
Armand de Vignerot du Plessis de Richelieu (1696-1788)
Francesco Algarotti

Comments

Re: Chesterfield on FW / predestination

[felis]

Haaa, love the quote. Certainly makes one interested in reading the rest of his reports.

It also touches on something that's been irritating me since I first read it: FW's opposition to predestination, and the fact that he made it such an important part of Frederick's submission. Because as far as I know, FW was a calvinist, and Calvin's doctrine was clearly pro predestination, so I don't quite get it. Did he just not care about the doctrine in this case and his opposition is all personal and a result of his conflict with Fritz, as in: Fritz discovering it as a clever argument against him, saying that everything he is/does/likes is predestined by God, so why would his father fault him for it? Certainly comes across that way. (It's an argument to irritate his father for sure, but it's also interesting in the context of Fritz trying to make sense of himself I think.)

And of course Fritz, submission or not, argues for predestination again, early on in his correspondence with Voltaire, while Voltaire obviously takes the free will side. It's very much a philosophical instead of a theological argument with him, though, because since Fritz doesn't believe in an immortal soul, the whole post-death part of salvation/damnation is clearly irrelevant to him.

Re: Chesterfield on FW / predestination

[mildred_of_midgard]

The answer to this is veeery interesting, but due to physical limitations around computer use, I'll let selenak take this one, while I go study German. :)

Re: Chesterfield on FW / predestination

[selenak]

FW being against the predestination doctrine predates his conflict with Fritz, and indeed predates Fritz’ existence. To summ up a longer tale, Tiny Terror FW was an unruly kid terrorizing his teachers until Mom and Dad gave him a really strict Calvinist teacher (despite being lax believers themselves). Thereafter, FW was a strict Calvinist living in religious terror especially due to the predestination doctrine, and argued himself into thinking in this particular case, Luther was right, not Calvin. But it continued to trouble him throughout his life and kept coming up.

Ergo: Fritz could have found no surer way to strike at Dad under the guise of submission (since he was reading religious books and talking with the preacher, as demanded) than to declare himself a believer in predestination. Aside from that, it also was a way to justify himself. (I.e. assert his individuality - if God had meant him to be the way he was, etc.). But seriously, Predestination was a life long terror to FW, and anyone who knew him personally knew that.

Re: Chesterfield on FW / predestination

[felis]

OH. Well. So in a way, personal reasons indeed, just a lot more extensive than I expected. Very interesting indeed, thank you.